PDA

View Full Version : OT: How to deal with pirates



lazlo
04-13-2009, 10:19 AM
Three long-distance headshots, in the dark, from the rolling deck of a Navy ship in high seas. My hat's off to them!

US captain freed; Somali pirates vow to retaliate

(AP) Apr 13, 8:54 AM (ET)

NAIROBI, Kenya (AP) - Bracing themselves on a rolling warship in choppy seas, U.S. Navy snipers fired three flawless shots to kill a trio of Somali pirates and free the American sea captain being held at gunpoint, a Navy commander said Monday.

The nighttime operation was a victory for the world's most powerful military, but few experts believed it would quell a rising tide of attacks in one of the world's busiest shipping lanes.

Interviewed from Bahrain, U.S. Naval Forces Central Command chief Vice Adm. Bill Gortney said the takedown happened shortly after the hostage-takers were observed by sailors aboard the USS Bainbridge "with their heads and shoulders exposed."

U.S. Defense officials said snipers got the go-ahead to fire after one pirate held an AK-47 so close to Capt. Richard Phillips' back that the weapon appeared to be touching him. Two other pirates popped their heads up, giving snipers three clear targets, one official said.

The Navy released images of the scene from an unmanned drone that showed snipers positioning themselves on the fantail of the USS Bainbridge. The snipers fired simultaneously.
Asked how the snipers could have killed each pirate with a single shot in the dark, Gortney described them as "extremely, extremely well-trained." He told NBC's "Today" show that the shooting was ordered by the captain of the Bainbridge.

The SEALS arrived on the scene by parachuting from their aircraft into the sea, and were picked up by the Bainbridge, a senior U.S. official said.

He said negotiations with the pirates had been "going up and down." The official, asking not to be publicly identified because he, too, was not authorized to discuss this on the record, said the pirates were "becoming increasingly agitated in the rough waters; they weren't getting what they wanted."

Just as it was getting dark, pirates fired a tracer bullet "toward the Bainbridge," further heightening the sense that the incident was ratcheting up, the official said.

He said when the time snipers fired, Phillips' hands were bound. Phillips was not hurt in several minutes of gunfire Sunday.

News of Phillips' rescue caused his crew in Kenya to break into wild cheers and brought tears to the eyes of those in Phillips' hometown of Underhill, Vermont, half a world away from the Indian Ocean drama.

toyjeep73
04-13-2009, 10:22 AM
Thats how a response should be. Glad to see the Bainbridge Captain had the nerve to order it.

biometrics
04-13-2009, 10:27 AM
I am retired Army, but in this case... Kudos and salutes to the Seal Snipers! GO NAVY!

madman
04-13-2009, 10:43 AM
No Brain No Pain.

daryl bane
04-13-2009, 10:47 AM
I must be naive or very ignorant about the rules on the high seas. Seems everybody is fretting over these pirates. Would it not be feasible in the short term, to have a small well-armed trained team (ex-Blackwater types) on the ships, and whatever happens in the sea ,stays in the sea? Also , don't these ships have 24hr lookouts ,radar, night vision, that should be able to spot these guys coming? I get the feeling somebodys not doing their job. Seems like you could take care of the problem before they ever got to your ship. I'am sure the official response will be to send more aid to this impoverished place, as a deterrent, yeah right.

Davek0974
04-13-2009, 10:53 AM
Amazing, exactly what was called for, short, sharp and exact.

I cant believe that these days with pocket computers, global mobile phone coverage, laser eye surgery etc we still have pirates, ridiculous! Whats more, they get away with it more times than not.

tdkkart
04-13-2009, 11:03 AM
These "pirates" I would think would have to be a fairly sophisticated bunch, and something you should be able to detect at some fair distance before they got to your ship??

I mean after all, you do not simply pull along side and board an ocean going freighter running at full steam on the open ocean from a 12' rubber dingy?? The boat they board from has to be something fairly substantial, fairly easily seen and/or detected.

The freighter captains know they are potentially a target in this area of the world, arm the freighters and let it be known that any vessel that gets within 1/2 a mile of them will be dealt with accordingly unless they clearly indentify themselves when requested.

Of course then again, I doubt these freighter companies are much different than any other money grubbers in the world of business, if it's gonna cost $1.49 extra to protect the boat properly it's not likely in the budget and they'll just take their chances. Of all the ships out there, whats the chances of your's being the next one to get highjacked??


Oh, and I doubt the guns the snipers were equipped with were your average garden variety M16's, more likely something that the civilian world scarcely knows about.

lazlo
04-13-2009, 11:05 AM
Would it not be feasible in the short term, to have a small well-armed trained team (ex-Blackwater types) on the ships, and whatever happens in the sea ,stays in the sea?

I was wondering the same thing -- in the Old West, companies would hire Pinkertons to guard their shipments.

Blackwater is the modern equivalent of Pinkertons (ex-military mercenaries/bodyguards). But I know a lot of Blackwater guys are ex special forces, so I doubt they're cheap.

dp
04-13-2009, 11:10 AM
I vote for a 100 yard no-violate zone. Cross the line and watch a stream of burning napalm from the deck guns walk toward your craft. The fire goes out when the IR signature indicate no life on the intruding vessel. And I'd stream the NapalmCam video on YouTube just so everyone gets the idea.

Dawai
04-13-2009, 11:18 AM
Radar activated Chain gun.

Most pirates are armed with arm launched rocket launchers.

Just cut the boat up at say 1/4 mile. Kinda like they did the USS Liberty.

Michael Edwards
04-13-2009, 11:31 AM
Also , don't these ships have 24hr lookouts ,radar, night vision, that should be able to spot these guys coming? I get the feeling somebodys not doing their job. Seems like you could take care of the problem before they ever got to your ship.

I agree Daryl, been sayin the same thing. With the quality of the radar on the ship, and the fact that it's mounted so high off of the water, they should easily be aware of pirates several hours before they arive. Gives em plenty of time to go wake up the sharpshooter and put him back on the stern with a 50 cal. Pirates in a skiff on the open ocean wouldn't stand a chace.

ME

dan s
04-13-2009, 11:31 AM
Also , don't these ships have 24hr lookouts ,radar, night vision, that should be able to spot these guys coming?
They have all of that stuff actually, but it doesn't really help. The pirates are usually in larger skiffs that are 2 or 3 times faster than a freighter. The other main issue is all the international laws/bs that effectively prevent merchants from carrying any kind of real firepower.

Ries
04-13-2009, 11:34 AM
There are lots of problems with arming the crews, even though it sounds like a good solution.

and money looms large, for sure.

About 1/2 of 1 percent of all ships that sail this stretch are attacked- which would mean 99.5% of your money is wasted, and beancounters run shipping companies, for sure. Especially now, when shipping profits are nonexistent- these companies are losing money like crazy this year.

Most shipping company insurance would double or triple if the crews were armed.

The rise in insurance costs alone would probably be ten times or more what is paid in ransoms right now. And, so far, anyway, the actual injuries and deaths from pirates have been very few- the losses have all been monetary, except to our pride.

Furthermore, most ports, worldwide, will not allow armed merchant ships to dock. So you would have to figure out some way of disarming, like checking your guns at the door, before you docked anywhere- probably impractical, but definitely really expensive.

Then, there is crew competence- this ship was american flagged- because the US government requires all US military goods to be shipped in american flagged vessels, there are a VERY FEW american flagged and crewed freighters. Something like 400 total, but only 100 or so general freight like this.

The vast majority of crews are very low paid Phillipino or Pakistani or Chinese or other third world guys, who are not great candidates to hand guns to, without extensive, and expensive, training. You hire a cook, or a crane operator, for a few hundred bucks a month. A real Blackwater op, ex US military, expects to get paid a hundred grand a year or more. In many cases, even the captain on these ships doesnt get paid that much.

And what weapons would you give these guys?
The pirates have full auto AK's, RPG's, and, sometimes, even PK machine guns.

To defend against this, you would need at least similar, and hopefully, larger, arms.
M 60's, grenade launches, missiles, and so on.

Big bucks. There is a reason we spend $8 Billion a month in Iraq- real military grade equipment is expensive to buy and maintain, and training for the guys to use it costs a lot too.

Not to mention that a lot of these ships are oil and natural gas tankers. Ship owners tend to shudder at the thought of gun battles taking place around a few million gallons of flammable liquids.

The idea of actually arming crews is probably a nonstarter.
And the coastline of Somalia is as long as the entire Eastern Seaboard of the USA. To patrol it well, figure a quarter of our navy, along with 2 or three major bases, to the tune of Billions of bucks a year.

If it was easy, somebody would have done it already.

The real solution is gonna be a stable government in Somalia- which, for the last hundred years, has been a bit of a problem.

dp
04-13-2009, 11:46 AM
Israeli ships are armed to the teeth. When I worked on shipboard electronics in LA harbor I'd been patted down numerous times on the gangway of Israeli ships by very serious looking gentlemen with Uzis who would safe the weapon only when I was able to identify all my radar components in my spares box.

It can be done - it's being done. It just needs to be a priority.

Evan
04-13-2009, 11:50 AM
Thats how a response should be. Glad to see the Bainbridge Captain had the nerve to order it.


He didn't need to worry. It was reported here that The President had already given him orders to use deadly force at his discretion if he felt the hostage was in danger. He had a blank check.


Vice Admiral William Gortney of the U.S. Navy's 5th Fleet says elite special forces aboard the USS Bainbridge took action on orders from President Barack Obama to use deadly force, if Phillip's life was at stake.


http://www.voanews.com/english/2009-04-13-voa6.cfm

garyphansen
04-13-2009, 12:06 PM
I would say the answer ,would be to announce that any small, fast. armed boats more than 11 miles from the coast will be sunk. With spy satellites, it would not be that hard to find and sink a few. It would be easy with out putting any of our Navy people in harms way. Problem solved. Gary P. Hansen

Evan
04-13-2009, 12:17 PM
Arm the US flag ships with a 50 cal machine gun. Give appropriate training to the boatswain. Require that it be dismantled and stowed in locked storage when entering national waters. Most countries will allow that already.

Weston Bye
04-13-2009, 12:20 PM
Yep, spy sattelites, armed drones - UAVs - Navy or Air Force.

Suspect boats, as Gary describes, get 1 warning shot, across the bow. Continued hostile behavoir earns them serious targeting.

Video posted on You-Tube.

"If you can't be a good example, you'll have to serve as a horrible warning."

dkaustin
04-13-2009, 12:24 PM
If the shipping companies truly see Somali pirates as a serious threat, I would think they'd consider forming convoys under naval escort.

Allan Waterfall
04-13-2009, 12:28 PM
If it happened this side of the pond,the pirates relatives would now be suing us for the loss of the pirates lives with all this human rights crap that goes on over here.
Only criminals seem to have any rights nowadays with all the "bleeding heart crowd " fighting for their rights.

I hope they shoot a few more of these pirates and sue their families for the cost of doing it.

Allan

Carld
04-13-2009, 12:30 PM
I have said for some time now that the shipping companies that move through those waters should be required to have at least 4 men trained in the use of surface to surface missles shoulder fired and be on duty in shifts. Any boat that approaches the ship should be blown out of the water at once. There is no reason why a ship should be boarded under any conditions except by those authorized.

gnm109
04-13-2009, 12:32 PM
I must be naive or very ignorant about the rules on the high seas. Seems everybody is fretting over these pirates. Would it not be feasible in the short term, to have a small well-armed trained team (ex-Blackwater types) on the ships, and whatever happens in the sea ,stays in the sea? Also , don't these ships have 24hr lookouts ,radar, night vision, that should be able to spot these guys coming? I get the feeling somebodys not doing their job. Seems like you could take care of the problem before they ever got to your ship. I'am sure the official response will be to send more aid to this impoverished place, as a deterrent, yeah right.


It's a good idea to arm someone on the ships. The negative issue is that generally speaking, firearms have to be declared at each port, I understand this is a lot of paperwork and will often require bribes to prevent having the firearms confiscated. Of course, there's also the problem that the pirates will shoot back at you when you shoot at them.

I would prefer a small atom bomb dropped directly in the middle of Mogadishu, Somali but I doubt that will happen. :p

.

dp
04-13-2009, 12:39 PM
He didn't need to worry. It was reported here that The President had already given him orders to use deadly force at his discretion if he felt the hostage was in danger. He had a blank check.

And so dies another campaign point - negotiation, not armed conflict, is how to solve these issues. BO rode that mantra all through the (seemingly endless) election cycle. And at the first opportunity to demonstrate his "vision", he goes from a hostage situation to first-strike military force.

But I'm not surprised.

Now it will be interesting what he does with the lone survivor. Guantanamo?

saltmine
04-13-2009, 12:43 PM
I was hoping the negotiator would offer the pirates a few cans of fuel in trade for Capt. Phillips and give them a three minute head start.

I would have loved seeing four Somali pirates trying to dodge Naval five inch shells on their way back to their "brethren" onshore.

This area has been a haven for pirates for some time, I'm suprised the shipping companies haven't either started avoiding the area, or arming the crews to the teeth.

I vote for a surgical air strike on Somalia...removing the whole country from the face of the earth. This will send a message to all of the rest of the would-be pirates around the world...Don't

daryl bane
04-13-2009, 12:55 PM
I fully expect the pirates to "up the ante" by carrying women and children aboard their boats to deter a premptive strike against them. And of course, it will work perfectly. I am sure the Pentagon has already figured this, or should have, and might now move against the pirates land based operations. Blackhawk down, anybody?

Tinkerer
04-13-2009, 01:24 PM
If the shipping companies truly see Somali pirates as a serious threat, I would think they'd consider forming convoys under naval escort.

You know I had the same thought. Also why don't they have any alarms on the gang ways of the ship to alert of intruders? Or a system of photo sensors that are armed in the wheel house that when tripped discharge a massive clouds of purple dye and pepper spray.... or that sticky stuff. Then no one has to be armed per say. But hats off the the Navy crew.

lazlo
04-13-2009, 01:27 PM
And so dies another campaign point - negotiation, not armed conflict, is how to solve these issues.

Oh come on Dennis, after three days of negotiations, Pirates had AK-47's pressed against the heads of American citizens, and you're criticizing Obama for calling the shot?
If this were handled by Bush, we'd be invading Kenya by now. And yes, I know Kenya has nothing to do with the Somali pirates. :p


Now it will be interesting what he does with the lone survivor. Guantanamo?

They committed piracy on the high seas -- a crime under international law. No need to hide them without a trial on indeterminate legal grounds.

jkilroy
04-13-2009, 01:36 PM
The lone survivor? No doubt piracy is punishable by death? Firing squad? Hanging? On youtube no doubt. Air drop his corpse into his old village from 10,000 ft.

aboard_epsilon
04-13-2009, 01:40 PM
they want a water cannon on each boat.

they wouldn't get near then .

all the best.markj

Deja Vu
04-13-2009, 01:44 PM
I vote for a surgical air strike on Somalia...removing the whole country from the face of the earth. This will send a message to all of the rest of the would-be pirates around the world...Don't

This and a comment by gnm109 regarding a small nuke to exterminate.......
I hope you are being nothing more than facetious or sarcastic.
...otherwise.... a couple of idiots who find a few bad apples and set out to destroy the entire orchard. :mad:

Circlip
04-13-2009, 01:52 PM
Yep, simple problem, bomb Somalia, go in with all guns blazing, Where's John Wayne when you need him?? It can be solved in a week, Just like Iraq and Afghanistan. :rolleyes: Easy away from the problem.

Regards Ian.

lazlo
04-13-2009, 02:03 PM
Yep, simple problem, bomb Somalia, go in with all guns blazing, Where's John Wayne when you need him?? It can be solved in a week, Just like Iraq and Afghanistan. :rolleyes:

Worked at the Shores of Tripoli :)

Seriously though, Tripoli was a sovereign nation, and the pirates were state-sponsored. Somlia, although a Muslim country, is comprised of a bunch of warring factions, and many (most?) have no interest in religion.

dan s
04-13-2009, 02:28 PM
I can say one thing for sure, the pirates will think twice before trying to take another ship that's flying an American flag.

dp
04-13-2009, 02:39 PM
The lone survivor? No doubt piracy is punishable by death? Firing squad? Hanging? On youtube no doubt. Air drop his corpse into his old village from 10,000 ft.

He's 16. If brought back to the US he'll probably face rehabilitation and given a new identity. Definitely won't be strung up. He's BO's first prisoner of "man caused disasters" so it will be interesting to watch how it plays out.

lazlo
04-13-2009, 03:00 PM
http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u15/rtgeorge_album/saw2.jpg

lazlo
04-13-2009, 03:01 PM
He's not a terrorist, he's just a plain, ordinary criminal.


I can say one thing for sure, the pirates will think twice before trying to take another ship that's flying an American flag.

Damn straight! I can just picture the next set of pirates-- they'll be looking around nervously, and bobbing and weaving a lot :)

jkilroy
04-13-2009, 03:03 PM
All I want to know if three of the four were killed, who missed? Bet that guy is catching some flack! :D

lazlo
04-13-2009, 03:05 PM
The fourth guy had apparently been stabbed in the hand by a crewman three days earlier, and was not doing well.

That knife wound saved his life...

Davek0974
04-13-2009, 03:10 PM
How do they get on board?

As far as i can remember, the deck of these ships is like half a mile above sea level:rolleyes: surely they dont leave the back door open or the gang-plank down?

They must know there is a vessel aproaching? Just go down on deck and as the scumbags come up the ladder, bust a cap in their head, oh yeah, no guns so just use the fire-hose.

Ok, so they use grappling hooks and ropes, comando style? Just stand at the top and as they are half way up, lift the hook off and let go - bye bye mr pirate.

Surely it cant be that hard to repel boarders on a ship that massive and radar equipped?

Dave

Michael Edwards
04-13-2009, 03:21 PM
How do they get on board?

Ok, so they use grappling hooks and ropes, comando style?

Surely it cant be that hard to repel boarders on a ship that massive and radar equipped?

Dave

Best place is at the stern. That is by far the calmest area of water around the ship. Just run the skiff up against the stern and keep it pinned. Grappling hooks with a knotted rope attached would do quite nicely. I agree that it shouldn't be that hard to keep em off.

