Semper f'n FI! Marines Rescue Ship from Somali Pirates

[GunnyFreedom]

Remember about a year and a half ago when the US Navy SEAL's rescued a ship from Somali pirates through the use of coordinated sniper fire? Yeah, that was pretty awesome, and one of the few just uses of military force we have seen in this day and age.

Well, the Marines have just upped the ante. :D


Marines Rescue Cargo Ship From Somali Pirates (http://www.military.com/news/article/marines-rescue-cargo-ship-from-somali-pirates.html?ESRC=marine.nl)

MANAMA, Bahrain - U.S. Marine commandos stormed a pirate-held cargo vessel off the Somalia coast Thursday, reclaiming control of the ship and taking nine prisoners without firing a shot, the U.S. Navy said.

...

In April 2009, a team of Navy Seal sharpshooters positioned on the fantail of a U.S. warship killed a trio of Somali pirates to free an American sea captain who had been taken hostage and was being held at gunpoint onboard a lifeboat.



Read More Here (http://www.military.com/news/article/marines-rescue-cargo-ship-from-somali-pirates.html?ESRC=marine.nl)

UUHRAH! :D

Now watch the neocons bytch because nobody actually died... :eek:

[speciallyblend]

palin

[coastie]

Remember about a year and a half ago when the US Navy SEAL's rescued a ship from Somali pirates through the use of coordinated sniper fire? Yeah, that was pretty awesome, and one of the few just uses of military force we have seen in this day and age.

Well, the Marines have just upped the ante. :D



Read More Here (http://www.military.com/news/article/marines-rescue-cargo-ship-from-somali-pirates.html?ESRC=marine.nl)

UUHRAH! :D

Now watch the neocons bytch because nobody actually died... :eek:




The media wont give it as much airtime because no one died, either.;)

[Brian4Liberty]

Not a shot fired. That's amazing. Yet the Las Vegas Police shoot and kill ex-military civilians at Costco...

[BlackTerrel]

Wow. That is pretty badass.

[Mini-Me]

Now that...is the way it's done.

[TC95]

palin

Gross.

[Bruno]

Sounds like the way it should be done, whenever possible.

[Imperial]

Awesome! The sad thing is I didn't hear about this until now.

[madengr]

Not a shot fired. That's amazing. Yet the Las Vegas Police shoot and kill ex-military civilians at Costco...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

[Anti Federalist]

If US flagged ships were armed, as they should be, none of this would be needed.

I had a shipmate of mine die last year, due in no small part to injuries sustained from being hijacked off his vessel in Nigeria a before that.

Fucking spineless companies and stupid fucking UN laws make having a small arms locker onboard impossible.

[bruce leeroy]

damn, the swarthy swashbucklers of somalia got PWNED
DAMN
did yall see that youtube vid of the russians dealing with em?

[Acala]

Gunny is THE MAN!!!! And I am inclined to not say a word that could be construed as not being 100% in his corner right now. But . . .

Why should I be paying to protect private shipping?

[RedStripe]

Wow a bunch of welfare queens boarded a ship occupied by third-world pirates for the benefit of some private company.

Rah rah go america, yes we can, uh-rah, look we're so cool and tough, military is badass, support ARE troops, etc :rolleyes:

[bruce leeroy]

wonder who would win in a free for all
the somali pirates, the vicelords and disciples of chicago, al queda, or mexican cartels?

[phill4paul]

wonder who would win in a free for all
the somali pirates, the vicelords and disciples of chicago, al queda, or mexican cartels?

Send a request to Deadliest Warrior. Here's the Taliban vs. the IRA.

http://www.lowkick.com/TV-Shows/Deadliest-Warrior-9-IRA-vs-Taliban-Video

[bruce leeroy]

I know piracy is a serious problem and all, but I cant help but find it funny a bunch of skinny ass long necked black kids with second hand AK's ridng in bass boats are fucking holding major world powers by the balls
GARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR MAYTEEEEEEEE

[oyarde]

wonder who would win in a free for all
the somali pirates, the vicelords and disciples of chicago, al queda, or mexican cartels?

