Again, without reading the whole story there may be a reason they were within the 500 mile exclusion zone but if no reason exists....but if not.

WHY should anyone in the military or the police put their lives in jeopardy for people who pursue stupidity? If they hold their life at so little value why is the soldier or policemans life considered equally or less valued?

Two types of 'clear and present danger.'

WAR ZONE I can't think of any reason why anyone from a country and flying a flag that is on one side to go into a war zone where the opposing side is plentiful and protection is nil or minimal. If they'll whack out a Frenchie who, ostensibly, are on the other side why would they hesitate to do in an English or US boat?

PIRATE AREA I can't think of any reason why anyone would go into one of the two major pirate areas the other being Straits of Malacca and surrounding area.

For both reasons insurers have said no to paying up to 500 miles offshore Somolia and the whole Mideast war zone as well

Both are outside my comfort zone along with sailing in storm seasons. Expecting others to ride to the rescue is also outside my comfort zone.

It's not like there hasn't being plenty of warnings. Not agreeing with your government or producing a DNC membership card isn't really going to impress them into backing off and what yachtie is able to outgun them? I was on the way to Europe but didn't want to go round S. Africa so took the short route. Trusting to dumb luck, God and country also don't qualify.

Put the two together there either has to be some redeeming acceptable reason for being there OR it's one of the above. Probably I didn't think duuuhhh???

Personally I'm Darwinian. Survival of the fittest. IF they WERE in fact guilty of stupidity ce'st la vie ce'st la morte. It's not reason enough to use violence beyond that which is already being used.

HOWEVER, people in the military and police forces at least in our country don't get to make those decisions. Witness Kosovo as a prime example. So you might say that violence is the way of governments..especially when those in government don't have to risk their own lives.

I'll apply the same reasoning to the Maersk Alabama. The crew gets no choice, the ship's Master gets little choice. No one from the Maersk head office who designated destination, route, required speed etc. had to risk their own life.

In this case Darwinian selection came down on the side of the Pirates who, by the way, have yet to attempt a US or French flagged commercial vessel since the Maersk Alabama incident to my knowledge.

IF however there was an acceptable reason for their presence....different story. Two on a yacht, 10 bodies in a balkan grave, 30 on a container ship, four thousand in a building , the number doesn't matter. Send in the marines.

If its an acceptable reason.

At least when you wear the uniform you hope that's the case. Doesn't always work out that way.

Picking a sailing route as we've discussed elsewhere demands getting informed, staying informed and making a conscious decision then accepting the consequences. The same thing I do going to the union hall in Jacksonville or accepting assignment to a ship going to risky places.Enlist or not enlist. Sail or don't sail Evalute. Decide. Act. Be Responsible.

Michel D.

PS doing Mexico or FP again is still on my no way list and California is definitely a 'sailby' state.