News Stories

[AnimeFan188]

Originally Posted by don_Durandal

And one look at the XIXth century lets you see what happens to the workforce when corporations have all powers and unions are inexistent.

Surely there must be a middleground between legal mafia and quasi-slavery exploitation. (and no, I'm not calling you Shirley)

Employee-owned businesses?

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by flying ^

one only has to look @ sorry places like Detroit to see what happens when you let unions have a bit too much power

the Union or that he Detroit Auto company were ran by idiots who couldn't see the Forrest for the trees. The union have their share of fault in the big 3 almost going down but they weren't the ones driving the bus, that was the free corporate executives. Who regardless of the Auto Union would have made the same mistake.

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by AnimeFan188

Employee-owned businesses?

Aye.. *real* employee-owned businesses (not the "here's 1 share - you're an OWNER!! now shut up and keep doing this the stupid way"). They're statistically successful and they scare the hell out of plutocrats. My grandfather was part of one for the last 20 years of his life - they ran a special fuels cracking facility in the oil industry. Everyone in the company was an equal share partner. yeah there was internal drama - but none of this "fuck you I've got 99% you can fight each other over the bit of shit left, but off the clock, peasants".

[AnimeFan188]

"Libya has a "significant" stockpile of chemical weapons, developed during the
1980s, according to U.S. officials, but the U.S. also believes there is no evidence
that he is prepared to use them against his own people. With the destruction of
3,500 aerial bombs in 2004, Gadhafi may not have the delivery systems needed.

"We have no indication he is planning to use them against his population ... but
he doesn't always make rational decisions," said one official, speaking on
condition of anonymity."

See:

http://openchannel.msnbc.msn.com/_ne...emical-weapons

If Gadhafi decides to pull a Saddam, and gas his own people, this could get
very ugly, very fast.

[flying ^]

Originally Posted by AnimeFan188

If Gadhafi decides to pull a Saddam, and gas his own people, this could get
very ugly, very fast.

great... now USA is about to get involved in 4th front

yes... a 4th front!

here's where they at right now...

South/Central Asia -> Afghanistan

Middle East -> Iraq

this should be officially a 3rd front, but no one from DC cares
North America -> Mexico
"Farmers and ranchers are being run off their own property by armed terrorists showing up and telling them they have to leave their land(!!!)"


coming soon... North Africa -> Libya

[SaintessHeart]

Why high-seas piracy is here to stay

WASHINGTON — In 2005, the average ransom paid for the release of a ship hijacked by Somali pirates was around $150,000. By the end of last year, it stood at $5.4 million. That means revenues for the business of piracy more than doubled every year. The 2005 to 2010 percentage increase is a staggering 3,600 percent.

The ransom numbers come from the One Earth Foundation, a U.S. think tank, and help explain why the business of piracy, probably the world’s most profitable, has been expanding — despite an increased international naval presence in the waters hounded by Somali pirates, despite a string of plans to protect shipping, and despite increasingly exasperated statements from politicians and ship owners.

Talking about pirates off Somalia, who killed four Americans on February 22, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said this week that “I’m fed up with it.” Piracy is moving up Washington’s list of priorities, according to her. A few weeks earlier, Ban Ki-Moon, the United Nations Secretary General, noted that “piracy seems to be outpacing the efforts of the international community to stem it.”

Ship owners agree. Early in March, five of the world’s largest maritime organizations, complaining that “2,000 Somali pirates are hijacking the world’s economy”, launched an advertising campaign and a website (www. SaveOurSeafarers.com) demanding tougher action. The group includes the International Chamber of Shipping, which represents about 80 percent of the world’s merchant ships, and INTERTANKO, whose members operate most of the world’s tankers.

In half page advertisements in leading newspapers, including the Wall Street Journal, the group noted that “even when caught red-handed, 80 percent of pirates are released to attack again.”

The practice, known as “catch and release”, figures in the risk-reward calculations of the piracy business, whose leaders are aware of the thicket of laws, regulations and jurisdictional ambiguities which has made arrest and prosecution of pirates difficult. There are no uniform rules of engagement for the warships on counter-piracy missions in the Gulf of Aden and the Indian ocean. By some definitions, an act of piracy does not begin until grappling hooks are thrown over the sides and the pirates start clambering up.

While the number of navy vessels on counter-piracy patrols has increased (there are about 30 warships on patrol now) so has the area threatened by pirates, who launch speedboats from mother ships up to a thousand miles from the Somali coast. So, the warships are looking for needles in a haystack.

AN ENTERPRISE DOOMED TO FAILURE

Which is why trying to end piracy purely with sea-borne operations looks like an enterprise doomed to failure. The key to solving the problem is on land – the fact that Somalia, a failed state, is a sanctuary for pirates. No country is prepared to take action against that sanctuary, where more than 800 seafarers are currently held hostage.

“The problem is being addressed right now only from the sea,” Nikolas Gvosdev, a professor at the U.S. Naval War College, said in a recent radio discussion on piracy. “We are trying to deter attacks. We are trying to protect ships. But the problem lies on land. It lies in villages and port cities, in ungoverned spaces where…this is a profitable business. It is essentially the main driver for revenue in Somalia.”

