Hostages Taken off Somalia

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by bobsadler

it's perhaps worth remembering what george washington said ...

And what he, and subsequent Presidents did.

During President Washington’s administration, American diplomats repeatedly negotiated treaties of “Peace and Amity” with the Barbary Powers* in an effort to ensure protection for American ships in the Mediterranean. These often officially recognized the Muslim religion in order to halt the escalation of Holy War.

* Morocco, Algiers (Algeria), Tunis (Tunisia), and Tripoli (Libya)

Under these treaties, the United States was forced to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars a year in “tribute” to each of the Barbary nations. In 1795 tribute just to Algiers totalled almost one million dollars, and by the last year of Washington’s administration, sixteen percent of the federal budget was going to the Barbary Pirates. The United States was forced to obtain a loan from Holland to cover what had become a substantial economic burden.

As late as 1800, the frigate “George Washington”, commanded by William Bainbridge, became the first U.S. Navy warship to enter the Mediterranean, when it sent to Algiers with $500,000 worth of tribute for the Dey of Algiers.

It wasn't until the the fourth US President, James Madison, that the Barbary pirates were militarily defeated (1815).

[bobsadler]

so i guess we have the lesson of history to show us what works

[James S]

Originally Posted by GordMay

In 1795 tribute just to Algiers totalled almost one million dollars, and by the last year of Washington’s administration, sixteen percent of the federal budget was going to the Barbary Pirates. The United States was forced to obtain a loan from Holland to cover what had become a substantial economic burden.
).

Wow...thats incredible!

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by bobsadler

so i guess we have the lesson of history to show us what works

Yes, but the situations (North Africa then & Somalia now) are not quite analogous.

Then was war between nations, now is armed crime.

“... In 1801, the Pasha of Tripoli, Yusuf Qaramanli, citing late payments of tribute demanded additional tribute and declared war on the United States. The United States successfully defeated Qaramanli?s forces with a combined naval and land assault by the United States Marine Corps. The U.S. treaty with Tripoli concluded in 1805 included a ransom for American prisoners in Tripoli, but no provisions for tribute.

In 1812, the new Dey of Algiers, Hajji Ali, rejected the American tribute negotiated in the 1795 treaty as insufficient and declared war on the United States. Algerian corsairs captured an American ship several weeks later. In accordance with an agreement between the Dey and British diplomats, the Algerian declaration was timed to coincide with the start of the War of 1812 between Britain and the United States. The war with Britain prevented the U.S. Government from either confronting Algerian forces or ransoming U.S. captives in Algiers. Once the Treaty of Ghent ended war with Britain, President James Madison was able to request that Congress declare war on Algiers, which it did on March 3, 1815...”

More ➥ Barbary Wars, 1801-1805 and 1815-1816

[bobsadler]

no, not quite analogous, but what the history shows is that paying them off, in the long run, simply exacerbated the problem.

[David M]

Yup, exactly. Giving in to demands creates success for them which only encourages more of this activity. Only when they are no longer successful will they stop their attempts.

[speakeasy]

Originally Posted by GordMay

Yes, but the situations (North Africa then & Somalia now) are not quite analogous.

Then was war between nations, now is armed crime.

“... In 1801, the Pasha of Tripoli, Yusuf Qaramanli, citing late payments of tribute demanded additional tribute and declared war on the United States. The United States successfully defeated Qaramanli?s forces with a combined naval and land assault by the United States Marine Corps. The U.S. treaty with Tripoli concluded in 1805 included a ransom for American prisoners in Tripoli, but no provisions for tribute.

Yes, an assault led by Lt. Presley O'bannon.

Marine Corps history states that a sword of this type was presented to Marine First Lieutenant Presley O'Bannon by the Ottoman Empire viceroy, Prince Hamet, on December 8, 1804, during the First Barbary War, as a gesture of respect and praise for the Marines' actions at the Battle of Derne.[citation needed] Upon his return to the United States, the state of Virginia presented him with a silver-hilted sword featuring an eaglehead hilt and a curved blade modeled after the original Mameluke sword given him by Hamet. Its blade is inscribed with his name and a commemoration of the Battle of Tripoli Harbor.[1]



Perhaps due to the Marines' distinguished record during this campaign, including the capture of the Tripolitan city of Derna after a long and dangerous desert march, Marine Corps Commandant Archibald Henderson adopted the Mameluke sword in 1825 for wear by Marine officers. After initial distribution in 1826, Mameluke swords have been worn except for the years 1859-75 (when Marine officers were required to wear the U.S. Model 1850 Army foot officers' sword), and a brief period when swords were suspended during World War II. Since that time, Mameluke swords have been worn by Marine officers in a continuing tradition to the present day.

