...however you can detect a slight whine from reading Associated Press (AP) articles.
Here, AP provides some pirates with a forum to make threats against the US, France and other civilized nations:
(Last week French commandos stormed a pleasure boat held by pirates. Four pirates were killed, but unfortunately so was one hostage).
In this article AP implies that the military "crackdown" won't resolve anything because pirates will move their operating bases:
Comrade Karla points out some facts:
First of, there has been no "crackdown." If there were, you WOULD see a decrease in pirate activities because they'd be, well, dead.
Second, if the "crackdown" consists of "criminal charges" rather than doing a Barataria, then nobody should be surprised if results are--shall we say--limited?
Finally, while a number of events appear to be reported accurately, the article remains (at least to me) another example of trying to make a public case for inaction. Where's Hearst when you need him?
At least the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) has the right idea:
And finally, the renown military historian John Keegan hits the nail on the head:
So our campaign must be ruthless and pitiless: pirate ships must be sunk on sight and the crews left to swim to safety, if it can be reached.
The esteemed Mr Keegan doesn't mention anything about emergency meetings at the United Nations, or voting on yet another useless resolution.
Nothing of the sort is needed. There are already laws on the books dealing with piracy--it's time to enforce them.
Pirate havens in the Horn of Africa exist because they are allowed to do so. Merchant ships can be armed, but until the pirate havens are wiped out, the scurvy dogs will continue to prey on peaceful ships. Elimnation of pirate nests however, will require the use of military forces--which no nation--even ours--is willing to employ at this time.