|
Korean Job Discussion Forums "The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Big_Bird

Joined: 31 Jan 2003 Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
Posted: Sat May 23, 2009 2:48 am Post subject: Why We Love to Hate Pirates |
|
|
I thought about posting this on the existing pirate thread - but that's getting quite long.
Why We Love to Hate Pirates
Quote: |
Make no mistake about it. We hate Somali pirates. What's more, we love to hate them. In a survey by the Pew Research Center (17-20 April 2009), the capture of the American-flagged Maersk Alabama was the most closely followed news story of that week, displacing the economy, the discovery of CIA torture memos, and potential changes in U.S.-Cuban relations. According to a Rasmussen Reports poll (13-14 April), an overwhelming majority of Americans supported the decision to kill the three pirates who had taken hostage the American captain. Hating the pirates is not a partisan issue, and it is not limited to Americans.
Across countless blogs and media outlets, here and abroad, thousands of people have called unequivocally-often in blunt, colorful language-for killing Somali pirates. "Kill the Pirates" was the headline of a Washington Post op-ed on April 13 by Fred Ikl�, a defense expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. As Jonah Goldberg wrote in the Los Angeles Times, "Shoot the pirates, problem solved." The mainstream media has described today's pirates as savage enemies of humankind, with pundits even saying that if it were not for political correctness, international law, and human rights, we could eliminate this scourge. In his blog, Amitai Etzioni of George Washington University blames piracy itself on "a radical interpretation of human rights," which discourages capturing and trying pirates for fear of violating their rights. He proposes instead a "007 license" with shoot-to-kill permission for commercial ships. Even before the latest incident, Robert Farley and Yoav Gortzak wrote in the December 2008 issue of Foreign Policy, "nobody likes pirates, and nobody-legal niceties aside-really minds too much if you shoot them."
The hatred is obvious. The question is why.
|
Some of the subheadings are:
Barbary Wars.
Black Hawk Down.
Disney Effect.
War on Terror.
Commerce and Crime.
Quote: |
So we prefer the use of force, as we did in Iraq, despite the fact that America's unmatched military power is ineffective against the underlying causes of piracy, and plunking a few plunderers does nothing to reverse a sunken American image in the world. Using force is expedient and the pirates are expendable, even if no one should be overly impressed with shooting teenagers in a lifeboat attached to a warship at 90 feet-the distance from home plate to first base. Military action is indeed a quick, dramatic, and satisfying morale-booster for a battered military and an image-burnisher for an administration concerned about looking soft. It makes for good sound bites and masquerades easily as derring-do, the stuff of Hollywood.
In the end, hating the pirates has very real effects. We convince ourselves that they can be deterred by a show of force, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary-attacks increased after the SEALs operation. We dismiss as na�ve calls for a political solution, which would require too much of us: rebuilding Somali state institutions that afford basic protections to the Somali people and providing sustainable support for a country suffering from a multi-year drought and food shortages. We are blind to the potential for unintended consequences like the possibility of piracy becoming more violent, costly, dispersed, and deadly. We ignore the hard choices, even while we remain intensely fascinated by pirate attacks and armed responses that let us live out our childhood and nationalistic fantasies.
|
I found it very ugly that certain posters were gloating over the deaths of 3 teenagers. The mob baying for blood and all that. If they were killers, that's one thing. But pirates in that area had not been killing. Just going after wealth. 3 lads dead - I can't see anything to be gleeful about. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
blade
Joined: 30 Jun 2007
|
Posted: Sat May 23, 2009 3:41 am Post subject: Re: Why We Love to Hate Pirates |
|
|
Big_Bird wrote: |
I found it very ugly that certain posters were gloating over the deaths of 3 teenagers. The mob baying for blood and all that. If they were killers, that's one thing. But pirates in that area had not been killing. Just going after wealth. |
What's worse is that some of said same people like to pretend they're "Christians" or from so called enlightened western countries.
Also I'd like to know in scale of 1 to 10 where should we put these young boys on a scale of evil and how does there actions which are partly motivated by the need to survive in a hostile world compare people who take part in the illegal dumping of nuclear and chemical waste off the coast of Somalia? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Gopher

Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
Posted: Sat May 23, 2009 8:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
But how do they choose to simply "go after wealth?" How is that acceptable?
I am reading an account right now on Latin America's Revolutionary Coordinating Council (JCR), the group that succeeded Che Guevara in attempting to transform South America into "one, two, three Vietnams" in order to bring/force world revolution there.
How did JCR secure its operating funds? kidnapping and extortion (backed by death threats) of business executives. bank robberies -- violent, armed robberies. The author, another leftist, goes to great pains to explain that these guerrillas were nice to their kidnap victims, played chess with them every day -- and they usually let them win, too! When the guerrillas threatened to cut off the executives' ears and mail them to their corporations if said corporations did not pay the ransom, well, that was just talk, come on.
I will never understand this kind of apologia. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
bacasper

Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
Posted: Sat May 23, 2009 8:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
I think this article is better posted here as well.
You are being lied to about pirates
Some are clearly just gangsters. But others are trying to stop illegal dumping and trawling
Monday, 5 January 2009
Who imagined that in 2009, the world's governments would be declaring a new War on Pirates? As you read this, the British Royal Navy � backed by the ships of more than two dozen nations, from the US to China � is sailing into Somalian waters to take on men we still picture as parrot-on-the-shoulder pantomime villains. They will soon be fighting Somalian ships and even chasing the pirates onto land, into one of the most broken countries on earth. But behind the arrr-me-hearties oddness of this tale, there is an untold scandal. The people our governments are labelling as "one of the great menaces of our times" have an extraordinary story to tell � and some justice on their side.
Pirates have never been quite who we think they are. In the "golden age of piracy" � from 1650 to 1730 � the idea of the pirate as the senseless, savage Bluebeard that lingers today was created by the British government in a great propaganda heave. Many ordinary people believed it was false: pirates were often saved from the gallows by supportive crowds. Why? What did they see that we can't? In his book Villains Of All Nations, the historian Marcus Rediker pores through the evidence.
If you became a merchant or navy sailor then � plucked from the docks of London's East End, young and hungry � you ended up in a floating wooden Hell. You worked all hours on a cramped, half-starved ship, and if you slacked off, the all-powerful captain would whip you with the Cat O' Nine Tails. If you slacked often, you could be thrown overboard. And at the end of months or years of this, you were often cheated of your wages.
Pirates were the first people to rebel against this world. They mutinied � and created a different way of working on the seas. Once they had a ship, the pirates elected their captains, and made all their decisions collectively, without torture. They shared their bounty out in what Rediker calls "one of the most egalitarian plans for the disposition of resources to be found anywhere in the eighteenth century".
They even took in escaped African slaves and lived with them as equals. The pirates showed "quite clearly � and subversively � that ships did not have to be run in the brutal and oppressive ways of the merchant service and the Royal Navy." This is why they were romantic heroes, despite being unproductive thieves.
The words of one pirate from that lost age, a young British man called William Scott, should echo into this new age of piracy. Just before he was hanged in Charleston, South Carolina, he said: "What I did was to keep me from perishing. I was forced to go a-pirateing to live." In 1991, the government of Somalia collapsed. Its nine million people have been teetering on starvation ever since � and the ugliest forces in the Western world have seen this as a great opportunity to steal the country's food supply and dump our nuclear waste in their seas.
Yes: nuclear waste. As soon as the government was gone, mysterious European ships started appearing off the coast of Somalia, dumping vast barrels into the ocean. The coastal population began to sicken. At first they suffered strange rashes, nausea and malformed babies. Then, after the 2005 tsunami, hundreds of the dumped and leaking barrels washed up on shore. People began to suffer from radiation sickness, and more than 300 died.
Ahmedou Ould-Abdallah, the UN envoy to Somalia, tells me: "Somebody is dumping nuclear material here. There is also lead, and heavy metals such as cadmium and mercury � you name it." Much of it can be traced back to European hospitals and factories, who seem to be passing it on to the Italian mafia to "dispose" of cheaply. When I asked Mr Ould-Abdallah what European governments were doing about it, he said with a sigh: "Nothing. There has been no clean-up, no compensation, and no prevention."
more at link |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Leslie Cheswyck

Joined: 31 May 2003 Location: University of Western Chile
|
Posted: Sat May 23, 2009 4:57 pm Post subject: Re: Why We Love to Hate Pirates |
|
|
Big_Bird wrote: |
I found it very ugly that certain posters were gloating over the deaths of 3 teenagers. The mob baying for blood and all that. If they were killers, that's one thing. But pirates in that area had not been killing. Just going after wealth. 3 lads dead - I can't see anything to be gleeful about. |
You missed the part about kidnapping, and what that implies. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Big_Bird

