Is It 1979 All Over Again?
Someone please help me answer this:Â If Obama cannot stand up to Somali pirates who capture a US vessel and kidnap its captain… how confident am I that he will protect the USA from much more serious enemies who have already declared war on America and Western values and who want to murder Americans by the thousands?
Answer: Scared to death.
-Bruce (GayPatriot)
27 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
He won’t stand up for us, but he’ll apologize and bite on a pillow for us. That’s the “changeâ„¢ we needed”.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — April 10, 2009 @ 6:28 pm - April 10, 2009
Well, as history has shown us, for every Jimmy Carter there is a Ronald Reagan. Let’s see who carries the mantle in 2012.
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — April 10, 2009 @ 6:46 pm - April 10, 2009
It seems to me that we should make an example of these pirates: do what it takes to get the captain back and then blow the pirates to kingdom come.
In defense of Obama, greater minds than His have struggled with piracy.
Rick Brookhiser at NRO: George Washington negotiated, and John Adams signed, a treaty with the bashaw of Tripoli in which we agreed to pay protection money to spare our ships from attack and asserted that America “was not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.”
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YWEyNjZjMGFkY2ZjMzlkZjBiNzk2NWFlZWEyYWYzMzk=
Comment by SoCalRobert — April 10, 2009 @ 8:07 pm - April 10, 2009
Filtered: but see interesting post at NRO
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YWEyNjZjMGFkY2ZjMzlkZjBiNzk2NWFlZWEyYWYzMzk=
Comment by SoCalRobert — April 10, 2009 @ 8:07 pm - April 10, 2009
Ok.. Genr’l Bruce. Whats your operational plan?
Comment by Tom in Lazybrook — April 10, 2009 @ 8:07 pm - April 10, 2009
Peter, I hope we don’t have a catastrophe before 2012, that is what I fear, they won’t wait that long to hit us.
Comment by Leah — April 10, 2009 @ 8:09 pm - April 10, 2009
In not issuing a strong statement and a willingness to change international agreements re. arming cargo shipping and merchant marines (or withdrawing from them), the administration is issuing an invitation to anyone with an urge to do harm, especially to Americans. I’m being damn cynical, but I wonder how many Americans are secretly cheering that a crew from the United States got its “come-uppance” via a lawless band of thugs.
Comment by Ignatius — April 10, 2009 @ 8:39 pm - April 10, 2009
Aww, don’t be so hard on Obama. He’s had that big swarm of honeybees on a bush nightmare at the white house to worry about. Plus, he had to come up with lies to cover his behind over the incident of bowing to the Saudi king. He’s been a busy man.
Comment by Patriot Goddess — April 10, 2009 @ 9:45 pm - April 10, 2009
We need somebody like Lt. Robert Maynard.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — April 11, 2009 @ 1:56 am - April 11, 2009
Iran knows Obama is another Democrat pantywaist, and they are celebrating his weakness by trying an Iranian-American journalist for espionage this week. I fear she will die just so the mullahs can test the depths of Obama’s weakness. God forbid.
Comment by American Elephant — April 11, 2009 @ 3:30 am - April 11, 2009
filtered
Comment by American Elephant — April 11, 2009 @ 3:31 am - April 11, 2009
So you want every thug around the world to know that all he has to do is take a hostage to engage the POTUS?
Not to mention this is what day 3…4 and the pirates are sourrounded by war ships.
The question in my mind is how do you define “stand up to Somali pirates” ?
Comment by James Sherman — April 11, 2009 @ 7:51 am - April 11, 2009
Holy sh*t. You’re scared of Somali pirates now? I mean what would you have him do?
Comment by Levi — April 11, 2009 @ 9:50 am - April 11, 2009
I agree with Bruce that something more needs to be done, but I think the blame game is intellectually dishonest. This has been going on since the previous administration. That is NOT to say it is the previous administration’s fault, but it’s intellectually dishonest to single out this administration without recognizing the failure of the previous administration as well. They have both been terribly lazy in responding to the threat of piracy, and a mere three or four ships is not enough for a coastline roughly the size of the US eastern seaboard.
