Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 10/30/2011 9:20:23 AM PDT by george76
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: george76
"...radical action..."

LOL. Whatever you say.

2 posted on 10/30/2011 9:22:12 AM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: george76

Time to play the old game of, “imagine if Bush had done that”. Can you say, “cowboy”? Come on, ya know ya can.


3 posted on 10/30/2011 9:23:07 AM PDT by Lonesome in Massachussets (Ceterum autem censeo, Obama delenda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: george76

Depends on the armaments involved - are they packing small arms, or something big enough to blow them out of the water?


4 posted on 10/30/2011 9:23:12 AM PDT by Old Sarge (Marking time on the government's dime...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: george76
The Prime Minister said radical action was required because the increasing ability of sea-borne Somali criminals to hijack and ransom ships had become "a complete stain on our world".

Cameron better watch his tongue! That can be interpreted by some as being racist!

5 posted on 10/30/2011 9:24:18 AM PDT by Cowboy Bob (Greed + Envy = Liberalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: george76
HOZE-EM!!!

7 posted on 10/30/2011 9:28:02 AM PDT by Chode (American Hedonist - *DTOM* -ww- NO Pity for the LAZY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: george76
Obvious solution, about ten years too late. A few experienced veteran sharpshooters with sniper rifles and M-4's should suffice.
8 posted on 10/30/2011 9:29:24 AM PDT by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: george76

Water cannon, boiling vats of oil, flame throwers, electirfied railing...........


9 posted on 10/30/2011 9:34:20 AM PDT by umgud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: george76

But...But...Evil people might be hurt. Next, commoners will want to be able to own guns to protect their homes. Oh, the violence........


11 posted on 10/30/2011 9:44:03 AM PDT by immadashell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: george76

What I find to be a sign of insanity is that British law has to be changed to allow their ships sailing into troubled waters to protect themselves.

Admiral Lord Nelson must be spinning in his grave.


13 posted on 10/30/2011 9:51:06 AM PDT by LegendHasIt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: george76
A legal ban on weapon-toting protection staff will be relaxed so that firms can apply for a licence to have them on board in danger zones.

Until complete safety can be assured, and it can not be, every zone is a danger zone; at best safety is only belief about probability.

14 posted on 10/30/2011 9:51:53 AM PDT by coloradan (The US has become a banana republic, except without the bananas - or the republic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: george76

about damn time

I have never understood how motley poorly equipped Muslim bandits in tiny boats could overtake a large modern tanker. Put radar on board and weapons that can sink small craft. If you can’t make radio contact on one approaching your ship, sink it.


15 posted on 10/30/2011 9:59:35 AM PDT by FreeAtlanta (Fight for Liberty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: george76
I dunno, I still like the Russian solution...

"Apparently they all have died"

17 posted on 10/30/2011 10:00:06 AM PDT by FunkyZero ("It's not about duck hunting !")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: george76

Bring back the commerce raiders, then when the pirates are cleaned up go after the illegal fishing in their waters.


19 posted on 10/30/2011 10:20:10 AM PDT by Dawggie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: george76

There aren’t very many British-registered ships around. Its not a popular “flag of convenience”.

Perhaps a few more vessels will be shifted to British registration because of this, but based on the numbers its insignificant in itself.

However, it could start a change with the shipowners and insurers.


20 posted on 10/30/2011 10:32:03 AM PDT by buwaya
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: george76

I cynically state any vessel that does arm with such guards will probably be cut off from insurance by Lloyds.

Seems from past readings that Lloyds has been a major obstacle to such action as guards on board the vessels, or arming of qualified crew members.


21 posted on 10/30/2011 10:40:40 AM PDT by rockinqsranch (Dems, Libs, Socialists, call 'em what you will, they ALL have fairies livin' in their trees.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Uh Oh! Didn't Donate?


Click The Pic To Keep Your Forum

23 posted on 10/30/2011 10:56:05 AM PDT by DJ MacWoW (America! The wolves are here! What will you do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: george76

Had the U.N. Small Arms treaty been law, the legality of nations arming their merchant ships in international waters would have been disputed...perhaps even abrogated.

To Americans this arming is only common sense and self-defense. Yet, somehow, to the British this is a ponderously difficult issue for them; a profound change that may lead to a radical undermining of British society and four o’clock tea..

Go Figure!


31 posted on 10/30/2011 12:59:06 PM PDT by firefox ((Vote Democrat...Its Easier Than Thinking!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson