News Somali Pirates seize super tanker

[kasse]

Well done, India!

 

[LowlyPion]

They know where their land bases are but apparently it would take a UN resolution to legally attack them there.

I'm sure if the pirates keep it up they can get enough countries fed up with them to go along with that.

The Somali government could also permit such actions. A little Foreign aid and skids can be greased I'd think.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

The Somali government could also permit such actions. A little Foreign aid and skids can be greased I'd think.

There is no Somali government. The closest thing is probably the Transitional Federal Government which does not actually control the country. I'm guessing Joe the Pirate is behind in his taxes too.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_Somalia"

 

[BobG]

The early precursor to Somali pirates: http://www.illegal-fishing.info/item_single.php?item=news&item_id=145&approach_id=13

Resulting in fisherman finding a new way to make a living: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2008267714_pirates15.html

Of course, at first the pirates mainly went after foreign fishing boats, slowly expanding to other small targets, and now have reached the point of being able to threaten oil tankers further from the coast than ever before.

Now Somali pirates obtain around $100 million a year in ransoms. Not quite breaking even for the $300 million in losses due to foreign fishing, but getting closer. Now that they've become a large enough threat, I doubt they'll ever actually reach the break even point, though.

 

[devil-fire]

I think even large ships have been at risk of pirate attack in some areas for a long time. A gas powered grappling hook is all it would take to get up onto the deck of most large ships.

From what I have read about piracy, it is mostly the usual lawless thugs who are in the business. Mostly independent organizations of people who want something and see an opportunity to get it.

mgb_phys is right, pirates try to loot the crew of money and belonging that can be loaded onto their speed boats, not the cargo of the ship itself. Could you imagine how difficult it would be for 25 people from a coastal fishing city to off-load thousands of tons of grain? Assuming their city has a port that could accommodate that size of ship, and assuming the local police wouldn't stop them and assuming the pirates aren't concern about being arrested when they get back to shore, their best option for unloading grain would be to throw the grain over the side of the ship one bucket full at a time.

You also have to remember these are just common criminals in a country that doesn't have the police man power to investigate crimes that take place foreign vessels, so fireing missiles into pirate bases... that is just straight out of an 80s B action movie. It wouldn't make sense to try to bomb a drug dealer's base (aka his house or apartment) because it would kill a lot more people then are involved in drug dealing but mostly because a police raid would do a much better job. I mean for the cost of 1 UAV and 1 missie, you could pay the wage of the entire Somalian police force for a year.

The best and most money efficient solution would be to help the Somalis bring their country out of lawlessness (at least the coastal areas where the pirates operate out of) but that would take years and it would just be a complicated arrangement to make sure things are done right. Also it scores popularity points for a country to send out multi-million dollar ships to patrol around searching for pirate activity when otherwise they would just be floating there doing nothing.

 

[BobG]

There is no Somali government. The closest thing is probably the Transitional Federal Government which does not actually control the country. I'm guessing Joe the Pirate is behind in his taxes too.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_Somalia"

The best and most money efficient solution would be to help the Somalis bring their country out of lawlessness (at least the coastal areas where the pirates operate out of) but that would take years and it would just be a complicated arrangement to make sure things are done right. Also it scores popularity points for a country to send out multi-million dollar ships to patrol around searching for pirate activity when otherwise they would just be floating there doing nothing.

Don't count on bringing Somalia out lawlessness any time soon.

Somalia has more tribal factions fighting for power than Afghanistan does. Somalia has been in civil war since 1991. Afghanistan since at least 1980 (with a break in warfare imposed by the Taliban, thanks to outside financial backing).

Factions in the Somali Civil War

 

[kasse]

Somali islamists promise to fight the pirates and protect the ships in the region.

 

[edward]

The more money they collect in ransom the more sophisticated their weapons will be the next time.

Crews only need a way to keep the small boats at a distance. The older TOW missiles had a range of something like 3000 meters.

A Norwegian company is now routing its 90+ ships around Africa rather than using the Suez canal.

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/africa/11/18/pirates.norway/

I have a gut feeling the USA is waiting for a private security force to step in.

 

[LowlyPion]

I have a gut feeling the USA is waiting for a private security force to step in.

That might be more problematical as opposed to a say a United Nations Safe Sea Keeping Force.

For instance a private firm would be subject to litigation more easily for damage and death to pirates, or for that matter the ships they were protecting if they failed to do so.

Moreover, a United Nations force would likely not lack for the authority to attack any land bases either, which is ultimately the best way to deny them any respite.

 

[Borek]

The older TOW missiles had a range of something like 3000 meters.

I would prefer some machine gun, 7.62 or even 12 mm. TOW is one shot and it is effective against armored vehicles, that's not the case.

 

[Office_Shredder]

For instance a private firm would be subject to litigation more easily for damage and death to pirates, or for that matter the ships they were protecting if they failed to do so.

Subject to litigation through what? The US suggested ships hire their own security... there's no government in Somalia that can enforce any kind of lawsuit (and hence no international treaties that Somalians fall under) and in international waters, I'm not sure what the rule is.