ME

Rigger
04-13-2009, 03:32 PM
Taking a ship of this type and size is easy.
Any SF personnel will have trained just for this, Rubber attack boats are virtually invisible to radar on commercial ships. A cargo ship this size will be lucky to have more that 3 crew on duty at night and none will be on patrol.

Approach towards the stern and three men can be on board within two minutes and they only need to overpower the three men on duty then they have hostages they can coerces the rest of the crew with.

BTW, Blackwater guys start at $110.000 pa the Brit Ex SAS guys can command nearly $200,000 tops.

Rigger.

Michael Edwards
04-13-2009, 03:48 PM
Rubber attack boats are virtually invisible to radar on commercial ships. A cargo ship this size will be lucky to have more that 3 crew on duty at night and none will be on patrol.

Approach towards the stern and three men can be on board within two minutes and they only need to overpower the three men on duty then they have hostages they can coerces the rest of the crew with.
Rigger.

The radar on that ship is probably over 100' above the water. You only need one good 90 degree corner to get a signal. That skiff would stick out like the proverbial turd in a punchbowl. Radars have a zone alarm, set it to what ever distance you like, if something gets inside that circle, an alarm goes off. So even if no one is paying attn, the zone alarm should still give you plenty of time. Even a crappy radar at that height should pick em up 50 miles out. I think the crew of the ship knew they were coming, just didn't have the where withall to do anything about it.

ME

lazlo
04-13-2009, 03:50 PM
Michael, I think Rigger is a Blackwater employee.

I gather he's quoting his salary :)

By the way Rigger, why would Blackwater pay British SAS more than American Special Forces? Does ex Delta Force get paid more than a SEAL or Green Beret?

Michael Edwards
04-13-2009, 03:59 PM
Michael, I think Rigger is a Blackwater employee.

I gather he's quoting his salary :)



If Rigger is a Blackwater employee, then he is the kind of guy I would put on the ship for defence. Blackwater is the first thing that came to my mind in order to put and end to the pirate's picknic. My point is that when I was fishing on a small boat with a radar only 25' above the water, our 10' inflatable was very easy to spot on a radar that I doubt cost more that one percent of the radar on that ship.

ME

saltmine
04-13-2009, 05:01 PM
Have you ever been to one of these places, Deja Vu?

Real sh**hole, no kidding!

The lawness is so bad it makes a "Mad Max" movie look like the "Lolipop Kids on Vacation"....

The whole country is at war with everybody within 50 miles, people are starving, babies dying, little kids running around with AK-47's...
The government, such as it is, is totally corrupt. They not only condone piracy, but support it.

Sure, I said wipe the whole place off the map. The only thing these people understand is death...brutal, unforgiving death...And it's liberals that want our military and government to kiss their a**es and give them a candy bar.

Most of these guys would stick a knife in your ribs even if you just handed them a million dollars...Wake up, Dude. You're not dealing with rational people, like you and me, these clowns are animals, plain and simple. The only way to deal with them is treat them like animals...

Maybe....maybe you and some of your liberal friends ought to sail over there, and see what kind of "poor people" we're dealing with....and, if you live long enough, report back here.....

Deja Vu
04-13-2009, 05:15 PM
Have you ever been to one of these places, Deja Vu?

Real sh**hole, no kidding!

The lawness is so bad it makes a "Mad Max" movie look like the "Lolipop Kids on Vacation"....

The whole country is at war with everybody within 50 miles, people are starving, babies dying, little kids running around with AK-47's...
The government, such as it is, is totally corrupt. They not only condone piracy, but support it.

Sure, I said wipe the whole place off the map. The only thing these people understand is death...brutal, unforgiving death...And it's liberals that want our military and government to kiss their a**es and give them a candy bar.

Most of these guys would stick a knife in your ribs even if you just handed them a million dollars...Wake up, Dude. You're not dealing with rational people, like you and me, these clowns are animals, plain and simple. The only way to deal with them is treat them like animals...

Maybe....maybe you and some of your liberal friends ought to sail over there, and see what kind of "poor people" we're dealing with....and, if you live long enough, report back here.....

hah! You are one of those coming out of 'The Mist". You don't even consider the ramifications involved by your brutal "superior" actions. I notice you don't mention all those little old ladies leading the young impressional minds into the battles.... or those infants that scream for justice, or those mothers of those infants that are probably a product of rape just wanting to live while their young grow into the environment only to be brainwashed to kill, steal and continue the cultural waste. Or, is that your superiority complex lashing out to exterminate across the board to get rid of a problem? Yah, sure. I'd like to(well no I wouldn't) see you in charge of appeasing the rest of the world's countries for your proposed solutions..

You don't have a clue..your responses to a problem demonstrate that.
Your answers would only set humanity back a few thousand years....is 100,000 years enough?

edit. and to answer your question about me having been to one of those places? Yes! although I wasn't right in the thick of it, I was close enough to have a gun with the hammer pulled back pointed at me personally from ten feet.

topct
04-13-2009, 05:25 PM
We can take the antibiotic approach or we can pull the splinter out.

What shall it be?

Deja Vu
04-13-2009, 05:29 PM
We can take the antibiotic approach or we can pull the splinter out.

What shall it be?


Heh... according to saltmine, the third approach.....kill the infected whole.:eek:

topct
04-13-2009, 06:06 PM
Heh... according to saltmine, the third approach.....kill the infected whole.:eek:

The whole of it is a big word.

oil mac
04-13-2009, 06:31 PM
Message from Scotland -- Well done the Yanks!, At long last somebody has decided to do something about these scumbags, I raise my hat to the American special seals and the men of the Bainbridge who carried out the act of surgically removing vermin from the face of the earth, and saved the life of a very brave master mariner

There has been mariners from all over the world hijacked and terrified (including two from my country) off the Somali coast,in the last two years or so, Should the Americans take a just and decisive stand, against these people who are busily making lots of money, from acts of violence & criminality, big time, And while we are at it, dont forget their drug dealing, money laundering, and international terrorism into the bargain, We would no doubt find that in the European Union, and especially Britain, (under our weak , inefectual, and hopeless government,, we have in power at present,) , I can hazhard a fairly accurate guess, as to who would not back any effective stand against this malaise, Already in my mind i can hear the plaintive whine, "What about the human rights of these poor pirates?"from the liberal loony left who are stuffing us up big time over here In other words, we would no doubt in todays climate become the soft underbelly of the fight against this scourge Where i am concerned, A criminal is a criminal end of story, forget all this claptrap about the dreadfull conditions, During the hungry twenties &thirties by and large 99.9% of the population did not set themselves up as murderers and robbers, rapists, and hijackers in the United Kingdom, No sir there was a moral code, What the hell is wrong with Somalia? A feral country out of control, with a disease which will spread unless checked pretty damned quick.
At one time when Britain was at the height of its maritime power, and the Royal Navy was the biggest in the world, Somalia would not have dared engage in piracy on the high seas His Brittanic Majesties battleships, would have had some target practice against the coastal settlements in that country, Whilst i do not condone such action today, I believe we should consider going in and sinking everything that floats in that damned country, Whether it is a fishing boat or a tin bathtub, and keep up the momentum until the message gets home, Tough but efficient, The rot set in big time,after the debacle in Mogadishu, Talking of that place, only tonight i heard on the television news, the American envoys plane was attacked by rockets, after he had left a meeting with the president. So much for trying deplomacy with that rotten lot
Is it not possible to ring the sides of merchant ships, with a pipe below the deck level, having a series of nozzles,& connected to the waste heat boiler, anyone coming up the sides of the ship gets a salutory lesson with superheated steam soon repells boarders!
Sadly i think a lot of people in power in my country are labouring under the delusion, that we are dealing with a lot of little boys with a red handkerchief round their heads, and a toy cutlass instead we have murderous drug fueled vicious thugs, If they are caught no mercy.

Thruthefence
04-13-2009, 07:16 PM
Let the countries of the area, Europe & Asia take care of their own.
If another US flagged ship is attacked, do the same as we did this time.
Kill the parasites.
Do you really think these "pirates" are getting to keep their million dollar "bootie"? No, they are having to pass it on to some warlord. NPR had a story today, where every suggestion for relief, was shot down by some "consultant" as unworkable. Only "Tribute" (lip service & payoffs) is acceptable. Someone mentioned "Blackhawk Down"? We had assets to clear that mess out as well, in theater,but our "former administration" wouldn't allow them in. While not an Obama supporter, he did the right thing by approving lethal force.

Let's not have any hand wringing over "poor unemployed fishermen".

Pherdie
04-13-2009, 07:18 PM
Shortly after the news of the rescue broke, I had occasion to access the BBC web site for further information. I believe that it was through a link provided there to comments by readers, that I found several interesting postings.

One of those postings was by a supposed unemployed soldier of fortune who claimed to have been previously employed riding freighters off the coast of east Africa. He said he worked as part of an armed detail that would provide on-board security for the trips along the coast. He stated that at the northern and southern ends of Africa, they would pick up another ship headed in the return direction. He went on to say that a while back, ship owners, upset with security costs and having noted a DROP in piracy, elected to drop the security services. According to the poster, piracy immediately began to resurface.

The remainder of the postings ran about 70% in favor for the actions of the US and about 30% in favor for the pirates. Those lamenting the situation of the pirates pointed out their 'desperation' and poverty. I don't know about you, but I've never heard anything about Somalian pirates using their booty to build hospitals and schools or buy boatloads of food for starving people, have you?

I'm more inclined to believe a good part of that money (if not most) will just buy more guns, RPGs and death in Somalia.........

Fred

dan s
04-13-2009, 09:00 PM
You don't have a clue..your responses to a problem demonstrate that.
Your answers would only set humanity back a few thousand years....is 100,000 years enough?
You know, I can think of several things I'd like to say to you, unfortunately all of them would probably get me permanently banned from this site.

Thruthefence
04-13-2009, 09:03 PM
semper fi, Dan

mochinist
04-13-2009, 09:11 PM
You know, I can think of several things I'd like to say to you, unfortunately all of them would probably get me permanently banned from this site.So you would like to say some really mean stuff to him, but you're afraid your internet message board name will get banned?



lol

pressurerelief
04-13-2009, 09:25 PM
Instead of posting here, some of the bleeding hearts should go over there and help out the poor unemployed fisherman. Maybe after they got treated to the local culture they might wake up and smell reality.

P/R

mochinist
04-13-2009, 09:34 PM
Instead of posting here, some of the bleeding hearts should go over there and help out the poor unemployed fisherman. Maybe after they got treated to the local culture they might wake up and smell reality.

P/RYou should go over there and kick some a55

dan s
04-13-2009, 09:43 PM
So you would like to say some really mean stuff to him, but you're afraid your internet message board name will get banned?

1. I'm not afraid, I know...
2. even if I was banned, I could still get in whenever I want, I just don't want to deal with the bs required to do so.

doctor demo
04-13-2009, 10:03 PM
I think that the remaining pirate should stumble and fall off the navy ship in the dark when "nobody" is watching.


Steve

Deja Vu
04-13-2009, 10:06 PM
You know, I can think of several things I'd like to say to you, unfortunately all of them would probably get me permanently banned from this site.

Oh? what say you? I fully agree with what we did to free the captain, but wiping somalia off the map, as Saltmine suggests, to prevent further incursions would be similar to removing ones face because of a small spot of melanoma on ones nose....:(

So go ahead and say what you are thinking ..maybe just use your intellect rather than words that could produce a ban.:D

tony ennis
04-13-2009, 10:12 PM
+1 on giving the pirates reason take a pass on US flagged ships.

Our actions vis a vis piracy need to be unambiguous, easily understood, and consistent. I think we're going to see that. I believe the message is, "If you engage in piracy against a US flagged ship, you will die or spend decades in prison."

+1 Evan on .50 calibers. A dual mount overpowers easily anything the pirates carry including RPGs. There is no need for exotic weapons at all. The motherships would likely be taken down by warships. AP ammo in the .50s would probably pretty much do any civilian ship out there anyway.

I can see the US generating a small flotilla of fast anti-piracy frigates. One 5" gun, 4 quad 50 mounts or gattling guns, high speed. A tender with fuel for the frigates and helicopters for eyeballs would complete the package.

I think Obama made the right choice. But really, how could he get it wrong.

And hatsoff to the snipers. What a bunch of pros.

Now, what next? The pirates will/are putting hostages on the motherships and maybe even the attack boats...

Ries
04-13-2009, 10:28 PM
I think sometimes its easy to pretend we are in fifth grade again, where guns never run out of bullets, and you never miss.

The Maersk Alabama is one of the smaller ships of the 470 that Maersk owns- at 511 feet long.

I dont see how you could just throw a .50 caliber machine gun on it- I think at a minimum you would need 5. Even that is pretty sketchy coverage at night or in foul weather- but lets say 5.
You need three shifts, of course, to man these five guns.

Thats a minimum of an additional 15 guys- and, thats stretching it thin- in the military, I would guess that with additional cooks, armorers, searchlight operators, radiomen, additional radar crew, and gun crews, the Navy would be allotting closer to 40 crewmembers to man 5 gun turrets.

If they arent manned, all the time when you are in the 2000 mile or so stretch of pirate infested waters, they are worse than not having em- you cant leave em alone, as the pirates can use em against you.

And, as mentioned, you cant exactly use the $500 a month phillipino cooks and oilers to do this job.

So you double or triple the crew size- probably needing additional crew quarters, definitely needing additional food and supplies.

Costs, before insurance, are pretty high. Now multiply that by 470, for Maersk alone. Most, however, are closer to 1000 feet long, and would probably need more crew, more guns, and cost a bunch more.

It costs millions a year to run a real warship, and it aint all spent on $800 toilet seats.

The cost to actually arm cargo ships would easily run into the billions every year, and, as a return on investment equation, its WAAAY cheaper to just pay the ransom.

This is not satisfying, or something to be proud of, or even, necessarily, right- but its a fact of life.

Right now, the single largest business in Somalia, by far, is piracy. Its the economic engine for the country. So to think that killing three teenagers is going to change the behavior of the warlords who are bankrolling, and profiting, from this- well, they got lots and lots more illiterate teenagers who can wave an Ak-47 where those 4 came from, and, just like the shipowners, they can figure percentages. Currently, they have 200 hostages, and they lost 1 captain.
They will keep hijacking ships unless real navies crack down hard on em.

Which just might happen, especially if they kill a crewmember or two next time.

But its just unrealistic to think that arming the crews is either practical or possible, politically, financially, or any other way.

Imagine the first time a freighter with an all Pakistani crew pulls into Los Angeles harbor with a half dozen 50 caliber machine guns mounted on it. Or even locked in lockers...
TSA would soil their snappy trousers faster than you can say "swat team".

Now multiply that by a couple thousand ships a month calling on US ports. With guns? Forget it.

And even the navy option is pretty farfetched- as I mentioned, the coastline of Somalia is 1880 miles long. And thats not counting millions of square miles of the red sea and the indian ocean.
How many ships and helicopters do you need to have rapid response over 1800 miles?
How much does that cost?
How many support bases, how many support contractors and navy sailors, how many million gallons of fuel, and on and on?

Feeling rich right now?
I kinda doubt the US government is.

tony ennis
04-13-2009, 10:48 PM
How many ships and helicopters do you need to have rapid response over 1800 miles?

20 ships on patrol = 90 miles between ships = 45 mile radius of responsibility. Doable with 40 frigates as described above and their support if we decide it is a priority. Sailors need to train, sounds like the place to do it.

Ries
04-13-2009, 11:14 PM
40 Frigates?

We aint got em. There are 33 Oliver Perry class Frigates in the entire navy.
Current US Navy thinking is a Frigate is 450 feet long, and has a crew of 300 or so.
Again, these cost Millions per year to operate.

40 of em, with support vessels, is a HUGE operation. And it could take years.

I guess we COULD raise taxes...

wierdscience
04-13-2009, 11:15 PM
Well the last time we were there everything else was tried including warships none of which worked.The fight against the pirates was taken to land by a few US Marines and some 300 mercenaries.

Black Hawk down?Troops were sent in,in broad daylight,to abduct just one man.Bad move all the way round.Much easier to just kill him,one bomb would have done him and several others that had it coming.One 1,000lb bomb lot cheaper than all the troopers we wasted.

News reports have warlords building mansions along the Somali coast,they would make nice targets.

tony ennis
04-14-2009, 12:02 AM
Current US Navy thinking is a Frigate is 450 feet long, and has a crew of 300 or so.

Yeah. Frigates change in size over the years. The USS Constitution is a Frigate. In today's terms if compared to its peers we'd call it a battle cruiser! I was thinking of something MUCH smaller. Basically, a ship designed for the task.

I checked WWII destroyers. My sample of 1 :D shows they were 300' long and has a crew of 133. That's still larger than the task needs.

A very nice Australian design (http://www.defence.gov.au/dmo/esd/jp2043/images/Armidale_Class_Patrol_Boat.jpg) This beauty is 186 ft long, has a crew of 21, and sports a 25mm deck gun and two .50 cals. It's perfect.

Here's the USA's Cyclone class. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyclone_class_Patrol_ship) 170' long, 28 crew. It is over-armed for the task but what the heck.

You get the idea. Basically, this could happen without breaking the budget if it became a priority. 28*40 = 1120 sailors.

KiddZimaHater
04-14-2009, 12:03 AM
FAKE !!!!!
Everybody knows that Pirates have wooden peglegs, eye-patches, and parrots on their shoulders.
I haven't seen one on the news yet.
And they sail the Carribean.... Not Africa.
PPPFFFFTTTTT.......
Besides, when have you ever heard a Somalli say something cool like, "YAR MATEY." or "SHIVER ME TIMBERS." or call another Somalli "SCALLEYWAG."
FAKE !!!!!!

dp
04-14-2009, 12:11 AM
FAKE !!!!!
Everybody knows that Pirates have wooden peglegs, eye-patches, and parrots on their shoulders.
I haven't seen one on the news yet.
And they sail the Carribean.... Not Africa.
PPPFFFFTTTTT.......
Besides, when have you ever heard a Somalli say something cool like, "YAR MATEY." or "SHIVER ME TIMBERS." or call another Somalli "SCALLEYWAG."
FAKE !!!!!!