The Somali pirates and Chicago thugs would not hold up to al queda or the cartels .

[oyarde]

The Somali al Shabaab and Warlords could hold own .

[Vessol]

Imagine how much money would be saved if ships were allowed to arm and protect themselves from pirates instead of having to spend a few millions dollars in a rescue operation by the military :\

[Pericles]

If US flagged ships were armed, as they should be, none of this would be needed.

I had a shipmate of mine die last year, due in no small part to injuries sustained from being hijacked off his vessel in Nigeria a before that.

Fucking spineless companies and stupid fucking UN laws make having a small arms locker onboard impossible.

A single 5 inch gun would also do merchantmen a great deal of good.

Well done, US Marines!

[Flash]

Never forget the reasons for piracy:

The UN envoy for Somalia, Ahmedou Ould-Abdallah, has stated that "because there is no (effective) government, there is ... much irregular fishing from European and Asian countries,"[63] and that the UN has "reliable information" that European and Asian companies are dumping toxic and nuclear waste off the Somali coastline.[61] However, he stresses that "no government has endorsed this act, and that private companies and individuals acting alone are responsible."[61] In addition, Ould-Abdallah told the press that he believes the toxic waste dumping is "a disaster off the Somali coast, a disaster (for) the Somali environment, the Somali population", and that what he terms "this illegal fishing, illegal dumping of waste" helps fuel the civil war in Somalia since the illegal foreign fishermen pay off corrupt local officials or warlords for protection or to secure counterfeit licenses.[63] However, Ould-Abdallah noted that piracy will not prevent waste dumping: "The intentions of these pirates are not concerned with protecting their environment", and "What is ultimately needed is a functioning, effective government that will get its act together and take control of its affairs."[61]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piracy_in_Somalia


Wow a bunch of welfare queens boarded a ship occupied by third-world pirates for the benefit of some private company.

Rah rah go america, yes we can, uh-rah, look we're so cool and tough, military is badass, support ARE troops, etc :rolleyes:

soldiers = welfare queens. But welfare recipients = poor people living off of crumbs (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=2888830&postcount=5). :confused::confused::confused: Most people go into the army for financial reasons.


I had a shipmate of mine die last year, due in no small part to injuries sustained from being hijacked off his vessel in Nigeria a before that.

Fucking spineless companies and stupid fucking UN laws make having a small arms locker onboard impossible.

Wow that is messed up. Another reason for America to leave the United Nations and cut funding.

[Dr.3D]

But, but, but, the UN laws say the oceans are a gun free zone. There shouldn't be anybody out there with guns so how in the world do those pirates take over those ships?

Oh... yeah... I forgot.... those who like the so called gun free zones also like to be robbed and murdered.

Might as well hang a sign on those ships saying.... "Go ahead and board us, we won't resist because we don't have weapons."

[nobody's_hero]

Nice to see the Marines able to do what the Corps was formed to do. Marines are at home on ships! —Not doing police work in the middle of the desert.

[Mini-Me]

Wow a bunch of welfare queens boarded a ship occupied by third-world pirates for the benefit of some private company.

Rah rah go america, yes we can, uh-rah, look we're so cool and tough, military is badass, support ARE troops, etc :rolleyes:

Come on, you're just being contrary and bitter for the sake of it here. The guys on board the ship are forbidden by the US and UN from carrying any weapons on board, so they were sitting ducks. They got captured by violent assholes with no recourse or means of defending themselves. Is it seriously a bad thing that someone actually saved them, with no shots fired and no blood spilled? Protecting merchant ships from pirates was one of the original responsibilities of the Navy, not some recent imperialist idea. If there's any legitimate use of armed forces, this is it, along with genuine defense at home.

