I was wrong. I’m quite proud the President ordered this. It has made me rethink and not be so brazen with negativity so you should like that.
I do like that, but you also invited people to throw rocks, so I chucked one at your head just for the hell of it. You deserved it.
[/quote]
Another thing I like about Obama is he has decided to NOT pursue Bush by opening up the sealed presidential files under attack by the left who want him tried and prosecuted.
Obama got educated on how seriously that would hurt national security.
Plus he would set a precedent, and he would likely go down too once out of office.
[quote]borrek wrote:
I was watching a computer recreation of what those snipers did, and it was ri-freakin-diculous. First, they arrived by parachuting into the water to be picked up by the USS Bainbridge. Then, while the naval ship was towing the lifeboat, 3 snipers simultaneously took out the 3 remaining pirates, all by head shots, from one moving boat to another moving boat, in the freaking dark.
Damn good training! That is some tax-money well spent. [/quote]
Honestly, I disagree.
I want my SEALs landing, via parachute, on tide buoys 800m away from their targets and taking the shots in the dark after three days in the rain.
I would expect anyone in the Navy (or Marines vis-a-vis) in the E-6 paygrade (possibly lower for the marines) to be able to do what those SEALs did. Save the SEALs, time, gas, money, parachutes, etc. for Afghanistan.
I was wrong. I’m quite proud the President ordered this. It has made me rethink and not be so brazen with negativity so you should like that.
I do like that, but you also invited people to throw rocks, so I chucked one at your head just for the hell of it. You deserved it.
[/quote]
I’ll continue to throw rocks because obama is a fucking moron. One thing right out of 100 things wrong is still a bad record. Now the pirates are going crazy and took 4 ships, so let’s see what he does now.
I am just cheering the fact that he finally did something right for a change.
[quote]AA197 wrote:
But let’s assess our basis for our thoughts: Negotiating with “moderate elements” of the taliban, sending an open letter to iran with no prior diplomatic feelers, open letter to russia again without precedence, bowing to the saudi’s, doing nothing, still, about north korea, apologizing to the European’s for our arrogance (I am still shocked on that one), etc.
Ok, first let me say that I am neither Republican or Democrat, Left or Right Wing, I find myself somewhere in the middle. That being said…
HUH?
It seems to me like the right is way out of line with the criticism of the current administration. “Bowed to the Saudis” Bush kissed the guy and held hand with him! (and is an indirect business partner with him) I’ll take a bow over that anyday. What measure did Bush take against North Korea that actually had any results? Yes, he said we took an arrogant attitude towards Europe, but he also said that they were guilty of the same towards us, and that both sides need to change that attitude to make progress. Can you really argue with that? I lean towards republican on many issues such as gun control, abortion, death penalty, etc… but it seems to me like the guy is being unfairly judged by the right wing who conveniantly ignores what Bush Jr. did. ???[/quote]
What does Bush fuck ups have to do with obama fuck ups? It’s not a zero sum game. You don’t have to either like Bush or like obama, you can actually dislike them both. I think Bush was bad, but obama is worse. But I liked neither.
It was Bush’s face as the poster for conservatism that led to the massive pendulum swing to the left. Thankfully it will be short lived. Fewer stupid people vote in midterm elections.
Why aren’t these ships arming themselves when going into pirate infested waters?
I would think a few well trained mercenaries would be cheaper than getting hijacked.[/quote]
That’s a good question…How are these little boats hijacking the big boats? I mean if the ships go full steam don’t stop if somebody gets in front of them, how are the pirates getting to them? The ships are huge, you can’t just jump on.
Why aren’t these ships arming themselves when going into pirate infested waters?
I would think a few well trained mercenaries would be cheaper than getting hijacked.
That’s a good question…How are these little boats hijacking the big boats? I mean if the ships go full steam don’t stop if somebody gets in front of them, how are the pirates getting to them? The ships are huge, you can’t just jump on.[/quote]
I have seen pictures of the pirates with rocket lauchers. The key would probably be to take them out before they got in range. A couple of snipers would probalby take care of it.
