The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums
-
Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community
In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
If you do not have an account, please register.
REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your InfoPLEASE READ: To register, turn off your VPN (iPhone users- disable iCloud); you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.
Why is Sec of State HRC laughing?
- Thread starter crzyrazn
- Start date
Glafna
Beware.. Opinionated
Well, we don't know exactly why she laughed, only that it was very badly placed, and the guy beside her had a sort of of "what is going on" smile and look on his face.
Who knows, the rest of the video might actually explain it.
Who knows, the rest of the video might actually explain it.
dont you just love context
I dunno. Maybe HRC is laughing because unlike her husband, she inhales.
I_want_it_free
On the Prowl
I think she's laughing because she can't believe how ridiculous what she's saying is. It's 2009 and they are fighting PIRATES!!!! I think its the own damn shipping companies fault though. Why don't they better protect their ships? Its 2009 and there are so many g-damned technologies available. I don't know if they already have these on their ships but why don't they add night vision cameras, motion sensors, door alarms? Combine all of those technologies with a few armed guards and I think nobody could get on board or at least it would make it much more difficult for the pirates to take control of the ship.
MCsNo1Fn
NOVEMBER 3RD
^^ I agree. Hell, when I first heard about this whole situation, I laughed. It just doesn't seem like something that would happen nowadays. But, it is a reality, and it is serious...but you can't help but kinda laugh.
Glafna
Beware.. Opinionated
There were what, 9 of the pirates?? A few armed guards would most definatly help, or it might not, depending on the crew that are planning the raid.
You know what, it does sound ridiculous, pirates in the 21st century
You know what, it does sound ridiculous, pirates in the 21st century
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2006
- Posts
- 123,002
- Reaction score
- 4,576
- Points
- 113
She noted that Morocco was the first country to recognize the U.S. back at the Revolution, and within a generation we were fighting piracy off the coast of Morocco.
That's worth a bit of a laugh.
That's worth a bit of a laugh.
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2006
- Posts
- 123,002
- Reaction score
- 4,576
- Points
- 113
Piracy will occur any time you have the right set of circumstances, which include good chance of profit vs. low risk, and desperate people with little to lose. Both of those are economics.
It's easiest to attack the problem at the risk end: arm the ships' crews, add a couple of retired Navy SEALs or such to each crew, throw a few destroyers and cruisers into the mix. But depending on the level of desperation involved, that can also turn into a sort of arms race -- one constrained only by the availability of weapons... and we know where that "constraint" sits as far as the Middle East.
Risk can also be changed by finding the heads of the groups who send out their minions, and dealing with them; the Barbary pirate situation to which SecState Clinton referred came to an end only when Stephen Decatur demonstrated that not only did we have the power to fight them at sea, but that we could carry the war into their home territory. The big difference there, though, is that there was just one Bey of Algiers, but there are an unknown number of warlords in Somalia -- and while beating the Bey meant beating Algiers, beating one warlord just means another can take his place.
A related issue is whether they have something to fall back on. The Barbary folks had other ways to support themselves besides piracy, so once it had been demonstrated to them that they could be slammed down hard, they turned to those other pursuits. With Somalia, though, there isn't much else to turn to, and that means the desperation factor is higher -- so it will take correspondingly more deterrence to force a change. That there is no single authority to make the decision to stop exacerbates that; other warlords will always be tempted to think, "Well, I won't get caught."
That leaves the avenue of increasing their opportunities at home. We've seen, however, where that leads: so long as it is a country of warlords, theft is the order of the day, and any aid may as well be shoveled down a black hole.
So my estimate is that the point of most leverage is with the warlords: find the ones sending out the pirates, and take them out. Make it too costly to be a warlord, or a pirate working for one. Perhaps once it sinks in that the twenty-first century world isn't going to put up with seventh-century behavior, there will be an opportunity for doing something about the economics of the situation.
It's easiest to attack the problem at the risk end: arm the ships' crews, add a couple of retired Navy SEALs or such to each crew, throw a few destroyers and cruisers into the mix. But depending on the level of desperation involved, that can also turn into a sort of arms race -- one constrained only by the availability of weapons... and we know where that "constraint" sits as far as the Middle East.
Risk can also be changed by finding the heads of the groups who send out their minions, and dealing with them; the Barbary pirate situation to which SecState Clinton referred came to an end only when Stephen Decatur demonstrated that not only did we have the power to fight them at sea, but that we could carry the war into their home territory. The big difference there, though, is that there was just one Bey of Algiers, but there are an unknown number of warlords in Somalia -- and while beating the Bey meant beating Algiers, beating one warlord just means another can take his place.
A related issue is whether they have something to fall back on. The Barbary folks had other ways to support themselves besides piracy, so once it had been demonstrated to them that they could be slammed down hard, they turned to those other pursuits. With Somalia, though, there isn't much else to turn to, and that means the desperation factor is higher -- so it will take correspondingly more deterrence to force a change. That there is no single authority to make the decision to stop exacerbates that; other warlords will always be tempted to think, "Well, I won't get caught."
That leaves the avenue of increasing their opportunities at home. We've seen, however, where that leads: so long as it is a country of warlords, theft is the order of the day, and any aid may as well be shoveled down a black hole.
So my estimate is that the point of most leverage is with the warlords: find the ones sending out the pirates, and take them out. Make it too costly to be a warlord, or a pirate working for one. Perhaps once it sinks in that the twenty-first century world isn't going to put up with seventh-century behavior, there will be an opportunity for doing something about the economics of the situation.
JayHawk
Rambunctiously Pugnacious
Someone who can laugh at a serious situation probably has the right attitude to destroy that which is a problem.
Could be context.
I agree the shippers could do more. They will and we will pay for it.
The whole concept of gps driven ships with minimal crew drives our low cost economies. They were simply unprepared for the paradigm change. They will recover.
Our silent professionals recently dealt a blow to recover one of our own but that resulted in several more attacks.
The answer is law enforcement in Somalia. That however will not be a reality untworld realizes they have to participate early instead of react later. Not an easily thing in a world where nationalistic interest trumps common harmony everyday.
Could be context.
I agree the shippers could do more. They will and we will pay for it.
The whole concept of gps driven ships with minimal crew drives our low cost economies. They were simply unprepared for the paradigm change. They will recover.
Our silent professionals recently dealt a blow to recover one of our own but that resulted in several more attacks.
The answer is law enforcement in Somalia. That however will not be a reality untworld realizes they have to participate early instead of react later. Not an easily thing in a world where nationalistic interest trumps common harmony everyday.