Granted, I don't want gun prohibition on the seas, and I don't want a standing army at all, but this right here was cool. It was also better than any alternatives that remained after the sailors were already captured. I have my reservations, but I'm not going to go around mocking people with zero restraint, either. The government should be criticized for the authoritarian policies that made this rescue necessary in the first place, and it should be criticized for using the Marines instead of eliminating those coercive policies...but FFS, the policy is not the sailors' faults or the faults of the specific Marines involved. The sailors have been freed, and nobody died, and that's amazing enough for the people involved to deserve credit more than they [or people who give credit where it's due] deserve your completely unmeasured, disproportionate contempt. Criticize where necessary, but do it with dignity, and start following your own advice about getting some perspective and taking context into account. Unlike the debate over law (demanding axiomatic laws vs. giving government the leeway to make its own subjective value judgments that affect all of us), there is no excuse for sidestepping context in moral judgment of other individuals.

[RedStripe]

soldiers = welfare queens. But welfare recipients = poor people living off of crumbs (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=2888830&postcount=5). :confused::confused::confused: Most people go into the army for financial reasons.

Yea, and people on welfare get treated the exact opposite by the majority of Americans and they aren't going around killing people or protecting corporate assets.

You do know where the term "welfare queen" comes from right? And you do realize that even people on the Ron Paul forums can't help but participate in some military circle-jerking on occasion.

[Mini-Me]

Yea, and people on welfare get treated the exact opposite by the majority of Americans and they aren't going around killing people or protecting corporate assets.

You do know where the term "welfare queen" comes from right? And you do realize that even people on the Ron Paul forums can't help but participate in some military circle-jerking on occasion.

Look, I don't like where the soldiers get their money either, but if some guy on welfare saved some people's lives from kidnappers, I wouldn't take the opportunity to blast him for being on welfare. I'd take the opportunity to applaud his awesomeness. I also don't like most of what the soldiers do in the first place, but does that really mean I have to still shit on them on the exceptional occasions when they do something positive? You're so focused on "GAHHH, CORPORATE ASSETS, BLARGH, BECAUSE I EQUALLY HATE ALL BUSINESSES AND EVERYONE WHO WORKS FOR ONE" that you're totally ignoring the whole part about sailors' lives being saved from violent kidnapping pirates without a shot fired. (Yes, I know I'm misrepresenting your position with the caps in quotes, but when you attack people here with disrespectful straw men, you should expect treatment in kind.)

[RedStripe]

Come on, you're just being contrary and bitter for the sake of it here. The guys on board the ship are forbidden by the US and UN from carrying any weapons on board, so they were sitting ducks. They got captured by violent assholes with no recourse or means of defending themselves. Is it seriously a bad thing that someone actually saved them, with no shots fired and no blood spilled? Protecting merchant ships from pirates was one of the original responsibilities of the Navy, not some recent imperialist idea. If there's any legitimate use of armed forces, this is it, along with genuine defense at home.

Says a lot about the fundamental purpose of the state: protecting the assets of the wealthy. Preserving the economic status quo. This is exactly why the colonial bilderburg group held a constitutional convention to create a stronger central government.

I don't blame the pirates for doing what they are doing. They've been shit on by a combination of Western governments and western-based international corporations for so long, it's out of desperation and retaliation that they seek restitution through ransom for the ships. To my knowledge, the people who have been taken hostage have been treated extremely well - much better than anyone unfortunate enough to come in contact with the police forces of the United States. Not a single one has been killed (as far as I'm aware) and the pirates have even brought in professional chefs to provide food for them. The violent assholes are the thug mercenaries of the US military who get paid to protect corporate America abroad by killing the impoverished people of the third world.



