Reuters: Somali Pirates Form Investment Cooperative

[leroi]

"World political powers focus on Afghanistan as Somalia time bomb ticks:  For the military experts meeting here, Somalia is a time bomb that the world is not giving much attention. Somalia, like Afghanistan, has al Qaida cells, which according to Nathan Mugisha, the commander of the African Union peacekeeping force in Somalia, are getting stronger.":
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-12/04/content_12584973.htm

Yes mariomike, as I've come to understand the piracy problem,  the impoverished thugs are being organized by al-Qaeda because it's one of their target areas.  Al-Qaeda refer to the Gulf of Aden as "the throat" and want to keep a "stranglehold" on that area preventing the movement of trade, oil,  supplies to our troops, etc.

Perhaps, I'm oversimplifying; feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[Kat Stevens]

That it would cost to much political and financially to do what is actually needed, especially seeing how much in the hole US is and some NATO countries are with Iraq and Afghanistan a long with the reminder of what happened last time anything was attempted in Somalia?

So your solution is to pour more of our hateful Western decadent capitalist money into the deep dark hole that is Africa?  I can't believe you are defending the behavior of common thugs.  Maybe your opinion of our fictional mugger and those like him would change if you'd ever been on the wrong end of a mugging.  Your defense of these alleged people is mind boggling.

 

[mellian]

What you are saying is that due US is and some NATO countries actions with Iraq, Financially and Politically , the Government of Somalia would rather have the Villains continue to raid and Pirate the area where "Western" ships roam.

I was referring to countries fighting the piracy. The legal western backed 'government' would not be able to do much about it even if they wanted to as they focus on Islamic insurgents and various warlords.

And that sits well with you.....
Why?

A lot of things in the world does not sit with me, but I not going to advocate bombing them.

So your solution is to pour more of our hateful Western decadent capitalist money into the deep dark hole that is Africa? 

Last I check, bombing them would also cost money, including all out invasion. It costs money to just fight piracy. So no matter what, it will cost money to deal with and resolve much of the problems of Africa, a long with ignore them in the case of Somali piracy.

I can't believe you are defending the behavior of common thugs.  Maybe your opinion of our fictional mugger and those like him would change if you'd ever been on the wrong end of a mugging.  Your defense of these alleged people is mind boggling.

Understanding and pointing out what is going on there and why the piracy is happening is not defending them. Bombing the pirate 'stock exchange' is not going to resolve or really dent the entire piracy problem.

If you are looking for me to chose a side, I chose to fight piracy and support all the Navies that are.

Just saying there is other means and ways of resolving a problem than bombing someone.

 

[Fusaki]

I hate to agree with mellian (and I REALLY hate to agree with mellian), but dropping JDAMs on Somalia won't stop the pirate problem. 

Dropping bombs worked in Lybia (and Kosovo, Iraq '91, ect) because there was a centralized authority to target and coerce.  What are you going to target in Somalia? Haradeere?  That will work once, but by the time the smoke clears the rest of the pirates will have decentralized themselves into the countryside.  Then what?  Bomb every tin hut within 50km of the beach?  Fighting piracy doesn't justify genocide.

Maybe a better idea would be for a Private Military Company to establish a shipping corridor and monitor it by a fleet of armed UAVs.  The corridor would be well away from coastline so fisherman would have no reason stray into the area and the company would be given the legal authority to use lethal force against small boats with armed men entering the area.  Now, I'll admit that I don't know who would pay for this or the details in how it would be implemented.  I'm not an expert on international law or the legality of lighting up pirate ships on the high seas.

My point is just that indiscriminate violence is not good enough.  In this situation, the only effective deterrent is targeted violence.  Because of the decentralized nature of the pirate threat,  you need to kill individuals as they are caught in the act. 

No pirate will be stopped if he thinks his chances of living or dying are the same regardless of his individual actions.  The only thing what will stop him is the knowledge that chances of dying actually increase whenever he goes out on the water, but decrease if he finds another line of work.

So, looking back on this post I can't help but thinking: I might agree with mellian, but does she agree with me? >

 

[mellian]

So, looking back on this post I can't help but thinking: I might agree with mellian, but does she agree with me? >

Why would I not? I completely agree with what you said, apart from the private corridor thing as it does not seem realistically possible. 

