I haven't bothered to read the Grauniad article, but a western armada IS the way to tackle pirates - hey, it worked with slavery! Sadly we don't have a navy up to the task any more.
What I am certain will not work is lots of talk and UN resolutions.
"What I am certain will not work is lots of talk and UN resolutions."
Depends what you mean by 'work' and what. If you mean lots of lucrative 'diplomacy' for UN apparatchiks then I'm sure that will work fine. If you mean stopping the piracy, then no, probably it won't.
Anyway, isn't the RN forbidden from firing on them because of their human right to commit piracy?
That article is positively hawkish by Guardian standards. Usually it would blame America or us for the piracy and demand subsidies for the pirates, blaming slavery or the Roman Empire or something.
"Usually it would blame America or us for the piracy..."
He's left that to the commenters. One in particular (halgeel84) is adamant that Bush is responsible for mass rapes and murder in Somalia. Apparently, this never happened before he was elected President of the US...
If you occupy the costal ports then you end piracy. History shows that solution clearly. Equally clearly the UN wouldn't do it. Black Hawk Down and all that. The Guardian, its so wet you don't so much read it as water the garden with it.
8 comments:
Ah, but they sadly failed to sink those two speedboats.
I haven't bothered to read the Grauniad article, but a western armada IS the way to tackle pirates - hey, it worked with slavery! Sadly we don't have a navy up to the task any more.
What I am certain will not work is lots of talk and UN resolutions.
"Ah, but they sadly failed to sink those two speedboats."
True, but letting a few go to spread the word about what happens when you tell a warship 'Yeah? You and whose army..?!' isn't such a bad idea.
"Sadly we don't have a navy up to the task any more."
The Iranian debacle aside, I think we do. It's the political interference that needs to be squashed first.
"What I am certain will not work is lots of talk and UN resolutions."
Depends what you mean by 'work' and what. If you mean lots of lucrative 'diplomacy' for UN apparatchiks then I'm sure that will work fine. If you mean stopping the piracy, then no, probably it won't.
Anyway, isn't the RN forbidden from firing on them because of their human right to commit piracy?
That article is positively hawkish by Guardian standards. Usually it would blame America or us for the piracy and demand subsidies for the pirates, blaming slavery or the Roman Empire or something.
"Usually it would blame America or us for the piracy..."
He's left that to the commenters. One in particular (halgeel84) is adamant that Bush is responsible for mass rapes and murder in Somalia. Apparently, this never happened before he was elected President of the US...
"Bush is responsible for mass rapes and murder in Somalia"
You wouldn't think he'd have the time, would you?
If you occupy the costal ports then you end piracy. History shows that solution clearly. Equally clearly the UN wouldn't do it. Black Hawk Down and all that.
The Guardian, its so wet you don't so much read it as water the garden with it.
Post a Comment