Tom in Lazybrook, my own thoughts are that we need a two pronged approach. First, we need to begin more vigorously monitoring the coast line and identifying areas the pirates are using as safe havens. The French have done this and captured or killed 30 pirates who had hijacked a French-flagged yacht. It is a deceptively large coastline, I admit, but there are only so many areas capable of handling the type of activity we’re talking about. Focus recon efforts in those areas, identify the mother ships the pirates are using, and hit them with cruise missiles, predator drones, or Navy SEALs depending on what the situation warrants. At see, we need to deploy additional ships with an amphibious assault ship or helicopter carrier at the center of the task force, and change the ROA with suspected pirates — instead of futzing around with the current “catch and release” protocol they seem to have (we capture 16 “suspected” pirates earlier who were fleeing from a ship they tried to hijack, only to release them for “lack of evidence”), fire a single shot across the bow of suspected pirates… if they keep running, blow them out of the water. Pirates didn’t use to get due process and, if they did, it was quick and aboard the ship that captured them. I never thought I would agree with Pat Buchanan, but he was right the other day on Scarborough when he said we should just kill them. This is nonsense. (However, I also place no trust in the Somalis to handle this themselves. Some UK paper ran a piece the other day with the Somalis complaining nobody was helping them and, if only they got some international aid, they could shut down the pirates internally. Rubbish… the graft and corruption in that country is legendary and the aid is just going to wind up in the hands of the pirates themselves.)
Comment by CR — April 11, 2009 @ 11:21 am - April 11, 2009
Levi- Kill them. Killing pirates is what the first ships of the United States Navy were built to do; killing pirates was recognized as a duty- not a perogative, a DUTY- of ALL of the navies of the world; killing pirates is the thing that kept piracy to a nonexistant state until…well, until people like YOU got in charge.
But I guess you have a better idea: something like subsidizing piracy in the hopes that the pirates will voluntarily leave the line of business that you’ve rendered profitable without risk. After all, that method has worked so well for North Korea, right?
And Levi, in case you had no idea… taking responsibility for problems like this is part of the President’s job. It was part of the job for every previous President, and Obama isn’t going to be allowed to vote “Present” on it just because he has no idea what to do.
Comment by DaveP. — April 11, 2009 @ 11:22 am - April 11, 2009
Sure, I support killing the pirates as well, especially if that is the most effective way of getting the captain back. While this situation is obviously not good, it is not a major threat to the security of our nation. So being pragmatic and careful seems to be a good approach at this time.
Comment by Pat — April 11, 2009 @ 1:19 pm - April 11, 2009
What to worry? Didn´t Joe Biden say we are safer now than during the Bush/Cheney Administration? I really believe it. Also, I have money available to buy a bridge in Brooklyn from whomever owns it.
Comment by Roberto — April 11, 2009 @ 1:23 pm - April 11, 2009
Steyn has a good column up today re the pirates:
Meanwhile, the Royal Navy, which over the centuries did more than anyone to rid the civilized world of the menace of piracy, now declines even to risk capturing their Somali successors, having been advised by Her Majesty’s Government that, under the European Human Rights Act, any pirate taken into custody would be entitled to claim refugee status in the United Kingdom and live on welfare for the rest of his life…When all the world’s a “distraction,” maybe you’re not the main event after all. Most wealthy nations lack the means to defend themselves. Those few that do, lack the will. Meanwhile, basket-case jurisdictions send out ever bolder freelance marauders to prey on the civilized world with impunity.
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/distraction-world-pirates-2361189-states-distractions
Comment by SoCalRobert — April 11, 2009 @ 2:00 pm - April 11, 2009
Levi- Kill them.
That’s retarded. This is a tiny little boat and we’d be extremely likely to kill the American hostage. How about waiting them out for another couple of days until they run out of food and water and are pleading with us to pick them up and send them to jail?
Further, how exactly can you insist that Obama has responsibility for this? Shouldn’t it be the responsibility of the military negotiators and commanders at the scene? You’d like the leader of the free world to personally handle matters as trivial as this?
Comment by Levi — April 11, 2009 @ 2:31 pm - April 11, 2009
#17: “You’d like the leader of the free world to personally handle matters as trivial as this?”
