PDA

View Full Version : Nat'l Security Obama is a pussy...Sends SEALS to rescue hostages


dirk digler
01-25-2012, 09:47 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/25/world/africa/somalia-aid-workers/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

U.S. special forces swooped into Somalia in a pair of helicopters in a daring overnight raid to rescue two kidnapped aid workers -- an American and a Dane -- and killed several gunmen, American officials said Wednesday.

The hostages, Jessica Buchanan and Poul Thisted, were seized in October after they visited humanitarian projects in northern Somalia, said the Danish Refugee Council, the agency for which they worked.
Both are unharmed, the aid group said.

They were taken to a regional medical facility and receiving care from U.S. military doctors and nurses, Pentagon spokesman George Little said.

Navy SEALs from the unit that killed al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden last year in Pakistan were part of the mission, a U.S. official said, without specifying whether any of the same individuals were on both assaults.

The official is not authorized to speak to the media and asked not to be named.

The special forces troops took fire as they fought their way into a compound where the hostages were held, the official said, adding the troops believed that the kidnappers were shooting.

Nine heavily armed gunmen were killed in the strike, Pentagon spokesman Little said, adding that they had explosives nearby.

There were no known survivors among the kidnappers, Little said.

listopencil
01-25-2012, 10:03 AM
There were no known survivors among the kidnappers, Little said.


:clap:

alanm
01-25-2012, 10:05 AM
I read that this morning and for the life of me I don't understand why he sent Seals to rescue these two people? Not that I disprove or anything but it's not the first Aid people kidnapped or State department people for that matter and the US hasn't stepped in to rescue them.
Something is just fishy about this.

dirk digler
01-25-2012, 10:08 AM
I read that this morning and for the life of me I don't understand why he sent Seals to rescue these two people? Not that I disprove or anything but it's not the first Aid people kidnapped or State department people for that matter and the US hasn't stepped in to rescue them.
Something is just fishy about this.

IMHO we don't do enough of these rescues.

vailpass
01-25-2012, 10:09 AM
Dumbest thread title of the year so far.

vailpass
01-25-2012, 10:11 AM
IMHO we don't do enough of these rescues.

Especially in election years. We oughta' do one of these every week. It takes a tough Potus to put our troops' lives in danger for political gain.

dirk digler
01-25-2012, 10:16 AM
Especially in election years. We oughta' do one of these every week. It takes a tough Potus to put our troops' lives in danger for political gain.

My point is more in general. There have been hostages kept for year(s) and I haven't quite understood why we never try to rescue them.

vailpass
01-25-2012, 10:21 AM
My point is more in general. There have been hostages kept for year(s) and I haven't quite understood why we never try to rescue them.

Yes, seems like a US citizen should be able to expect a rescue attempt barring political necessities that would preclude such an action. Would-be kidnappers ought to know that if they snatch a Yank they can expect a sudden onset of lead poisoning.

dirk digler
01-25-2012, 10:26 AM
Yes, seems like a US citizen should be able to expect a rescue attempt barring political necessities that would preclude such an action. Would-be kidnappers ought to know that if they snatch a Yank they can expect a sudden onset of lead poisoning.

See we agree no need to get all pissy about it. :p

BucEyedPea
01-25-2012, 10:28 AM
Sounds like Obama is using the tools an incumbent has and a media to wash his balls white.

Pitt Gorilla
01-25-2012, 10:31 AM
I read that this morning and for the life of me I don't understand why he sent Seals to rescue these two people? Not that I disprove or anything but it's not the first Aid people kidnapped or State department people for that matter and the US hasn't stepped in to rescue them.
Something is just fishy about this.I think it helps to set a precedent. You kidnap an American, you get dead.

Frankie
01-25-2012, 11:22 AM
If Mama O wuz alive maybe Barack wouldn't end up so bad(ass).

SNR
01-25-2012, 11:45 AM
What Western society citizen would in their right mind step a single foot into Somalia?

vailpass
01-25-2012, 11:54 AM
What Western society citizen would in their right mind step a single foot into Somalia?

Agreed, although there has to be some sort of resource there that can be exploited. If enough dollars call a young man must answer but he has to know there could be consequences.

orange
01-25-2012, 01:58 PM
What Western society citizen would in their right mind step a single foot into Somalia?

A Libertarian.


The Independent Institute - 25 Years of Enlightening Ideas

A Peaceful Ferment in Somalia
June 1, 1998
Spencer Heath MacCallum
The Freeman


A social experiment with far-reaching implications for human freedom is shaping up in Somalia. I had known that something was afoot but learned the details only last summer on meeting a Somali tribeswoman traveling in the United States with her European husband. She was an elegant, educated lady who would have been at home in any of the great cities of the world. When her husband introduced me as an anthropologist with classical liberal leanings, conversation turned toward her tribe, an independent, nomadic people who control and move over a large area on both sides of the Somalo-Ethiopian border. Hers is one of a constellation of tribes sharing similar language, culture, and customary law that for countless centuries lived together in relative harmony in that easternmost jut of the continent known as the Horn of Africa. The Somali nation by tradition, she said, is a stateless society; they have never accepted the authority of any central government, their own or any other.

Then she asked a question that took me by surprise: “Do you think it possible that my people could come into full participation in the modern world-culturally, scientifically, economically-without becoming a part of any state?” I told her I’d thought about that possibility with respect to tribal peoples for many years, but had never expected that anyone would ask the question. I said I thought it was theoretically possible, but that it would take extraordinary patience, careful planning, great flexibility. The way was untraveled.

As we talked, she explained an approach that Somalis from several tribes had discussed. It involves capitalizing on their statelessness by opening areas within their tribal lands for development, inviting businessmen and professionals the world over to come to take advantage of the absence of a central government or other coercive authority. In this way Somalia’s statelessness might prove to be a uniquely valuable asset in the modern world.

Specifically, they were considering offering suitable tracts within their tribal lands on long-term lease for private development. Such development would take the pattern of large multiple-tenant income properties—“estates,” as the British would call them—where the land would be leased but the improvements would be privately owned. An attractive site under consideration by my friend’s tribe was a sparsely populated upland valley, which because of its elevation enjoyed a temperate climate yet also had access to the sea.

An industrious population, the tribespeople reasoned, attracted from all quarters of the globe by the promise of unprecedented personal and business freedom, could make such areas productive enterprise zones. Some of the more successful zones might eventually become bustling cities not unlike the free cities of medieval Europe that began the modern age. Such an arrangement would yield the tribes an income; their members would enjoy a dignified status as the ultimate landlords; and they would have available to them in their own backyard, as it were, an abundance and variety of educational, training, and work opportunities. It would be their steppingstone to full entry into the modern world. This was the dream that my friends shared with me on a summer afternoon.

The Chaos That Isn’t

Other Americans they had mentioned this to were horrified. All had a similar picture in mind. From media reports, they knew-or thought they knew-contemporary Somalia to be in unrelenting chaos, ravaged by warfare, starvation, and disease, the battleground of rival warlords such that people could neither put in their crops nor harvest them if they did. What else could one expect of a country that had been without a central government for seven years? But my friends said this picture is sadly exaggerated. While there is a modicum of fighting and disorder in some areas, most notably in the south, the overall picture is far different. Many Somalis, they said, are finding that the absence of a central government has its advantages.

Having been influenced by the same media, I was skeptical. But the possibility that my friends might be right was so intriguing that over the next few months I found myself looking for corroboration. It came from many places. First, a Los Angeles Times article, titled “A Somali Alternative to Chaos,” described the prosperity of the seaport of Bosaasso in northeastern Somalia. Its opening words were, “Near the tip of the Horn of Africa, a port city is booming, helped by a lack of clan warfare and the absence of a central government.”1

Next was a signed newspaper editorial in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, titled, “Does Somalia Really Need a Government?” There could be no doubt that the author, Mohamed Mohamed Sheikh, was a qualified observer. Born in Somalia, south of Bosaasso, he had worked in Mogadishu as a radio reporter, then in the information services of various ministries, and finally as a consultant with UNESCO. He wrote that “donor countries and international financial institutions . . . are uneasy with the Somali experience which they perceive as dangerously contagious. In fact, the Somali experience is rather confusing for the ordinary minds. Who could imagine that Somalia exports today five times more than in 1989, the last year of which official estimates are available.”

He went on to state that the economy of Somalia “functions as a perfect model of ‘laissez-faire’ as conceived by Adam Smith. Government spending is reduced to zero and inflation is very low. The Somali shilling is freely convertible in the market and exchange rates are more stable than in most African countries.” He also said that “telecommunications and air transport have made tremendous development during the last seven years. . . . Indeed, Somalia has no customs authorities and all goods are imported duty free. New schools and clinics are opening every day offering their services to those who can afford to pay.”2

In the absence of statistics, I wondered how Mohamed Mohamed obtained his information that Somali exports had increased fivefold? In correspondence with me, he explained how he had carried out field research, what assumptions he had made, and how he defended his conclusion. The approximation sounded reasonable, however rough.

More evidence was a lengthy report in the APC-EC Courier, published by the Commission of the European Communities, Brussels.3 The report notes that “The outside world’s picture of Somalia has been distorted by the natural tendency of the foreign media to focus on bad news.” It goes on to say that “In the absence of a central government, Somalia has fractured into dozens of different fiefdoms with all manner of competing and overlapping authorities.” Yet, states the report, “Peace reigns in most of the country. Regional and local governments have been able to resume working in many areas, albeit on a minimal basis.”

The report continues that the markets in towns and cities had a large variety of imports and that local entrepreneurs were furnishing consumer products and jobs. “They now provide many services normally associated with government,” it says. “The lack of state structures means no bureaucratic interference. Somalis seem particularly well adapted to operating in such an environment. . . . The clan tradition makes any form of central government difficult here. . . . Somalis consider themselves born free. To them, the State equals registration, regulation and restriction.”

All these reports, and more, lent credence to my friends’ statement that when the Somalis dismantled their state in 1991, tribal governments had quickly filled the vacuum. That had come as a surprise, they said, to those who remembered the determined efforts of the state to eliminate Somalia’s traditional judges and police from the political scene. But tribal government remained the government of choice for Somalis. According to my friends, this indigenous government, composed of part-time police and law courts, had been effective during the past seven years in keeping the peace in the rural areas. They said that many observers thoughtlessly describe this situation as anarchy whereas, in reality, it is government based on natural law.

Unraveling the Somali Political Equation

Before the colonial era, the homeland of the Somali nation was the whole of the Horn of Africa, bounded on the north and east by the Indian Ocean, on the south by the Tana River in what is now Kenya, and on the west by the Ethiopian and Galla highlands. It was fragmented into five parts by the colonial powers-France, England, Italy, and Ethiopia. In 1960, the British withdrew from the north and the Italians from the south, leaving in their place one government over the former two colonies. There resulted a v-shaped country, the Republic of Somalia—a 1,600-mile belt of coastline around both sides of the Horn with an average depth of some 200 miles.

The French subsequently withdrew from the extreme northwest coast, leaving the Republic of Djibouti. A fourth part of the original Somali nation is now controlled by Kenya. The fifth part lies inland, comprising the heartland of the Horn. It is wholly within Ethiopia and nominally independent-hence unrestricted movement is permitted between Ethiopia and Somalia.

Soon after the British and Italian withdrawal, the Somalis realized that independence had not made them free. The foreign oppressors had left, but their tool of oppression, the state, remained intact. Three decades later, therefore, with the intention of restoring the pre-colonial indigenous political tradition, the leading tribes within the republic joined forces and deliberately dismantled the central government. The United Nations attempted militarily to reinstate it but was defeated, and Somalis themselves made several splinter attempts at state formation, notably in Mogadishu and Hargeisa. Such attempts accounted for most of the turmoil in the years following the dissolution of the central government in 1991.

The basic problem confronting the Somalis is that voting democracy cannot work in a tribal or clan system, where any coercive political apparatus with power to tax and confer patronage is seen as a prize to be controlled for the benefit of one’s kindred. The presence or even the prospect, therefore, of a state apparatus keeps the country in continual agitation.

That explains the Somali “warlords.” These are warriors who gain their support within their tribes by holding out the promise that they will re-establish the state and control it in order to grant privileges to their kinsmen and prevent others from doing the same to them. In dismantling their state in 1991, the Somalis did not realize that the mere possibility of a future state would be enough, in the short term at least, to prevent peace from returning to their country. If the tribes could convincingly declare that their territory would remain forever stateless, no one would listen to these warriors and they would have no option but to place themselves again under the discipline of tribal customary law. The Somali nation would have neutralized its warlords.

Unfortunately, there has been no practical possibility of that happening. The mere likelihood of a central government has been like the golden apple of Eris, Greek goddess of discord. Eris rolled a golden apple into the hall on Mount Olympus where all the gods were partying without (for good reason) having invited her. Inscribed “For the fairest,” the golden apple quickly accomplished its intended purpose of setting the gods to fighting.

This was the Somalian stand-off for seven years, with the country gradually stabilizing as the prospect of a new Somali state receded. Were there such a category, Somalia would now qualify for the Guinness record for the country with the longest absence of government. Meanwhile, the world’s “family of nations” has become increasingly uncomfortable that any place on the globe should be outside the jurisdiction of a state, especially for a significant length of time and with indications that its inhabitants might not only survive, but prosper.

Could anything be more unsettling to those having a stake in perpetuating widespread belief in the necessity of the state? Moreover, the donor governments and international financial organizations mentioned by Mohamed Mohamed Sheikh cannot very well regulate a national economy in the absence of a central government into which to channel funds. Since the failure, therefore, of the first international attempt to restore the Somali state, pressure has been building for a second.

Plans took shape for a “Somali peace conference” in November 1997. Participating would be the United Nations, European Union, Arab League, Italy and Ethiopia, with U.S. funding. Their reported agenda: to bring an end to chaos and restore peace in Somalia by instituting a central government. The European Union engaged a London university professor to draft a constitution and, as incentive for the Somalis, promised a substantial financial aid package for the new government.

Twenty-six Somali political groups, most led by military figures, met in Cairo. The resulting “Cairo Accord” declared a provisional government in which one of Somalia’s larger tribes, the Hawiye, would assume the key executive positions and control more than 50 percent of the votes in the parliament. Despite its strong endorsement by the UN, the European Union, and the Arab League, the accord was soon forgotten. Significantly, almost none of the negotiations had dealt with the constitutional questions of what powers the new state should have or how they should be limited; the only issue was how control would be shared among the mostly military figures present.

The “American Text”

Then a small group of Somalis, including my friends, received from private sources in the United States a proposal for a Somali constitution drafted by anthropologist and businessman James C. Bennett of Baltimore. It was offered as an alternative to the constitution drafted in London, and the two were soon dubbed the “English text” and the “American text.” The latter provided for a government of such exceedingly limited functions that it could not become a bone of contention simply because it held out no prospect of power and patronage. It would provide the structure of a central government as required by the international community while scrupulously preserving the autonomy of the tribes. The basic principles of the American text include:4


Sovereignty. Sovereignty resides in individual Somali citizens, over whom the Somali Federation shall exert no powers. The Federation’s main purpose will be to conduct a foreign policy, to enable foreigners to deal with the Somali nation as a whole, and to make the Somalis credible in the eyes and minds of foreign governments and individuals. It shall not regulate relations between Somalis, between Somali communities, nor between Somali regions. The Xeer (customary law, pronounced “hair”) will govern that.


Customary Law. The Somali nation has always been based on the Xeer, even during the period of colonization (for disputes involving only Somalis and not colonials) and after independence. The unity and peace of the Somalis, as well as their mutual understanding, are based on the Xeer. The Xeer stands at the center of the Somali identity; without it there could not be a Somali nation.


Foreign Policy. The Somali Federation will appoint federal ambassadors abroad, but every tribe will be entitled to appoint its own consuls, who shall enjoy federal status. Debts to foreigners incurred by the Somali state prior to its collapse in January 1991 will be settled by a corporation to be established by the new Federation.


Peace and Development. To preserve the peace and facilitate the development of the nation, the Somali Federation shall have no police, no military, no taxation, no courts of law, and no majority rule.


If the American text should become the basis for a national organization of the Somalis, it would open the way for the tribes to develop enterprise zones or free cities as a bridge to full participation in the modern world. But success would depend on a stable social environment within Somalia that offered effective protection of private property and freedom of contract. In a situation of autonomous tribes and no strong central government, how would this be assured?

Kritarchy

I began by saying that a social experiment with far-reaching implications is shaping up in Somalia. That experiment consists in the Somalis seeking an alternative to legislative law by looking to their existing customary tribal law, the Xeer, and its further development to serve all of the needs of an emerging urban society. The Xeer promises to become one of the great bodies of customary law, like Anglo-American common law or Jewish traditional law (Halacha). These legal codes are flexible, responsive, and can be maintained without a large central state or legislative apparatus.

A small amount of private funding has just been committed to begin codifying the Xeer. While the Xeerada (plural) appear to vary from tribe to tribe, it is only because each contains mythology particular to its tribe. In essence, the Xeerada are alike in protecting freedom of movement, free trade, and other individual freedoms, and forbidding the contrary-including taxation and legislation.

The Somali nation did not start with the tribes having a common language but by their common observance of the Xeer. Hence the law is called both father and child of the Somali nation.

A society organized strictly in accordance with the Xeer is technically a “kritarchy,” as opposed to a democracy, theocracy, monarchy, oligarchy, or other form of political government. The term, a little-used nineteenth-century word compounded from the Greek, literally means “rule by judges.” Many stateless societies have been kritarchies, including the well-known example of the Old Testament Jews during the time of the Judges. The proposed free enclaves also would be kritarchies, since they would be founded solely on the principles of successful modern commerce and the traditional Xeer.

One principle of the Xeer, like that of the customary law of many kritarchies, is that the clan or other kinship group in effect insures its members, paying compensation in the event any of its members injures someone of another group. This is how the various Somali tribes in the absence of a central state managed to live for untold centuries in relative harmony. It is a principle ideally suited for adaptation to an urban society, where that function can be performed by commercial insurance. The only requirement, in fact, of visitors to Somalia under the proposed constitution would be that they have adequate insurance against any liability that might incur under the Xeer.

I wish my Somali friends well. Such a radical experiment to find better ways of protecting private property and freedom of exchange, the underpinnings of all other freedom, is long overdue in the world. It was in 1776 that the last great experiment of this kind was made. Whether or not it succeeds today as envisioned by my friends, this intellectual ferment in Somalia augurs a better future for us all.

mikey23545
01-25-2012, 02:01 PM
I read that this morning and for the life of me I don't understand why he sent Seals to rescue these two people? Not that I disprove or anything but it's not the first Aid people kidnapped or State department people for that matter and the US hasn't stepped in to rescue them.
Something is just fishy about this.

That fishy smell is called "election year"

orange
01-25-2012, 02:03 PM
The End of the Salad Days in Somalia
by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.

Fifteen glorious years without a central government in Somalia! It was typically described as a "power vacuum," as if the absence of a taxing, regulating, coercing junta is an unnatural state of affairs, one that cannot and should not last.

...

So here is a good rule. When a government falls, don't call it a "power vacuum." Call it a zone of liberty and be done with it. If some group claims to be the government, the proper answer should be: "Yeah, and I'm the Duke of Windsor. Get a life."

June 9, 2006

Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. [send him mail] is president of the Ludwig von Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama, editor of LewRockwell.com and author of Speaking of Liberty.

mikey23545
01-25-2012, 02:04 PM
Hussein has brass balls, and he will continue to show the guts to risk others lives in more rescue attempts...

go bowe
01-25-2012, 03:56 PM
Hussein has brass balls, and he will continue to show the guts to risk others lives in more rescue attempts...

good...

wazu
01-25-2012, 04:44 PM
Dumbest thread title of the year so far.

Agreed.

RNR
01-25-2012, 05:08 PM
Hussein has brass balls, and he will continue to show the guts to risk others lives in more rescue attempts...

This! The fact we risked skilled men to rescue people who chose to risk their selfs in that shit hole is beyond me. People who feel the need to risk their lifes trying to help these people should do it at their own risk. This by no means reflects well on Barry as he has proven time and time he will stop at nothing for a photo op or a sound bite~

orange
01-25-2012, 05:31 PM
waaah!

more waaah!

http://iamhilarious.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/butt-hurt.jpg

RNR
01-25-2012, 05:33 PM
http://iamhilarious.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/butt-hurt.jpg

How is pointing out what is clear to most more waah LMAO

Bill Parcells
01-25-2012, 05:35 PM
How is pointing out what is clear to most more waah LMAO

When you're a ''super libtard'' (like Orange) you lash out at the truth. its called denial, and it aint no river in Egypt.

orange
01-25-2012, 05:38 PM
How are you more waaah?

we risked skilled men

We sent hardened, motivated warriors on the sort of mission they live for.

"But Obama might get another dozen votes. Waaah!"

orange
01-25-2012, 05:39 PM
SEAL Team 6 members' nightly prayer: "Please, please don't send me into combat."

:thumb:

RNR
01-25-2012, 05:41 PM
How are you more waaah?



We sent hardened, motivated warriors on the sort of mission they live for.

"But Obama might get another dozen votes. Waaah!"

The value of these men worth is way past votes. That is something you and your hero could never care about or understand~

Bill Parcells
01-25-2012, 05:47 PM
I admit it. I am a gutless whiner

:thumb:

jspchief
01-25-2012, 06:24 PM
This thread is a prime example of what's wrong with American politics. People bad mouthing this simply because it came from a president they are at political odds with. It's embarrassing.

As for the timing of this (election year) vs action or non-action for past captives. I'm guessing the military assesses the possibilities and risks of every situation, and are very careful about taking those risks. The idea that a president would order them to do something they've deemed too risky is absurd. This more likely a case of understanding what they were dealing with; dumbass Somalia hoodlums that couldn't hold a candle to American special forces.