Granted, I don't want gun prohibition on the seas, and I don't want a standing army at all, but this right here was cool. It was also better than any alternatives that remained after the sailors were already captured. I have my reservations, but I'm not going to go around mocking people with zero restraint, either. The government should be criticized for the authoritarian policies that made this rescue necessary in the first place, and it should be criticized for using the Marines instead of eliminating those coercive policies...but FFS, the policy is not the sailors' faults or the faults of the specific Marines involved. The sailors have been freed, and nobody died, and that's amazing enough for the people involved to deserve credit more than they [or people who give credit where it's due] deserve your completely unmeasured, disproportionate contempt. Criticize where necessary, but do it with dignity, and start following your own advice about getting some perspective and taking context into account. Unlike the debate over law (demanding axiomatic laws vs. giving government the leeway to make its own subjective value judgments that affect all of us), there is no excuse for sidestepping context in moral judgment of other individuals.

US mercenary follows orders. News at 11.

Yea, talk about taking context into account. Not once in your entire post did you consider the motivations and narrative of the Somalis who chose a dangerous lifestyle of stealing from multinational corporations rather than attempt to fish in waters tainted by illegal industrial waste. Fuck the Marines. They're the same thing they've always been: pawns of the state-corporate alliance. Here they go again, wasting tax payer money to solve a problem created by their own masters. Hurray for the boneheads! They're so brave! :rolleyes:

[Flash]

Yea, and people on welfare get treated the exact opposite by the majority of Americans and they aren't going around killing people or protecting corporate assets.

You do know where the term "welfare queen" comes from right? And you do realize that even people on the Ron Paul forums can't help but participate in some military circle-jerking on occasion.

Yeah I agree but I was just confused by what you meant because I read your earlier post. I figured most soldiers who join the military do so for financial reasons.

[RedStripe]

Look, I don't like where the soldiers get their money either, but if some guy on welfare saved some people's lives from kidnappers, I wouldn't take the opportunity to blast him for being on welfare. I'd take the opportunity to applaud his awesomeness. I also don't like most of what the soldiers do in the first place, but does that really mean I have to still shit on them on the exceptional occasions when they do something positive? You're so focused on "GAHHH, CORPORATE ASSETS, BLARGH, BECAUSE I EQUALLY HATE ALL BUSINESSES AND EVERYONE WHO WORKS FOR ONE" that you're totally ignoring the whole part about sailors' lives being saved from violent kidnapping pirates without a shot fired. (Yes, I know I'm misrepresenting your position with the caps in quotes, but when you attack people here with disrespectful straw men, you should expect treatment in kind.)

Oh, because being a good Samaritan on your own initiative is the moral equivalent of doing what your superiors order you to do.

Look! That soldier in Iraq gave that kid a piece of candy! Gee, aren't they swell guys?

[RedStripe]

Oh, and the marines took 9 people "prisoner" and it's possible that they, like on pirate captured previously by the US, will face ~30 years in federal prison. Who's the violent kidnappers again? Who is "doing the right thing" now?

[Mini-Me]

Says a lot about the fundamental purpose of the state: protecting the assets of the wealthy. Preserving the economic status quo. This is exactly why the colonial bilderburg group held a constitutional convention to create a stronger central government.
Protecting merchant ships is not only "protecting the interests of the wealthy," unless you can't see more than two feet in front of your face. Protecting merchant ships means protecting trade in general and therefore the interests of everyone who wants to peaceably buy goods from foreign markets or sell goods to them. We can argue over free trade, fair trade, managed trade, hegemonic trade, etc., but that's irrelevant to the issue of nonviolent people being kidnapped and having their ships hijacked.


I don't blame the pirates for doing what they are doing. They've been shit on by a combination of Western governments and western-based international corporations for so long, it's out of desperation and retaliation that they seek restitution through ransom for the ships. To my knowledge, the people who have been taken hostage have been treated extremely well - much better than anyone unfortunate enough to come in contact with the police forces of the United States. Not a single one has been killed (as far as I'm aware) and the pirates have even brought in professional chefs to provide food for them. The violent assholes are the thug mercenaries of the US military who get paid to protect corporate America abroad by killing the impoverished people of the third world.
So it's okay to kidnap people, as long as you cook well for them? :rolleyes: Look, I don't exactly hate the pirates either - which is why I'm so thrilled about nobody getting hurt - but painting them as the good guys here is a little much. Similarly, I think the military - as it stands today - is largely a force of evil in the world, and I think that ANY standing military is dangerous (because it can become as much), but I'm not about to go crapping on soldiers when they rescue sailors, especially without hurting anyone else.