Donna Hopkins, the U.S. government’s coordinator of Counter Piracy and Maritime Security, has described piracy as “deeply ingrained in the Somali economic and social structure” and said the problem would continue as long as there is no effective government to control territorial waters and the Somali coastline.

When might that happen? Don’t hold your breath. Somalia has had no effective government since 1991 when the Communist dictatorship of Mohamed Siad Barre was toppled. In the two decades since then, the country has been torn by fighting between rival warlords and militias, an Ethiopian invasion to oust Islamists, and battles between militants linked to al Qaeda and what passes for a government.

In the process, Somalia earned the dubious distinction of being ranked the world’s most corrupt country. It came dead last on the 2010 corruption perception index of 178 countries compiled by Transparency International, a watchdog group based in Berlin.

The longer the problem festers, the more difficult it is to resolve. “As pirates become richer, they become harder to dislodge,” says Roger Middleton, the author of a report on piracy by Chatham House, a British think tank. “Pirates can be chased on the ocean, but piracy can only be eradicated on land.”

So what to do? One way would be stepped up military action on land, following the example of a daring helicopter-born French commando raid in 2008 to capture pirates who had held 30 hostages from a French yacht. Another way would be to redouble international efforts to finally help Somalia establish an effective government to tackle the linked problems of piracy, poverty, hunger and war.

Both options require what the ship owners backing the Save Our Seafarers campaign say governments around the world lack — political will.

I am more inclined to think that the governments lack the necessary intelligence levels to engage the pirates.

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

Why high-seas piracy is here to stay



I am more inclined to think that the governments lack the necessary intelligence levels to engage the pirates.

i do agree it is a lack of wills

1. hang the pirates and damn the human rights criticism.

2. allow the ships to carry guns.

3. make example of the villages that harbor pirate, burn them to the ground.

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

i do agree it is a lack of wills

1. hang the pirates and damn the human rights criticism.

2. allow the ships to carry guns.

3. make example of the villages that harbor pirate, burn them to the ground.

I think for once the world agrees with the Russians. Load the pirates onto their skiff, cover that boat with Semtex, move to a safe distance and blast that boat sky high.

Talk about setting a good example. In Soviet Russia, the pirates don't hijack your boat, the boat hijacks and kills them!

[ganbaru]

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

i do agree it is a lack of wills

1. hang the pirates and damn the human rights criticism.

2. allow the ships to carry guns.

3. make example of the villages that harbor pirate, burn them to the ground.

The first 2 points could pass but the third have probably no chance to be put in action, unless by the russian.

[Ithekro]

I'm still for setting up high price bounties on the pirates and/or setting up a system of privateers to hunt the pirates down for profit. Make it cost more to be a pirate than to hunt them down, or make the risk worth less than the rewards. Thus cutting the bottom out of the piracy market. (Privateers might even get creative with it and take out pirate strongholds for all we know).

[Xion Valkyrie]

Seems like a great market for PMCs to take advantage of. Station a few ex-military snipers and most of the smaller scale pirate attacks would be solved.

[ganbaru]

China internal security spending jumps past army budget
http://ca.reuters.com/article/topNew...7222RA20110305

[Roger Rambo]

More news on Libya

Four Libyan towns which forces loyal to Colonel Gaddafi claimed to have retaken remain under rebel control, witnesses say.

Tobruk and Ras Lanuf remain in rebel hands, BBC correspondents said.

Anti-Gaddafi forces still control Misrata and Zawiya, residents and rebels said.

But both Misrata and Ras Lanuf came under renewed attack on Sunday, and clashes have been reported in the small town of Bin Jawad.

In the capital, Tripoli, officials said pre-dawn gunfire there was celebrating pro-Gaddafi "gains" of the towns.

Many people there first thought the firing was clashes between pro- and anti-government forces, and there are suspicions celebratory gunfire was then used to cover up the gunfight.

Tripoli has been Col Gaddafi's main stronghold as he attempts to reassert control over the country from rebels who have taken much of the east of the country as well as some towns closer to Tripoli, in the west.
'Dancing in the square'

Troops backed by helicopter gunships have attacked the eastern coastal towns of Bin Jawad and Ras Lanuf, recently captured by the rebels.

Ras Lanuf - 160km (100 miles) east of Col Gaddafi's stronghold of Sirte - was taken by opposition forces on Saturday.

Two people were killed and about 40 were wounded in fighting around the major oil town on Sunday.

Rebels said their forces withdrew from Bin Jawad - about 50km north-west of Ras Lanuf - after coming under attack when they advanced.

They are meeting stronger resistance, and are also running short of fuel, correspondents say.

In the west, tanks have been in action against the rebel-held cities of Misrata, 200km east of Tripoli, and Zawiya.

A local doctor in Misrata told the BBC that the situation had become "very bad" after pro-Gaddafi forces with tanks and armoured cars went into the city centre and opened fire.

