Are you pissed by the US pirate response?

[imported_animes2k]

Did anyone seriously expect Obama to do something? We're sitting so far away, the captain jumped in the water and tried to swim away and we still couldn't do anything.

Shows the captain is braver than our president. Coward (not the captain).

What, did you want him to go over there and work his secret muslim magic to free the hostage?









Oh, wait...

Navy Seals to the Rescue!

A senior US official tells me that President Barack Obama approved a recommendation by Defense Secretary Bob Gates and Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Michael Mullen to dispatch special forces to the US scene on Friday.



These special forces were authorized to take action "in extremis" against the Somali pirates holding Maersk Captain Richard Phillips, 53, hostage on a motorized lifeboat off the coast of Somalia.



A senior official tells me that when the fourth Somali pirate was on the Bainbridge ship, Phillips moved to side of the lifeboat to relieve himself.



At that point, U.S. special forces saw their opportunity and took other three pirates out.



Captain Phillips is now safe aboard a U.S. vessel.



It's "going to make a great movie," a U.S. official adds.

Here you go:

 

[Flawless Image]

I'm far from a pansie. I also guarantee you did nothing in Iraq to benefit my of life so get over your self real quick. If you read my post I'm all for going in and wiping out the pirates and I'm very happy it ended they way it did. Just because I don't mindlessly jump on the band wagon doesn't make me a pansie.

you are a sad sad person.. quote that first sentence and say it to the nearest soldier (that served in Iraq) face to face.. oh, and make sure one of your pansie buddies is getting it on camera! would be FANTASTIC on youtube!

 

[yourgrandma]

Yeah, I'm glad we have people who are eager to serve, but calling everyone who doesn't a pansy is just the type of thing that strips you of credibility. You're not doing yourself any favors by coming across like some hoo-rah, macho tuff guy. If you want people to consider your arguments, avoid calling them a pansy. Something to keep in mind. I'm pro-military, but I have a hard time agreeing with someone whos main point is "You're a pansy, and army guys will beat you up".

 

[Flawless Image]

Yeah, I'm glad we have people who are eager to serve, but calling everyone who doesn't a pansy is just the type of thing that strips you of credibility. You're not doing yourself any favors by coming across like some hoo-rah, macho tuff guy. If you want people to consider your arguments, avoid calling them a pansy. Something to keep in mind. I'm pro-military, but I have a hard time agreeing with someone whos main point is "You're a pansy, and army guys will beat you up".

dont put words in my mouth. where did i say that 'everyone who doesnt serve is a pansy'? I can see that you are just looking for a fight, so im not going to justify myself anymore.

The guy that posted about 'your service in Iraq did nothing to benefit his life', you are the one I was talking to. And YES, i do say that if you say that to a vet, it very well could cause problems..

Take it how you want..

 

[white gecko]

What, did you want him to go over there and work his secret muslim magic to free the hostage?









Oh, wait...





















Here you go:

No, just not sit back like a coward with no comment, and no decision. What a sign of leadership :down

 

[wytstang]

Glad they killed the pos's and saved the captain at the same time.

I wonder how you would feel if you were arrested put in a place Gitmo and denied Due Process and face kangaroo courts and it was all justified by some enemy combatant BS?

This has to be the stupidest sentence I've read on autopia.

 

[imported_animes2k]

No, just not sit back like a coward with no comment, and no decision. What a sign of leadership :down

So, no way he can win?



If the captain had been killed as a result of the attack by the SEALs, it would be the President's fault, right? Since he ordered the attack.



But he doesn't deserve any credit either for ordering a successful attack?

Sure as hell seems like he made a decision.

It was decisive, final and the action succeeded.



What more do you want? What would have been "appropriate action" and what does it matter now that the situation was resolved.



I think he passed this test with flying colors but the real challenge is piracy in general and I think this resolution sends a strong positive message.

