Analysis: Obama beats first national security test

[Puppycow]

Funny how something that the president has little control over is seen as a success or failure for him personally. Carter was seen as wimpy partly because the rescue attempt he ordered was a big fail, even though I don't see what any president of either party could have done to make it succeed. We have soldiers dying almost every day, but one guy is taken hostage and the news focuses only on that until it's over. One guy.

 

[Gangularis]

Pirates vow to kill U.S.; French sailors

There's a neat little video in the link that illustrates how it went down.

 

[dudalb]

And if the pirates kill the sailors, I look forward to how the pirate apologist will spin that.

 

[Meadmaker]

I predict little will have changed within a year. The problem has been festering for a lot longer than that so far, and nothing has fundamentally changed even if the problem is getting more attention. What CAN be done? Not much, because going ashore is basically not a politically acceptable option. We're a long ways away from the days which gave birth to "the shores of Tripoli" line in the Marines' hymn.

Well, there's a new sheriff in town, I guess we'll see what he does.

 

[dirtywick]

Pirates vow to kill U.S.; French sailors

There's a neat little video in the link that illustrates how it went down.

Pretty stupid IMO. In fact, if they'd never captured an American at all they probably would have been free to continue making money from those willing to pay.

 

[Ysidro]

Pretty stupid IMO. In fact, if they'd never captured an American at all they probably would have been free to continue making money from those willing to pay.

Except for the French and Germans pulling operations to rescue hostages.

Frankly, we need to catch up to them both! Maybe we can seed the seas with some bait just to send SEALs in after them.

 

[shadron]

A little piece reported by the Federaion of American Scientists, Secrecy in Government project, on this subject. The FAS maintains a huge website on which they publish almost everything they can get from government, whether officially released or not. However,

SNIPER TRAINING MANUAL REMAINS OFFLINE

"When... dealing with multiple targets, such as two hostage-takers, [snipers] must coordinate to fire simultaneously," according to a U.S. Army sniper training manual. "Taking [the targets] out one at a time may allow the second suspect time to harm the hostages."

This was the scenario facing Navy SEALs on the Indian Ocean on April 12. They fired simultaneously at three Somali pirates, killing them and rescuing an American hostage.

"Shooting simultaneously by command fire with another sniper is a very important skill to develop and requires much practice," the Army manual advises.

A copy of the U.S. Army Special Forces Sniper Training and Employment manual (FM 3-05.222) was obtained by Secrecy News. Although the document is unclassified, it is subject to restricted distribution in order "to protect technical or operational information."

For once, such restrictions appear to make sense and the 474-page manual will not be posted on the Federation of American Scientists website. But as always, views on the question of disclosure differ. A 2003 discussion on the "Shooter's Forum" website presented contrasting opinions on the desirability of publishing this Manual.

In this the FAS is doing the responsible thing, as opposed to those who think the project and the people in it are just crazy lib'ruls.

 

[Demigorgon]

So North Korea launching an ICBM and Iran's nuke situation were not a national security test?

 

[Dr Adequate]

A little piece reported by the Federaion of American Scientists, Secrecy in Government project, on this subject. The FAS maintains a huge website on which they publish almost everything they can get from government, whether officially released or not. However,



In this the FAS is doing the responsible thing, as opposed to those who think the project and the people in it are just crazy lib'ruls.

Wrong thread?

 

[Dr Adequate]

Geography alone doesn't make any significant difference. But it's tactically, strategically, and politically VERY different. The high seas are common territory, land is not, so any land operation is automatically an invasion, which is more problematic politically. But more importantly, the actual fighting would be very different. There are far more potential enemies, it's harder to know where they are and what they're doing, it's far easier for them to set up ambushes and counterattacks, and there will be lots of civies to get in the way or be used as human shields. Land-based operations will be far more dangerous, to the troops, to the hostages, and to any potential collateral.

This problem is not new. It's been going on for years now. Various navies have even been patrolling the water for years now too. But nobody is moving against the pirate bases on land. Because nobody wants to. I see no reason to expect that to change.

All this may be true; but it doesn't relate to claims that they'd be reluctant to join in a coalition because of pirate threats to the hostages. If that worked, then the pirates could keep their navies out of the waters off Somalia with similar threats.

 

[Ziggurat]

All this may be true; but it doesn't relate to claims that they'd be reluctant to join in a coalition because of pirate threats to the hostages. If that worked, then the pirates could keep their navies out of the waters off Somalia with similar threats.

Our current anti-piracy actions aren't stopping them, so there's no need to. But actually, if we did start attacking pirate ships directly, I wouldn't be at all surprised if that's exactly what they'd start doing. Hell, they don't even need western hostages: just bring along some Somali women and children, and you've got a PR bonanza when their pirate boat gets torpedoed.

 

[MattusMaximus]

So North Korea launching an ICBM and Iran's nuke situation were not a national security test?

Good point, but those are ongoing national security scenarios which are "old hat" - Obama's been working on those already, when he picked up from where the Bush administration left off.

This situation with the Somali pirates is the first national security "test" for Obama that is solely his to deal with. I think that is why it has garnered so much attention.

 

[headscratcher4]

I haven't read through the whole thread...but in case this graphic hasn't been added to the equation, here it is.

http://jamiemottram.tumblr.com/post/96079947/obama-the-pirate-killer-in-graph-form