US mercenary follows orders. News at 11.

Yea, talk about taking context into account. Not once in your entire post did you consider the motivations and narrative of the Somalis who chose a dangerous lifestyle of stealing from multinational corporations rather than attempt to fish in waters tainted by illegal industrial waste. Fuck the Marines. They're the same thing they've always been: pawns of the state-corporate alliance. Here they go again, wasting tax payer money to solve a problem created by their own masters. Hurray for the boneheads! They're so brave! :rolleyes:
I didn't consider the Somalis' story because it's irrelevant to the coolness of rescuing kidnapped sailors without firing a shot. If you kidnap innocent people (save the "everyone is a filthy little guilty cog" tripe), I'm going to root for their rescue, and I'm especially going to cheer if someone can do it without casualties.

I agree the Somali pirates aren't all bad. Everyone on every side of a conflict has their story, and most on both sides are going to be sympathetic. Sometimes the situations people are put in are simply unjust all around. I mean, when countries go to war, you have a bunch of dumb 18-year-old kids on both sides killing each other under false pretenses, for the calculated enrichment of old fat cats at home and abroad. The Christmas Truce of World War I (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christmas_truce) really tells you more than you need to know about the inhumanity of it all. When you reflect on that, you can weep, or you can cynically say, "Pfft, let them all die, the stupid boneheaded mercenaries." Personally, I think the former is a more appropriate response.

The pirates do what they think they have to, and I don't hate them for it, but kidnapping people still isn't cool, and I'm glad to see them rescued. It is for that very same reason that I don't hate the troops, either. Most of what they do isn't cool (unlike this), but they made their own life choices based on their brainwashed beliefs and the options they saw in front of them. (Yes, there are some that are evil and beyond redemption, but I'll paint with that brush on an individual basis.) Just because I oppose the policies in place and the nature of a standing military, does not mean I'm going to take an unqualified collectivist dump on everyone involved.


Oh, because being a good Samaritan on your own initiative is the moral equivalent of doing what your superiors order you to do.

Look! That soldier in Iraq gave that kid a piece of candy! Gee, aren't they swell guys?

Sure, being a good Samaritan on your own initiative is obviously different from doing it because someone told you to, but does that mean it's deserving of your completely over-the-top contempt? Orders or not, soldiers are not fail-safe machines, and being able to rescue the sailors without a shot fired is a praise-worthy accomplishment.

Besides, maybe these specific soldiers actually joined the Marines because they wanted to rescue people exactly like this without running afoul of FUBAR US and international law? You just don't know, which is why it's better to oppose wars and occupations and a standing military without assuming the worst about every member and passing such harsh judgment on all of them. Nothing good comes from needless, reckless hate.


Oh, and the marines took 9 people "prisoner" and it's possible that they, like on pirate captured previously by the US, will face ~30 years in federal prison. Who's the violent kidnappers again? Who is "doing the right thing" now?

If you personally kidnapped a bunch of people right here in America, would you consider it unjust to be kidnapped and imprisoned for it in return? Perhaps your social status and all that should be considered mitigating circumstances - and as such, I think 30 years is excessive for these guys - but the sentencing isn't exactly up to the guys who rescued your hostages and took you in, is it? Now, if the pirates were going to be sent somewhere like Abu Ghraib, and the Marines knew about it, that would be a different story...but I seriously doubt that's the case here.

[ARealConservative]

hey look, a story about the golden calf. :rolleyes:

[Son of Detroit]

http://images.starpulse.com/news/media/south-park-pirates.jpg

[jacque]

Gunny is THE MAN!!!! And I am inclined to not say a word that could be construed as not being 100% in his corner right now. But . . .

Why should I be paying to protect private shipping?

Once a Marine, Always a Marine. The Few, The Proud, The Marines!