Well we have. And the mission went down perfectly.
Pirates that the AP interviewed for the story (it always amazes me what kind of people the AP is able to interview) said that they are out for revenge. The US is now their number one enemy.
Maybe they missed the part where the Seals took out three pirates at once, at night, in choppy waters, and the hostage was completely unharmed.
So, to Abdullahi, Jamac, and any other pirate that feels like capturing American ships and killing hostages, think again. You may be able to kill some Americans, but the US Navy is going to come looking for you. And an AK-47 is not going to do much damage to this. (OK, it could damage it but the MK V has enough firepower and speed you probably shouldn't try.)
One other thought. International Law either needs to be changed or the US needs to start disregarding it. The law for International shipping is that the crew is not allowed to be armed. Fine. Then hire some former Marines to be security for these ships. Not allowing weapons or soldiers on these boats seems to make these a slight target for the Somalis, among others. It seems like just a small change like that would work. Maybe the founding fathers had an idea when they included the 2nd amendment. (For a laugh read this pdf put out by the International Maritime Organization where they suggest shining bright lights on pirates and spraying them with hoses but not to use guns because it may escalate the situation and cause attackers to carry guns too. Page 11 is funny.)
Finally, a big thanks to the Seals. The military may not be real popular with many, but you have shown why we need you.
interesting :=) Toytrkman's been saying that too. Thanks for the post.
ReplyDeleteAnybody that's willing to lay down their life for their country (myself included) is a hero in my book.
ReplyDeleteBut seriously, don't you think that shining bright lights on the pirates just might scare them away?
Not even a chance?
I'm curious, being interested in the high seas, where you found that International law forbids the carrying of weapons. I've been looking for such a thing and haven't found it. It was always my understanding that in the high seas you can defend yourself with pretty much any means necessary (which I would!). According to an article put out by the American Society of International Law, the carrying of weapons even by cargo ships is not prohibited under international law. Here is the article. http://www.asil.org/insigh94.cfm I'm only curious, I'm certainly no expert on International Law.
ReplyDeleteI was just telling my wife, if I were a pirate, any ship flying our flag would NOT be a target of mine!
I think that the Captain is to be commended for his bravery.
Evil is not overcome by fleeing from it. ;-}
I found another article concerning the subject of my above comment. It seems that most cargo ships elect not to carry arms because when they land at the various ports, they fall under the jurisdiction of the country they are porting at and it sounds like the laws are so varied that it is hard to remain legal. They could get into trouble with the various countries. Seems stupid to me. I would think that the receiving country would want there stuff to get there. Maybe I should rule the world. Liberals wouldn't like it.
ReplyDeleteThe reason I thought that international laws forbade weapons was based on a story I heard at work on NPR. Based on a little more reading, there is no law keeping people from having weapons. It is just strongly encouraged from various international groups.
ReplyDeleteGo ahead and try to rule the world. Until you get a whole lot of letters after your name-ideally from Ivy League schools-the chances are not too good. I would vote for you, though, if that is any consolation.
There has recently been a few articles on this subject on outdoorsunlimited.net.
ReplyDelete