He said they shot at people whether they were armed or not, and that three people had been killed.

On Saturday, residents of Zawiya, 50km west of Tripoli, said Col Gaddafi's troops had fired indiscriminately on civilians as they attempted to capture the town.

In their eastern stronghold of Benghazi, rebels formed a 30-member National Libyan Council which claims to now be the country's sole representative.
SAS detained

The UN estimates that more than 1,000 people have died in the unrest in Libya, which follows public protests in neighbouring Tunisia and Egypt that saw their presidents overthrown.

The UN Security Council approved sanctions last week imposing asset freezes and travel bans on Col Gaddafi and his family and aides.
map

The resolution also referred Col Gaddafi and his inner circle to the International Criminal Court for investigation of crimes against humanity.

But in an interview with a French Sunday newspaper, Col Gaddafi said he would welcome a United Nations or African Union investigation into the violence in the country.

Meanwhile, French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe, speaking on a visit to neighbouring Egypt, said any international military intervention in Libya would have "absolutely negative" effects.

In a separate development, the UK Ministry of Defence has declined to comment on a newspaper report that six members of the SAS had been detained by rebel forces in Benghazi.

The Sunday Times said the men - dressed in plain clothes and carrying weapons, ammunition, maps, and passports from four different countries - had been trying to put UK diplomats in touch with the rebel leadership.

British ministers have said a diplomatic mission was sent to Benghazi, but declined to give further details.

I find it mind boggling that some people in the media are talking about how this situation might develop into a civil war. That's like a man after finishing up on his fifth mistress wondering if what he's doing might lead to Adultery.

[SaintessHeart]

Well the firing of DShK HMGs have already sealed the fate of Libya. Though I wondered why the UKMOD decided to send their SAS troopers to talk to the rebels - they will be captured anyway.

If those 6 are going to fight their way out, it is going to be a three-way conflict. I wonder how are they going to get back home.

[ganbaru]

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

. Though I wondered why the UKMOD decided to send their SAS troopers to talk to the rebels - they will be captured anyway.

Probably than anyone would had be captured anyway, so it's probably better to send peoples than have better chance to survive.

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by ganbaru

Probably than anyone would had be captured anyway, so it's probably better to send peoples than have better chance to survive.

No, actually it would be better to send a politician who can't fight. Sending the SAS is a bad idea because when these guys start to fight their way out, it isn't going to be pretty on the headlines.

It would definitely be a failed escape, but approximately 300 rebels are going to die trying to put them down. And I mean outright kills, not subsequent death due to injury.

[ganbaru]

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

No, actually it would be better to send a politician who can't fight. Sending the SAS is a bad idea because when these guys start to fight their way out, it isn't going to be pretty on the headlines.

Sending a politician in a warzone to talk to rebel force don't look like such good idea to me; because he might be well know they would treat him better but if his presence is know Gaddafi would have a easy argument to claim outside interference into this conflict. And of course, if ''the shit it the fan'' trained specialists have better chance to survive than anyone else.

Someone from the Foreing Office or the SIS might have been a good compromise...

[Anh_Minh]

Originally Posted by ganbaru

Sending a politician in a warzone to talk to rebel force don't look like such good idea to me; because he might be well know they would treat him better but if his presence is know Gaddafi would have a easy argument to claim outside interference into this conflict. And of course, if ''the shit it the fan'' trained specialists have better chance to survive than anyone else.

Someone from the Foreing Office or the SIS might have been a good compromise...

Er... I'd say that Special Forces with enough gear to assassinate half of Tripoli are more of an "outside interference" than some guy coming to talk to the possibly future government of Lybia.

[Haak]

Originally Posted by ganbaru

Sending a politician in a warzone to talk to rebel force don't look like such good idea to me; because he might be well know they would treat him better but if his presence is know Gaddafi would have a easy argument to claim outside interference into this conflict. And of course, if ''the shit it the fan'' trained specialists have better chance to survive than anyone else.

Someone from the Foreing Office or the SIS might have been a good compromise...

I don't think Gaddafi thinks he needs one to be honest.

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by ganbaru

Sending a politician in a warzone to talk to rebel force don't look like such good idea to me; because he might be well know they would treat him better but if his presence is know Gaddafi would have a easy argument to claim outside interference into this conflict. And of course, if ''the shit it the fan'' trained specialists have better chance to survive than anyone else.

Someone from the Foreign Office or the SIS might have been a good compromise...

Spooks would take too long because they need to collect information on the leaders first, whom they have to ID before making a move, and the leaders are concealing themselves to prevent assassination attempts. Sending a low-key diplomat would have been an easier way of getting through to them, though it should only be made known on the rebel side.

Originally Posted by Anh_Minh

Er... I'd say that Special Forces with enough gear to assassinate half of Tripoli are more of an "outside interference" than some guy coming to talk to the possibly future government of Lybia.

They are in plainclothes and armed, but most likely with concealed weapons like pistols and SMGs.

Then again, these guys are trained to operate practically all the small arms in the world, so yeah.....they TECHNICALLY have enough gear to trip up the place (pun unintended).