 

[yourgrandma]

dont put words in my mouth. where did i say that 'everyone who doesnt serve is a pansy'? I can see that you are just looking for a fight, so im not going to justify myself anymore.

The guy that posted about 'your service in Iraq did nothing to benefit his life', you are the one I was talking to. And YES, i do say that if you say that to a vet, it very well could cause problems..

Take it how you want..

I'm not the one looking for a fight. You're obviously an aggressive guy. I just critiqued your approach man. You keep lending credibility to the stereotypes I know are false. It only takes a few pissed off army guys to make people look at the whole lot differently.



So the way I take it is that you want people to constantly thank you for your service and tell you how brave you are. One person doesnt comply, so he's a pansy.



Vets are like everyone else. Some are great, some are hot headed jerks. Which are you?



Just chill a bit is all I'm saying. Clearly there's a lot of misinformation on both sides of the military issues, you'd be doing a great service to the truth if you would present your opinion in a more civil manner. Otherwise, you give the impression that all members of the armed forces are trigger happy pricks, therefore making people unlikely to listen to what you have to say. I'm just trying to help is all.

 

[wytstang]

So, no way he can win?

Sure, give that order day 1 just so they know that option IS available from the get go. Not wait days to give it.

If the captain had been killed as a result of the attack by the SEALs, it would be the President's fault, right? Since he ordered the attack.

Nope, it would be a failed mission with a sad ending. But at least they tried to save him instead of just letting him be taken away so they can do what ever.

I know I would much rather be killed trying to be saved then allowed to be dragged away into the jungle and feed to a lion alive. Or given to a King Pen to figure out what to do with me. At least my family would have a body to bury and not an empty box.

 

[imported_animes2k]

It's easy to play armchair quarterback in a situation like this, after the fact.



You want the President to give the order to attack the lifeboat on Day 1? Did they have CNN in the lifeboat so that they WOULDN'T know that an attack like this is pending? I don't think this type of rescue was ever off the table... unless you know something the Joint Chiefs weren't sharing...



You don't think that's rushing into things a little blind? They weren't about to get away. They were worn down, without food and fresh water by the time the attack came. Sure seems like an effective means of increasing the odds of the rescue/attack team. The pirates couldn't afford to lose their sole captive.



These aren't terrorists with an ideological bone to pick - they're thieves. As such they want to be paid and won't get anything by killing their only hostage.



Personally I am not offended or disheartened by patience and caution when dealing with a hostage situation such as this. It's hardly "cowardice" like some here appear to think.



As for your assertion that it would only be a failed mission with a sad ending (and not a political football)... I know you're not naive. An element of the pundit class was calling this a failure of the President, Administration and the Navy under his command from day one. You can't possibly believe that they would let a negative outcome NOT be his fault.

 

[wytstang]

You want the President to give the order to attack the lifeboat on Day 1?

Nope I want an order on day one giving them the green light to take them out 'if' the opportunity presents itself. Not sit there and call the FBI to talk about it and turn it into a law enforcement thing. International waters, international rules. It didn't take the French 5 days to deal with there problem but it did us.

You can't possibly believe that they would let a negative outcome NOT be his fault.

I'm sure it could be twisted some how to blame Bush. It's what the current administration is good at. The blame game.

 

[yourgrandma]

I'm sure it could be twisted some how to blame Bush. It's what the current administration is good at. The blame game.

Didin't you get the memo? From now on, nothing bad happens in the world without it being caused by Bush.



This tippy toe approach to global affairs is going to backfire. Maybe the metro crowd wont make such rude comments on their blogs, but the people who hate us wont look at it as an opportunity to hold hands and eat smores together.

 

[imported_animes2k]

Do you know that SEALS weren't an option on Day 1?

Technically it IS a law enforcement situation.

And one of the French hostages ended up dead in the assault. Are you SERIOUSLY holding up the French as a positive example here? :spit:



On the last point, way to deflect the question with a red herring.