Trivial? Levi, you only find it trivial because Obama has chosen to avoid the issue for fear of offending the Muslim pirate community. You also find it “trivial” because you are viewing it in isolation, with no consideration of the novel idea of handling the crisis in a way that will discourage future acts of piracy and terrorism (thereby preventing more deaths of seamen). To you, it’s just a little boat out in the ocean with one insignificant American being held captive by a band of roguish upstarts. Meanwhile, pirates have struck AGAIN, even during the current standoff:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/11/somali-pirates-hijack-tugboat
And why shouldn’t they, Levi? We certainly aren’t doing anything about it.
Of course, this is all coming from a person who no doubt joined the chorus of idiots condemning President Bush for not personally meeting with every individual family who had lost a loved one in the War on Terror and for not turning the Oval Office into a 24-hour grief center.
Comment by Sean A — April 11, 2009 @ 3:21 pm - April 11, 2009
Yes Levi, Kill them. It’s that simple. Why we didn’t blow the boat to hell when the captain swam for it is beyond me.
We make it clear, “You let the captain go, you live. You don’t, you die, hung from the dock with bacon stuffed in your mouth, your rotting damned corpses serving as warnings to others.”
Comment by The_Livewire — April 11, 2009 @ 4:46 pm - April 11, 2009
How about waiting them out for another couple of days until they run out of food and water and are pleading with us to pick them up and send them to jail?
The pirates are in the ship’s lifeboat. This is a covered fiberglass vessel, which first off reduces their risk of exposure. Since it came off a US-flagged vessel, that means that it has to follow US law, which means that that lifeboat likely contains food sufficient to sustain the entire 20-person crew of the Alabama for weeks, as well as a reverse-osmosis desalinator that allows them to make fresh water from seawater.
Think your strategy is going to work now?
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — April 11, 2009 @ 10:08 pm - April 11, 2009
It sounds like a job for a hostage negotiator.
Then again maybe its 1985 when Reagan let the PLO terrorists get away that hijacked a cruise ship and killed Leon Klinghoffer, a US citizen.
Or maybe its 2000 when Bush issued a letter of apology to the Chinese gov’t for in incident by hinan (sp?) island off the coast of China. Our spy plane collided with a chinese jet if you don’t recall. The crew was held and interrogated for 10 days. Were we all held hostage for 10 days? Its hard to remember.
These things take time.
Comment by Chuck In Del — April 11, 2009 @ 10:49 pm - April 11, 2009
Yes Levi, Kill them. It’s that simple. Why we didn’t blow the boat to hell when the captain swam for it is beyond me.
Livewire, if we could have done it without fear of the captain’s safety, we damn well should have.
Comment by Pat — April 11, 2009 @ 11:05 pm - April 11, 2009
Leftists don’t understand peace through strength. When you are the big dog, most little pip squeeks don’t mess with you. Bush 43 and Cheney would have launched a cruise missle and blown the pirates out of the water. How many copy cat pirates would have followed? You people don’t understand the forward projection of power. If you aren’t willing to use it, don’t let your navy leave port. Levi squeeks “what do you expect Obama to do”….whine whine whine. Poor weak Mr President. The pip squeeks around the world knew Obama was going to be a talking do nothing Commander in Chief. This is just the start.
A disturbing video is Sec of State Clinton giggling uncontrollably when asked about piracey off the coast of Africa particularly off Moroco. Her punch drunk giggling was very distrubing and I’m sure another weak signal to the bad guys.
Comment by Gene on Pennsylvania — April 11, 2009 @ 11:47 pm - April 11, 2009
BTW another day or two and the captain is going to be dead of dehydration. “What’s Obama to do?” What ever happended to YES WE CAN, fraud. Boobs, morons, creeps and crooks. Day 84. Wake up Levi you have to admit to Stockholm Syndrome. You’re guy is impotent.
Comment by Gene on Pennsylvania — April 11, 2009 @ 11:51 pm - April 11, 2009
Gene, according to North Dallas Thirty, the life boat is equiped with enough food to sustain a crew of 20 for weeks, with a water desaliniser.
What is your suggestion on how to save the captain? Not snarky, just asking.
Comment by Chuck In Del — April 11, 2009 @ 11:56 pm - April 11, 2009