Are terrorists finally quaking in their boots now they know Obama is sending the Navy SEALs after them?

Question

Finally a president who will surgically remove the disease of Terrorism the only way a War on Terror can be fought.

Answer 1

Anyone who thinks that pirates AREN'T terrorists have never had an AK-47 aimed at their head or shot at them. The pirates USE terror to accomplish their sick goal. Otherwise, why all the guns, RPGs, etc? And piracy is not restricted to the Indian Ocean / Gulf of Aden area: there is piracy around the world, and some of the bloodiest has been in the Straits of Malacca in the general area of oil-rich Malaysia, Indonesia, Borneo, etc.



You will be seeing, i guarantee, more 'pure' terrorists get into what had been a 'pure;y' piratical business... at least, they will try. Their success or failure will depend on effective action against such attempts. Look for convoys of ships, escorted by armed multinational naval boats and planes, as well as more usage of ever-advancing GPS warning and tracking devices, such as transponders.



And get this straight: the U.S. Navy's job #1, their "raison d'etre" is NOT to safeguard American shipping, nor was the initial forming of the U.S. Marines. It might be job #2 these days, but that's a different consideration.



What most people don't "get" is that the ship's owner is the ONLY one who can grant permission to the FBI, Navy or anyone else to get involved. Most companies just go ahead and pay the ransom. Insurance companies slap a hefty premium on ships that have armed security. That also costs the shippers big bucks to hire armed guards.



So there were multiple factors in this equation. One of those keys was Obama giving the on-scene commanders any and all authorization to do what needed doing, rather than trying to micro-manage the situation. In this case, the strategy worked and worked well.



My main concern would be to keep the details of the operation a secret. One important result is that it leaves the terrorists / pirate community wondering just exactly what REALLY happened. They would see a freed Captain and NOTHING about how he was freed, NOR who freed him NOR what happened to his captors.



Then I'd fill 4 body-bags with rocks, and 1 pirate in each bag (3 dead, 1 alive) and ooooooops, overboard they'd go. Awwwwwwwww. Then I'd cut up and sink the 'lifeboat' except for 1 piece that would have a "bite" sculpted into that would represent the bite of a 75-foot shark... I'd make sure that THAT piece actually made it to shore. Now THAT would REALLY make them wonder.



Bottom line:

Most of the Armchair Admirals here got it wrong on ALL counts.



Who got it RIGHT?

Obama, Jim Jones' National Security team, The FBI negotiators, the Navy on-site commanders, the SEALs and Captain Phillips. The pro's were given the go-ahead, the authority and responsibility to take ALL necessary action to ensure the safe release of the Captain.



As several retired SEALs and Special Ops personnel stated "Time is our main commodity, safety is our main concern, effectiveness our goal. And we spend our 'main commodity' wisely."

.

Answer 2

The White House was very careful not to call the pirates terrorists. If you want to call them terrorists, that's fine, but they're behaving in the true tradition of piracy. In a sense, I guess all pirates throughout history have relied on terror as one of their weapons. One big difference between the pirates and terrorists is that the pirates aren't trying to effect change through their behavior; they're trying to get rich.



There really was no choice in the outcome of this latest event; the US cannot allow the Somali pirates to continue to prey on shipping because it will undermine US authority on the high seas (which is critical to the future success of this nation's foreign policy and economic strategy.)



The Somali pirates are doubtless undeterred as of yet; they have lots of hostages from other raids, and they'll try and up the ante (perhaps killing a few to a few dozen of their hostages in retaliation.) The bottom line is the Somalis go to sea as pirates because they have little else to offer hope.



If it's wise, the US will continue to respond to incidents of piracy surgically and with force, irregardless of the cost in hostage lives. The end goal will be to put the fear of the US Navy in the pirates so they leave both US shipping and US-sanctioned shipping alone.



The cost of this policy will be very small (especially if Obama continues to downplay the events and decline to take credit for them.) In the end, the pirates will stop antagonizing large vessels and, instead, prey on small, defenseless and independent shipping; a win-win for both sides.

Answer 3

I would hope that Obama will use Military Force to eliminate the Pirate Strongholds in Somalia.



That is what Thomas Jefferson did over 200 years ago when the Barbary Pirates of North Africa were hijacking American Ships and demanding ransom.