 

[ballz]

Your defense of these alleged people is mind boggling.

That's really putting words into somebody's mouth. Where did she "defend" anything they did/do?

She doesn't agree with killing a large mass of people for the sake of killing a large mass of people while knowing it won't make a difference. I don't either. That's mind boggling? The surface area of a human lung is the same as a tennis court. That's mind boggling. A cubic mile of fog contains one gallon of water. That's mind boggling. An electron pops in and out of existence at random. That's mind boggling. I have a Rubik's cube. It's mind boggling.

Not agreeing with dropping a bomb or two on a bunch of random hungry people, that does not quite measure up to my definition of "mind boggling."

 

[bdave]

Mellian,

How do you propose we stop the Somalians from pirating?

Your points are:
-Not all of them do it for greed
-The problems lies too deep to solve by investing any money (peaceful solution not exactly possible)
-Bombing them is bad because bombing people who can't help their situation is immoral.

However, you don't offer a solution.
Killing people is bad, yes. And some of them do it out of necessity but that doesn't make them right.
A criminal might break into my house and steal my television and sell it. His motivation is he had a tough life and knows nothing else. He might have kids to feed.
The thing is, it's still illegal and that doesn't make him right. The world doesn't work like that.
If someone breaks into my home, and steals my stuff, and i can do something about it (i have several cans of whoop ass that i am willing to offer to our surely hungry guest, in my cupboard), then i will.
While i sense a certain distaste for the west, in your posts, I do agree that bombing innocent people is wrong.
However, bombing criminals is A-OK.
An attack on our people is an attack on us. I really could not care less what some criminal is thinking or feeling.
We all have problems. We all need a way to put food on our table and we all need shelter to protect ourselves and our loved ones.
All that being said, WE come first.
We can be myself, my loved ones, my friends, my country (wo)men and my country.
If some guy, who has problems, decides to mess with something i hold dear, well then it is him versus me.
I don't care about his problems when he is causing problems for me.

If bombing is what it takes to stop Somalians from being pirates (aka criminals), then so be it.
Until someone offers a BETTER solution, it is the only solution we got.
Don't invest money into that shit hole, fine. However, stand by and doing nothing? No.
You might think that sending JDAMs their way won't really act as a deterrent but as far as i know, doing nothing acts even less as a deterrent.
Real people with real lives are in danger. I'm not gonna let some misplaced pity get in the way of protecting what comes first: Us.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Hijacking back to the economics, this from the Associated Press:

A parcel of land here that sold for $12,000 two years ago now costs more than $20,000. The price of a nice pair of men's shoes has gone up from $20 to $50.

The reason: pirates.

The influx of millions of dollars in ransoms has changed life in this coastal Muslim community, driving prices up and creating a schism between the pirate haves and have-nots. As piracy ramps up again with the end of the monsoon season, the lifestyle of the pirates _ big houses, fast cars and easy drugs _ is decried by both religious leaders and ordinary villagers ....

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Wow, just wow.

 

[Loachman]

I knew that I should have bought that property in Somalia when I had the chance, instead of blowing all of my money on booze and women.

 

[mellian]

How do you propose we stop the Somalians from pirating?

I have no solution, and I would be a fool to say that I had one. I just point out that bombing them serves no real purpose, that is all. Whatever the solution may be, it requires a lot of political will and the finances to spend, and at present, there is no country willing to do anything about it apart from sending naval ships and fight piracy when it happens, rescue hostages, etc.

 

[mellian]

Hijacking back to the economics, this from the Associated Press:

Going from practically nothing to millions in short few years would make any economy go out of whack and attract many from all walks of life.

 

[Kat Stevens]

That's really putting words into somebody's mouth. Where did she "defend" anything they did/do?

She doesn't agree with killing a large mass of people for the sake of killing a large mass of people while knowing it won't make a difference. I don't either. That's mind boggling? The surface area of a human lung is the same as a tennis court. That's mind boggling. A cubic mile of fog contains one gallon of water. That's mind boggling. An electron pops in and out of existence at random. That's mind boggling. I have a Rubik's cube. It's mind boggling.

Not agreeing with dropping a bomb or two on a bunch of random hungry people, that does not quite measure up to my definition of "mind boggling."