And you never hear from them except on Sept. 19.

dfw5914
04-14-2009, 12:33 AM
I find it interesting that Pres. Obama authorized the summary execution of three Somali criminals, how is this going to sit with his very soft hearted core constituency?

BillH
04-14-2009, 12:59 AM
Carpet bomb them to hell with b52's and sink every single boat that leaves Somalia. Especially fishing boats. I find it AWSOME that we sniped the sons of bitches! I am very surprised Obama authorized it, being a liberal weeny.

dp
04-14-2009, 01:04 AM
I find it interesting that Pres. Obama authorized the summary execution of three Somali criminals, how is this going to sit with his very soft hearted core constituency?

Obama lied, pirates died.

dan s
04-14-2009, 01:29 AM
for those that are interested, the seals most likely use this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQ8pKd2Hn28

barts
04-14-2009, 01:37 AM
FAKE !!!!!
Everybody knows that Pirates have wooden peglegs, eye-patches, and parrots on their shoulders.
I haven't seen one on the news yet.
And they sail the Carribean.... Not Africa.
PPPFFFFTTTTT.......
Besides, when have you ever heard a Somalli say something cool like, "YAR MATEY." or "SHIVER ME TIMBERS." or call another Somalli "SCALLEYWAG."
FAKE !!!!!!

Pirates? Everyone on the Internet knows: to fight pirates, you need ninjas!

- Bart

macona
04-14-2009, 03:56 AM
He's 16. If brought back to the US he'll probably face rehabilitation and given a new identity. Definitely won't be strung up. He's BO's first prisoner of "man caused disasters" so it will be interesting to watch how it plays out.

Get this... Al Sharpton is calling these pirates "volunteer coast guard". You have got to be freeking joking...

dan s
04-14-2009, 05:26 AM
Get this... Al Sharpton is calling these pirates "volunteer coast guard". You have got to be freeking joking...
LOL,

We should tell the government of Somalia that. We can then inform them:

"since a military vessel from your country attacked our ship in international waters, you have committed an act of war. Thus under international law, we are informing you that we intend to mount a full scale offensive as soon as the rest of the fleet arrives."

I can only imagine what the look Somalian officials face would be.

Weston Bye
04-14-2009, 06:00 AM
there is no Somalian government. That is part of the problem.

Circlip
04-14-2009, 06:10 AM
"Carpet bomb Somalia"

Yep, that was proved to be very effective in Germany in WW2, seemed to lose the plot in Vietnam though???

You're/we're in a minority Ries,

Best regards Ian.

And no,I'm NOT a mamby pamby liberal or tree hugger, just a REALIST

Your Old Dog
04-14-2009, 06:22 AM
I agree Daryl, been sayin the same thing. With the quality of the radar on the ship, and the fact that it's mounted so high off of the water, they should easily be aware of pirates several hours before they arive. Gives em plenty of time to go wake up the sharpshooter and put him back on the stern with a 50 cal. Pirates in a skiff on the open ocean wouldn't stand a chace.

ME

I think part of the problem is the pirates use the rule of the sea in that you are bound to help any boat that professes to be "in trouble", you can't just blow them out of the water. If they get close enough to shove an RPG up your tailpipe you have to think twice about responding.

The pirate problem is compounding in that they supposedly have the full support of most of their communities they live in and enjoy a celebrity status for bringing such wealth to dirt poor communities. This is another problem we will likely sit on a few years before we do something like we did with the Bin Laden group.

Circlip
04-14-2009, 07:11 AM
Then there were three :D

oldtiffie
04-14-2009, 07:44 AM
First of all, those on USS Bainbridge did exactly what they were trained for and ordered to do - and did it very well.

Memory spans are pretty short here.

There is a lot of deja vu (aka "been there - done that") that, as can be seen today, is not noted for its success.

I would hope that cooler heads would not only prevail but would at least re-visit if not learn from history in Somalia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somalia_Affair

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Deliverance

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Restore_Hope

I think that the Brits, the French and the Italians and Turks (Ottoman Empire) could give lessons as to what its like and what it cost to get bogged down in Africa.

Do you know where Somalia is and what it is?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somalia

It is part of the Horn of Africa:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horn_of_Africa

Just to give an idea of the "who's who" of neighbours and nations as well as the Gulf of Oman, Arabian Sea, Red Sea etc. with a shortage of "friendly ports" etc. the logistics of maintaining an effective presence would be horrendous - just for "patrolling" and just how difficult and expensive (men, material and money) would it be if a/the "Military Option" were used?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arabian_Peninsula

Both China and Russia have substantial "interests" in that part of the world too.

I read too in the New York Times that China is not only reducing its rate of purchase of American bonds but is also selling at an increasing rate. Perhaps there may not be enough "bonds" to finance the US deficits as well as another significant military invasion.

[Edit]
Piracy (and Privateering) are neither new nor localised to Somalia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piracy
[End edit]

Liger Zero
04-14-2009, 08:10 AM
I find it interesting that Pres. Obama authorized the summary execution of three Somali criminals, how is this going to sit with his very soft hearted core constituency?

Even soft-hearted squishy-spine sweet-talking liberals have the moxie to stand up to the Bad Guys sometimes.

Question is are we going to "solve" this by flipping missiles into Somalia then eight years later face an epic retaliation on our soil (again) or is he going to do something more permanent.

Heck given technology today maybe an update of the classic plywood PT boat is in order. Make it out of fiber glass, power it with a gas turbine, arm it with laser-aimed .50cal guns and Hellfire missiles and crew it with crazy mo'fos who enjoy blasting across choppy seas at 60 knots and shooting at stuff. (Aussies? :D)

I suspect we could build these very cheaply and use them to patrol the sea-lanes. Problem is the political angle.

oldtiffie
04-14-2009, 08:23 AM
Why give it to the "Aussies"? when the US has ample "form" with PT-109?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PT-109

No doubt the USCG can be used when they sort out the "traffic" (to and) from South America.

Do you appreciate the amount of resources that are tied up in trying to patrol/control sea traffic in the Red Sea?

Liger Zero
04-14-2009, 08:26 AM
Why give it to the "Aussies"? when the US has ample "form" with PT-109?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PT-109

No doubt the USCG can be used when they sort out the "traffic" (to and) from South America.

The stereotype of the Typical Aussie up these parts is a drunken hooligan tearing across the asphalt in a jeep at 90mph shooting at beer-bottles launched from another jeep.

Actually that sounds like fun. :eek::D

oldtiffie
04-14-2009, 08:29 AM
That's what you lot might call the more civilised (least primitive?) of us. It gets "better"?? from there on in.

Actually "Jeep" is probably a generic name for 4WD/SUV's and the like - the best of which are Asian and "Jeep" doesn't have much going for it - but it may improve when its is designed by the Italians (Fiat?).

tony ennis
04-14-2009, 08:38 AM
Aussies rock. They are one of the few dependable countries on the Earth.

Regarding BO, let's give him a break. He's a liberal. And seems weak. But he by all accounts he's a decent guy. I expect him to take the easy path in all cases. We'll see what happens when he's presented with a tough choice. It hasn't happened yet.

Bombing the populace won't help. Killing the warlords won't help either as there are many more in-waiting. Improving the economy there will do them in. And that's hard with no government. For now, it is the US government's duty to protect US interests. If that means combatting piracy similar to what we sw recently, so be it.

I do NOT want to be in the business of making the seas safe for all ships. That is, I do not want the US to be the world's "Ocean Cop." The world hates us and hates our military. Out of respect for other countries of the world, we must let them solve the problems their way, using their own resources.

BillH
04-14-2009, 08:42 AM
So when are we going to Tar and Feather DP?

Circlip
04-14-2009, 08:46 AM
OH Gawd, ANOTHER ultimate solution. :eek:

oldtiffie
04-14-2009, 08:52 AM
I wonder what would happen if a ship registered in Panama or Liberia flying a "flag of convenience" were to fly a US flag (for convenience?) if it were threatened by pirates?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Convenience

There's lots of shipping in the US Merchant Marine:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Merchant_Marine

List of Merchant Marine by capacity:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_merchant_marine_capacity_by_country

Big job protecting them - if they tell you (or if they want to) where they are etc. - "Africa" and environs included.

lazlo
04-14-2009, 08:59 AM
for those that are interested, the seals most likely use this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQ8pKd2Hn28

I highly doubt the Navy SEALS used M14's :)

Snipers are trained on a variety of weapons, but the M24 and M40 sniper rifles are very common in all three services (Army, Navy, Air Force), and it's basically a militarized Remington 700.

For a large bore rifle the Barret M99 (.50 caliber) is popular, but I still haven't heard the range of the SEAL's shot posted.

oldtiffie
04-14-2009, 09:12 AM
Lazlo,

read this from yesterday's NYT:

Meanwhile, members of the Navy Seals were flown in by fixed-wing aircraft. They parachuted into the sea with inflatable boats and were picked up by the Bainbridge. On Sunday, the pirates, their fuel gone, were drifting toward the Somali coast. They agreed to accept a tow from the Bainbridge, the senior officials said. At first, the towline was 200 feet long, but as darkness gathered and seas became rough, the towline was shortened to 100 feet, the officials said. It was unclear if this was done with the pirates’ knowledge.

at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/13/world/africa/13pirates.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&th&emc=th

And now - as of today - it seems to have all been forgotten? "blow-over"? or "leaned on"?

lazlo
04-14-2009, 09:17 AM
Obama lied, pirates died.

Direct quote from Rush Limbaugh. At least we know where you get your news. :rolleyes:

lazlo
04-14-2009, 09:20 AM
read this from yesterday's NYT:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/13/world/africa/13pirates.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&th&emc=th

And now - as of today - it seems to have all been forgotten? "blow-over"? or "leaned on"?

From the same article. What kind of lifeboat has hatches and windows? This sounds like a small ship, not an inflatable raft?

"At dusk, a single tracer bullet was seen fired from the lifeboat. The intent was unclear, but it ratcheted up the tension and Seal snipers at the stern rail of the Bainbridge fixed night-vision scopes to their high-powered rifles, getting ready for action.

What they saw was the head and shoulders of two of the pirates emerging from the rear hatch of the lifeboat. Through the window of the front hatch they saw the third pirate, pointing his AK-47 at the back of Captain Phillips, who was seen to be tied up.

That was it: the provocation that fulfilled the president’s order to act only if the captain’s life was in imminent danger, and the opportunity of having clear shots at each captor. The order was given. Senior defense officials, themselves marveling at the skill of the snipers, said each took a target and fired one shot."

Dawai
04-14-2009, 09:24 AM
Lou Dobbs last night said 100 feet.. That is near spear throwing distance??? I think he was confused.

Anyways.. they pulled the lifeboat behind the ship, then choked up the distance on the tow rope to get it closer. Probably what the pirates were looking at when they got their headaches cured. Also what he said..

I was thinking the other day as I watched the neighborhood pedophile playing with some 3-5 year old children down the road.. I used to shoot golf balls at the 250 yards separating us. About the size of his eyes.. Aww the parents of such children, the traffic on the street I live on had to stop to allow the children time to amble out of the road.
I'm older sicker, not as much muscle to hold a rifle on target.. yes it is muscle too, or you have to prop it up on something steady.

Not my children, Not my worry.. unless.... I want to meddle..

oldtiffie
04-14-2009, 09:41 AM
.................................................. ...
From the same article. What kind of lifeboat has hatches and windows? This sounds like a small ship, not an inflatable raft?
.................................................. .



Quite common - especially on ships/vessels that operate in colder climates (read: Arctic etc.) where life in an open life-raft would be short and painful - for the short time it lasted. They also have them on oil-rigs in the North Sea etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lifeboat_(shipboard)

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=lifeboat+design&meta=&aq=3s&oq=life+boat

tony ennis
04-14-2009, 10:25 AM
Yeah, those ain't your daddy's lifeboats.


Direct quote from Rush Limbaugh. At least we know where you get your news.

Sure he's a pompous bag of hot air. But he's usually more right than wrong. His little quote was a jab at a similar saying leftists use to mock Bush.


the towline was shortened to 100 feet, the officials said. It was unclear if this was done with the pirates’ knowledge.

*coffee spew!*

A.K. Boomer
04-14-2009, 10:26 AM
double print .................

A.K. Boomer
04-14-2009, 10:26 AM
If this has already been covered please excuse, What kind of coordination did the seals use -- I dont know the details of what they do in a situation like this, Are they all linked by means of radio or are they all right next to each other (the snipers)
There has to be a very accurate countdown with all three -- there has to be very good communication without any confusion -- no one can "lead" at all - it has to happen all at the same time or nothing, I wonder how many countdowns it took for everyone to have a clear shot.
My nephew would know - he was a seal but we lost him:(

seals are about as tough as a humans can get.

toyjeep73
04-14-2009, 10:44 AM
I do NOT want to be in the business of making the seas safe for all ships. That is, I do not want the US to be the world's "Ocean Cop." The world hates us and hates our military. Out of respect for other countries of the world, we must let them solve the problems their way, using their own resources.

X 2 !!!

Its about time we let some of the world take care of themselves. I am tired of reading about our unwanted help where I don't think we should be to start with.

lazlo
04-14-2009, 10:52 AM
I do NOT want to be in the business of making the seas safe for all ships. That is, I do not want the US to be the world's "Ocean Cop." The world hates us and hates our military.

True, but that's because we had a bad habit of invading sovereign nations.

The whole world is cheering us on for dealing with the pirates, after they've been kicking everyone (including the Russians) in the balls. Everyone, that is, except the American Right Wing :)

A.K. Boomer
04-14-2009, 11:05 AM
Yeah but they just got 4 more ships, its time to start arming the ships, big time.


http://news.aol.com/article/somali-pirates-hijack-ships/422848


"The four pirates that attacked the Alabama were between 17 and 19 years old, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said.
"Untrained teenagers with heavy weapons," Gates told students and faculty at the Marine Corps War College. "Everybody in the room knows the consequences of that."


Look who's pushing everyone around, dont try to police the entire ocean - thats insane -- arm the ships and blow the hillbilly kids out of the water... end of story.

dan s
04-14-2009, 11:08 AM
I highly doubt the Navy SEALS used M14's :)

Snipers are trained on a variety of weapons, but the M24 and M40 sniper rifles are very common in all three services (Army, Navy, Air Force), and it's basically a militarized Remington 700.

For a large bore rifle the Barret M99 (.50 caliber) is popular, but I still haven't heard the range of the SEAL's shot posted.

This is not an official navy website, but the info is pretty close to what I have read from official resources.

http://www.navyseals.com/weapons-demo

jkilroy
04-14-2009, 11:18 AM
17 to 19 years old in Somalia is middle age.

garagemark
04-14-2009, 11:56 AM
My sources (can't reveal them or I'd have you all killed) indicated gyro stabilized rifles... The same technology that allows our new warship cannons to stay on target in rough seas. There was indeed a lead man on the fantail, as is the case for all multiple personnel actions. It was on his countdown that all three shots were fired. The only time you are on your own is if you are out there on your own. Again, don't ask for my source. Through them I now also know where you all live. ;)

As for dealing with pirates. Assuming that the Somali government is going to remain non existent, it should be up to the shipping companies to police their problem. If they wish to pay for protection, so be it. If they wish to let it go and take their chances, so be it. If they choose to take the long way around, Okey-Dokey. But I don't think this should be a government issue (Unless it turns out to be a cool place to play war games once in a while, which we have to do somtime somewhere anyway!).

tony ennis
04-14-2009, 01:07 PM
True, but that's because we had a bad habit of invading sovereign nations.

That's not why they hate us.

The hate us because they know sometimes it's the right thing to do and they don't have the stones to do it. We make them feel bad about themselves, and enviously long for the day when THEY had courage.

With the Taliban gone (or at least on the run) the world's a better place.
With Saddam Hussein, his savage sons, and murderous henchmen gone, the world's a better place.

By and large, the rest of the world would see more mass graves in Iraq and women who wear lipstick have those lips cut off with razor blades before they'd lift a hand.

Are we perfect? No. But our actions, if sometimes clumsy, have made the world a better place.

/rant off

dp
04-14-2009, 01:19 PM
Direct quote from Rush Limbaugh. At least we know where you get your news. :rolleyes:

Sorry, no. I didn't know Rush used that nor do I have any way of knowing he used it, but it is predictable that he would. The first time that phrase occurred to me was at the moment I typed it in here. It wouldn't be the first time Rush has used my stuff.

And as you probably know but choose to ignore, Rush is not a news source, nor a journalist, nor a non-partisan broadcaster. I'm told by people who listen to him (seems to include you) that he makes these very claims so people won't be confused about his role.

A.K. Boomer
04-14-2009, 01:22 PM
Sadman was indeed an asswhipe -- but i hardly doubt that he would have killed 2/3rd of a million of his peoples in 6 years of time and displaced the rest of them -- Who's worlds a better place? Just a little perspective for you there Tony.

A.K. Boomer
04-14-2009, 01:26 PM
so people won't be confused about his role.


Which remember -- is and always has been to consume as much oxycontin as he can get his mitts on:D

dp
04-14-2009, 01:29 PM
From the same article. What kind of lifeboat has hatches and windows? This sounds like a small ship, not an inflatable raft?

I was in Hong Kong in 1984 to install some radio and lifesaving gear on an oil drilling platform. Part of my work included installing the emergency radio tranceivers in the lifeboats. These are fully sealed vessels, self-righting, and all fiberglass construction. They have a twin-cylinder engine, flotation voids so it will float even if full of water, rations, life preservers, and of course the radio.

It was a major decision deciding how to penetrate the sloping cabin bulkhead to allow the telescoping antenna to extend outside the vessel as any penetration was a weak point and source of leakage. A plumb bob was the final decider where to make the penetrations.

It was a union yard and I was not allowed to use any tools so had to convey all instructions to my non-English speaking crew (as I don't speak any dialect of Chinese, it was an interesting challenge). The crew did an excellent job and the seal they installed was perfect.

dp
04-14-2009, 01:33 PM
Sadman was indeed an asswhipe -- but i hardly doubt that he would have killed 2/3rd of a million of his peoples in 6 years of time and displaced the rest of them -- Just a little perspective for you there Tony.

He did intend and was actively engaged in killing off the Kurds in the north. I don't know how you would know when you're done with a job like that, but I'd guess it is when you can't find any Kurds to kill.

My take on Iraq is we did the right thing there for the wrong reasons. Limbaugh may have also said that - I have no way of knowing, so I'll defer to Lazlo who follows his show to validate.

tony ennis
04-14-2009, 02:06 PM
My take on Iraq is we did the right thing there for the wrong reasons.

Well, the public reason didn't seem accurate. I wonder if we'll even know the real story.


Sadman was indeed an asswhipe -- but i hardly doubt that he would have killed 2/3rd of a million of his peoples in 6 years of time and displaced the rest of them -- Just a little perspective for you there Tony.

The 600,000 number you quote is straight from left wing zealot George Soros and has been shown to be wildly inaccurate - off by an order of magnitude. Further, we didn't kill the majority of the civilians - the insurgents are the ones doing the murdering. Many civilian deaths attributed to the US were in fact caused by insurgents using them as human shields. Finally, Saddam has put 300,000 people in mass graves and used WMDs on the Kurds. As far as displacements are concerned, ex-patriots have been returning to Iraq and the economy is improving steadily. If you include Saddam's daily murder count, there is less death in Iraq now than in the last 30 years.

Hope this helps.

wierdscience
04-14-2009, 02:43 PM
The right has maybe given less credit to Obama than he deserves,after all he did shut up and let the military do what it does best.He is getting more like Bush everyday,seems warrant less wire tapping ain't so bad after all:rolleyes:

The left is giving too much credit,they're acting likes it's VE day.

The rest of the world,especially Europe is doing what it always has,nothing hoping we will do the job for them.Well they are a bunch of P---ies,but we already knew that didn't we?

Next question will be how big of a ship will the pirates sink in retaliation?It is coming after all.Event ala USS Cole,except maybe an oil tanker.

Rush?Well most libs won't listen to him because if they did they might find out he makes more sense than they do:p

BillH
04-14-2009, 03:16 PM
The only way is to deal with pirates is to kill them, their families, and their pets. Turn their villages into craters with B52's. This react only philosophy is a joke.

lazlo
04-14-2009, 03:29 PM
Here we go again.. Two hours ago:

Somali pirates hijack 2 freighters in 1 day

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/africa/04/14/somalia.pirates/index.html

Pirates in the Gulf of Aden on Tuesday hijacked the MV Irene EM, a 35,000-ton Greek-owned bulk carrier, according to a NATO spokesman and the European Union's Maritime Security Center.

Later Tuesday, pirates on four skiffs seized the 5,000-ton MV Sea Horse, a Lebanese-owned and Togo-flagged vessel

dp
04-14-2009, 03:46 PM
Here we go again.. Two hours ago:

Somali pirates hijack 2 freighters in 1 day

This will continue for so long as it is considered tolerable by the world. It is not a priority so much as an embarrassment at this point. It is at times like this that I burst with pride at being a citizen of a member nation of the UN.

Roy Andrews
04-14-2009, 03:48 PM
sitting at home it all seems easy but it is a very big ocean and the pirates get to choose when they make a try. a small boat in a wavy open ocean is very hard to spot on radar. the crews are undermanned and over worked. i did about 300 boardings in the navy as counter drug and counter insurgency. the tactics are as follows. two or three small boats one approaches from the rear the others stand off and provide cover if necessary. most of these ships will have a rope ladder or other way of boarding already set up. if they don't it's knotted ropes and grapples. anyone who shows themselves on deck gets shot at. if you get spotted you always can stop. there are a lot of times these pirates are turned away by water or hostile maneuver. you just don't hear about it.

as far as the capt of the bainbridge making the decision. they have to say that its his ship and he is responsible. if the bainbridge is the old ship i think it is the capt more than likely wasn't academy pink panty political and maybe had the balls to make his own decision. but people with those kind of balls in the surface navy are few and far between.

i don't see shooting three of these people in the head as any great deterrent. have you seen the way these people treat each other? i have no problem with the way this was dealt with. it was the only way to do it. it's going to take substantially more commitment to end the problem though.

David S Newman
04-14-2009, 03:57 PM
The right has maybe given less credit to Obama than he deserves,after all he did shut up and let the military do what it does best.He is getting more like Bush everyday,seems warrant less wire tapping ain't so bad after all:rolleyes:

The left is giving too much credit,they're acting likes it's VE day.

The rest of the world,especially Europe is doing what it always has,nothing hoping we will do the job for them.Well they are a bunch of P---ies,but we already knew that didn't we?

Next question will be how big of a ship will the pirates sink in retaliation?It is coming after all.Event ala USS Cole,except maybe an oil tanker.

Rush?Well most libs won't listen to him because if they did they might find out he makes more sense than they do:p
I hope your not including the UK in this statement, as a small country I think we have done our duty and suffered many losses of our men, feel pretty insulted by your thread. David

Spin Doctor
04-14-2009, 04:19 PM
I hope your not including the UK in this statement, as a small country I think we have done our duty and suffered many losses of our men, feel pretty insulted by your thread. David

I thought the Brits always prided themselves on not being European?

In terms of taking action in the Horn of Africa, how can you tell the players without a score card. These guys ain't exactly flying the Jolly Rodger you know. If they play with the big boys and get caught in the act and wind up paying the piper, well it was their choice to play the game. But to go in to Somalia and kick butts and take names is a good way to create plenty more volunteers.

johnl
04-14-2009, 04:46 PM
On the Mississippi river, once a ship gets around pilottown, the ship is boarded by a river pilot that takes it upriver to New Orleans. Why can't Blackwater or someone use the same tactic. Once entering the area, ship or ships, pirates would not know which ones would receive an armed escort. After leaving the area, the escorts leave the ship.
John L

johnhurd
04-14-2009, 05:10 PM
Gallon jug of petrol with a wick, light the wick and drop it in their dingy............ Low tech even the natives will be able to understand it.:D

Willy
04-14-2009, 05:16 PM
While I am very thankful that this particular hijacking turned out as it did, I have to wonder about how this response is going to affect negotiations for release of the 300 crewmen and 17 ships (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hGVh2G-Ucxq_YERjJBmhD83ElH0QD97ICC2O0)that are still being held off of the coast of Somalia. Some going back to Oct. or Nov. of 2008.
Although the incidence of pirate attacks off of the coast of Somalia have risen dramatically as of late, it is by no means the only area of concern to international shipping. The west coast of Africa as well as the waters near Malaysia have also been plagued with piracy for many years.

Stopping or controlling piracy is a daunting task whose cost should not be borne by any single country's military even though they are admittedly the best equipped and trained to do so. I believe a change to international maritime law is needed so that each ship can defend itself, if needed.
But I must admit that change will not come until it becomes economically feasible to do so.
I can see the prices for cheap overseas shipping rising to reflect the increased cost of doing business.

oil mac
04-14-2009, 05:53 PM
The damned so & so,s are still at it, They seem to have nothing but contempt for the rest of the world oblivious of race & colour, I just dont get it, we are supposed to have various high tech systems, which can pick out a bug on a camels arse from five miles up in the air, Yet nobody in todays high tech world, can differentiate between a couple of high speed craft speeding towards you, & a perfectly law abiding shp-- Weird if you ask me

O.K. Have we become so politically correct today that we have to be 100% sure something racing across the water is not pirates but some kids just out of Somalia for a bit of high speed fun ? Aye Right! Shoot first & ask questions later in this case, Not too many years ago the British army would have quelled this lark, That was before the days of our modern politicians, and a European Union which holds us back, with a convention on human rights, mis- used i believe, This was set up originally, and was a great idea, to protect us from nazi thugs such as another Hitler or Franco, Not to be conveniently exploited by criminals, or scroungers
Some few years ago, i read in one of our tabloids, that in one of the areas of London there is a sizable Somali community, and reading between the lines they are dodgy, So much so that it would seem one night a group of these enterprising chappies raided one of the royal parks, and took away for butcher meat the pet donkeys (property of the queen) these animals were a great favourite with all the children of the visitors Iwould have thought that was high treason? & should have warranted jail + deportation
Should military action break out in that country, no doubt the British government will allow hordes of refugees to flood into poor old Britain with no checks & balances carried out,as to chareacter
Saying that everyone is not a rotter, in my town we have a sizable group of Congolese refugees, and as regards behavior,manners & ethics they are exemplary
If that country is dealt with, I would think, the homes of the pirates would be opulent amongst the mud huts etc, and could be targetted easily by drone aircraft Bring the fight to their doorstep, and hit where it hurts

Dawai
04-14-2009, 06:09 PM
Gallon jug of petrol with a wick, light the wick and drop it in their dingy............ Low tech even the natives will be able to understand it.

Yes, a african necklace is to break a persons arms, put a car tire on them, tie wire it, fill it with gasoline and set it on fire.

Winnie Mandella, she said she was going to liberate Africa with her necklaces and matches.. MOST you people ain't got a clue that is what she meant.

That is a hard cruel part of the world civilized people don't understand.

tony ennis
04-14-2009, 07:01 PM
Brits rawk also!

speedy
04-14-2009, 07:19 PM
I can say one thing for sure, the pirates will think twice before trying to take another ship that's flying an American flag.

Yes, they may even think on three times but they will still do what they do.
More and more so it is a dog eat dog world.
You may have seen similar behaviour in your neighbourhood although on a lesser scale. I see it in mine.

dp
04-14-2009, 07:38 PM
I've discovered the secret to the success of the pirates. Our homeland security people are after much bigger fish:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/apr/14/federal-agency-warns-of-radicals-on-right/

It's those wascally wepubwicans, again. Should have known!

That's a hell of a headline for returning vets to come home to. This guy might want to recant his rant:

http://www.theweek.com/article/index/95352/The_Republican_Ruins

as it would appear there is some reason for the polarization claim.

I'm going to go make chips that curl to the right.

wierdscience
04-14-2009, 08:26 PM
I hope your not including the UK in this statement, as a small country I think we have done our duty and suffered many losses of our men, feel pretty insulted by your thread. David

Absolutely not,most Americans don't consider the UK to be part of Europe.It's the reason we sent our fathers and brothers to defend England in two world wars.

If we are ever needed again you can bet there will be a boat load or three of Yanks waiting for the call.:)

Ries
04-15-2009, 11:45 AM
"Carpet bomb Somalia"


You're/we're in a minority Ries,



Yeah, you, me, and Robert Gates, the Secretary of Defense, along with most of the admirals in the pentagon, who all have gone on record saying there isnt enough Navy in the world to defeat these guys militarily, and the only real solution is political, on the ground, in Somalia.

Which is not to say we shouldnt send in ships and snipers whenever another situation like this occurs- but we were lucky- we had 5 days to get in place for this one.

But there is no way we are building 40 frigates, and staffing a permanent patrol in the Red Sea/Indian Ocean. It would take ten years to get em built, cost a couple hundred billion dollars, and, by then, we would have a whole different problem somewhere else.

Dawai
04-15-2009, 11:52 AM
Da deal?? remember the show "oceanquest"?? it had these tendrel "Whisker feelers" running around the ship with instrumentation on them..

Think of a armed bot, camera, chaingun.. ran by this pimply faced kid in a armored room..
ROBUTT SAYS: State your business approaching this ship please.. OR DIE..

Perhaps just submerge, then cut the side out of the plastic boat? zap the prop.. leave them awash in shark infested waters to swim in.

Imagine the side scan radar in approach to a harbor??

Anyone remember the "carjackers" torch also from this area of the world? it was like zoomies on a fuel car.. blowed flames out the side of the car as people approached the doors.. Roasted carjacker.

tony ennis
04-15-2009, 12:26 PM
But there is no way we are building 40 frigates, and staffing a permanent patrol in the Red Sea/Indian Ocean. It would take ten years to get em built, cost a couple hundred billion dollars, ...

Well, not so fast.

It may take years to build them, but you don't have to build them all before you can start using them.

And the cost for the boats would be more like $1B. The Aussie Armidale class boats I linked cost $28M Aus each. I don't know what the US Cyclone class ships cost, but $1B for 40 for them is not unrealistic. And why not - we just gave $1.5T to unworthy insurance companies and bankers.

The ships would require about 1100 sailors - hardly a staggering amount. We have around 5,500 on each super carrier.

In short, I don't think the finances or the time to make it happen are show-stoppers.


...and, by then, we would have a whole different problem somewhere else.

False Dilemma. Just because we get new problems doesn't mean our old ones just go away. If we decide that piracy is a scourge and needs to be addressed (and we haven't thought that way up until now...) then it follows we should have the right tools for the job. As you've rightly pointed out, we can't make enough Bainbridge-class ships. But we don't need ships like those, either.

lazlo
04-15-2009, 12:51 PM
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/apr/14/federal-agency-warns-of-radicals-on-right/

It's those wascally wepubwicans, again. Should have known!

From your link:

"The Department of Homeland Security is warning law enforcement officials about a rise in "rightwing extremist activity," saying the economic recession, the election of America's first black president and the return of a few disgruntled war veterans could swell the ranks of white-power militias. "

Basically, Bubba's pissed that he lost the election :rolleyes:

White supremacists plotted to assassinate Barack Obama in top hats and tails (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/3271895/White-supremacists-plotted-to-assassinate-Barack-Obama-in-top-hats-and-tails.html)

Two neo-Nazis plotted to embark on a killing spree culminating in the assassination of presidential candidate Barack Obama, American police have said.

The white supremacists, who met online, planned to carry out the massacre dressed in white top hats and tails, according to documents released by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. They intended to kill Mr Obama by driving at him at full speed and firing from their vehicle.

US government agents said they thwarted the plan to kill the White House front-runner and shoot or decapitate 102 black people.

MickeyD
04-15-2009, 01:03 PM
Looks like a good job for Q-Ships. Put a handful of 20mm Vulcans in containers on the deck with drop sides and the problem will be solved quickly. Pirates who seize ships full of relief supplies for starving people don't rank very high on the totem pole.

lazlo
04-15-2009, 01:35 PM
The Quake (First-person Shooter) solutions of mounting chain guns on the freighters, or on escort ships, are as impractical as putting expensive mercenaries on board -- like Ries keep pointing out, there are thousands of freighters moving up and down the coast, and there are literally millions of square miles to patrol.

I think if there are enough dead pirates, they might consider finding an easier way to make a living.

Dawai
04-15-2009, 01:54 PM
Some neighborhoods in America, you can be killed for a fancy pair of tennis shoes.. Over there it is much worse.

I don't think killing a few will stop the many. How many street corner drug dealers "stop" selling drugs cause a few get shot in drug wars over turf?? Not many.. One goes down, two take his place.

lazlo
04-15-2009, 01:58 PM
I don't think killing a few will stop the many. How many street corner drug dealers "stop" selling drugs cause a few get shot in drug wars over turf?? Not many.. One goes down, two take his place.

Good point, and great analogy David, but until Monday, everyone (including the Russians) has been negotiating with the Pirates. If people keep paying the ransom, they'll keep coming back...

Pherdie
04-15-2009, 02:05 PM
If people keep paying the ransom, they'll keep coming back...

As will more of them........

Ries
04-15-2009, 03:17 PM
My point is not that we COULDNT patrol these waters.
Of course we could.
Its just we cant afford to.
And, really, we dont want to.

It gets everybody's goat that these pirates can do what they do.

But realistically, the US military has zero interest in being the policeman of the Red Sea and Indian Ocean. And the US public really wouldnt want to do it, once the financial, political, and other consequences became clear.

Then, there is this little thing about the economy, the deficit, the national debt, the $500 Billion a year we are currently spending on defense, two wars, most of the military already pretty burnt out from back to back double and triple tours of duty, and so on.

We will do a bit, but there is no way the Navy has the resources to keep more than three or four ships there.
And the US military, the US government, and the US taxpayer all have bigger fish to fry right now.

tony ennis
04-15-2009, 04:17 PM
Its just we cant afford to.

I think I have shown that we can.


And, really, we dont want to.

I think that's the question.


the US military has zero interest in being the policeman of the Red Sea and Indian Ocean.

I was thinking more like, "protector of US ships." Let other countries tend to their own.



And the US public really wouldnt want to do it, once the financial, political, and other consequences became clear.

The finances may matter. If an American gets killed then probably that won't matter either.


Then, there is this little thing about the economy, the deficit, the national debt, the $500 Billion a year we are currently spending on defense, two wars, most of the military already pretty burnt out from back to back double and triple tours of duty, and so on.


Well, spending up into oblivion doesn't seem to upset Congress, so I think that's not an issue. (But then again, the economy isn't tanking like it was supposed to, either.) The deficit.. nope, not a concern. $500B on defense probably has some slush in it. Two wars yeah, but this would be a police action*, and the Navy isn't burned out yet.

This is doable. The only question is will the government want to.








* DANGER WILL ROBINSON! DANGER!

chief
04-15-2009, 05:15 PM
But I thought the teleprompter messiah said everyone would love us after he was elected?

dp
04-15-2009, 06:41 PM
You can bet if it were passenger jets being shot out of the sky they'd find a way and the money to make it happen. We need to stop calling them pirates and start calling them what they are. Nobody took "mad cow disease" seriously but as soon as it was called Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease it got the attention it deserves.

Let me be the first to call these "pirates" what they really are: "Evil Doers!"

Discuss.

sansbury
04-15-2009, 07:00 PM
From your link:

"The Department of Homeland Security is warning law enforcement officials about a rise in "rightwing extremist activity," saying the economic recession, the election of America's first black president and the return of a few disgruntled war veterans could swell the ranks of white-power militias. "

Basically, Bubba's pissed that he lost the election :rolleyes:


Where I live (East Boston) the bigger problem are the central American gangs, especially MS-13. Of course, I don't have to worry too much about them, since they mostly feed on their own--illegal immigrants who are afraid to go to the policia.

Unlike Ms. Napolitano's right-wing hobgoblins, there are sizable drug gangs from south of the border in most of our large cities, and they are quite active in a variety of nefarious pursuits. While extremist groups are not wholly imaginary they are statistical noise by comparison. I can understand those who argue for accommodation of honest illegal aliens, but IMHO if you get popped for a felony or multiple misdemeanors, we should save the court and jail fees and send you back from whence they came on the next flight. They hurt people of their own race and nationality worse than anything else.

johnhurd
04-15-2009, 07:34 PM
I am wondering if it were white pirates if the problem would be more front burner??? Is that racist of me?:mad:

tony ennis
04-15-2009, 07:51 PM
No, it would be more front-burner if the pirates killed more Americans. They haven't killed many at all yet.

The pirates tried for another US ship yesterday I think. They sprayed the ship with bullets and RPGs. Had they killed a crewman it would have been 'gloves off.'

It's all the same to me - organized violent crime is quite unacceptable.

oldtiffie
04-15-2009, 09:05 PM
Well, not so fast.

It may take years to build them, but you don't have to build them all before you can start using them.

And the cost for the boats would be more like $1B. The Aussie Armidale class boats I linked cost $28M Aus each. I don't know what the US Cyclone class ships cost, but $1B for 40 for them is not unrealistic. And why not - we just gave $1.5T to unworthy insurance companies and bankers.

The ships would require about 1100 sailors - hardly a staggering amount. We have around 5,500 on each super carrier.

In short, I don't think the finances or the time to make it happen are show-stoppers.



False Dilemma. Just because we get new problems doesn't mean our old ones just go away. If we decide that piracy is a scourge and needs to be addressed (and we haven't thought that way up until now...) then it follows we should have the right tools for the job. As you've rightly pointed out, we can't make enough Bainbridge-class ships. But we don't need ships like those, either.

Tony,

while the "Armidale" class patrol boats might look good on paper as far as I am aware it has not been the case in practice.

They have been a maintenance nightmare with long/frequent stays alongside a wharf with consequent lack of reliability as well as some pretty pissed-off crew who don't want to go to them, don't want to stay on them and who all too often because of them will nor or do not re-engage for a further stint. Long times away from families doesn't help either. Even in these "hard times" there is a large lack of initial recruits/"new entries" etc. It is not only those vessels that are having this problem - so are some of the other surface ships and the submarines. Quite a few are in or virtually in "preservation" or "deferred maintenance/upgrade".

Keeping ships patrolling on a foreign station is a horrendously expensive and difficult task. It is the very reason that the US and the Brits had so many very large bases for this sort of support to these patrols etc. Have any of you ever been to the US bases in Guam or Subic Bay or Korea, Japan, Philippines etc. and the Brit bases and dockyards in Hong Kong and Singapore, Malta and else -where in the Mediterranean as well as also in the case of the Brits, Port Elizabeth (Africa) or Aden (Arabia), as they were when they were all in their "prime"?.

Are you aware of the dreadful conditions with the weather and sea-states in and around the Horn of Africa and the Bay of Bengal? How much help can you count on from South Africa or India? or Pakistan etc?

The logistics are appalling - and so are the long and short term costs.

Have any considered the relative speeds of those inflatable pirate vessels and a Navy Destroyer or Frigate or Patrol Boat? And how long would it take for a Navy ship to cover at least and probably a lot more than say 100 miles? And where do you think the pirates will be? And do you think they won't be warned by others? How so you know that the pirates don't have modern GPS and satellite communications (it need only be a hand-set after all) and support from land as regards "spotting" potential targets or interceptors - or perhaps an innocent-looking "mother ship"? I seem to recall a stand-off with the Russians and one or more of their war-ships over a pirated ship with old but perhaps still useful Soviet tanks and "other stuff" in the not too distant past. And it was in Africa as well.

Which country or which "Sovereign Find/s" are going to buy the additional US bonds that will be needed - and if bought, on what conditions and costs - and for how long. I think future generations have more than enough on their plate.

"Diplomacy" will have to sort this out. Its a matter of what pressure is able to be brought to bear at what cost and compromise and to what extent and where.

The "shoot-'em up" "solution" just won't work.

Piracy in the open sea is one thing, but I can assure that piracy in and chasing pirates in restricted or shallow or enclosed tropical waters close to shore is no easy task and the up-side is very much in favour of the pirates etc. Think Asia. Lots of US shipping there as well.

I suppose that all the "go get 'em" and "we'll show 'em how" brigades as well as many "red-necks" will be only too willing to get off their ar$es and pay their own way, risk their own necks, take their own "hardware" and ammunition etc., go there and really "sort this lot out". Two things are conspicuous by their absence - volunteers and a lot of the "we/I will go and show e'm" diatribe.

I'm surprised that no one has "volunteered (conscripted?)" the "Governator" alias "Rambo".

Go Arnie!!!! Shoot 'em up!!!

http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa294/oldtiffie/Funnies/Rambo1-1.jpg

http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa294/oldtiffie/Funnies/machine-gun-cat-animation.gif

Or is it:
http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa294/oldtiffie/Funnies/Life_in_oldies_after_all.gif

It seems a lot like this:
http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa294/oldtiffie/Funnies/pumpkin1.jpg

Take a cold shower and a suppressant.

pressurerelief
04-15-2009, 09:48 PM
OldTiffie,

I was waiting for a link to Wikipedia in that last response and did not see one. I actually looked three times, this must be serious.

P/R

A.K. Boomer
04-15-2009, 10:04 PM
One last time Tony, you dont - you can't patrol that kind of ocean --- You simply arm the ships their after... Its the only practical solution.

wierdscience
04-15-2009, 10:09 PM
I was talking with a friend who has had some experience with Indonesian pirates not to long ago.

He says we (US) do have an effective military means to deal with pirates.It just takes awhile and doesn't make the newspapers.Think Trojan Horse;)

oldtiffie
04-15-2009, 10:46 PM
All of a sudden after the action by Bainbridge's snipers - well done by the way - there is virtually no mention of it in the main media - almost as if the media has been "requested???" to "drop it". I'd have thought that the media would have milked that story for all that its worth for at least a week!!

A US version of the Brit - and Australian - "D-Notice" perhaps? "Gagging" the media?? Surely not!!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D_Notice

I notice too that there has been no mention of the ships cargo or manifest nor where it sailed from or was sailing to. No mention of what equipment the pirates had either.

I wonder why or if it was so important that the action by Bainbridge and the US Government was so quick and drastic. It was on the high-seas and in international waters (not "territorial") waters after all.

I will bet the the "security" and "diplomatic" people from several countries at least were VERY busy with some serious horse-trading before Bainbridge was depatched/deployed. My guess too is that the "approval" was delivered when Bainbridge was on or just about "on-station".

I guess we will never know.

wierdscience
04-15-2009, 11:03 PM
All of a sudden after the action by Bainbridge's snipers - well done by the way - there is virtually no mention of it in the main media - almost as if the media has been "requested???" to "drop it". I'd have thought that the media would have milked that story for all that its worth for at least a week!!

A US version of the Brit - and Australian - "D-Notice" perhaps? "Gagging" the media?? Surely not!!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D_Notice

I notice too that there has been no mention of the ships cargo or manifest nor where it sailed from or was sailing to. No mention of what equipment the pirates had either.

I wonder why or if it was so important that the action by Bainbridge and the US Government was so quick and drastic. It was on the high-seas and in international waters (not "territorial") waters after all.

I will bet the the "security" and "diplomatic" people from several countries at least were VERY busy with some serious horse-trading before Bainbridge was depatched/deployed. My guess too is that the "approval" was delivered when Bainbridge was on or just about "on-station".

I guess we will never know.

The Maersk Alabama was carrying humanitarian relief aid bound for Africa ironically,or maybe not.

http://www.voanews.com/english/Africa/2009-04-15-voa33.cfm

In that part of the world food is used as a weapon and a way to inslave people into supporting a cause they otherwise maybe would not support.

Notice the other two ships attacked since were also carrying food aid meant for Africa.

sicero
04-15-2009, 11:26 PM
This whole thing tells me the USA is not able to protect the coast of the US either. I guess we found that out on 9-11. Kind of scary isn't it. Our friend from Britian has the best plan. Send planes down the coast and shoot up everything that floats. A good place for live action manuvers. Gary Hanson also has one of the good posts. Kenny

Roy Andrews
04-15-2009, 11:53 PM
I think I have shown that we can.



I think that's the question.



I was thinking more like, "protector of US ships." Let other countries tend to their own.



The finances may matter. If an American gets killed then probably that won't matter either.



Well, spending up into oblivion doesn't seem to upset Congress, so I think that's not an issue. (But then again, the economy isn't tanking like it was supposed to, either.) The deficit.. nope, not a concern. $500B on defense probably has some slush in it. Two wars yeah, but this would be a police action*, and the Navy isn't burned out yet.

This is doable. The only question is will the government want to.








* DANGER WILL ROBINSON! DANGER!

you obviously know nothing of the navy and haven't served in it in the last 20 years. your continuous oversimplification of this in the face of repeated correction tells me you should be a politician.:rolleyes:

oldtiffie
04-16-2009, 12:56 AM
The Maersk Alabama was carrying humanitarian relief aid bound for Africa ironically,or maybe not.

http://www.voanews.com/english/Africa/2009-04-15-voa33.cfm

In that part of the world food is used as a weapon and a way to inslave people into supporting a cause they otherwise maybe would not support.

Notice the other two ships attacked since were also carrying food aid meant for Africa.

Thanks ws - good post - appreciated.

I followed your link and it was very interesting. No support for the "military" of "shoot 'em up" options??? - at all - just for diplomacy.

Seems the French have been both active, pro-active and reactive - and getting results - and doing it "their way" which is not unusual and will be causing some angst and heart-burn else-where in the halls of power and those dark corners of diplomacy.

Good articles though and good reading. Some of the links from that link of yours are at:
http://www.voanews.com/english/2009-04-14-voa58.cfm

http://www.voanews.com/english/2009-04-15-voa58.cfm

http://www.voanews.com/english/2009-04-15-voa37.cfm

http://www.voanews.com/english/2009-04-15-voa18.cfm

etc.

oldtiffie
04-16-2009, 01:08 AM
OldTiffie,

I was waiting for a link to Wikipedia in that last response and did not see one. I actually looked three times, this must be serious.

P/R

OK PR - here it is.

a link for Wikipedia.

and there it is.

Look no more - only too happy to oblige.

Happy?

Willy
04-16-2009, 01:09 AM
Tiffie, the French have been busy, but the Chinese, Denmark, Holland, and India too have been out there, as well as others.
Big problem for hundreds of years, not going to go away soon.

Big page here (http://comment-blog.advance.net/cgi-bin/mte/mt-search.cgi?tag=piracy&blog_id=4243), takes a while to load and longer to read, but interesting.

tattoomike68
04-16-2009, 01:18 AM
I will guard a ship for $1,000 a week. give me a 338 magnum and a 44 auto mag and I will send them punks to heaven by the boat load.

I will cork them bitches in thier frigin peanut all day long.

oldtiffie
04-16-2009, 03:18 AM
Tiffie, the French have been busy, but the Chinese, Denmark, Holland, and India too have been out there, as well as others.
Big problem for hundreds of years, not going to go away soon.

Big page here (http://comment-blog.advance.net/cgi-bin/mte/mt-search.cgi?tag=piracy&blog_id=4243), takes a while to load and longer to read, but interesting.

Thanks Willy - good read - appreciated.

I knew most of it.

So far there is a lot of "for the public" posturing and fine words/rhetoric but a lot of "not much of substance".

Aden is where a very large British base was - it might be handy now. Not a lot of helpful nations or help in that area of the world.

Aden is at the southern entry to the Red Sea, the top of which is the Suez Canal (owned by Egypt - an Arab nation).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aden

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Sea

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suez_Canal

So there is quite a bottle-neck at the southern end of the Suez Canal near Aden and just right for pirates!!!

If Egypt were to close the canal to military shipping it would cause all sorts of problems in what is essentially an Arab/Muslim area with its own set of "hot-spots" and "sensitivities".

There is a lot of "discussion" and "diplomacy" needed yet - and all "behind closed doors".

There will be some "token action" and "tough talk" to be seen to be "doing something" but what that "something" is or will be (if any) has yet to be seen.

We will just have to wait and see.

wierdscience
04-16-2009, 08:33 AM
Thanks ws - good post - appreciated.

I followed your link and it was very interesting. No support for the "military" of "shoot 'em up" options??? - at all - just for diplomacy.

Seems the French have been both active, pro-active and reactive - and getting results - and doing it "their way" which is not unusual and will be causing some angst and heart-burn else-where in the halls of power and those dark corners of diplomacy.

Good articles though and good reading. Some of the links from that link of yours are at:
http://www.voanews.com/english/2009-04-14-voa58.cfm

http://www.voanews.com/english/2009-04-15-voa58.cfm

http://www.voanews.com/english/2009-04-15-voa37.cfm

http://www.voanews.com/english/2009-04-15-voa18.cfm

etc.

The bulk of the pirate activity has moved away from and out of the Gulf of Aden to Somolia's southern coast mainly because of stepped up patrols in the Gulf of Aden.

tony ennis
04-16-2009, 09:02 AM
while the "Armidale" class patrol boats might look good on paper as far as I am aware it has not been the case in practice.

I was using them as an example more than advocating a particular boat - the context was that ships like the Bainbridge were too expensive. I am sure there is someone that can design a ship for the task.


Roy Andrews: you obviously know nothing of the navy and haven't served in it in the last 20 years. your continuous oversimplification of this in the face of repeated correction tells me you should be a politician.

A delightfully classless cheapshot. What corrections? The ones I have shown are at least debatable or incorrect? I propose to solve a problem. No one has said why a Navy presence wouldn't work. In fact, the gist from the boards seems to be that the Navy is unable to protect shipping. The remaining solutions seem to be either to carpet bomb the place, send in ground forces, or pay tribute.
We're unlikely to carpet bomb the cities. We're unlikely to send in ground forces again. So what's left is to pay tribute.


This whole thing tells me the USA is not able to protect the coast of the US either. I guess we found that out on 9-11.

Well, against a horde of drug traffickers in small boats... not all the time. But we seem to have very little piracy off our coasts. 9-11 worked because we're a decent people and we're used to other being equally decent.

oldtiffie
04-16-2009, 09:23 AM
Here's a long-standing on-going variation in our own back-yard in OZ - people smuggling - and the smugglers are not above killing the so-called refugees either.

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,25341744-421,00.html

http://search.news.com.au/search?us=ndmnews&sid=421&as=NEWS&ac=news&q=people%20smuggling

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=people+smuggling+in+australia&meta=&aq=2&oq=people+smu

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=people+smuggling+in+indonesia&btnG=Search&meta=

oldtiffie
04-16-2009, 09:50 AM
The bulk of the pirate activity has moved away from and out of the Gulf of Aden to Somolia's southern coast mainly because of stepped up patrols in the Gulf of Aden.

OK wierd.

If that is the case, why do the commercial shipping come around the Cape of Good Hope (southern Africa), past Madagascar and then straight up the east African coast just off-shore from Somalia instead of going further out to sea in the Indian Ocean toward India and then turn West at the north coast-line? It should then be further out from land-based Somalian/African pirates and closer to Navy vessels patrolling in the Red Sea.

Or better yet, why not have the commercial shipping that is at risk traverse the Mediterranean Sea and travel south through the Suez Canal and the Red Sea to the Gulf of Aden where as you say the Navy concentration and risk to pirates as well as guardianship of shipping is greatest?

I would bet that "money" - or more particularly "costs" are a lot to blame.

If that is the case then shipping companies who should bear the risk and costs are shifting it to various Defence forces and their Governments and tax-payers.

I am surprised that some one hasn't mentioned gathering all commercial shipping into convoys and having the various Navies escort them in and out.

Seems a lot like a maritime version of the "bail-outs" in Wall Street and the Auto industry et al.

lazlo
04-16-2009, 11:28 AM
The Maersk Alabama was carrying humanitarian relief aid bound for Africa ironically,or maybe not.

http://www.voanews.com/english/Africa/2009-04-15-voa33.cfm

In that part of the world food is used as a weapon and a way to inslave people into supporting a cause they otherwise maybe would not support.

Notice the other two ships attacked since were also carrying food aid meant for Africa.

Almost all the ships being attacked are carrying humanitarian aid. There's a great article in this week's Economist about the piracy: almost all the attacks are happening in a very small area: the Gulf of Aden, which links the Suez Canal and the Red Sea to the Indian Ocean (it's the shortest route from Asia to Europe).

In 2003, there were 21 pirate attacks in that area. So far this year, there have been 79 attacks, compared with 111 for all of 2008!

Here's a map showing the highly concentrated, and very regular pattern of attacks:

http://ak.imgfarm.com/images/ap/PIRACY_FOOD_AID.sff_GFX339_20090415162735.jpg

It seems like the Bainbridge is the only US frigate in the the area -- they were returning the Captain and crew of the Maersk Alabama (rescued by the snipers) to Kenya, but had to divert back to rescue the Liberty Sun, which was hit by a barrage of RPG's on Tuesday.

If the NATO countries put more warships in that area, it seems like it would quell the attacks pretty quickly:

http://ak.imgfarm.com/images/ap/PIRACY.sff_GFX101_20090326154658.jpg

garagemark
04-16-2009, 11:51 AM
The fact is that in 2008, there were 111 attacks out of approximately 113,000 trips across the area. Though a pain in the ass, the shipping companies themselves need to take ownership of this problem- not ANY government. There are almost limitless options, however expensive, to protect these boats privately.

The only exception might be capture of a pirate (though if I was guarding the ship, there wouldn't be any captures). Those captured should be turned over to the government who's flag was over the ship for prosecution.

oldtiffie
04-16-2009, 12:28 PM
Good "off the cuff" reply Lazlo.

http://ak.imgfarm.com/images/ap/PIRACY_FOOD_AID.sff_GFX339_20090415162735.jpg

But as said by others (and me) it really should be the responsibility of the shipping companies and not shifted to the Navies and the tax-payers of any country. It should be as it always has been - part of the risks and costs of doing business at sea in known troubled areas.

This could almost end up as an international maritime version of "Wall Street" and the "Auto Industry" (and others) "bail-out"!!