I still have mine, and have been thinking I should perhaps sharpen it and seek out an instructor to learn how to use it effectively to be able to repel boarders. Oh, ouch, I mean after I see my chiropractor and get my creaky old back straightened out.

[GordMay]

I absolutely agree that “paying off” criminals cannot be any part of an effective long-term national/international policy.
Notwithstanding, as a matter of personal expediency, (were I a pirate captive) I’d like to think that my family & nation would do whatever it took (including ransom) to safeguard my life, prior to executing national policy.

[David M]

I think a well armed band of modern day pirates just might die laughing at "Bluebeard" popping out of the companion way wielding a sword.

[sarafina]

Originally Posted by GordMay

I’d like to think that my family & nation would do whatever it took (including ransom) to safeguard my life, prior to executing national policy.

Interesting... I can imagine being scared and 'wanting them to ransom me' but I would not expect it. In fact I would prolly tell them that my government does not negotiate and that my family is very ordinary and can not make any large payment on my behalf.*

I would be astounded in fact if a ransom were paid. A rescue attempt yes, a diplomatic negotiation perhaps, but payment? I don't think so...






*and then suggest they just set me loose as a lost cause, can't hurt to try... ; -)

[SabreKai]

I wonder how they'd like it if the boat they came along side suddenly exploded in flame and raked them with a broad side of nails, broken glass, old nuts n bolts and what not. It would not be too hard to weld small pots made of steel to the inside skin, charge them with black powder and the above bits n pieces and then seal the outside water tight. Electrical detonation is very easy to wire. Let them get along side and then let them have it.

Sabre

[neelie]

The pirates are able to operate about 1000 nm miles from Somalia because they have larger mother ships from which to launch their skiffs. The location of these mother ships are mostly well known by most navies in the region. However our New Age Western over-valuation of human life prevent us from hunting down and sinking the b$$$ds. You can be sure our innocent little Somali "fishermen" have their spin doctors at work in the West to keep the media on side and to ensure any action is redefined as a human rights atrocity on the front pages. Hence the Western Navies and Governments are nervous of actually doing anything permanent. You can't blame them.

Physically putting a stop to the Somali pirates in the Indian Ocean is but a part of the problem, the PR battle in our kumbaya media world is not quite so easily won.

A fanciful idea would be to outsource the patrolling of those waters to countries with appalling human rights records, e.g. China, Burma, Turkmenistan, Zimbabwe, Iran et al. Not a new idea at all, really - the CIA has been doing this for years with some success.

Now for the bad news - reality check !..all we can do is resign ourselves to another decade or two of indignation about these acts of piracy and dream of yet another "Final Solution".

[bobfnbw]

Originally Posted by sarafina

Interesting... I can imagine being scared and 'wanting them to ransom me' but I would not expect it. In fact I would prolly tell them that my government does not negotiate and that my family is very ordinary and can not make any large payment on my behalf.*

I would be astounded in fact if a ransom were paid. A rescue attempt yes, a diplomatic negotiation perhaps, but payment? I don't think so...






*and then suggest they just set me loose as a lost cause, can't hurt to try... ; -)

I agree..
When I ever go out in harms way, I don't think I would expect my family back home to bankrupt them selves to get my sorry ass out of a situation of my own making.
I would much prefer to go down in a battle between them and I, taking a few of them with me... than to go that route.
I would not ever support the idea that pirates should profit from this.

[David M]

Originally Posted by SabreKai

I wonder how they'd like it if the boat they came along side suddenly exploded in flame and raked them with a broad side of nails, broken glass, old nuts n bolts and what not. It would not be too hard to weld small pots made of steel to the inside skin, charge them with black powder and the above bits n pieces and then seal the outside water tight. Electrical detonation is very easy to wire. Let them get along side and then let them have it.

Sabre

Interesting...decoy boats that when boarded self-destruct taking the pirates with them. I kinda like the idea although it could backfire taking some innocent, curious people with them.

[s/v Jedi]

This news item of today shows that decisive action is required:

BBC NEWS | Africa | Spain resists deal with pirates

ciao!
Nick.