Somali pirates

[Vulkyn]

Some info on Somali

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/co...es/1072592.stm

[Boston]

an immediate and overwhelming assault is how you respond to terrorists beating hostages
there killing them anyway so might as well go for it
buddy of mine is a swat officer and that kind of thing generally results in action

my take is a massive attack by land sea and air on the Somali coast, no screwing around with PC just flatten anything resembling a building or vehicle and take anyone wealthy enough to fund the pirates. Then make them show proof of income, or confiscate there stuff and use it to reimburse the families. I read somewhere that there's a few pretty wealthy areas along the Somalia coastline that are likely getting there revenues from the piracy industry.

[hoytedow]

Originally Posted by Boston

an immediate and overwhelming assault is how you respond to terrorists beating hostages
there killing them anyway so might as well go for it
buddy of mine is a swat officer and that kind of thing generally results in action

my take is a massive attack by land sea and air on the Somali coast, no screwing around with PC just flatten anything resembling a building or vehicle and take anyone wealthy enough to fund the pirates. Then make them show proof of income, or confiscate there stuff and use it to reimburse the families. I read somewhere that there's a few pretty wealthy areas along the Somalia coastline that are likely getting there revenues from the piracy industry.

Agree. Make it clear that beatings or violence will result in immediate annihilation. Leave 1 wounded pirate survivor to report back home.

[hoytedow]

Somebody give Boston points, positive or negative, just to show you care.

[whitepointer23]

Originally Posted by Boston

one hellfire missile costs about $70,000 and one predator drone costs about 4 million, then there's the will it ever fly global hawk at 15 million



my bet is that they don't deploy these systems into a theater with difficulties like the ocean environment because it would highlight the radical failings of this program.

thats my idea out the window, from the doco i watched about the predator it looked really good. must have had to much input from the manufacturers. the hell fire missile is a bargain, whats 70k compared to hijacking a ship. even 4 million for the predator is cheap if they sort out the problems. how many of them can you buy compared to one raptor.

That's a very negative outlook on a very positive technology. Everything has bugs to be worked out.

[hoytedow]

Forget the price Predator vs Raptor. Think cost robot pilot vs human pilot. Predators go in harm's way to protect American lives. So what if they have a large crash rate; at least we don't have to mount a rescue mission.

[Boston]

Actually they do launch rescue missions for those things, they are trying to protect the technology. Thing is just like the patriot missiles failed to protect Israel when it was first deployed these first generation remote spyplanes basically all fell out of the sky. Is it another star wars technology that will never make it. Probably not, any fool can fly a RC plane in his backyard, so why cant the military? Probably cause they overcomplicated it. My bet is they will get simpler fast and eventually simpler enough to actually work. Untill then we'll keep hitting birthday parties and weddings rather than the bad guys.

besides who'd want to deny the guys the satisfaction of shooting the pirates themselves, those navy snipers are pretty dam good shots.

[hoytedow]

Even terrorists have weddings and birthdays. Nuke 'em till they glow and shoot them in the dark.

I assume by rescue you mean high temperature neutralization of said UAV?

Light it up after people show up, like they do in the market-place.

[troy2000]

Originally Posted by Boston

Actually they do launch rescue missions for those things, they are trying to protect the technology. Thing is just like the patriot missiles failed to protect Israel when it was first deployed these first generation remote spyplanes basically all fell out of the sky. Is it another star wars technology that will never make it. Probably not, any fool can fly a RC plane in his backyard, so why cant the military? Probably cause they overcomplicated it. My bet is they will get simpler fast and eventually simpler enough to actually work. Untill then we'll keep hitting birthday parties and weddings rather than the bad guys.

besides who'd want to deny the guys the satisfaction of shooting the pirates themselves, those navy snipers are pretty dam good shots.

Boston, the article you quoted was from ten years ago. That's ancient history when it comes to technology, and the "first generation" drones are long gone -- although claiming they made a habit of falling out of the sky is gross exaggeration anyway. You might want to read something a little more up to date, because the US carried out 116 Predator or Reaper strikes in 2010, more than double the number from the year before.

And trust me: most of the targets have not been birthday parties and weddings. As a general rule, the only civilian casualties are the wives and children of anyone dumb enough to let the Taliban meet at his house.

Unmanned drones have also spent long hours aloft just conducting surveillance and gathering intelligence. And we have mini-UAV's the size of pizza platters now, that can hang around for hours on end watching a person or place. They're so quiet that they can hover outside a window watching a room at night, and not be heard.