It is fairly obvious why the most interventions by pirates were in the Gulf of Aden as the "victims" may well have been in restricted waters (channels and sea-lanes) and/or under pilot-age where they are very vulnerable. Most in the Gulf of Aden are in Yemeni waters but the Yemen don't seem to be doing much to deter the pirates and if I were a pirate I'd start out from hiding in Yemen in a very fast maneuverable shallow-draft vessel - voilà - "inflatables". It may well suit the Yemen. I don't think that any of those Arab nations would be all too willing to help any others. Same applies to Ethiopia and Somalia.

If you have a look at where the latest hi-jackings have been and use the scale you will see that they are 200>600 miles off the Somali coast. That is a lot of sea-room and a long way for an inflatable with uneducated peasants in them. There just has to be support "out there" by way of "Mother Ships" etc. - and probably a lot bigger than has been reported so far. That is a huge piece of ocean to patrol.

I have yet to see an agreed "Rules of Engagement" for Navies of any country to intercept the ships of any other - even if pirates are on-board. Further, some countries have let any pirates go as its too difficult to deal with if they take them to the home country of the Navy who has captured them.

I wouldn't count on too much help from the NATO countries as they have dragged their feet in assisting in Iraq and Afghanistan etc. as well as Bosnia etc. etc. and they aren't showing much sign of changing any time soon.

It would be all too easy to spark an "International Incident" if one navy were to try to intercept the shipping of another even if pirated. Think of the stand-off with the Russian navy when a US Navy ship sought to intercept a ship (Russian?) with tanks etc. on-board who it was suspected were for a a group who were trying to over-throw another that the US was supporting. Nearly very nasty.

garagemark's post was very topical:


The fact is that in 2008, there were 111 attacks out of approximately 113,000 trips across the area. Though a pain in the ass, the shipping companies themselves need to take ownership of this problem- not ANY government. There are almost limitless options, however expensive, to protect these boats privately.

That is (just) less than 1 in 1,000 in a known pirate and risky area. Not bad odds at all really.

dp
04-16-2009, 12:45 PM
That is (just) less than 1 in 1,000 in a known pirate and risky area. Not bad odds at all really.

If we had a 1 in 1000 likelihood of being assaulted when going to church we'd probably opt to drop into a tavern instead. The chances of being assaulted are equally as great, but the atmosphere is probably an improvement. :)

This entire thing reveals a curiosity of human behavior. In fact the world is already doing what it thinks is appropriate about this problem and has all along. But because it is now widely discussed and found on front pages of the news the drama involves people who are just now responding (destabilizing event). This is a feedback mechanism that has flexed the status quo and which has changed the response to the pirates (terrorists). This change will negate to a degree the feedback mechanism and a Schuler cycle will follow until a new level of stability is reached. That stability will be breached when a new destabilizing event occurs.

Ries
04-16-2009, 03:07 PM
In fact the world is already doing what it thinks is appropriate about this problem and has all along.

I think you hit the nail on the head there.

Lets say you are a shipping company, like Maersk, whose ship was the one which started attracting all this attention.

You run 470 ships, each of which has a 1/2 of 1 % chance of being hi-jacked, in this area- but worldwide, your actual chances are probably much lower, averaged over your entire fleet- more like 1/10 of 1% or less.

If one of your ships is taken by these pirates, the going ransom has been running about $1 million US.

If you look at that $1 Million, as a percentage of your overall operating cost for this fleet, its gotta be such a tiny percentage of your monthly payout as to be negligible. And you are only running a tiny bit of 1% chance of having to pay that.

For instance, it costs $600,000 for one of these ships to transit the Suez Canal. They burn 50 to 100 TONS of fuel a day. Typical costs for Fuel alone for a trip from europe to hong kong would be $250,000 to $400,000, depending on fuel costs, vessel size, and load.
Add in crew costs, insurance, wear and tear, and its easily a million or two per voyage in costs for these big boys.

So from a strictly dollars and sense viewpoint, Maersk's costs, IF a ship is hijacked, are so small, as to be not worth worrying about, paying ransom.

Especially since up to now, there have been virtually no deaths due to the pirates.
Close to 300 crewmembers are hostage right now, waiting to be ransomed, and, for the last year, the ransom system has been working just fine as far as the pirates are concerned, and really isnt too big a deal for the shippers.

Now, if they start killing crewmembers, everything changes. Which they just might, since we have upped the ante.

BillH
04-16-2009, 03:10 PM
They are kidnapping people and holding them for ransom... The only punishment for that is death.

Yankee1
04-16-2009, 04:00 PM
Hello
You might try the Italian news sources because they had reporters in the area of the action that took place against the pirates. It seems they have a different story about it than the American Press. You will find it interesting.
Yankee1

lazlo
04-16-2009, 04:09 PM
If we had a 1 in 1000 likelihood of being assaulted when going to church we'd probably opt to drop into a tavern instead.

Agree Dennis. The bigger problem is the reason the Somali Warlords are attacking the aid ships: they're intercepting badly needed food and medical supplies, and parlaying those supplies into money, power, and swelling ranks.

So a minor warlord starts by sending some cronies out with a little rubber skiff, hijacks a small freighter carrying humanitarian supplies, peddles those supplies to starving locals, and the next thing you know he's got a private militia attacking the Maersk Alabama and the Liberty Sun with RPG's.

Dawai
04-16-2009, 05:43 PM
For half a century, we have allowed the "war lords" to distribute the food.. they drive up in a truck with people hanging off it with AK's.. the relief people help load it, then they go sell it. They are called the community leaders. I guess it is productive like that, since the ones who produce and can afford to purchase food survive to make more chillen.

Just ask anyone who has actually been there.


If we had a 1 in 1000 likelihood of being assaulted when going to church Well sometimes in the "area" you go to church in is good, good chances nothing will happen.

Some parts of Chattanooga the prostitutes come out at 4-5pm Sunday, stay out till the next morning. Now them parts will get a brick bounced off your skull. (Bubba has one eye that looks left, and one that he can still see out of)

I can account for 500' of road frontage. It's my home turf. I was warned by the police not to extend my control beyond that and look after the neighbors.

GIVE your charity close to home. Your church or local Helping hand house, soup kitchen..

tony ennis
04-16-2009, 07:30 PM
In fact the world is already doing what it thinks is appropriate about this problem and has all along.

+1


So from a strictly dollars and sense viewpoint, Maersk's costs, IF a ship is hijacked, are so small, as to be not worth worrying about, paying ransom.


Law enforcement has never been a profit maker. But stopping piracy isn't about saving money, it's about doing what's right.


Now, if they start killing crewmembers, everything changes. Which they just might, since we have upped the ante.


I would venture the pirates upped the ante by attacking a US ship and moreso taking a US citizen hostage. That was a silly thing to do. I suppose the thing to do now is to ring up the warlords and let them know exactly what's going to happen if they misbehave.

dp
04-16-2009, 08:24 PM
I suppose the thing to do now is to ring up the warlords and let them know exactly what's going to happen if they misbehave.

I would bet my last post-tax dollar that BO is not going to permit his military to shoot another desperate black teenager in the head to save some cargo and insurance money.

Thruthefence
04-16-2009, 08:35 PM
How is this any different the the Mafia destroying Sicily? It started out, just a little protection money, then the economy was devastated, everybody had their hand out. It didn't start out with murder if you didn't pay 'protection', but evolved to that. It caused a huge exodus out of the country.
Do you people really think the "pirates" will stay at the current level of thievery? I do agree, that we cannot protect every ship out there, but if it's flagged with the American flag, we should protect it. If our 'armed' merchant ships aren't welcome in African ports (loaded with food paid for by the taxpayers) so be it. Your bean-counting excuses are just that. excuses. The easy way out. Keep paying the blackmailers.

lazlo
04-16-2009, 09:10 PM
How is this any different the the Mafia destroying Sicily? It started out, just a little protection money, then the economy was devastated, everybody had their hand out. It didn't start out with murder if you didn't pay 'protection', but evolved to that. It caused a huge exodus out of the country.

Do you people really think the "pirates" will stay at the current level of thievery?

That's my concern as well. If you look at that chart I posted, there were more pirate attacks in 2008 than the previous three years combined, and almost as many in the first 4 months of 2009 as 2008.

So something's going on in Somalia that's causing an exponentially increasing rate of piracy -- the world is not going to be able to blithely ignore it and hope it goes away.

Dennis: I don't see how race has anything to do with this. They're pirates and, regardless of race, they need to be controlled.

dp
04-16-2009, 09:43 PM
Dennis: I don't see how race has anything to do with this. They're pirates and, regardless of race, they need to be controlled.

You and I know this and that is rational thinking, but Limbaugh is fanning the murdered black teenage pirate flame (I read it, didn't listen!), Al Sharpton is sounding sympathetic to the Somali "Coast Guardsmen" role, and Jesse Jackson who has been marginalized by BO is looking for any hook to set, and the middle east is alight with this aspect of this topic. All the elements are in place to make this anything but a pirates issue for BO. It is now in the hands of the 4th estate of government (that is the press for anyone still reading). Google "teenage somali pirates" to see the headlines trend (and ignore the idiot bloggers as they're in their own feeding frenzy circle jerk).

wierdscience
04-16-2009, 09:53 PM
That's my concern as well. If you look at that chart I posted, there were more pirate attacks in 2008 than the previous three years combined, and almost as many in the first 4 months of 2009 as 2008.

So something's going on in Somalia that's causing an exponentially increasing rate of piracy -- the world is not going to be able to blithely ignore it and hope it goes away.

Dennis: I don't see how race has anything to do with this. They're pirates and, regardless of race, they need to be controlled.

There is an Islamic element in Somalia,it has been there probably since 1980 or so.In recent years it has reached crtical mass and begun to affect it's neighbors.OBL was there when our trip went bad,he is credited with providing basic urban tactics to the locals.

IIRC in 1999-2000 Somalia had been launching cross boarder raids into Ethiopia and Kenya including several terrorist attacks.This led to Ethiopia invading Somalia and pushing the Islamist fighters back to the sea coast.The Islamists promptly engaged in an Iraq style insurgent campaign which Ethiopia was not able to overcome.As a result they had to pull back from the coast which allowed breathing room for the Islamists and the pirates.The US Navy provided some support for the Ethiopian campaign along with help from India???

The Islamists have done in Somalia what Hamas has done on the WestBank.They go into poor neighborhoods,hand out food,clothes and medicine,most of it paid for by others.This of course turns the hearts and minds of the people against the're so called enemy and incourages terroist activity until said enemy can stand no more and they retaliate.Presto they now have ample supply of "innocent civilians" in harms way just waiting for the AP lens to find and the cycle of death,destruction and worst of all usery begins again.

Like it or not the only long term solution will be to impose order in Somalia.So far no one is willing to do that.

oldtiffie
04-16-2009, 10:25 PM
Originally Posted by dp
If we had a 1 in 1000 likelihood of being assaulted when going to church we'd probably opt to drop into a tavern instead.


Agree Dennis. The bigger problem is the reason the Somali Warlords are attacking the aid ships: they're intercepting badly needed food and medical supplies, and parlaying those supplies into money, power, and swelling ranks.

So a minor warlord starts by sending some cronies out with a little rubber skiff, hijacks a small freighter carrying humanitarian supplies, peddles those supplies to starving locals, and the next thing you know he's got a private militia attacking the Maersk Alabama and the Liberty Sun with RPG's.

Not so sure about that.

There pretty well has to be some seriously good intelligence as well as financing, planning and resourcing here. The pirates may well be a bit lacking but I'd bet those behind them aren't. It seems that the pirates are pretty well informed as regards the cargo, its point of origin and destination as well as the crew and country of "flag". So they seem to have pretty good information and planning.

Perhaps not unlike the success of the two-way passage of contraband (at El Paso?) between the US and Mexico - or even perhaps the Indonesian and other People Smugglers heading for Australia - and Europe.

There is a lot of very attractive cargoes on the high-seas - most of which is illegal and not prosecuted.

Its very difficult, expensive, resource-intensive and not all that successful pursuing pirates and smugglers.

Perhaps targeting the Maersk Line was inevitable if not planned given its size and diversity. It is a foreign-owned (Denmark) diversified company that has substantial US shipping interests:


Maersk Line, Limited
Maersk Line, Limited, is a US-based subsidiary of A. P. Moller-Maersk Group which manages a fleet of US-flag vessels and provides U.S. government agencies and their contractors with transportation and logistics services. Headquartered in Norfolk, Virginia,[8] it manages the world's largest fleet of US-flag vessels. Beginning with a relatively small number of vessels focused on handling commercial and US Government-subsidised cargoes, MLL's fleet of vessels engaged in commercial liner services. MLL grew significantly after acquiring Sea-Land Service, Inc. in 1999 and P&O Nedlloyd and Farrell Lines in 2005.

from:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maersk

I wonder just what cargoes Maersk transports for the US government and military? I wonder what the outcome would be if the pirates hi-jacked one of "those" cargoes in a US-flagged Maersk-owned vessel in international waters.

Or did they?

We live in interesting times.

Perhaps this bloke is behind it all:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captain_Hook

Even I get a mention there (I wish!!):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Pan,_or_the_Boy_Who_Wouldn%27t_Grow_Up


Originally Posted by dp
If we had a 1 in 1000 likelihood of being assaulted when going to church we'd probably opt to drop into a tavern instead.

Not likely here Dennis - my chances of being "hit" going to church are zero (never go) as are my going to the boozer (had to get off it and stay off it - or else) and due to other circumstances I am not at all likely to be shot while "tom-catting" (yeah - I wish, as there's worse ways to go!!). So I might just fluke dying of old age!!! Wow - what an anti-climax!! - a disappointment to a lot I may well outlast and see THEM off - the irony is beautiful!!!

Thruthefence
04-16-2009, 11:09 PM
You know, this "one in a thousand" crap is exactly what odds the derivative traders used when making their "bets" that have nearly sunk this country.

What are the odds of hitting the lottery? And yet, week after week, "somebody" wins a lottery. If you had a son or brother in the merchant marine, would you like the odds? Your loved ones sitting in a stinking dungeon, while the pirates decide, " what the heck, let's up the ante, to say 30 million, after all, they've caved everytime before!"

Meanwhile, the money gnomes are consulting their actuarial tables, and decide, at this figure, it's cheaper to just walk away. Kinda like "deal or no deal" except your daughter's husband, the father of your grandchildren, spewing with dysentery, in a medieval cell, is left holding the bag for our failures.

tony ennis
04-16-2009, 11:19 PM
money gnomes

/golf clap

oldtiffie
04-16-2009, 11:43 PM
Well,

the seems to be some concern about "money Gnomes" and Actuaries and how they only concern themselves with the probability of outcomes and associated risks and gains.

That sounds pretty much like "Wall Street", the US Auto Industry as well as Government Auditors and the "Investors" the Government is trying to bait.

Its one helluva an expensive poker hand to deal yourself into and/or lose but one helluva profit if your hand or bluff wins it. Add a mix of politics into it and there is a recipe for fabulous gains and losses.

The end-game is money and power. People are only an expendable necessity and/or a "consumable/disposable/trade-able" commodity in this high-stakes game.

So - what's new? Nothing.

And will it change anytime soon? Never.

Next week the public will get sick of it, and the media and politicians will have milked it dry - and as soon as another "Oh Wow" effort arises or is manufactured, the public will forget about it and things will go back to where they were when this "event" arose in the public and political "interest".

It will just fade away.

lazlo
04-17-2009, 09:54 AM
Next week the public will get sick of it, and the media and politicians will have milked it dry - and as soon as another "Oh Wow" effort arises or is manufactured, the public will forget about it and things will go back to where they were when this "event" arose in the public and political "interest".

Will the pirates get tired of it too? :rolleyes:

At the rate the attacks are increasing, there will be 100 attacks a month by August.

The solution is pretty simple, IMHO: put more NATO warships in the area, don't pay the ransoms, and let the snipers out more often.

johnhurd
04-17-2009, 10:43 AM
But if you don't put the same number in all the different areas of the oceans, isn't that profiling???:(

tony ennis
04-17-2009, 03:31 PM
the seems to be some concern about "money Gnomes" and Actuaries and how they only concern themselves with the probability of outcomes and associated risks and gains.

That would be ok if there was a monetary risk associated with each hostage taken or killed. For example, what is the 'value' of a life? Maybe the Gnomes will call it $1M. At some point, those numbers will change the Gnomes' calculations. When they do, they will seek a way to reduce the risks, the first of which is to push it onto someone else by calling the navy :p

For extra fun, consider what happens if the $1M number was to become public... "What! You think a human life is worth only $1M??"

Regarding the idea that the shipping companies should just insure their boats... Why not apply that idea to all of US society? For example, get yourself some "violence" insurance so if someone splits your skull open you can get compensated. No need to bother with expensive police, prisons, lawyers, or legal system. Perhaps there will be a stream of thieves breaking into your house and stealing your stuff... no, problem, just get some "theft" insurance. Now it's all ok, right?

pressurerelief
04-17-2009, 03:37 PM
"For extra fun, consider what happens if the 50k or 10M numbers were to become public..."

This happened to Ford Motor Co when discussing the costs of seat belts in cars before the seat belt regulations. It was a public affairs nightmare for them.

P/R

oldtiffie
04-17-2009, 08:14 PM
there seems to be some concern about "money Gnomes" and Actuaries and how they only concern themselves with the probability of outcomes and associated risks and gains.


That would be ok if there was a monetary risk associated with each hostage taken or killed. For example, what is the 'value' of a life? Maybe the Gnomes will call it $1M. At some point, those numbers will change the Gnomes' calculations. When they do, they will seek a way to reduce the risks, the first of which is to push it onto someone else by calling the navy :p

For extra fun, consider what happens if the $1M number was to become public... "What! You think a human life is worth only $1M??"

Regarding the idea that the shipping companies should just insure their boats... Why not apply that idea to all of US society? For example, get yourself some "violence" insurance so if someone splits your skull open you can get compensated. No need to bother with expensive police, prisons, lawyers, or legal system. Perhaps there will be a stream of thieves breaking into your house and stealing your stuff... no, problem, just get some "theft" insurance. Now it's all ok, right?