Joined: 31 Jan 2003 Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
Posted: Sat May 23, 2009 5:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Gopher wrote: |
But how do they choose to simply "go after wealth?" How is that acceptable?
I am reading an account right now on Latin America's Revolutionary Coordinating Council (JCR), the group that succeeded Che Guevara in attempting to transform South America into "one, two, three Vietnams" in order to bring/force world revolution there.
How did JCR secure its operating funds? kidnapping and extortion (backed by death threats) of business executives. bank robberies -- violent, armed robberies. The author, another leftist, goes to great pains to explain that these guerrillas were nice to their kidnap victims, played chess with them every day -- and they usually let them win, too! When the guerrillas threatened to cut off the executives' ears and mail them to their corporations if said corporations did not pay the ransom, well, that was just talk, come on.
I will never understand this kind of apologia. |
Sigh. Do you mete out the death penalty to thieves in America? I thought it was still just murderers (or innocent people convicted of murder) that were allowed the joys of that particular punishment. Or do you punish your thieves in a manner that doesn't require execution.
Perhaps it truly was the case that US forces thought the killings were necessary in order to preserve the captain's life. But even if that were the case, were these deaths something to gloat over?
Do you also regard the killing of teenaged boys as something to celebrate? Did you chortle with glee when you heard 3 lads had been shot? If not, did you look on those who did with tacit approval?
I will never understand this kind of apologia. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
ManintheMiddle
Joined: 20 Oct 2008
|
Posted: Sat May 23, 2009 6:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Big Bird lamented:
Quote: |
I found it very ugly that certain posters were gloating over the deaths of 3 teenagers. The mob baying for blood and all that. If they were killers, that's one thing. But pirates in that area had not been killing. Just going after wealth. 3 lads dead - I can't see anything to be gleeful about. |
It's truly a sight to behold to see how our resident school marm twist things. Next thing you'll be calling these thugs martyrs to the cause against globalization or some other Leftist campaign. Again, it's revealing that you devote a thread to pirates who deserve no sympathy but can't bring your bleeding heart to post on the recent rocket attacks from Gaza into Israel or the constant threat posed to Israel by its Muslim neighbors.
Oh, and this gem of a conditional clause:
Quote: |
But even if that were the case, |
It WAS the case. Deal with it. Thugs with guns pointed at his head getting an itchy trigger finger. Oh, wait, I suppose you expected the USN to call in a third party negotiator.
No, BB, this is just another opportunity for you to strike out at what you perceive as that big bully on the global block, the U.S. The article you cite impugns our motives, declaring that "we prefer to use force." What utter rubbish. Anyone (not you or the article's author) who's spent any time around American military personnel knows that the vast majority would rather avoid conflict at any cost for they are the ones most affected by it. If you can't see that, then we have no basis for discussion.
The article goes on to talk about the suffering of the Somali people but they have done it to themselves. These pirates are little better than the drug gangs in Mexico. The American crew they detained was carrying relief aid to Kenya. Do you think they cared one jot about that? Somalia is a failed state but won't tolerate intervention on their behalf. So while it's a sad situation, they've dug their own graves.
As for capital punishment, BB, I'll bet you'd have a quick change of heart if someone you held dear was kidnapped, brutally raped, and murdered by someone. It's easy to be philosophical from a cool distance and even easier to seek a scapegoat for the world's ills.
Last edited by ManintheMiddle on Sat May 23, 2009 7:45 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Gopher

Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
Posted: Sat May 23, 2009 7:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Big_Bird: swarming into the high seas, seizing merchant ships, and holding human beings prisoner, hostage, against their will, through force, is not the same thing as mere theft, as you seem to want to establish here.
And yes, there was a time in America, and in some places it still exists, when we shot armed bankrobbers and horse thieves on sight. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
bacasper

Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
Posted: Sat May 23, 2009 7:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Gopher wrote: |
Big_Bird: swarming into the high seas, seizing merchant ships, and holding human beings prisoner, hostage, against their will, through force, is not the same thing as mere theft, as you seem to want to establish here. |
We don't execute kidnappers either.
Quote: |
And yes, there was a time in America, and in some places it still exists, when we shot armed bankrobbers and horse thieves on sight. |
So let's return to the times of the Wild West? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Gopher

Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
Posted: Sat May 23, 2009 8:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: |
The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, Pub. L. 103-322, � 60003(a)(6), effective September 13, 1994, reinstated the death penalty for kidnapping and provided an effective mechanism for utilization of the death penalty punishment provision where the death of any person results. Federal prosecutors are advised to consult the Death Penalty Protocol as detailed in USAM 9-10.000 whether they intend to request permission to seek the death penalty or permission not to seek the death penalty. With respect to kidnapping, or conspiracies to kidnap, taking place prior to September 13, 1994, the penalty was "imprisonment for any term of years or for life." See Pub. L. 92-539.
In 1976, Public Law No. 94-647 extended the scope of the statute to cover situations in which the victim is a "foreign official, an internationally protected person, or an official guest," (see this Manual at 1623), and provided for a penalty of not more than 20 years imprisonment for an attempted kidnapping of such individuals (18 U.S.C. � 1201(d)).
In 1986, Public Law No. 99-646 amended � 1201(a) to cover kidnapping of Federal officers and employees designated in � 1114 of Title 18 U.S.C., and provided for a penalty of not more than 20 years imprisonment for attempted kidnapping of persons so designated (� 1201(d)). |
Department of Justice
Kuros: is this the current law on the matter?
Last edited by Gopher on Sat May 23, 2009 9:32 pm; edited 3 times in total |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
RJjr