And one last thought... If this was "risking soldiers for political gain" wouldn't it also be risking soldiers for political suicide?

WoodDraw
01-25-2012, 06:34 PM
This thread is a prime example of what's wrong with American politics. People bad mouthing this simply because it came from a president they are at political odds with. It's embarrassing.

As for the timing of this (election year) vs action or non-action for past captives. I'm guessing the military assesses the possibilities and risks of every situation, and are very careful about taking those risks. The idea that a president would order them to do something they've deemed too risky is absurd. This more likely a case of understanding what they were dealing with; dumbass Somalia hoodlums that couldn't hold a candle to American special forces.


And one last thought... If this was "risking soldiers for political gain" wouldn't it also be risking soldiers for political suicide?

The sooner you stop thinking of DC on CP as being indicative of anything resembling reality, the better. :thumb: Most of the smart ones gave up on that long ago. Look through the last few pages and see how many people actually start threads in here.

fan4ever
01-25-2012, 09:08 PM
It's interesting how much doves loath hawks until they get to be one...

ClevelandBronco
01-25-2012, 10:39 PM
Sounds like Obama is using the tools an incumbent has and a media to wash his balls white.

<a href="http://www.gifbin.com/981768"><img src="http://gifs.gifbin.com/sw50sw8sw578.gif" alt="funny gifs" /></a>

|Zach|
01-25-2012, 10:52 PM
It's interesting how much doves loath hawks until they get to be one...

"Rescuing those hostages was a really aggressive hawkish thing to do!" - Nobody Ever

ForeverChiefs58
01-26-2012, 12:23 PM
I read that this morning and for the life of me I don't understand why he sent Seals to rescue these two people? Not that I disprove or anything but it's not the first Aid people kidnapped or State department people for that matter and the US hasn't stepped in to rescue them.
Something is just fishy about this.

My point is more in general. There have been hostages kept for year(s) and I haven't quite understood why we never try to rescue them.

Somali captors move US hostage after SEAL raid


MOGADISHU, Somalia (AP) — A group holding an American hostage in Somalia moved him at least three times in the day since U.S. Navy SEALs rescued an American and a Dane and killed their nine kidnappers, pirates said Thursday. The abductors said they would kill the hostage if they are attacked.

The high-profile rescue early Wednesday raised questions about whether the many other Western hostages held in Somalia have a greater chance at release — or are in greater danger.

"If they try again we will all die all together," warned Hassan Abdi, a Somali pirate connected to the gang holding the American. "It's difficult to hold U.S. hostages, because it's a game of chance: die or get huge money. But we shall stick with our plans and will never release him until we get a ransom."

U.S. Navy SEALs parachuted into Somalia early Wednesday and hiked to where captors were holding American Jessica Buchanan, 32, and Poul Hagen Thisted, a 60-year-old Dane. A shootout ensued and nine captors were killed. Buchanan, Thisted and the U.S. troops were all unharmed. The two aid workers had been kidnapped by gunmen in October while working on demining projects for the Danish Refugee Council.

Buchanan and Thisted on Thursday were at the U.S. Naval Air Base at Sigonella, Sicily as part of their reintegration process, undergoing more complete medical examinations and debriefing. Officials could not immediately say how long they would stay there before returning home.

The U.S. government said the raid was prompted by Buchanan's deteriorating health. An ailing Frenchwoman kidnapped by Somali gunmen died in captivity last year after not having access to her medication.

"Holding hostages in one place is unlikely now because we are the next target," Abdi said, referring to the raid in a phone conversation with The Associated Press. He expressed concern that the U.S. had pirate informants.

"It wasn't just a hit and run operation, but long planned with the help of insiders among us," Abdi said, noting the soldiers had struck at the time when the pirates were least on their guard.

The gang has moved an American kidnapped on Saturday in the northern Somali town of Galkayo three times in the last 24 hours, he said.

Other hostages held in Somalia include a British tourist and two Spanish aid workers seized in neighboring Kenya, a French military adviser and 155 sailors of various nationalities hijacked by pirates at sea.

The aid group Doctors Without Borders, known as Medecins Sans Frontieres, employed the two Spanish women. The group said it is pleased that Buchanan and Thisted were freed and that MSF is still seeking the liberation of its workers, Montserrat Serra and Blanca Theibaut. It hinted, though, that it views military raids as risky.

"MSF strongly favors the nonviolent resolution of such cases, as the use of force endangers the lives of the hostages and may result in the tragic loss of human lives," the group said. "We call upon the Somali population, especially the local authorities in control of the areas where the two are held, to do everything in their power to assist in their safe release."

It's not always clear what group is holding a captive in Somalia. Hostages have sometimes been sold from one gang to another. Captives can be held for long stretches: Two journalists from Canada and Australia were held for 15 months before being released in 2009, and the French military adviser has been missing for more than two years.

The security community is divided over whether the U.S. raid would make life more difficult for other captives, one Western official in Kenya said, or whether the killings of the nine captors might make pirates think twice about launching future operations. He spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the press.

On Wednesday evening, hours after the U.S. military raid, the gang holding the American kidnapped on Saturday started circulating false rumors that they had executed him.

Another security official who has years of experience in the region said it is likely the men holding the American would move him onto a ship with other foreign hostages, because ships were easier to defend and planning rescue operations is more complicated when there are hostages from other countries involved.

The official also spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the press. At least one pirate agreed with his analysis.

"I think land captivity is going to end now. Sea is much safer," pirate Mohamed Nur said by phone from the coastal town of Hobyo. "Even ships are not very safe but you can at least hit back and resist."