Thomas Jefferson sent the Marines into North Africa and wiped out the Pirate Strongholds in North Africa.



That eliminated the Pirate probelm for over 200 years.



We need to wipe out the Pirate strongholds in Somalia.



Fortunately we now have airpower.



Most of that can be done with air strikes on the Places where the Pirate leaders live in Somalia.



And yes, the Somali Pirates are also Musliim Terrorists.

Answer 4

Navy Seals have been involved in the Iraq War since 2003. This is nothing new. The terrorists are not scared. They are waiting for us to leave so they can take over again.

Answer 5

These re pirates but honestly, no one can 'track down' terrorists...its like finding a needle in a haystack, and in all honesty, the buzzword 'terrorism' is just an excuse to invade other countries to steal resources....why else did USA invade Somalia and ditch it leaving it without gov't? Rawanda?

Somalia/ Rawanda has nothing they want...but Iraq on the other hand...mmm OIL...afghanistan..mmm opium!

Answer 6

Sorry, candy cheeks, yet we are held to a intense conventional who serve our united states of america. The regulation of Armed conflict is drilled into our heads from day one, as are the provisions of the Uniform Code of militia Justice. Abuse of a POW is an offense under the LOAC and the UCMJ. there is rarely justification for it and all and sundry who does so is superb referred for disciplinary action. They have been presented Captain's Mast, a sort of non-judicial punishment, under Article 15 of the UCMJ. As is their genuine under Article 15, they voluntarily chosen to be tried at courtroom Martial. that would artwork of their desire, i've got seen it ensue. i've got additionally seen it backfire. The President has no direct impression thus and it would be unlawful for him (or all and sundry else contained in the Chain of Command) to wield any impression in basic terms before their trial. in the event that they're convicted at courtroom Martial the convening authority would desire to check the conviction and would approve the call and punishment, vacate the call, or decrease the punishment. he or she can not impose a harsher punishment. as quickly as THAT evaluation technique is complete, the provider Secretary or The President would desire to step in and vacate the call or impose a lesser sentence in the event that they needed to take action. The President may additionally issue a pardon at any time AFTER the call is rendered. it rather is exceedingly obtrusive that lots of the respondents listed under are clueless of ways the militia justice equipment operates. Now you have been knowledgeable by potential of an authority. BTW, it would help in case you found out the adaptation between "metallic" and "meDal." the only "metallic" that they are going to see is the slamming of the metallic doorways of a penitentiary cellular in the event that they're convicted. Medals at the instant are not given out for breaking the regulation, a minimum of no longer contained in the U. S. militia.

Answer 7

I'm glad for it, yes. It makes more sense to me to have your military forces have a specific mission, with specific objectives, specific targets, specific outcomes, and specific ways of determining whether or not its objectives have been obtained.



You don't need a flotilla to kill 4 pirates, no matter what Fox News says. Do the words "swatting a fly with a cannon" mean anything?

Answer 8

No but to the pirates who had three members killed, one arrested, and came away with no money and no cargo it should send a message to them. Pick on the wrong country and pay the price.*

Answer 9

There is a terrorist group in somila...Al-Shabaab. It has been suggested their funding is coming from the pirates.

Answer 10

Those were pirates.

It is the duty of the US Navy and US Marine Corps to protect US shipping on the high seas.

That was it's original mission.



Terrorists are waiting for Obama to withdraw US troops from Iraq.

Answer 11

Yes.



After bush's failed vow to capture bin laden 'dead or alive" it's nice to see a President that can actually get things done fighting terrorists.

Answer 12

terrorists and pirates are two different things.

The Obama administration fights them both in their appropriate way.



The pirates are fought on the seas - not in the ports they briefly visit.

The terrorists are fought in the countries in which they act and hide.

Answer 13

If they know what they did to those pirates, they should be scared.

Answer 14

If we send them rice and powdered eggs will they give up their million dollar business and become good citizens?

Answer 15

These guys were not even terrorists. They were pirates.

Answer 16

Doubt it. Obama can't even manage to CALL THEM WHAT THEY ARE: Terrorists. Did you forget that?

Answer 17

Those were pirates not terrorists.

Answer 18

i don't think so , they are threatening to kill americans in retaliation

Answer 19

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA



Now THAT'S funny...



ANSWER: Um, NO.