[troy2000]

More on the use of Predators and Reapers in Pakistan, from an independent Pakistani think tank that specializes in studying the Tribal areas of Pakistan:

Aryana Institute for Regional Research and Advocacy is a think tank of researchers and activists from Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) and Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa province of Pakistan. It conducts research, does surveys and collects statistics on issues concerning Taliban and Al-Qaeda activities in the region. Based in Islamabad, its work has been widely quoted by national and International news media.

Its researchers go deep into FATA into areas not accessible to other journalists. Between November 2008 and January 2009 it conducted a survey of the public opinion about the drone strikes in Federally Administered Tribal Areas. 5 teams of 5 researchers each interviewed a total of 550 people from all walks of life. Based on the responses the researchers concluded 'The popular notion outside the Pakhtun belt that a large majority of the local population supports the Taliban movement lacks substance'. Most people thought that the drone attacks were accurate and did not lead to anti American sentiment and were effective in damaging the militants. In addition the locals wanted the Pakistani forces to also target the militants.

Khadim Hussain, a member of the institute, criticized the attempt of Pakistani government to impose Islamic law in Malakand District and called it a surrender to the militants. In December 2009 he was quoted as saying that the entire FATA was controlled by Haqqani network and any efforts against Taliban that excluded them would be ineffective.

In an analysis published in Daily Times on January 2, 2010 author Farhat Taj, a member of the Institute challenged the view that the local people of Waziristan were against the drone attacks. Author states on the basis of personal interviews with people in Waziristan that the locals in Waziristan support the attacks and see the drones as their 'liberators' from the clutches of Taliban and Pakistan's Intelligence agencies. She further challenged the government of Pakistan to provide accurate figures about the 'civilian' casualties and tell what methodology was used to collect this data. According to her 'The people of Waziristan are suffering a brutal kind of occupation under the Taliban and al Qaeda. It is in this context that they would welcome anyone, Americans, Israelis, Indians or even the devil, to rid them of the Taliban and al Qaeda.'

In response to this analysis Irfan Husain writing in Dawn agreed with her assessment and called for more drone attacks. He wrote 'We need to wake up to the reality that the enemy has grown very strong in the years we temporized and tried to do deals with them. Clearly, we need allies in this fight. Howling at the moon is not going to get us the cooperation we so desperately need. A solid case can be made for more drone attacks, not less."

In short, Boston, don't be in such a hurry to believe propaganda from Al Queda and the Taliban. I see no rational reason to take their word over that of our government, our armed forces, and objective Pakistani observers on the ground.

"don't be in such a hurry to believe propaganda from Al Queda and the Taliban" - Propaganda? Does that include that of Hillary Clinton and the NYT? Example, the b witch promoting Al Jazeera: http://abcnews.go.com/politics/video...aylist=2808979

[Boston]

you did not just tell me to trust the word of the US gubment

I think it was the US supreme court that held the dep of the interior responsible for steeling roughly 100 billion dollars from the native american trust. yet failed to enforce payment
100 years later

trust
and interesting term
reminds me of another term familiar to my brothers
forked tongue

don't worry though I don't believe what any gubment wants me to, I'm one of those independent and capable of critical thinking people that gobments every where are terrified of

if you read my post you would see

My bet is they will get simpler fast and eventually simpler enough to actually work

which should assuage any misgivings you have about why we hit that birthday party or why we blew up a wedding

collateral damage is irrelevant
always has been
always will be

anything else is a PR stunt.

[hoytedow]

Distrust authority, especially when forked-tongue Dems are in authority.

[troy2000]

Originally Posted by mark775

"don't be in such a hurry to believe propaganda from Al Queda and the Taliban" - Propaganda? Does that include that of Hillary Clinton and the NYT? Example, the b witch promoting Al Jazeera: http://abcnews.go.com/politics/video...aylist=2808979

When did this turn into the liberal-bashing thread? Give it a rest.

What Clinton actually said was fairly sensible. A lot of the stuff we've been getting from Al Jazeera is hard news about the uprisings in the Middle East, because they have reporters on the ground who speak the languages and have local contacts. That doesn't mean we have to swallow everything they say or adopt their viewpoint of the world, but they're a useful news outlet.

Of course, if you want to talk slanted news we can take a look at Fox, which has five -- count 'em, five -- potential Republican Presidential candidates on its payroll.

In case you can't count 'em: Newt Gingritch, Rick Santorum, Sarah Palin, Mike Huckabee and John Bolton.