Somali Pirates and Obama

April 12th, 2009 By: Michael van der Galien | Tags:

After Somali pirates hijacked an American ship earlier this week, most of the crew got away. The captain, however, was taken hostage. The pirates say they will release him if they are paid $2 million. Obviously, Washington D.C., cannot agree to such a deal.

It took the media and bloggers a few days – initial reaction was calm – but slowly but surely people started to wonder whether there was not something Obama could and should do. At the very moment that debate ignited, other Somali pirates hijacked yet another American boat.

The result: Team Obama has an international emergency on its hands. The longer the hostage situation lasts, the more people will join the growing chorus of hardline critics. Some, such as Duane Patterson on Ed Morrissey’s Internet Talk Radio Show yesterday, believe the U.S. should consider the pirates terrorists. This means they have to be dealt with swiftly, smoothly and violently.

Others, such as Morrissey himself, believe Obama was right – initially at least – to refrain from commenting on the crisis. There was not much he could do – negotations were (still are) in progress. Everything he says about the matter will have an impact. As such, keeping his mouth shut (correct me if I summarize your earlier position wrongly Ed) was Obama’s only option.

Reports now say some members of the military are advocating a military response. Attack the pirates and the extremists on land. Destroy their training facilities. Do not let them get away with this, do not treat them like common criminals.

I initially believed the pirates should be treated like… pirates, but the more I read about this matter, the more I get the impression that extremism might actually be involved. Somalia has a tremendous radicals-problem. If the pirates resemble Osama Bin Laden more in their beliefs than Captain Jack Sparrow, the U.S. has no other choice but to try to rescue the hostages and to bomb pirates and Somali extremists wherever they are.

You can, in theory, negotiate with criminals – not with extremists.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. craig
    April 12th, 2009 at 03:08
    Reply | Quote | #1

    Lets wake up. The people in the position to save Mr Richard Phillips (an AMERICAN) should have done so at first. This is the first time in a very long time that the pirates have captured an AMERICAN! If we do nothing and let the pirates continue we (USA) are asking for further trouble. What would be next? A carnival cruise line held captive by pirates sometime soon? Lets get our American freed asap! Freedom isn’t fee is we (USA) can’t even protect our citizens in harm way. Furthermore countries who host pirates need to be dealt with in the utmost hand of the highest law. Please save Mr. Phillips!

  2. craig
    April 12th, 2009 at 05:00
    Reply | Quote | #2

    Please read A Cooperative Strategy
    for 21st Century Seapower United states Navy
    I hope somebody could understand the need to protect and defend our citizens and not too wait. Please send these pirates a msg not to take free people hostage. Thank you

  3. John T
    April 12th, 2009 at 05:00
    Reply | Quote | #3

    It’s starting to look like the administration is only interested in getting away from this story, and that the compliant MSM are doing their best to bury the problem for them.

    The ships’ captain is a brave and good man and he deserves better.

  4. Bob McCarty
    April 12th, 2009 at 17:03
    Reply | Quote | #4

    It appears the liberals have found a way to end piracy. They’re going to stage a series of 12 benefit concerts for the pirates, beginning July 13, 2009, and ending July 13, 2010 — the 25th anniversary of the first LIVE AID concert to benefit Ethiopian famine relief efforts.

Comments are closed.

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.