- NEW!
by NeverWas on April 14th, 2009
It gave him a little more respectability as a man of action in the eyes of some, but I'm not convinced. When dealing with pirates, it doesn't take a genius to say "use our superior military force and kill them". There aren't political repercussions from ordering the death of a pirate as there would be a foreign political actor, so as a statesman, the choice is pretty clear. If the hostage had been killed, it still wouldn't have been portrayed as Obama's fault.
That said, kudos. He did what needed doing.
by Wide Awake @ has closing date woo hoo on April 14th, 2009
It's how criminals should be dealt with when they choose to commit such a crime.
by Rince on April 14th, 2009
Good for him, its about time someone stood up to them and did something instead of just saying how terrible it is :-)
by Gone on April 14th, 2009
If you follow my answers you can tell I am no fan of Obama's but I have to give him this one, he didn't talk about it until after it was over, I listen to conservative radio and have heard some of the hosts trying to find fault with what he did but I am not one of them on this one, I think he called it right.
by Rollie on April 14th, 2009
There seems to be a wringing of the hands syndrome around the world because everyone is politically fearful of making an unpopular move.
I'm sure his decision was to use force to rescue the captain and to use deadly force if necessary.
The decision of exactly how to do it was left to others including the actual pull of the triggers. Good for him for taking a stand and making the move to protect US citizens, etc.
Now, let's go from here and see what the other nations do about their ships and crews being held hostage.
by Timjon on April 14th, 2009
a job well done, especially by the navy seals!
by Heather108 on April 14th, 2009
Very very well done.
by Phillis - Zacks little sister on April 14th, 2009
I am SO GLAD that someone is finally standing up to the bad guys again. It somewhat alleviates my desire to co-mingle with the anarchists.
by Ditto on April 14th, 2009
Two to the chest, one to the head. Great work, Obama!!! WOOHOO!!!
by nzguy.. on April 14th, 2009
I would say he handled it very well in deed.
from what I have seen of him so far he is brilliant possibly the best thing that's come out of America in years.
He has given so many people hope in the future.
He is very different to the presidents who have gone before him..
he has integrity..Wisdom, knowledge, a good Taylor .
He's class on legs....
by Lori K still ignores stalkers and trolls on April 14th, 2009
I was very pleased that the American ship captain was freed with only 3 deaths. I was less pleased when an additional 4 ships and 60 people were taken hostage in retaliation the next day.
by QueenR eats the Terminator for breakfast on April 14th, 2009
Aye...seeing him there ramming his ship into them then jumping on board with his Kalashnikov blazing....oh PRESIDENT Obama you mean...ah
He did make the right choice in killing them.
These Pirates need what happened to them in the 17th century-hanged at the high water mark!
by FairLady on April 14th, 2009
Obama changes his mind back and forth, but this time he was quite resolute. I should give him a credit.
by Nightwatchdog on April 14th, 2009
It's a start - now we must put an end to the rest of them.
by SkyClad on April 14th, 2009
What did he do? The actions taken by the SEALS are dictated by the rules of engagement when dealing with hostage takers. The "on-scene commander" makes the call whether, or not, to use deadly force.
No disrespect intended for President Obama, but by the time a message was relayed to the President that the hostage was in imminent danger and the President would have responded, the hostage would have been dead..
by Nightwatchdog on April 22nd, 2009
It's a good start - but he needs to do more.
by fred flintstone on April 14th, 2009
Spot on
by CannedHam on April 21st, 2009
Pretty poorly. According to stories that are starting to come out of the SpecOps communuity, Obama had ordered that no lethal force was to be used unless the captain's life was in "imminent danger". His direction was that only negotiations were to be used to handle the situation.
The Bainbridge had been on station for 36 hours before Obama allowed a SEAL team to be dispatched. When the SEALs arrived, they were told the rules of engagement and forced to sit on their hands. At the time the captain made his escape attempt, the SEALs and the Bainbridge could not interfere since the captain was not in "imminent danger". A Navy boat that was sent to offer food and water was fired upon. The Navy was not allowed to return fire nor were the SEALs since it was only the boat crew that was in imminent danger and not the captain.
In the end, the Bainbridge skipper and the SEAL team leader decided that they were the ones who would make the call as to what "imminent danger" meant. So, when the pirates pointed a weapon at the captain, they assumed the pirates were about to shoot him (either intentionally or accidentally) and the SEALs shot the pirates instead.
This version of events is a bit more credible in light of what we know about Obama's leadership style. He is not quick and decisive. He is a policy wonk and given to introspection and analysis even when the issue on the table requires a snap decision.
by Lori K still ignores stalkers and trolls on April 21st, 2009
I think it's hardly "mission accomplished" yet -- even with these particular pirates. There's still a teenage Somali pirate to be dealt with. I don't know how the US justice system is going to handle someone like that. It seems unprepared. There's also now a stepped condition of piracy in retaliation. This is starting to feel like the beginning of another war.
I AM however, thrilled that this captain was freed. I'm not even particularly upset over the deaths of the 3 teenage pirates. I think the SEALS who made these shots were defintely to be commended. If it wasn't for their extreme skills, this could have gone very VERY wrong for the American hostage. I do think, however, that not every country is going to be pleased that 3 teenagers will killed.
Was the Watergate break-in during Nixon's presidency important in
American history? Before you turn this into a L-R question, think
first.
by einsteinwasright0116 on July 2nd, 2011
| 2 people like this
Is America headed for our third simultaneous troop invasion in Libya? First Afghanistan, then Iraq, now Libya?
by GibsonGuy on March 7th, 2011
| 2 people like this
Citizens of countries other then the United States, what do you think of United States citizens in general?
by futureMarine on May 6th, 2011
| 2 people like this
Why were East Pakistan and West Pakistan on opposite sides of India?
by stripeslewis on March 12th, 2011
| 1 person likes this
Who benefits from the instability of foreign governments?
by Anonymous on February 20th, 2011
| 1 person likes this
You're reading What do you think of how President Obama handled the pirates in Somalia?
Your favorite Q&A site is on Facebook! Become a fan to connect with the ever-growing community of Answerbaggers, share your thoughts and find out what Answerbag's up to next!
Comments
What more can you ask....?
by Teri on April 14th, 2009
+4 for you from Karen Ann
by Karen Anne Queen of AB on May 3rd, 2009