 

[white gecko]

So, no way he can win?



If the captain had been killed as a result of the attack by the SEALs, it would be the President's fault, right? Since he ordered the attack.



But he doesn't deserve any credit either for ordering a successful attack?

Sure as hell seems like he made a decision.

It was decisive, final and the action succeeded.



What more do you want? What would have been "appropriate action" and what does it matter now that the situation was resolved.



I think he passed this test with flying colors but the real challenge is piracy in general and I think this resolution sends a strong positive message.

Its not all about winning. He should have taken immediate decisive action to save that mans life, not say "no comment" in the beginning! A president LEADS, not sit back and see how it plays out so he can take credit if sucessful, or distance himself if it fails.



BTW, not an "attack" its a rescue. There is a difference. He deserves credit of making the right decision in a PATHETIC timetable. Give ya an idea how bad it was..... The captain took things into his own hands because Obama wouldn't let the seals take any action!

 

[white gecko]

Sure, give that order day 1 just so they know that option IS available from the get go. Not wait days to give it.



Nope, it would be a failed mission with a sad ending. But at least they tried to save him instead of just letting him be taken away so they can do what ever.

I know I would much rather be killed trying to be saved then allowed to be dragged away into the jungle and feed to a lion alive. Or given to a King Pen to figure out what to do with me. At least my family would have a body to bury and not an empty box.

:werd:



well said.

It's easy to play armchair quarterback in a situation like this, after the fact.

I think they shoulda done it from the beginning.... no ACQing after the fact here.

You want the President to give the order to attack the lifeboat on Day 1?

If it was me, yeah. I pay my taxes, I want my country to protect me. NOT WAIT!

They were worn down, without food and fresh water by the time the attack came. Sure seems like an effective means of increasing the odds of the rescue/attack team.

seems like an effective method of increasing the chances that they kill the captain. They are cornered....if they know they're screwed, they'll kill him. My country doesn't have the right to gamble with my life on the "wear them down coward tactic".

 

[white gecko]

/ with this thread.

 

[imported_animes2k]

The captain took things into his own hands because Obama wouldn't let the seals take any action!

You seem to be assuming a lot to make this situation fit your worldview.

 

[Scottwax]

Congratulations you re a little better than Saddam or the Taliban. It's nice to see you aim high in your standards.



I wonder how you would feel if you were arrested put in a place Gitmo and denied Due Process and face kangaroo courts and it was all justified by some enemy combatant BS?



Even if the people you have there are guilty the US should hold them selves to a higher standard. I say "if" they are guilty because I have no doubt many are not.

Seeing as I am not nor every will be an enemy combatant, I don't have to worry. Excuse me if I don't feel at all sorry for the scum at Gitmo.

 

[Setec Astronomy]

You guys crack me up. I can't find out what happened in the car accident around the corner because there is an investigation going on but you guys think that you know for sure all the national security dirt and when it happened half way around the world. Why the gov't would show their cards to you (via the media) while a situation was ongoing and the pirates could get that info by radio or sat phone? There is one thing that I am absolutely sure of, and that is that you or I will never know what the instructions to the SEAL team were, they never let the enemy know what the order of battle is. How you can assume that anything said in public in this kind of situation can be taken at face value is just naive.



EDIT: And how you guys can complain about this is beyond me. As Spilchy noted about three pages ago, this operation was perfectly executed. Captain retreived, seems completely unharmed, 3 pirates dead, 1 captured, ship, crew and cargo safe. How could it have gone any better? Contrary to how I might have sounded above, I'm not aware if there was any comment by the President or not (I just presumed from context that there was), but how anyone can presume that the SEALS didn't have the green light from minute one, but just didn't have the opportunity until this morning is also beyond me. How about this scenario from the admiral: "boys, you take those pirates out the first opportunity you have. But until then, we'll try diplomacy and negotiation".

 

[imported_animes2k]

Thank you.