Fair enough Pat,
I disagree that Obama thus far has been anywhere near the catastrophy that Bush was, but that depends on your views. I guess I was speaking to the numerous Conservatives on TV who accuse Obama of trampling the constitution while ignoring the Bush administration. My mistake for mistaking the 90% convervatives on TV with conservatives in general.
[quote]AA197 wrote:
Fair enough Pat,
I disagree that Obama thus far has been anywhere near the catastrophy that Bush was, but that depends on your views. I guess I was speaking to the numerous Conservatives on TV who accuse Obama of trampling the constitution while ignoring the Bush administration. My mistake for mistaking the 90% convervatives on TV with conservatives in general.[/quote]
First, Obama hasn’t done anything meaningful with regard to reversing Bush’s fuck-ups. At the same time he has done more financial damage in the short time he has been in office.
Anyone who ignored Bush’s constitutional tramplings is not a conservative. They are a mouth piece for the republican party.
Do you have any examples of someone supporting a Bush policy that mirrors an Obama policy they now admonish?
How exactly did Bush trample the constitution? I have a few complaints, but I would like to hear yours.
[quote]AA197 wrote:
Fair enough Pat,
I disagree that Obama thus far has been anywhere near the catastrophy that Bush was, but that depends on your views. I guess I was speaking to the numerous Conservatives on TV who accuse Obama of trampling the constitution while ignoring the Bush administration. My mistake for mistaking the 90% convervatives on TV with conservatives in general.[/quote]
Bush’s big three mistakes were Iraq, Patriot Act, and spending too much. So far, obama has spent 1.9 Trillion bucks and will add more than 50% to the debt by summer if he gets his way. He has kissed the taliban’s ass, sent out public letters to enemies with out diplomatic precedent, lambasted AIG for bonuses that he signed into law as mandatory, created a stimulus that only pays for pork. Keeps failing busisness with tax dollars, is working on forcing doctors and pharmacists to perform abortions or give abortion pills against their will,etc.
The good news, he allows the seals to take out the pirates…That’s a very tiny light in the cesspool of shit that he is done. He is an ASSHOLE.
Why aren’t these ships arming themselves when going into pirate infested waters?
I would think a few well trained mercenaries would be cheaper than getting hijacked.[/quote]
My understanding is that ships have to declare that they have no weapons before being allowed into port. If everyone were to arm themselves, we would have to allow armed foreign freighters into our ports.
Why aren’t these ships arming themselves when going into pirate infested waters?
I would think a few well trained mercenaries would be cheaper than getting hijacked.
My understanding is that ships have to declare that they have no weapons before being allowed into port. If everyone were to arm themselves, we would have to allow armed foreign freighters into our ports.[/quote]
Yeah, I thought about that. I think it is as reasonable to allow one to protect their own ship, just as it is reasonable for someone to hire armed guards to protect their property on land.
I can see how that could be an issue though. Maybe they declare what they have and keep it out of site when in port?
There has to be some reasonable answer to this problem.
There has to be some reasonable answer to this problem.[/quote]
Heavy guns (.50 BMG and bigger, all non-missile) bolted or otherwise fixed to the deck of the boats over a certain size. RPG defensive systems as well.
It’s foolish to think that Portugese, French, British, and Spanish ships have never entered U.S. ports with cannons on deck.
My other thought is, doesn’t the US gov’t ship anything along these routes and on these boats? Wouldn’t it be a huge deterrent if 1 out of every 10 boats had a SEAL team or a dozen Marines on board? Especially if that boat happened to be headed to the same place the Marines needed to go or it just happened to have two shipping containers full of HMV tires?
I don’t quite get why you would hide declared weapons.
There has to be some reasonable answer to this problem.
Heavy guns (.50 BMG and bigger, all non-missile) bolted or otherwise fixed to the deck of the boats over a certain size. RPG defensive systems as well.