Tony,

that is happening everywhere everyday of the week. A good example is how Governments, Health Insurers, Hospitals and idividuals make judgments about resource and risk allocation in assessing whether a patient should get any subsidised assistance at all, if so which and fore how long and at what level depending on resources, the age and likely outcome for the patient - in short "whether its worth it" and whther they die sooner or later and under what conditions and where - and at what cost - to whom.

Its the same as you under-insuring yourself and having to take a chance having to "wear it" yourself.

A life is not sacred or precious as at the end of the day its only worth what somebody is prepared to have or keep or retrieve it. And that rather depends on what some-one (or yourself) is prepared to or can pay - in short your are judged as to whether you are "worth it" to (usually) "someone else".

Hostage-taking (aka ransom) is a gamble on what the risks are and the likely outcome and the rewards.

Military people, insurers, actuaries, Economists and Financiers and banks - and Sovereign Funds" - are all investors and risk-takers - as are Politicians and "Pirates" - and the public at large.

The Military and Contracts are only "protection" (at a cost) after all. Whether they work as "insurance" is another matter.

"Self-insurance" is always an option and a risk you carry your-self. Under-insuring and "excesses" in Insurance Policies and Contracts are good examples (think: house and contents, car, medical etc. etc.).

And if the "Government" pays - then so do you - eventually.

"What a life is worth" is really more emotional than realistic as it is trying to put a price on emotion and delaying what is inevitable anyway.

We are all going to "fall off the twig" eventually - come what may - but it is only the timing and conditions that are important - and they are finite as well.

I guess that could be assessed more by politicians than Actuaries!!! But either way, guess who pays!!

Now that's something to think about.

oldtiffie
04-17-2009, 09:48 PM
Originally Posted by oldtiffie
Next week the public will get sick of it, and the media and politicians will have milked it dry - and as soon as another "Oh Wow" effort arises or is manufactured, the public will forget about it and things will go back to where they were when this "event" arose in the public and political "interest".


Will the pirates get tired of it too? :rolleyes:

At the rate the attacks are increasing, there will be 100 attacks a month by August.

The solution is pretty simple, IMHO: put more NATO warships in the area, don't pay the ransoms, and let the snipers out more often.

Lazlo,

are you SERIOUS - REALLY serious?

NATO?

Getting that lot to agree on anything of substance let alone getting it done quickly - or at all - is a "big ask".

And even if it did, there's a good chance the US will not only (have to?) pay for it but supply the means of "doing it".

Read this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Military_units_and_formations_of_NATO

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO

Why not take it to the UN as after all its in New York (pretty well as a "country within a country" with its own diplomatic immunity (like Rome in Italy?) and reliance on US funding - but most members with most say seem to be from Africa and/or in or sympathetic or supportive mode as regards some pretty unsavoury regimes in Africa. But its "local" in the US - might even have its own Zip-code - and they might speak "American" - and you won't need a passport to get there. But "getting in" or "seeing some-one" may well be a lot more problematical.

So - if anything of substance is to be done it will probably be mainly by the US - if it had the time, the military requirements (including bases??) - the money (in very short supply) and the political will.

I daresay "something" will be done in the short term at least but as to whether it addresses or solves the longer term problems (and consequences) is another matter.

Wayne02
04-19-2009, 01:31 AM
I'm a simple man, I say we continue to deal with them the old fashion way.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/0603/Bob8251/navyseal.jpg

oldtiffie
04-19-2009, 03:28 AM
And this is why a big focus of US attention is on South America - which is making sure it gets all that is on offer - and perhaps less than it might otherwise be on Pirates.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/16/world/16chinaloan.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=china+south+america&st=nyt

If China is using its wealth/surplus (US$) to get influence in South America instead of buying more US bonds (it is selling some) when the US is short of a buck, and given the way South America thinks it has been treated by the US, then having China in SA may be as bad as having the Russians in Cuba.

And this is some of the odd ways of dealing with pirates when operating under NATO.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/19/world/africa/19pirates.html?scp=4&sq=pirates&st=cse

Life is dead cheap out there.

But something is stirring in the pipe-line - perhaps:
http://www.voanews.com/english/2009-04-17-voa48.cfm

So the "shoot-'em up" and "carpet bomb 'em" options are a while off yet.

The "pending" and "too hard" baskets in a lot of countries are getting a good work-out.

Meanwhile, back at the Ranch ...................................

BigBoy1
04-19-2009, 06:09 AM
Having spoken to some SEAL pals here in Virginia Beach yesterday and asking why this thing dragged out for 4 days, I got the following:

1. Pres. Obama wouldn't authorize the DEVGRU/NSWC SEAL teams to the scene for 36 hours going against OSC (on scene commander) recommendation.

2. Once they arrived, Obama imposed restrictions on their Rules of Engagement (ROE) that they couldn't do anything unless the hostage's life was in "imminent" danger

3. The first time the hostage jumped into the water, the SEALS had the raggies all sighted in, but could not fire due to ROE restriction

4. When the Navy Rubber Inflatable Boat (RIB) came under fire as it approached with supplies, no fire was returned due to ROE restrictions. As the raggies were shooting at the RIB, they were exposed and the SEALS had them all dialed in.

5. Obama specifically denied two rescue plans developed by the Bainbridge Capt. and SEAL teams

6. Bainbridge Capt. and SEAL team CDR finally decide they have the OpArea and OSC authority to solely determine risk to hostage. 4 hours later, 3 dead raggies.

7. Obama immediately claims credit for his "daring and decisive" behaviour. As usual with him, it's BS.

So per our last email thread, I'm downgrading Obama's performace to D-. Only reason it's not an F is that the hostage survived.

Read the following accurate account.

Philips’ first leap into the warm, dark water of the Indian Ocean hadn’t worked out as well. With the Bainbridge in range and a rescue by his country’s Navy possible, Philips threw himself off of his lifeboat prison, enabling Navy shooters onboard the destroyer a clear shot at his captors — and none was taken.

The guidance from National Command Authority — the president of the United States, Barack Obama — had been clear: a peaceful solution was the only acceptable outcome to this standoff unless the hostage’s life was in clear, extreme danger.

The next day, a small Navy boat approaching the floating raft was fired on by the Somali pirates — and again no fire was returned and no pirates killed. This was again due to the cautious stance assumed by Navy personnel thanks to the combination of a lack of clear guidance from Washington and a mandate from the commander in chief’s staff not to act until Obama, a man with no background of dealing with such issues and no track record of decisiveness, decided that any outcome other than a “peaceful solution” would be acceptable.

After taking fire from the Somali kidnappers again Saturday night, the on-scene-commander decided he’d had enough.

Keeping his authority to act in the case of a clear and present danger to the hostage’s life and having heard nothing from Washington since yet another request to mount a rescue operation had been denied the day before, the Navy officer — unnamed in all media reports to date — decided the AK47 one captor had leveled at Philips’ back was a threat to the hostage’s life and ordered the NSWC team to take their shots.

Three rounds downrange later, all three brigands became enemy KIA and Philips was safe.

There is upside, downside, and spinside to the series of events over the last week that culminated in yesterday’s dramatic rescue of an American hostage.

Almost immediately following word of the rescue, the Obama administration and its supporters claimed victory against pirates in the Indian Ocean and declared that the dramatic end to the standoff put an end to questions of the inexperienced president’s toughness and decisiveness.

Despite the Obama administration’s (and its sycophants’) attempt to spin yesterday’s success as a result of bold, decisive leadership by the inexperienced president, the reality is nothing of the sort.

What should have been a standoff lasting only hours — as long as it took the USS Bainbridge and its team of NSWC operators to steam to the location — became an embarrassing four day and counting standoff between a ragtag handful of criminals with rifles and a U.S. Navy warship.

chief
04-19-2009, 07:15 AM
Big Boy1,
I heard the same sitrep from the specwar boys here in westpac. I think reason for the uphold was that the teleprompter messiah was trying to see if he could get the pirates UAW union cards and a jobs at a GM plant.

tony ennis
04-19-2009, 08:46 AM
However authoritative those debriefs sound, there's no way to check their accuracy.

lazlo
04-19-2009, 11:20 AM
What should have been a standoff lasting only hours — as long as it took the USS Bainbridge and its team of NSWC operators to steam to the location — became an embarrassing four day and counting standoff between a ragtag handful of criminals with rifles and a U.S. Navy warship.

So Rush and DP were criticizing the President for not spending more time negotiating with the pirates, and you're criticizing him for not steaming out to the site and killing everyone.

So exactly how do the Wingers propose that the situation should have been handled?

dp
04-19-2009, 12:01 PM
So Rush and DP were criticizing the President for not spending more time negotiating with the pirates, and you're criticizing him for not steaming out to the site and killing everyone.

So exactly how do the Wingers propose that the situation should have been handled?

I did not criticize the president for not spending more time negotiating. I observed that his stated philosophy during the campaign was abandoned almost immediately the first time it was tested. He was wrong then to espouse it, is wrong to continue to promote it, and despite his campaign rhetoric to the contrary, he did the right thing in this case.

I'd have been more impressed if he had picked up the phone and told the field ops people to do what they needed to do to close this open ticket but in fact the idiot got the call Friday night and slept on it before responding Saturday morning. A lot can have happened while he was sawing logs.

When you say "wingers", what exactly do you mean? It looks like an attempt to create the impression of an association between your fellow HSM members and some nefarious but badly identified group. Surely you have more class than to do that, but here is your opportunity to explain.

lazlo
04-19-2009, 12:18 PM
From a friend of mine - "The Rest of the Story"
...
1. Pres. Obama wouldn't authorize the DEVGRU/NSWC SEAL teams to the scene for 36 hours going against OSC (on scene commander) recommendation.

By the way, the "Rest of the Story" post that BigBoy copied is from a Winger Political Blogger, "Keltic Poet."

http://www.sodahead.com/user/profile/1199514/keltic-poet/

Some of his recent Blogs:

SEALS vs. somali pirates and dysfunction whitehouse
Somalia-- Anus of the World
The Image of Dumbass
...

lazlo
04-19-2009, 12:26 PM
When you say "wingers", what exactly do you mean? It looks like an attempt to create the impression of an association between your fellow HSM members and some nefarious but badly identified group.

WTF??? "Winger" means Right- or Left-Wing political extremist. So Rush Limbaugh on the Right, and Michael Moore on the Left. Bill Mahr on the Left, Bill O'Reilly on the right.

I consider it very offensive that you're trying to extrapolate a response to a comment politicizing the rescue of the American ship to my association with members of the Home Shop Machinist forum, most who have the good sense to stay out of these political discussions.

I plan to do the same.

George: I think this thread has run it's course, and strayed way past what I was hoping would be a well-deserved feel-good moment for most Americans. I would appreciate if you would lock it.

Rustybolt
04-19-2009, 12:35 PM
Piracy is profitable. That's why there are pirates. Up until last Sunday there was very little risk involved. Now there is more risk and being a pirate is more exciting. Two ways to dissuede them. Don't pay the ransom. Kill them. Or both. pretty soon, no more pirates. It's about the money.

dp
04-19-2009, 12:40 PM
WTF??? "Winger" means Right- or Left-Wing political extremist. So Rush Limbaugh on the Right, and Michael Moore on the Left. Bill Mahr on the Left, Bill O'Reilly on the right.

I consider it very offensive that you're trying to extrapolate a response to a comment politicizing the rescue of the American shop to my association with members of the Home Shop Machinist forum, most who have the good sense to stay out of these political discussions.

What does it matter what they think? It is very easy to predict what they will think, in fact. But I find it odd you consider any of those people extremists. Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn are extremists, Timothy McVeigh was an extremist. Michael Moore is no extremist. He's an obnoxious partisan but hardly an extremist.

I wasn't extrapolating anything. I was seeking clarification that only you could provide. You brought up "wingers" and I needed to know if I was considered a winger. It appears I may be if the group above is representative of what you consider extremist "wingers". Perhaps there is a further definition of extremist winger that is confined to popular media personalities but does not include violent extremists.

lazlo
04-19-2009, 12:48 PM
What does it matter what they think? It is very easy to predict what they will think

Because their drivel is being cut-and-pasted into this thread:

http://bbs.homeshopmachinist.net/showpost.php?p=436869&postcount=187

dp
04-19-2009, 01:02 PM
Because their drivel is being cut-and-pasted into this thread:

http://bbs.homeshopmachinist.net/showpost.php?p=436869&postcount=187

Whose drivel was that? It reads like a blogger's condensation of various news reports. The problem with reporting in real time is the real facts are not known until well after the event winds down. The best we can do is follow the news and hold judgment until all the events unfold and are chronicled by those who were there.

I didn't see anything in that post that could be attributed to one of your wingers.

tony ennis
04-19-2009, 01:06 PM
It won't be drivel if it turns out to be substantially true ;-)

I for one am not holding my breath.

BO is an amateur. However, he got out of this ok. Hopefully he'll make improvements or maybe even learn something. Hopefully his advisers will clue him in on what would have happened to his reputation had the hostage been killed on day 3 when the situation could have been favorably resolved almost immediately.

dp
04-19-2009, 01:07 PM
It won't be drivel if it turns out to be substantially true ;-)

I for one am not holding my breath.

I think what makes it drivel is it has conclusions that precede evidence and verification.

philbur
04-19-2009, 01:37 PM
Wow read it first here on HSM. What a crock of ****.

Phil


Having spoken to some SEAL pals here in Virginia Beach yesterday and asking why this thing dragged out for 4 days, I got the following:

1. Pres. Obama wouldn't authorize the DEVGRU/NSWC SEAL teams to the scene for 36 hours going against OSC (on scene commander) recommendation.

2. Once they arrived, Obama imposed restrictions on their Rules of Engagement (ROE) that they couldn't do anything unless the hostage's life was in "imminent" danger

3. The first time the hostage jumped into the water, the SEALS had the raggies all sighted in, but could not fire due to ROE restriction

4. When the Navy Rubber Inflatable Boat (RIB) came under fire as it approached with supplies, no fire was returned due to ROE restrictions. As the raggies were shooting at the RIB, they were exposed and the SEALS had them all dialed in.

5. Obama specifically denied two rescue plans developed by the Bainbridge Capt. and SEAL teams

6. Bainbridge Capt. and SEAL team CDR finally decide they have the OpArea and OSC authority to solely determine risk to hostage. 4 hours later, 3 dead raggies.

7. Obama immediately claims credit for his "daring and decisive" behaviour. As usual with him, it's BS.

So per our last email thread, I'm downgrading Obama's performace to D-. Only reason it's not an F is that the hostage survived.

Read the following accurate account.

Philips’ first leap into the warm, dark water of the Indian Ocean hadn’t worked out as well. With the Bainbridge in range and a rescue by his country’s Navy possible, Philips threw himself off of his lifeboat prison, enabling Navy shooters onboard the destroyer a clear shot at his captors — and none was taken.

The guidance from National Command Authority — the president of the United States, Barack Obama — had been clear: a peaceful solution was the only acceptable outcome to this standoff unless the hostage’s life was in clear, extreme danger.

The next day, a small Navy boat approaching the floating raft was fired on by the Somali pirates — and again no fire was returned and no pirates killed. This was again due to the cautious stance assumed by Navy personnel thanks to the combination of a lack of clear guidance from Washington and a mandate from the commander in chief’s staff not to act until Obama, a man with no background of dealing with such issues and no track record of decisiveness, decided that any outcome other than a “peaceful solution” would be acceptable.

After taking fire from the Somali kidnappers again Saturday night, the on-scene-commander decided he’d had enough.

Keeping his authority to act in the case of a clear and present danger to the hostage’s life and having heard nothing from Washington since yet another request to mount a rescue operation had been denied the day before, the Navy officer — unnamed in all media reports to date — decided the AK47 one captor had leveled at Philips’ back was a threat to the hostage’s life and ordered the NSWC team to take their shots.

Three rounds downrange later, all three brigands became enemy KIA and Philips was safe.

There is upside, downside, and spinside to the series of events over the last week that culminated in yesterday’s dramatic rescue of an American hostage.

Almost immediately following word of the rescue, the Obama administration and its supporters claimed victory against pirates in the Indian Ocean and declared that the dramatic end to the standoff put an end to questions of the inexperienced president’s toughness and decisiveness.

Despite the Obama administration’s (and its sycophants’) attempt to spin yesterday’s success as a result of bold, decisive leadership by the inexperienced president, the reality is nothing of the sort.

What should have been a standoff lasting only hours — as long as it took the USS Bainbridge and its team of NSWC operators to steam to the location — became an embarrassing four day and counting standoff between a ragtag handful of criminals with rifles and a U.S. Navy warship.

Your Old Dog
04-19-2009, 01:47 PM
I wonder if this thread will make it to 200 post?

tony ennis
04-19-2009, 02:10 PM
Maybe :-D

The Dutch intercepted a pirate mother ship a few days ago and threw the lot into the brig.

/hatsoff

They were using an interesting ship similar in size to the Bainbridge but equipped as an anti-aircraft boat.

RancherBill
04-19-2009, 02:37 PM
Originally Posted by BigBoy1
Having spoken to some SEAL pals here in Virginia Beach yesterday and asking why this thing dragged out for 4 days, I got the following:.............

It's the biggest piece of misinformation and political BS I've seen for a long time.

There is International Law, Maritime Law, US Law that says you just can't go around killing people even though they are committing a crime or because it seems like a popular idea at the time. It's the principle of reasonable force.

Their ROE were the same as any police officer in the US. Do nothing unless there is a clear imminent danger.

tony ennis
04-19-2009, 04:40 PM
Um, I think when bad guys have a hostage, and guns, and are threatening said hostage, ROE say headshots are ok.

oldtiffie
04-19-2009, 07:10 PM
Maybe :-D

The Dutch intercepted a pirate mother ship a few days ago and threw the lot into the brig.

/hatsoff

They were using an interesting ship similar in size to the Bainbridge but equipped as an anti-aircraft boat.