Then please allow me to rephrase, as I find your argument sound.  The word "defend" is hereby withdrawn, and is replaced with "justify".  All better?  These guys aren't pirating for subsistence, it's not like they're pinching a loaf (he he) of bread from a grocery store, they're making mega bucks, the motivation is greed, not necessity.

 

[NL_engineer]

I still think we should use them as a place to destroy old nukes  ;D just like another place that will remain unnamed cough*Iran*cough.

 

[Loachman]

These guys aren't pirating for subsistence, it's not like they're pinching a loaf (he he) of bread from a grocery store, they're making mega bucks, the motivation is greed, not necessity.

Those at the top of heap, most assuredly, and they need and deserve to be dealt with swiftly, surely, and harshly.

Those at the bottom are perhaps motivated by necessity.

I can sympathize somewhat with them, but not too much.

 

[mellian]

Then please allow me to rephrase, as I find your argument sound.  The word "defend" is hereby withdrawn, and is replaced with "justify".  All better?  These guys aren't pirating for subsistence, it's not like they're pinching a loaf (he he) of bread from a grocery store, they're making mega bucks, the motivation is greed, not necessity.

I am not justifying either, just understanding. What is driving the piracy to continue is certainly greed, but for many who get involved is because of necessity. We are no better here if something similar happens. Until they have better economic alternatives, it is going to be hard weaning them off it.

 

[Kat Stevens]

You have convinced me.  Let us not punish these people.  After all, they're only taking other peoples property at the point of a gun, and then selling it back to them at bargain prices.  And they're only doing it because us vile decadent western devils aren't guaranteeing everyone in Africa a job with our hateful money.  Sounds reasonable to me.

 

[bdave]

Wow, just wow.

I have no solution, and I would be a fool to say that I had one. I just point out that bombing them serves no real purpose, that is all. Whatever the solution may be, it requires a lot of political will and the finances to spend, and at present, there is no country willing to do anything about it apart from sending naval ships and fight piracy when it happens, rescue hostages, etc.

Bombing serves as a deterrent.
Do you think doing nothing is more beneficial?

If yes, explain why.

 

[Fusaki]

This thread is frustrating me.

Bombing serves as a deterrent.
Do you think doing nothing is more beneficial?

If yes, explain why.

I don't need to provide an alternative solution to the piracy situation in order to point out that indiscriminately dropping JDAMs on Somalia is a waste of money, ordinance,  is morally wrong, and would do absolutely NOTHING to solve the problem.  Dropping bombs is NOT a deterrent and would do nothing to disrupt pirate operations:

Dropping bombs worked in Lybia (and Kosovo, Iraq '91, ect) because there was a centralized authority to target and coerce.  What are you going to target in Somalia? Haradeere?  That will work once, but by the time the smoke clears the rest of the pirates will have decentralized themselves into the countryside.  Then what?  Bomb every tin hut within 50km of the beach?  Fighting piracy doesn't justify genocide.

My point is just that indiscriminate violence is not good enough.  In this situation, the only effective deterrent is targeted violence.  Because of the decentralized nature of the pirate threat,  you need to kill individuals as they are caught in the act. 

No pirate will be stopped if he thinks his chances of living or dying are the same regardless of his individual actions.  The only thing what will stop him is the knowledge that chances of dying actually increase whenever he goes out on the water, but decrease if he finds another line of work.

But this thread isn't about piracy anymore.  It's a pissing match between personalities.

Gay.

 

[George Wallace]

Bombing serves as a deterrent.

OK Mike......The site has gone wonkie.


I had to amend this post, as everything I spent my time typing has disappeared........



I'll try again:




I have to agree with mellian and Wonderbread here.  Bombing without putting boots on the ground serves absolutely no purpose and is a great expense for nothing positive in return. 

About the only thing we can do is to arrest all pirates who are conducting illegal activities in International waters and bring them to justice and incarcerate them.  We can not invade a "Sovereign Nation".

Anyone who thinks Air Superiority, without Ground Forces, is in anyway effective in fighting a war or crime, is not facing reality.  How do you even know if the target you bomb is in fact the target you want?  How do you even know if you have hit the target that you want?  Perhaps it was somewhere else.

If you want to bomb, then you had better be prepared to invade and control the Ground.  If you do invade, how long do you expect to stay and clean up the mess?  This isn't Mcdonalds.  It would take several decades.