"Big Gov." or "free market" solution to Somali pirates? (enemy, illegal)

[harborlady]

Originally Posted by Bostonian123

Your argument makes no sense. This is an attack by foreigners on US citizens which requires a military response. Who is in charge of the military? That would be the Federal government.

This is utter fallacy. These are individual criminals not sanctioned by the government, however, that government is not responsible for it's own controls. A criminal who happens to be from turkey coming at me on open seas doesn't require national guard to come out to defend me. I'll rid myself of him directly TYVM.

[harborlady]

Originally Posted by bls5555

So if an American goes someplace that you don't feel they should be going, they don't deserve protection from our government? My argument DOES make sense. Where exactly is the line you draw? When an American citizen goes to Mexico and something happens to them. DO they not deserve help from our Government?

Im trying to understand where you are coming from. As for your tax money question in the OP. THere are probably far bigger concerns about where your tax money is going besides this.

If I go to afghanistan right now, I had better expect that since law and order are essentially absent, I am taking my own life into my own hands.

If I go to mexico and break the laws of mexico, there is no recourse for me to be tried by my prefered habeus corpus jury of peers system. I am at the mercy of mexicos system by virtue of putting myself there & not doing as the romans do while visiting. I deserve no special privilege and 3/4's of the armed services sent to break me out of jail is an abuse of military function/ mission.

[NVplumber]

A very simple solution to the problem with these pirates is for target vessels to be armed. They don't doso now because of insurance purposes. Utterly moronic! The insurance companies won't underwrite a vessel to be armed, because of the "risk", but are willing to shell out BILLIONS in ransom money, lost merchandise and damage to the ships? Seems a bit skewed to me. A properly trained gun crew could take care of the problem. Watch how fast these pirates go away when their victims show up with a 20mm Vulcan on a crows nest turret. Seems the "risk" of arming the merchant ships is miniscule in comparison with the current state of affairs.

[harborlady]

NVplumb, seems like a no brainer to me. I feel your pain. Plan B is just as dopo described... don't go there. It's lawless territory that the somali gov't itself is unwilling to control. I'm not willing to send my brothers in arms to be the sheriff of every port on the planet. How nuts is that??? This is like the liberal version of imperialism.

[NVplumber]

Originally Posted by harborlady

NVplumb, seems like a no brainer to me. I feel your pain. Plan B is just as dopo described... don't go there. It's lawless territory that the somali gov't itself is unwilling to control. I'm not willing to send my brothers in arms to be the sheriff of every port on the planet. How nuts is that??? This is like the liberal version of imperialism.

Sendig the Navy in is not required, no. But I'm sure that our frigate and destroyer sailors would be OK with a "search and destroy" type mission. I don't think that they would be in to much danger from the pirates in their little speedboats and dingys. It would just be target practice. But they are needed elswhere and a properly armed mechant vessel could handle things just fine. The pirates would slink away, tail between their legs, after a few of their compatriots spent their last breaths sayng OH**** as a line of tracers arcs toward their little boat from a "helpless" merchant ship

[Dopo]

Originally Posted by stanman13

If you are going to require a "free-market solution," you'll have to give them all of the free-market options, such as arming themselves. As soon as governments limit this solution, they take over responsibility for the problem.

Are you sure you want all these commercial vessels arming themselves? It would solve the problem, and is really the only true "free-market solution."

How is the government restricting their right to have AK-47s in their ship?
All they have to do... is go and buy a few AK-47 and take care of business.
But from what I've heard, they don't do that because the insurance is gonna be to expensive,
so our government with my tax money has to go over there and save their a...

Hire XE (Blackwater) and we won't have to save you from pirates
Ship owners debate carrying weapons to fend off Somali pirates as attacks increase - WHNT (http://www.whnt.com/news/nationworld/sns-ap-piracy-why-no-guns,0,4005054.story - broken link)

Last October, the American firm XE — then known as Blackwater — offered a ship fitted with helicopters and armed guards for escorting vessels past the lawless Somalia coast. But spokeswoman Anne Tyrrell said the company, had had no takers so far.

[ViewFromThePeak]

Even the most ardent libertarians believe that a nation must have at least a minimal military structure to defend its sovereignty and those who are threatened in neutral waters.

[Dopo]

I believe in protecting citizens,
I don't believe in using our tax money to protect cargo ships from companies that don't want to spend money to protect themselves.

India sinks Somali pirate ship - November 2008
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7736885.stm

[stanman13]

Originally Posted by Dopo

How is the government restricting their right to have AK-47s in their ship?
All they have to do... is go and buy a few AK-47 and take care of business.
But from what I've heard, they don't do that because the insurance is gonna be to expensive,
so our government with my tax money has to go over there and save their a...

Hire XE (Blackwater) and we won't have to save you from pirates
Ship owners debate carrying weapons to fend off Somali pirates as attacks increase - WHNT (http://www.whnt.com/news/nationworld/sns-ap-piracy-why-no-guns,0,4005054.story - broken link)

Last October, the American firm XE — then known as Blackwater — offered a ship fitted with helicopters and armed guards for escorting vessels past the lawless Somalia coast. But spokeswoman Anne Tyrrell said the company, had had no takers so far.

Very good point and actually I agree with you. It really wouldn't take much to keep these guys off the ship.

[harborlady]

Originally Posted by Dopo

How is the government restricting their right to have AK-47s in their ship?
All they have to do... is go and buy a few AK-47 and take care of business.
But from what I've heard, they don't do that because the insurance is gonna be to expensive,
so our government with my tax money has to go over there and save their a...

Hire XE (Blackwater) and we won't have to save you from pirates
Ship owners debate carrying weapons to fend off Somali pirates as attacks increase - WHNT (http://www.whnt.com/news/nationworld/sns-ap-piracy-why-no-guns,0,4005054.story - broken link)

Last October, the American firm XE — then known as Blackwater — offered a ship fitted with helicopters and armed guards for escorting vessels past the lawless Somalia coast. But spokeswoman Anne Tyrrell said the company, had had no takers so far.

Seems to me the insurance companies themselves need to get out of their own way. How about they pay the hostage $$$ 500x's before they wake up and smell the cost of doing business???

They're counting on america to cover their hiney's and this is BS. You want our navy to protect you with escort, here is the price tag. Now do your math again, and think really hard before coming around uncle sam looking for welfare abroad.