Quote Originally Posted by motorfirebox View Post
That's one possible outcome. The money involved is a significant factor, though. Dead hostages net no ransoms. If killing hostages becomes significantly more commonplace, I think the main driver for that change will be the influence of al Shabaab--they'll be looking for more than just a money drop.
Do you really think the owners of say a full oil supertanker give a rats ass about the crew? The ransom is paid to get the ship and its cargo back. The crew are an inconvenience. I mean they may want compensation etc etc.

I would agree that pleasure boats and yachts are taken because they believe such people have money and their lives are the key to getting the ransom.

There is indication that the hostages on board the Quest may not have been killed as a result of simple bloodlust, but rather due to the US negotiators making what is--if the allegation is true--an incredibly bad decision.
Yes that was my reading (which I commented on in an earlier post). It all comes down once again to who is doing the negotiations.

...but I must comment again on your rush to excuse the Somali's of any blame. First we had your explanation that these poor victims were only resorting to piracy because others were illegally fishing in the Somali territorial waters and worse still others dumping toxic waste. Now that they are not drug (khat) crazed gangsters but only poor people trying to make a living.

What the worlsd needs to show these guys is that theirs was an incredibly bad decision to engage in piracy. I just don't understand the marines apparent need to take prisoners. You place your own men at unneccesary risk by so doing.