Was this the article?
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/19/world/africa/19pirates.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=dutch+%2B+pirates&st=nyt

Is it here?
http://query.nytimes.com/search/query?frow=0&n=10&srcht=a&query=dutch+%2B+pirates&srchst=nyt&hdlquery=&bylquery=&daterange=period&mon1=04&day1=01&year1=2009&mon2=04&day2=19&year2=2009&submit.x=32&submit.y=10

Here?
http://www.voanews.com/english/2009-04-19-voa9.cfm

http://www.voanews.com/english/2009-04-18-voa18.cfm

Probably sensible and good publicity but isn't it a bit late for what is essentially a problem for a long time. It does say a lot without saying much of substance at all - its not "spin" it it? Surely not.

Whether people like it or not, there are Laws and Rules appertaining to the sea and piracy as well as Rules of Engagement that have to be followed. These ROE are determined by which ever organisation or country the military is operating under - whether it be the US, NATO, UN - or what-ever. That's the "Rules of the game" and if you want to "play" you have to abide by the Rules and the decisions of the Referee.

Its not the first time that forces under NATO or the UN have had to stand by and just watch and let it happen.

The forces deployed are pretty thinly spread to be almost ineffective. Having them "standing off" just waiting for days or steaming a long way to an intercept or delivering captives to a port all take a lot of time. That time could be better spent "on-station".

I would bet that those behind the pirates would regard this episode as a very successful "probe" to see how the US and International forces re-act/ed and will adjust their strategies accordingly.

The pirates will have been seen to be heroes and winners against fearful odds by many and thus will garner a lot of support at "home" and "abroad" as well as any future "negotiations" - which is where it will end up eventually.

I expect that many are learning how the Brits felt when a lot of their "Empire" set about "pulling the tail" of the British lion. The French, Portuguese, Dutch, Russians, Italians and a few other "Great Powers" went through the same process.

This will take quite while to resolve "satisfactorily" (as a compromise) in both the short an longer terms - if it ever is (to be).

I'd bet that there is serious "Diplomacy" going on with regard to an "Exit Strategy" by and for many who can see the problems of another or more "involement/s".

BillH
04-19-2009, 07:14 PM
If I was the world emperor, the ocean would be red.

tony ennis
04-19-2009, 07:26 PM
I would bet that those behind the pirates would regard this episode as a very successful "probe"

Not at all. No one is saying, "Go test the American." Instead the pirates tried and failed. Which isn't to say they can't learn from the experience.


...adjust their strategies accordingly.

Of course. Measures and counter-measures is the way of these things. The pirates have already adjusted by using mother ships once the tankers moved farther from the coast. The warlord who doesn't adapt will become extinct. And not necessarily by US force, directly. Instead, if a warlord doesn't have enough income, another warlord will displace him.


but isn't it a bit late for what is essentially a problem for a long time.

Curiously so. But it's a first step.

I skimmed a few of thse articles. The one I read previously didn't mention that they let the pirates go. Amazing.

oil mac
04-19-2009, 07:34 PM
Its really getting worse, As the days wear on this piracy lark is getting more &more like a black,evil, advanced downmarket Hollywood version of the Muppet show with, Violence, fear of innocent people being killed, humiliation for the more civilised nations, threats, rocket attacks on shipping
,thugs and scum, making vast amounts of money, disruption to trade, and a vast oncost to the taxpayers in the west, Not forgetting the knock on effect of international crime & banditry And what is the latest feeble response? Just allow the perpatrators of two of the gravest of crimes,known to humanity, Namely kidnapping & forced slavery of their fellow man, walk free, Because the E.U. has no jurisdiction to detain the so and sos! Will the members of that imbicilic set up never learn, The powers that be will waken up when it is too late!

oldtiffie
04-19-2009, 08:51 PM
One item that is conspicuous by its absence is that about the pirate that was captured and as I recall was on "Bainbridge".

Where is he and what is to be done about him?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/17/world/africa/17pirates.html?_r=1&scp=3&sq=bainbridge+%2B+pirate&st=nyt

And:

Shipping companies victimized by the bandits have been wary of a military confrontation that could disrupt the crucial shipping lanes that run from the Suez Canal to the Indian Ocean. Experts said that companies would still rather pay large ransoms than arm merchant crews and pay hefty liability insurance premiums. In 2008 alone, experts estimate that merchant shipping companies paid some $40 million to the Somali pirates.

Rather than arm their crews, most major merchant lines with ships transiting the Gulf of Aden have contracts with professional crisis teams that are called when hijackings occur.

These teams include former Special Forces commandos and trained hostage negotiators who deal with the hijackers and their ransom demands, as well as with deliveries of supplies to ships during lengthy negotiations, the payment of ransoms (usually in United States 100-dollar bills) and the safe release of hostages.

Pentagon planners are beginning to adjust the American arsenal to deal with the threat posed by pirates and other stateless, low-tech foes. Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates recently announced plans to outfit the Navy with more combat vessels for patrolling coastlines and to slash programs building ships designed for open sea battles against traditional rivals.

The Office of Naval Intelligence hosted the Horn of Africa Piracy Conference in Maryland this week, an unusual gathering of 300 American and foreign government officials, along with experts from academia and representatives from the shipping industry.

From:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9500E6DF133CF933A25757C0A96F9C8B 63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1

But very little regarding that pirate on Bainbridge. Or is it another "hot potato" to be dealt with in secret?

Whether people like it or not, the Arabs, Islamics and most people from the Near, Middle and Far East as well as Eastern Europe, Africa and Asia are past masters at negotiation, tactics, strategies, and "insurgency" who are well able to deal with issues in the short, medium and longer terms. The "do it now" and "I want/need it now" are not normally issues for them. They have worn down many other "more powerful" (and impatient) adversaries before. They are willing to absorb - and deal out - very heavy losses.

There are ample current and past examples of this - as will be found out in dealing with an "up-set" and "off-side" South America.

There are no early or easy answers.

But I am still interested in what is happening with regard to that pirate that surrendered to and last I heard was still aboard Bainbridge.

gnm109
04-19-2009, 09:20 PM
It's sort of a catch 22. The ROE require that there be imminent danger before firing on the pirates. Had they gone ahead and killed Captain Phillips, presumably the imminent danger would have passed and there would be no right under international law to fire at that point either.

The pirates won't stop until someone starts killing them. I mean all of them - every last one.

Dunc
04-19-2009, 09:20 PM
Paraphrasing an old one to wit: those who ignore history are bound to have it repeat.
Well...
Britain - back when it was a maritime force to be reckoned with - had, imo,an ideal solution: string em up from their own yardarm. Sure eliminates repeat offenders!

tony ennis
04-19-2009, 09:26 PM
I think there is an easy answer right now. Make it impossible for the mother ships to operate. That will limit the pirates to operating close to shore. That doesn't involve fighting an insurgency or getting particularly entwined.

We can do it if we chose. It comes down to that choice. Do, or do not. Waiting for NATO or the UN (lulz) to do anything about it is silly.

Regarding the one captured pirate. Anything can become of him. He can be lobbed back into Somalia, he could spend most of his life in prison in the US, he could be granted asylum somewhere.

The question is, what do we do with the next 1,000 we capture. Then, the next 10,000? We may have to release these guys simply because we don't want to house them.

John Stevenson
04-19-2009, 09:28 PM
Best way to deal with pirates is to make them read this thread.
they'll get that bored they'll stay home and take up knitting...............







.

dp
04-19-2009, 09:43 PM
One item that is conspicuous by its absence is that about the pirate that was captured and as I recall was on "Bainbridge".

Where is he and what is to be done about him?

From the 13th:

http://www.tmcnet.com/usubmit/2009/04/13/4128563.htm

At the time of that interview the 4th pirate's disposition was in the hands of the US Justice Department. Hadn't been determined yet if he would go to Kenya or the US to face charges.

And this from today:

http://www.lufkindailynews.com/hp/content/news/stories/2009/04/19/pirate_patrol.html

Still on the USS Boxer and the disposition seems to be to fly the teen to the US for prosecution. That should provide great courtroom drama for the coming summer.

pressurerelief
04-19-2009, 09:46 PM
And now back to machining.....

Three things I shy away from discussing here, as the song says, "Politics, Religion, and Her"

P/R

oldtiffie
04-19-2009, 09:59 PM
If I were a total cynic - heaven forbid - I might be tempted to regard this as a "good story gone wrong" about being seen to be "doing something".

It might just be a smoke screen to get the "South America/n" and the pending "solution" to the US "auto industry" (and others) problems - all are which are to be "sorted out" in the near future - off the front pages.

If I recall properly, the US 2009/10 budget (which will include the "forward estimates" of the economy) is to be brought down in October. It will be an interesting read. Not much mention lately though. And I guess it will have changed more than a little since January.

The financial "rescues" and perhaps "ordered/orderly" bankruptcies have to be resolved shortly.

I wonder how the "piracy" issue fits in.

I have an interest as what happens in or to the US has world-wide "knock-on" and "trickle-down" as well as "ripples on a pond" effects.

oldtiffie
04-19-2009, 10:54 PM
Originally Posted by oldtiffie
One item that is conspicuous by its absence is that about the pirate that was captured and as I recall was on "Bainbridge".

Where is he and what is to be done about him?


From the 13th:

http://www.tmcnet.com/usubmit/2009/04/13/4128563.htm

At the time of that interview the 4th pirate's disposition was in the hands of the US Justice Department. Hadn't been determined yet if he would go to Kenya or the US to face charges.

And this from today:

http://www.lufkindailynews.com/hp/content/news/stories/2009/04/19/pirate_patrol.html

Still on the USS Boxer and the disposition seems to be to fly the teen to the US for prosecution. That should provide great courtroom drama for the coming summer.

Thanks Dennis as that answered some/most questions.

But there does seem to be a lot of holes in the contingency plans that are required for this sort of situation.

There seems to be a tacit admission of just not "being ready" and "sorting it out as we meet it or as we go along" as well as inadequate resources for the job.

I wonder why the "Kenya" option was considered - and why it may have been shelved?

dp
04-19-2009, 11:06 PM
International law in cases of piracy allows either the vessel's flag nation or the nation where the offenders hail from to prosecute. And it seems that laws regarding piracy are among the earliest to be adopted internationally.

oldtiffie
04-19-2009, 11:16 PM
Thanks Dennis.

Now that seems to infer that the surviving pirate was from Kenya. I thought he was from "Somalia" - or was he a resident of or sailed from or on a boat from Somalia but a citizen of Kenya?

My guess is that a lot of people will wish that this problem will go away.

But I'd also guess that some will see it as in their best interests if/that it doesn't.

This pirate may well be a sort of Sacrificial Lamb (??) or a pawn in a high-stakes but very "private game".

It will be interesting to see what sort of justice is meted out - and where - and when.

dp
04-19-2009, 11:25 PM
This pirate may well be a sort of Sacrificial Lamb (??) or a pawn in a high-stakes but very "private game".

It will be interesting to see what sort of justice is meted out - and where - and when.

I think it would be in everyone's interest to bring him to the US, rehabilitate him, and make him a productive member of a decent and ordered society. He stands to make a killing (pardon then pun) in reality shows and pop-TV. And it would end for all time the nonsense notion that crime does not pay. Obama should pardon him, and Madonna should adopt him.

Given what is known about his life experiences so far he's a model citizen of Somalia right now and has no proper sense of right/wrong at the world level. He's young. His compass can be fixed. If he were a 3rd generation mob boss and slave trader I'd have an entirely different view.

oldtiffie
04-20-2009, 12:07 AM
Thanks Dennis.

I can just about see the 3-ring circus (and the clowns) as well as P T Barnum in the wings ready to take up where he left off.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P._T._Barnum

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3_Ring_Circus

And who said that vaudeville was dead? Or is it to be a pantomime or a "Passion Play" (and who is to play God - and who wouldn't?).


.........................
Obama should pardon him, and Madonna should adopt him.

And Michael Jackson can be his mentor or "Guiding/Shining Light".

oldtiffie
04-20-2009, 06:53 AM
And they are still being caught and let go ....................

http://www.voanews.com/english/2009-04-19-voa9.cfm

moldmonkey
04-20-2009, 07:05 AM
Now that seems to infer that the surviving pirate was from Kenya. I thought he was from "Somalia" - or was he a resident of or sailed from or on a boat from Somalia but a citizen of Kenya?


I believe that is because there isn't a real government in Somalia at least not one reconized by the US. I wonder why not The Hague, like war criminals?

oldtiffie
04-20-2009, 08:19 AM
Thanks Jon.

My interest in Kenya in this political aspect was the President Obama's connections to/with Kenya.

I am NOT inferring anything improper at all, but the "Kenya" option just seemed to disappear all of a sudden.

I am merely following upon Dennis post (my emphasis) which agreed with the situation then as I understood it:



Originally Posted by oldtiffie
One item that is conspicuous by its absence is that about the pirate that was captured and as I recall was on "Bainbridge".

Where is he and what is to be done about him?


From the 13th:

http://www.tmcnet.com/usubmit/2009/04/13/4128563.htm

At the time of that interview the 4th pirate's disposition was in the hands of the US Justice Department. Hadn't been determined yet if he would go to Kenya or the US to face charges.

And this from today:

http://www.lufkindailynews.com/hp/content/news/stories/2009/04/19/pirate_patrol.html

Still on the USS Boxer and the disposition seems to be to fly the teen to the US for prosecution. That should provide great courtroom drama for the coming summer.

If that were the case and the captive pirate was not a Kenyan national, then the "Kenya option" was not or should not have been an option.

The Hague is not an option as that is for the trial of (usually) very high-profile alleged war criminals alleged to be guilty of genocide or crimes against humanity. I can't see that applying to this captive or any pirate thus far.

Next, using sizable warships at all let alone in that area of the world against poorly armed pirates in small craft seems to be cracking a walnut with a sledge hammer.

Catching them and (having to) let them go is bordering on the ridiculous and farcical.

One off my prior posts included a clip that said that the merchant fleet would rather the military stayed out of it and let them sort it out in their own way.

Further, it seems that patrol craft better suited to that purpose in that part or similar parts of the world are a long way off.

I have heard some very good reports about some of the later and better Royal navy (RN) and Honk Kong patrol boats that were ideal for this role - with machine guns and a rapid-firing 3" gun. I have seen one of those 3" QF guns and their control system and it is one very awe-inspiring and effective weapon.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peacock_class_patrol_vessel

It seems that the US is or has exported some very effective patrol craft:
http://www.hamiltonjet.co.nz/jet_applications/patrol_boats

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-137670370.html

It seems odd that with that sort of expertise that the US is using very expensive Destroyers and Frigates that might be better deployed elsewhere instead of using Patrol Boats such as these.

tmarks11
04-20-2009, 09:54 AM
It seems odd that with that sort of expertise that the US is using very expensive Destroyers and Frigates that might be better deployed elsewhere instead of using Patrol Boats such as these.

And where are the coastal patrol craft (PC) going to pull in for resupply and fuel? They do not have a long on-station time; better suited for friendly waters where they can pull in every week.

A frigate can (and does) patrol a given area of water for up to 6 months at a time without the need to pull into port. Resupply at sea is much easier (and less dangerous) in a large craft then in a small craft. The frigate can sprint at AAIII for a long time without running out of fuel.... unlike the PC.

And helicopters are definitely needed for this type of patrolling; most ships in interdiction ops spend a majority of their time running down and boarding. And the high speed, distance surveillance offered by a helo makes the job easier.


It seems that the US is or has exported some very effective patrol craft:
http://www.hamiltonjet.co.nz/jet_app...s/patrol_boats
Those are a bit small for the mission. Just because you are fighting somebody who has a knife doesn't mean you should throw your M-16 away and meet him mano-a-mano.

This is about the smallest boat for the job, and IMHO, it is too small for this job (not helo capable):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyclone_class


My interest in Kenya in this political aspect was the President Obama's connections to/with Kenya.
The agreement with Kenya to try pirates captured (note: NOT arrested) in that area of the world pre-dated the current President. Here is a news clip of a pirate trial from 2006:

http://www.news24.com/News24/Africa/News/0,,2-11-1447_1876086,00.html

oldtiffie
04-20-2009, 10:13 AM
Thanks tmarks11 for a well-reasoned, well-presented constructive and instructive post.

Appreciated.

tony ennis
04-20-2009, 01:31 PM
I don't think it would too much of a stretch to add few helo-capable tenders to support the Cyclones. Or maybe a Harrier-capable craft.

The US patrol craft linked above are too small. I think the Cyclone class is the right size with respect to speed, firepower, and crew size. I wonder how long a Cyclone stay on-station.

dp
04-20-2009, 01:57 PM
The US has a very small maritime commerce fleet. On any one day how many of them are in the problem zone? Any reason they cannot be formed up into a flotilla and guarded by a provisioned warship and oiler has escaped me.

I don't think this problem is going to last long enough to warrant developing tactical carrier/jump ship capability, but I can see where a diesel carrier with helo, vtol jet, blimps, and UAV capability would be a powerful tool while the problem is being solved shoreside.

RancherBill
04-20-2009, 02:27 PM
Any reason they cannot be formed up into a flotilla and guarded by a provisioned warship and oiler has escaped me.

This seems reasonable to me.

There was a program about a Mighty Ships Emma Maersk (http://watch.discoverychannel.ca/mighty-ships/mighty-ships-tregurtha/#clip132674) on TV. It ended up waiting at anchor to enter the Suez Canal. It is one way traffic. It would seem reasonable that they assemble out in the ocean somewhere and then convoy to the Suez for direct entry. Similarly, they can leave the area in a convoy. On the show they showed their pirate watch and fire hose drill, it was interesting.

I don't know for sure, but, I think there is only one convoy per day in the suez each direction. They must go slowly, 5 knots IIRC, so they don't create bow waves and erode the canal.

Yankee1
04-20-2009, 02:50 PM
I guess no one cared to take the time to see what the Italian media had to say about the pirates. It seems they had a reporter on the scene when the incident occurred. Not wanting to interpret this myself I suggested that you review it yourselves. The ships that were involved were different from what was reported here.
Yankee1

SDL
04-20-2009, 02:54 PM
I guess no one cared to take the time to see what the Italian media had to say about the pirates. It seems they had a reporter on the scene when the incident occurred. Not wanting to interpret this myself I suggested that you review it yourselves. The ships that were involved were different from what was reported here.
Yankee1

Have you got a link please?

Steve Larner