Americans have been captured by Somali pirate gangs before. In 2009, the cargo vessel Maersk Alabama was briefly hijacked before pirates took to the lifeboat with the ship's captain, who was rescued after Navy sharpshooters killed the pirates.

But in a sign that pirates are getting increasingly violent — and perhaps jittery — four Americans onboard a hijacked yacht were killed last February. It's still unclear why the hostages were shot. Two of the pirates had already boarded a U.S. warship shadowing the yacht.

Several senior pirates condemned Wednesday's U.S. raid, which was authorized by President Barack Obama, and at least one warned that any other U.S. hostages might suffer as a result.

"They send hit squads and kill all they want, so there is no way we will care for their people (hostages) while they are killing us. They will see the aftereffects and reap the results of their actions," said Bile Hussein, a Somali pirate commander.

A spokesman for Somalia's weak U.N.-backed government said the pirates had got what they deserved.

"Pirates have no place in our society," Abdirahman Omar Osman told AP. "This is a huge and unforgettable lesson for them."

vailpass
01-26-2012, 12:25 PM
Is there a way to administer poison gas to the pirates, or infect their blankets with cholera?

Garcia Bronco
01-26-2012, 12:27 PM
Good. Fuck Somila

orange
01-26-2012, 12:31 PM
"It wasn't just a hit and run operation, but long planned with the help of insiders among us," Abdi said

:clap:

mikey23545
01-26-2012, 12:37 PM
"The high-profile rescue early Wednesday raised questions about whether the many other Western hostages held in Somalia have a greater chance at release — or are in greater danger."


Yes, but the real question is does it help Hussein's reelection chances?

Frankie
01-26-2012, 12:40 PM
Good. **** Somilian Pirates

FYP

go bowe
01-26-2012, 12:44 PM
omg, a frankie sighting...

keep your head down buddy, those pirates will break apart in mid-air... :p

Chiefshrink
01-26-2012, 02:51 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/25/world/africa/somalia-aid-workers/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

U.S. special forces swooped into Somalia in a pair of helicopters in a daring overnight raid to rescue two kidnapped aid workers -- an American and a Dane -- and killed several gunmen, American officials said Wednesday.

The hostages, Jessica Buchanan and Poul Thisted, were seized in October after they visited humanitarian projects in northern Somalia, said the Danish Refugee Council, the agency for which they worked.
Both are unharmed, the aid group said.

They were taken to a regional medical facility and receiving care from U.S. military doctors and nurses, Pentagon spokesman George Little said.

Navy SEALs from the unit that killed al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden last year in Pakistan were part of the mission, a U.S. official said, without specifying whether any of the same individuals were on both assaults.

The official is not authorized to speak to the media and asked not to be named.

The special forces troops took fire as they fought their way into a compound where the hostages were held, the official said, adding the troops believed that the kidnappers were shooting.

Nine heavily armed gunmen were killed in the strike, Pentagon spokesman Little said, adding that they had explosives nearby.

There were no known survivors among the kidnappers, Little said.

Dirk my man! Learn politics my friend! It is an election year and the only thing OMarxist has done right was take OBL out so he is playing that card right now because he has nothing else:rolleyes:

orange
01-26-2012, 03:42 PM
Dirk my man! Learn politics my friend! It is an election year and the only thing OMarxist has done right was take OBL out so he is playing that card right now because he has nothing else:rolleyes:

How'd that hearing in Georgia go today? Is it President Biden yet?

fan4ever
01-27-2012, 09:48 AM
"Rescuing those hostages was a really aggressive hawkish thing to do!" - Nobody Ever

Eh, it's just interesting to see liberals touting our military when there's a democrat as commander in chief...

dirk digler
01-27-2012, 10:10 AM
Eh, it's just interesting to see liberals touting our military when there's a democrat as commander in chief...

I have always touted the military. I love our military and the people that serve in it.

fan4ever
01-27-2012, 10:13 AM
I have always touted the military. I love our military and the people that serve in it.

Like everything, there are always exceptions...painting with a broad brush I know.

|Zach|
01-27-2012, 11:24 AM
Eh, it's just interesting to see liberals touting our military when there's a democrat as commander in chief...

It is more interesting watching you swing and miss to try and paint others with a broad brush.

Frankie
01-27-2012, 11:39 AM
Like everything, there are always exceptions...painting with a broad brush I know.

Yep, there are. When our forces are used in a good direction, ala rescuing our citizens, eliminating the actual killers of our citizens, etc., it's always respected, hell even celebrated. When they are used to invade another country and be involved in death and destruction so CEOs of some companies buy their bigger and better yachts, it is questioned. So, what is your point?

Chiefshrink
01-28-2012, 12:59 PM
How'd that hearing in Georgia go today? Is it President Biden yet?

So glad to see you keep abreast of the "Usurper" in the oval office:thumb:

Yes I saw where Obama decided to keep snubbing his nose to the little people ("We The People"). It will only come back to haunt him.:shake:

ThatRaceCardGuy
01-28-2012, 01:01 PM
So glad to see you keep abreast of the "Usurper" in the oval office:thumb:

Yes I saw where Obama decided to keep snubbing his nose to the little people ("We The People"). It will only come back to haunt him.:shake:

You make me LMAO . And not because you have good political takes.