It’s foolish to think that Portugese, French, British, and Spanish ships have never entered U.S. ports with cannons on deck.
My other thought is, doesn’t the US gov’t ship anything along these routes and on these boats? Wouldn’t it be a huge deterrent if 1 out of every 10 boats had a SEAL team or a dozen Marines on board? Especially if that boat happened to be headed to the same place the Marines needed to go or it just happened to have two shipping containers full of HMV tires?
I don’t quite get why you would hide declared weapons.[/quote]
not hide. just keep out of site. As in not walking around with them.
There has to be some reasonable answer to this problem.
Heavy guns (.50 BMG and bigger, all non-missile) bolted or otherwise fixed to the deck of the boats over a certain size. RPG defensive systems as well.
It’s foolish to think that Portugese, French, British, and Spanish ships have never entered U.S. ports with cannons on deck.
My other thought is, doesn’t the US gov’t ship anything along these routes and on these boats? Wouldn’t it be a huge deterrent if 1 out of every 10 boats had a SEAL team or a dozen Marines on board? Especially if that boat happened to be headed to the same place the Marines needed to go or it just happened to have two shipping containers full of HMV tires?
I don’t quite get why you would hide declared weapons.
not hide. just keep out of site. As in not walking around with them.[/quote]
It would be very easy to be discrete on passenger ships. Seriously, I’m sure casinos have armed guards. They jsut keept hem hidden. A few good men with 308s, 300 win mags, 338 Lapua magunms, or 50 calibers could easily ruin the day of a pirate.
Some hand held RPGS or similair would eb a good idea.
[quote]Beowolf wrote:
Quick edit: Can anyone tell me where the hell the whole “ooohrah!” thing comes from? I’m curious now.[/quote]
It’s got roots in the Imperial Russia Military which when shouted sounds like the Russian word for victory.
And it isn’t really pronounced the way it is often spelled – it is more like a grunt yelled really loudly and smeared together like one syllable, thusly:
AH-UH
I am looking for audio but I cannot find any. When you get a bunch of marines standing in formation to yell it on cue it can be pretty intense.
not hide. just keep out of site. As in not walking around with them.[/quote]
I understand the definition of the word hide.
Isn’t the point in being ready to defend yourself, sending a message to those who would do you harm, and being open and honest with those you trust and would like to do business?
Hiding the guns makes you less ready, more likely to be targeted, and a burden on the trust of your port of call.
It would be very easy to be discrete on passenger ships. Seriously, I’m sure casinos have armed guards. They jsut keept hem hidden. A few good men with 308s, 300 win mags, 338 Lapua magunms, or 50 calibers could easily ruin the day of a pirate.
Some hand held RPGS or similair would eb a good idea.
[/quote]
Some hand held RPGs would be a great way to accidentally poke a significant hole in the side of your boat and would hardly deter a small force composed of multiple small crafts.
I understand the desire for discretion on a passenger ship, but I would hate to hamstring a security force by being discrete and never actually being ‘discrete enough’. I’m virtually positive the casinos don’t have armed guards. Possibly an undercover type of situation, but nothing worth referring to as a guard. Many of the cruise ship casinos don’t like to deal with cash and it’s not like you take the money and run from a cruise ship.
Edit: I said ‘RPG defensive systems’ earlier. I should’ve been more accurate and said anti-RPG defensive systems (partially-layered hulls, inflatable armor, maybe a chaff-type system, etc.).
not hide. just keep out of site. As in not walking around with them.
I understand the definition of the word hide.
Isn’t the point in being ready to defend yourself, sending a message to those who would do you harm, and being open and honest with those you trust and would like to do business?
Hiding the guns makes you less ready, more likely to be targeted, and a burden on the trust of your port of call.[/quote]
The issue was being armed while coming into port. if they are out of sight when coming into port they may be out of mind for those that would get nervous. so, before you come into port, put the guns away.