Joined: 17 Aug 2006 Location: Turning on a Lamp
|
Posted: Sat May 23, 2009 8:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ManintheMiddle wrote: |
Anyone (not you or the article's author) who's spent any time around American military personnel knows that the vast majority would rather avoid conflict at any cost for they are the ones most affected by it. |
While this is true, it's also irrelevant since they have to enter whatever conflict our politicians tell them to whether they like it or not. It's similar to how I do my part to bankroll the Iraq war every April 15th whether I like it or not, since our politicians say I must. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
bacasper

Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
Posted: Sat May 23, 2009 8:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Gopher wrote: |
Quote: |
The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, Pub. L. 103-322, � 60003(a)(6), effective September 13, 1994, reinstated the death penalty for kidnapping and provided an effective mechanism for utilization of the death penalty punishment provision where the death of any person results. Federal prosecutors are advised to consult the Death Penalty Protocol as detailed in USAM 9-10.000 whether they intend to request permission to seek the death penalty or permission not to seek the death penalty. With respect to kidnapping, or conspiracies to kidnap, taking place prior to September 13, 1994, the penalty was "imprisonment for any term of years or for life." See Pub. L. 92-539.
In 1976, Public Law No. 94-647 extended the scope of the statute to cover situations in which the victim is a "foreign official, an internationally protected person, or an official guest," (see this Manual at 1623), and provided for a penalty of not more than 20 years imprisonment for an attempted kidnapping of such individuals (18 U.S.C. � 1201(d)).
In 1986, Public Law No. 99-646 amended � 1201(a) to cover kidnapping of Federal officers and employees designated in � 1114 of Title 18 U.S.C., and provided for a penalty of not more than 20 years imprisonment for attempted kidnapping of persons so designated (� 1201(d)). |
Department of Justice
Kuros: is this the current law on the matter? |
I don't even support the death penalty for murderers.
Gopher, if this is as you say, it is dead wrong IMHO, especially how prosecutors define "kidnapping" at times, e.g. sometimes moving someone a few feet away from where he was is considered "kidnapping." |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
bacasper

Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
Posted: Sat May 23, 2009 9:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
RJjr wrote: |
ManintheMiddle wrote: |
Anyone (not you or the article's author) who's spent any time around American military personnel knows that the vast majority would rather avoid conflict at any cost for they are the ones most affected by it. |
While this is true, it's also irrelevant since they have to enter whatever conflict our politicians tell them to whether they like it or not. It's similar to how I do my part to bankroll the Iraq war every April 15th whether I like it or not, since our politicians say I must. |
Furthermore, that makes antiwar activists and military personnel the best of friends. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Big_Bird

Joined: 31 Jan 2003 Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
Posted: Sat May 23, 2009 9:27 pm Post subject: Re: Why We Love to Hate Pirates |
|
|
blade wrote: |
Big_Bird wrote: |
I found it very ugly that certain posters were gloating over the deaths of 3 teenagers. The mob baying for blood and all that. If they were killers, that's one thing. But pirates in that area had not been killing. Just going after wealth. |
What's worse is that some of said same people like to pretend they're "Christians" or from so called enlightened western countries.
|
Yep. I believe our own Hawaiian cop is one of these. A so called Christian who called for "3 cheers and a beer!" when he heard of the violent deaths of 3 young lads. What happened to compassion and forgiveness? What happened to hate the sin, love the sinner? I wonder what Jesus would think to "3 cheers and a beer!"
I have to say I have very little respect for the moralising and lecturing and general scolding tone of certain fake Christians here. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Big_Bird

Joined: 31 Jan 2003 Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
Posted: Sat May 23, 2009 9:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Gopher wrote: |
Big_Bird: swarming into the high seas, seizing merchant ships, and holding human beings prisoner, hostage, against their will, through force, is not the same thing as mere theft, as you seem to want to establish here.
And yes, there was a time in America, and in some places it still exists, when we shot armed bankrobbers and horse thieves on sight. |
No, Gopher. I made the distinction between crimes involving deliberate murder and crimes undertaken to seize wealth without intention to kill. I don't consider the latter punishable by death. Even in the US you don't punish theft with death. These lads didn't deserve to die, even by harsh US standards.
Sure, as I've said, perhaps the US military were acting in the interests of the captain's safety. But why the gloating? Why would you want to jeer and cheer over 3 deaths? 3 boys that up until that point, had not as far as anyone knew killed anyone. Rather, wouldn't you find such a waste of life tragic? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|