Frankie
01-28-2012, 01:42 PM
So glad to see you keep abreast of the "Usurper" in the oval office:thumb:

Yes I saw where Obama decided to keep snubbing his nose to the little people ("We The People"). It will only come back to haunt him.:shake:

u·surp   [yoo-surp, -zurp] Show IPA
verb (used with object)
1.
to seize and hold (a position, office, power, etc.) by force or without legal right: The pretender tried to usurp the throne.
2.
to use without authority or right; employ wrongfully: The magazine usurped copyrighted material.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/usurp

Last I checked Obama was elected in a landslide. You know, the kind that does not need any suspicion of things like Diebold machines and hanging chads.

fan4ever
01-28-2012, 02:33 PM
It is more interesting watching you swing and miss to try and paint others with a broad brush.

I have plenty of liberal friends who are now digging every military type move Obama makes; when Bush was president, yeah, not so much...but I'm sure you'e not part of a crowd like that.

fan4ever
01-28-2012, 02:36 PM
Yep, there are. When our forces are used in a good direction, ala rescuing our citizens, eliminating the actual killers of our citizens, etc., it's always respected, hell even celebrated. When they are used to invade another country and be involved in death and destruction so CEOs of some companies buy their bigger and better yachts, it is questioned. So, what is your point?

So cruise missles into Libya was cool with you? If yes, that's my point. Libbies wouldn't dig Bush doing moves like that I just bet 'cha and would be viewed as having all sorts of ulterior motives...when Obama does it = good, Bush = bad.

beach tribe
01-28-2012, 02:39 PM
IMHO we don't do enough of these rescues.

Seriously. Go get them all, and kill every POS in the way. It's good "practice" as these guys are hardly a threat to a team of SEALS.

|Zach|
01-28-2012, 03:17 PM
I have plenty of liberal friends who are now digging every military type move Obama makes; when Bush was president, yeah, not so much...but I'm sure you'e not part of a crowd like that.

I have plenty of friends who contradict whatever you are posting at a given time because it is really convenient that you dont know my friends or what they say. But trust me.

ThatRaceCardGuy
01-28-2012, 03:26 PM
Dirk my man! Learn politics my friend! It is an election year and the only thing OMarxist has done right was take OBL out so he is playing that card right now because he has nothing else:rolleyes:

Holy shit you're nuts!

Frankie
01-28-2012, 06:50 PM
So cruise missles into Libya was cool with you? If yes, that's my point. Libbies wouldn't dig Bush doing moves like that I just bet 'cha and would be viewed as having all sorts of ulterior motives...when Obama does it = good, Bush = bad.Again,... it's all about intent. It was not just lobbing "cruise missles into Libya." It was surgically hitting military targets. When we got involved was when a crazy murderous despot was about to commit genocide on his people using his military. WE DID NOT OCCUPY a country and stay there at the cost of many American and local lives, and money.

orange
01-28-2012, 07:02 PM
So glad to see you keep abreast of the "Usurper" in the oval office:thumb:

Yes I saw where Obama decided to keep snubbing his nose to the little people ("We The People"). It will only come back to haunt him.:shake:

Add another Marxist to the list, doc.

KChiefer
01-28-2012, 07:21 PM
Think this will boost his MW3 player numbers?

mlyonsd
01-28-2012, 10:42 PM
Again,... it's all about intent. It was not just lobbing "cruise missles into Libya." It was surgically hitting military targets. When we got involved was when a crazy murderous despot was about to commit genocide on his people using his military. WE DID NOT OCCUPY a country and stay there at the cost of many American and local lives, and money.Wow. Just, wow.

bandwagonjumper
01-29-2012, 03:46 AM
Dirk my man! Learn politics my friend! It is an election year and the only thing OMarxist has done right was take OBL out so he is playing that card right now because he has nothing else:rolleyes:

Call me naive but wouldn't it make sense to do the rescue operation two or three weeks before election instead of 8 months before. The same with Obama bin Laden.

fan4ever
01-29-2012, 02:14 PM
I have plenty of friends who contradict whatever you are posting at a given time because it is really convenient that you dont know my friends or what they say. But trust me.

Let's see if I can help you out and get back to the point I was alluding to in my original post: I now see, in this forum and in my own personal relationships with people, those who've been "anti-military action" now loving every military move Obama makes while every move Bush made was usually met with contempt and suspicion. I'm sure you don't agree; couldn't give a crap.

vailpass
01-30-2012, 03:16 PM
Let's see if I can help you out and get back to the point I was alluding to in my original post: I now see, in this forum and in my own personal relationships with people, those who've been "anti-military action" now loving every military move Obama makes while every move Bush made was usually met with contempt and suspicion. I'm sure you don't agree; couldn't give a crap.

Zach don't you have something snarky with which to respond to this spot-on post?

|Zach|
01-30-2012, 03:25 PM
Let's see if I can help you out and get back to the point I was alluding to in my original post: I now see, in this forum and in my own personal relationships with people, those who've been "anti-military action" now loving every military move Obama makes while every move Bush made was usually met with contempt and suspicion. I'm sure you don't agree; couldn't give a crap.

I have been involved in getting pretty good sized business deals as well as been involved in running out the clock or doing damage control in the middle of failed ones. They are both "doing business" just like what you talk about above are military matters but equating the nature of the two is just as disingenuous as your "friends" post.

Selling silliness like equating the actions of Bush and Obama is the kind of stuff that is going to keep Obama in office for another four years. Pretty incredible really.

Calcountry
01-30-2012, 05:42 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/25/world/africa/somalia-aid-workers/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

U.S. special forces swooped into Somalia in a pair of helicopters in a daring overnight raid to rescue two kidnapped aid workers -- an American and a Dane -- and killed several gunmen, American officials said Wednesday.

