Better camera? Better operators who aren't as task saturated? I don't know, you're the one with all the answers, right?
No ... you plan an OP and actually make it work..... But I guess we should just shoot now and worry about all that bothersome shit later, or maybe not at all! ...
So here's a bothersome question: is the situation getting better or worse?Okay, so maybe we hit a camp or two, maybe even three. What then? What about hundreds of hostages of the dozens of ships they have right now spread out all along the Somali coastline and apparently on land too? Are we going to rescue all of them? Not a simple undertaking by any stretch. And just how many are Americans? What if they start killing those hostages? How do you think our friends, acquaintances and allies whose citizens are among the hostages will feel about that? So far the pirates have killed only a very small handful of hostages they have held, the murder of the 4 Americans on the yacht appears to have been a result of a dispute among the pirates from what little info publicly available now. If we strike a land base expect the survival rate of the many remaining hostages to change. But I guess we should just shoot now and worry about all that bothersome shit later, or maybe not at all!
Of course we could clean up Somalia - with enough troops, blood and treasure anything is possible. Or, maybe the freighters could transit a little bit farther from the coast.
So, could we clean up Somalia, probably, the question is WHY would we go clean up Somalia.
"I don't think our troops should be used for what’s called nation building". - G.W. Bush Jr. 2000 presidential election debate.
Constructive... what is YOUR solution to the failed state?Because us funding the Ethiopians to fight in Somalia has worked out so well.
Reality check? The reality is that there are approximately 712 hostages from the 33 vessels spread up and down the Somali coast and beyond now held by the pirates, a huge problem I think escapes many here. Do you think striking a pirate base camp or two is going to make things better for them? I am aware that zero collateral damage is usually unrealistic but you don't want to spark a bloodbath either. I would be more than happy to let our rotary winged brethren here go nuts with Hellfires on motherships, let SOCOM start knocking off the pirate chieftains in their mansions and even have a CVBG do slow cruise up the coast.....but then reality intrudes. With this latest incident we may change our tune a bit but I would not be surprised if we don't.No ... you plan an OP and actually make it work.
Nothing's perfect, but if you think we shouldn't fight unless we can guarantee zero collateral damage, then I suggest a 'real-world' reality check is in order for some members of our intelligence community. I really don't care about camp followers ... they've made their bed, so let them sleep in it. And, given the opportunity, those camp followers you referenced ??? They'd blow YOUR brains out in a heartbeat and not lose one minute of sleep over it.
But still, you make some valid points. I just don't and won't default to the " it's too hard" position ... that's a sure ticket to a certain defeat in the short or long term.
Entebbe, Prince's Gate and Lufthansa Flight 181 were all damn hard but all were single target ops that were over and done with fast. The scale of what faces us, our allies and others off the Somali coast would stretch our capabilities during the best of times, it would overtax them during the wars we now face. All against pirates who don't hold one American ship or citizen right now. And finally, instead of one Dora Bloch we could face scores of instances like hers.If we need an example of how to overcome "insurmountable" obstacles, why don't we ask the guys who planned and executed Entebbe how to deal w/ what's "too hard" ???
Right ... butit seems you always suggest the 'zero sum' position ... i.e., if it costs "innocent" lives or is "hard", then it shouldn't be done. Accommodation and inactivity ALWAYS costs more lives in the end ...Reality check? .....
While you seem to suggest the easy and unrealistic position........ but it seems you always suggest the 'zero sum' position ... i.e., if it costs "innocent" lives or is "hard", then it shouldn't be done. Accommodation and inactivity ALWAYS costs more lives in the end ...
The US take hostages? Since when have we done that in modern times? And what do we get in return? None of our citizens are now held. Talk about unrealistic......What would I do ... ??? I wouldn't do pinprick attacks. For starters, I'd 'take' the families of the pirate chieftains to hold as collateral. It wouldn't be the first time this has been done and it's worked in the past.
With hostages are held in scores of locations up and down hundreds of miles of Somali coast I would argue that Bloch's case would certainly be applicable.Dora Block is a red herring ... she didn't make it ONLY because she wasn't in the airport proper.
No ... my 'position' is to opt for action -- vice talk, bureaucratic inertia (the resting part), and hand wringing. I've seen enough 'talk' over the past 45+ years and it only costs lives. Lots of lives. If something is currently going on 'back channel', then forget everything I said ... otherwise ???...you seem to suggest the easy and unrealistic position.....
The US take hostages? Since when have we done that in modern times? And what do we get in return? None of our citizens are now held. Talk about unrealistic......
With hostages are held in scores of locations up and down hundreds of miles of Somali coast I would argue that Bloch's case would certainly be applicable.
Unfortunately without a realistic plan to secure the safety of the 700 or so hostages now held by the pirates your position for 'action' is nothing but bluster.No ... my 'position' is to opt for action -- vice talk, bureaucratic inertia (the resting part), and hand wringing. I've seen enough 'talk' over the past 45+ years and it only costs lives. Lots of lives.
QUESTION: Where did I say the U.S. took hostages in 'modern times' ???
ANSWER: Nowhere ... you made your 'challenge' up out of whole cloth.
...... It would be helpful if you did not make up your 'talking points' as you go along and put words in others' mouths ..."it wouldn't be the first time this has been done and it's worked in the past"
.....For starters, I'd 'take' the families of the pirate chieftains to hold as collateral.......
Ah yes, you know so well from........my musings on the internets, talk about going off half-cocked. And from some of your recent comments you are flying blind anyways......but then -- if you didn't -- you wouldn't be S(f)lash, would you ??? Ah, yes ... we've come to 'know you', Slash ... and not in the Biblical sense ...
We stepped up after US citizens and ships were taken, not others. And thus far we have not paid a penny of ransom or an ounce of tribute keeping in line with our longstanding policies, even with the capture of US citizens.Who cares if the hostages are not 'ours'?? We go all around the world rescuing 'other' people from a variety of situations. They are hostages, period. They come from friendly and allied countries and the situation threatens lives, commerce, and free and open passage on the high seas -- which affects us all. UNREALISTIC ??? That didn't seem to matter 225 years ago when the US Navy stepped up (w/out our 'modern' self-imposed limitations) and moved on the bad guys.
Those guys did have the benefit of all the hostages being in held in one place - a place that happened to have been designed by an Israeli construction company, giving them access to full blueprints of the facility. And of course, inconveniently for those terrorists, it was a place immediately adjacent to an undefended runway on which C-130s full of Sayeret operators could land and practically taxi to the gate. An extremely impressive operation, don't get me wrong, but I think an American mission into Somalia might look less like Entebbe and more like Munich...or, well, Somalia.
If we need an example of how to overcome "insurmountable" obstacles, why don't we ask the guys who planned and executed Entebbe how to deal w/ what's "too hard" ???