The hostages, Jessica Buchanan and Poul Thisted, were seized in October after they visited humanitarian projects in northern Somalia, said the Danish Refugee Council, the agency for which they worked.
Both are unharmed, the aid group said.

They were taken to a regional medical facility and receiving care from U.S. military doctors and nurses, Pentagon spokesman George Little said.

Navy SEALs from the unit that killed al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden last year in Pakistan were part of the mission, a U.S. official said, without specifying whether any of the same individuals were on both assaults.

The official is not authorized to speak to the media and asked not to be named.

The special forces troops took fire as they fought their way into a compound where the hostages were held, the official said, adding the troops believed that the kidnappers were shooting.

Nine heavily armed gunmen were killed in the strike, Pentagon spokesman Little said, adding that they had explosives nearby.

There were no known survivors among the kidnappers, Little said.No, Obama is NOT a pussy. Obama, is a PIMP.

fan4ever
01-30-2012, 10:55 PM
I have been involved in getting pretty good sized business deals as well as been involved in running out the clock or doing damage control in the middle of failed ones. They are both "doing business" just like what you talk about above are military matters but equating the nature of the two is just as disingenuous as your "friends" post.

Selling silliness like equating the actions of Bush and Obama is the kind of stuff that is going to keep Obama in office for another four years. Pretty incredible really.

OK...I'm officially at the "Huh?" stage. I thought I explained my viewpoint fairly well...

go bowe
01-30-2012, 11:12 PM
yeah really, huh?

i'm reading along just fine and then there's this upstart know-it-all kid (/roy) who chimes in with all this capitalism-like stuff...

nobody likes a successful businessman... /romney

Aries Walker
01-31-2012, 04:26 AM
Let's see if I can help you out and get back to the point I was alluding to in my original post: I now see, in this forum and in my own personal relationships with people, those who've been "anti-military action" now loving every military move Obama makes while every move Bush made was usually met with contempt and suspicion. I'm sure you don't agree; couldn't give a crap.
There's a big difference between starting a ten-year war costing thousands of lives and committing hundreds of thousands more to service, and costing us a king's ransom, all based on bad intel and a dubious justification, and using the military to rescue hostages taken by pirates. Between this, the Maersk Alabama, and wiping out bin Laden and however many other terrorist supervillains, I'm just fine with how Obama is using the military.

jspchief
01-31-2012, 04:38 AM
I have been involved in getting pretty good sized business deals as well as been involved in running out the clock or doing damage control in the middle of failed ones. They are both "doing business" just like what you talk about above are military matters but equating the nature of the two is just as disingenuous as your "friends" post.

Selling silliness like equating the actions of Bush and Obama is the kind of stuff that is going to keep Obama in office for another four years. Pretty incredible really.

So do you believe Obama supporters would have given this action comparable praise had it come from the Bush administration?

go bowe
01-31-2012, 11:04 AM
There's a big difference between starting a ten-year war costing thousands of lives and committing hundreds of thousands more to service, and costing us a king's ransom, all based on bad intel and a dubious justification, and using the military to rescue hostages taken by pirates. Between this, the Maersk Alabama, and wiping out bin Laden and however many other terrorist supervillains, I'm just fine with how Obama is using the military.

srsly?

there's a difference?

but, it's obama...

obama bad...

obama real bad...

fan4ever
01-31-2012, 11:55 AM
There's a big difference between starting a ten-year war costing thousands of lives and committing hundreds of thousands more to service, and costing us a king's ransom, all based on bad intel and a dubious justification, and using the military to rescue hostages taken by pirates. Between this, the Maersk Alabama, and wiping out bin Laden and however many other terrorist supervillains, I'm just fine with how Obama is using the military.

...and that's a valid point...I just don't think they would have been this collective silence for the most part, for example, had Bush lauched cruise missles into Libya; like I said, it would have been highly criticized by those holding their tongues now, simply because it was done by "their guy" which I GUESS may be Zach's point...nature of politics.

fan4ever
01-31-2012, 11:57 AM
srsly?

there's a difference?

but, it's obama...

obama bad...

obama real bad...

Yeah, because liberals certainly didn't hold fast to...

but, it's Bush...

Bush bad...

Bush real bad...

...way too objective for that.

demonhero
01-31-2012, 12:03 PM
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/01/joe-biden-advised-against-the-osama-bin-laden-raid/

Biden... what a bitch.

go bowe
01-31-2012, 12:06 PM
Yeah, because liberals certainly didn't hold fast to...

but, it's Bush...

Bush bad...

Bush real bad...

...way too objective for that.

no no no...

bush id da debil, obama bad...

try to keep it straight, wuldja?

Frankie
01-31-2012, 12:22 PM
There's a big difference between starting a ten-year war costing thousands of lives and committing hundreds of thousands more to service, and costing us a king's ransom, all based on bad intel and a dubious justification, and using the military to rescue hostages taken by pirates. Between this, the Maersk Alabama, and wiping out bin Laden and however many other terrorist supervillains, I'm just fine with how Obama is using the military.

Can't explain it to the narrow-minded better than this. Rep. :thumb:

So do you believe Obama supporters would have given this action comparable praise had it come from the Bush administration?

Yes. There are idiots on both sides. But most lefties would praise it.

fan4ever
01-31-2012, 02:16 PM
Can't explain it to the narrow-minded better than this. Rep. :thumb:



Yes. There are idiots on both sides. But most lefties would praise it.

Frankie...the epitome of the open mind...

fan4ever
01-31-2012, 02:18 PM
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/01/joe-biden-advised-against-the-osama-bin-laden-raid/

Biden... what a bitch.

Wow...no wonder Obama knew it was the right thing to do...