On the issue of good guy/bad guy pirates... well, they're not good guys, but
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/11/19/world/main4616998.shtml?tag=topStories;secondStory

 

[jreelawg]

That might be more problematical as opposed to a say a United Nations Safe Sea Keeping Force.

For instance a private firm would be subject to litigation more easily for damage and death to pirates, or for that matter the ships they were protecting if they failed to do so.

Moreover, a United Nations force would likely not lack for the authority to attack any land bases either, which is ultimately the best way to deny them any respite.

The thing is, we have aided the warlord responsible for preventing stability. It is part of our effort to crush Islamic extremism. The problem is that the instability is makeing the place a living hell. Of coarse they are another country who likes to stone people to death for crimes and what not, so the problem is complex. We want to get rid of the "Islamic extremist culture"
, but our efforts only make more of them, and keep the place in chaos.

http://www.hiiraan.com/op2/2008/nov/obama_policy_options_in_somalia.aspx
The pirates haven't stolen anything from the U.S., why should we use action to help Iranian corporations and such.

If we use action we will also bring attention to the millions who are facing starvation. When people see the suffering and then learn that we have supported the warlord, it will strike up more anti americanism. Our best bet is to pretend they don't even exist. Certainly bombing famine ridden villages wouldn't look good for us.

 

[edward]

I would prefer some machine gun, 7.62 or even 12 mm. TOW is one shot and it is effective against armored vehicles, that's not the case.

The point is to keep the small boats away from the tankers and not get involved in a fire fight. I mentioned TOW only as as example because of it's 3000m range. If it can kill a tank it can kill anything that the pirates have in the water.

There were 5 series of TOW missiles produced and we have many of them left because we no longer anticipate an armored ground battle.

We also have a number of other missiles that would work as well.



Fire a missile over their bow at 3000 meters out and they won't want to come any closer.

 

[edward]

The pirarcy needs to be stopped now before they make enough money to get sophisticated weapons.

There is no firm deterrent, that's why the pirate attacks are continuing. The criminal activities are flourishing because the risks are low and the rewards are extremely high," Choong said.

Tuesday's incidents bring the number of attacks in Somali waters this year to 95, with 39 ships hijacked.

Thai government spokesman Nattawut Sai-gua said he had not been informed of the development. He said officials are checking with their diplomatic missions in the region.

Choong said 17 vessels remain in the hands of pirates along with more than 300 crew, including a Ukrainian ship loaded with arms and a Saudi Arabian supertanker carrying $US100 million ($A153.35 million) in crude.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/pirates-strike-again-17-ships-held/2008/11/19/1226770531523.html

 

[LowlyPion]

Fire a missile over their bow at 3000 meters out and they won't want to come any closer.

A Javelin would do it. But why bother to miss? Take out the Bridge. And then negotiate from there.

 

[Proton Soup]

For sure, who needs the all those sea creatures anyways.

no worries, it floats, and as soon as they open fire or launch a rocket-propelled grapnel, it all goes up in smoke.

i think some cruise ships actually have water cannons to use as defense. but they could use flamethrowers or industrial strength silly string for all i care. whatever it takes to neutralize the threat.

 

[jreelawg]

Why not use non lethal EM weapons. They could be operated from a computer from a well secured location on the ship. They could either use the one that makes your skin feel like it is burning, or they could use the new one that exploits the frey effect made public recently that beams sound directly into peoples brains at intense levels.

 

[jreelawg]

Savage thinks we ought to kidnap the families of the pirates and threaten to kill them if they don't stop. Perhaps we should just nuke the whole continent of Africa.

 

[devil-fire]

The water cannons do a fine job, the problem is not being able to detect the pirate ships before they are on board or at least knowing it is a pirate ship instead of a fishing ship that happens to be unusually close.

I think anti-tank missiles, torpedoes, the navy seals, 12 inch cannons, cruise missiles, F-22 Raptors, Abrams tanks, helicopter gun ships, and EM non-lethal weapons would all be hugely expensive to equip every ship in the area with and would cause more problems then they would solve.

Bombing their bases? These aren't paramilitary. They have more in common with the Crypts, Bloods and Mafia then they have with the Tamil Tigers. Could you imagine if a barber shop in New York was hit with a cruise missile because it was a base used by the Mafia? You could bet New Yorkers wouldn't be vary happy with Obama after that one.

 

[LowlyPion]

The water cannons do a fine job, the problem is not being able to detect the pirate ships before they are on board or at least knowing it is a pirate ship instead of a fishing ship that happens to be unusually close.

I think anti-tank missiles, torpedoes, the navy seals, 12 inch cannons, cruise missiles, F-22 Raptors, Abrams tanks, helicopter gun ships, and EM non-lethal weapons would all be hugely expensive to equip every ship in the area with and would cause more problems then they would solve.

Bombing their bases? These aren't paramilitary. They have more in common with the Crypts, Bloods and Mafia then they have with the Tamil Tigers. Could you imagine if a barber shop in New York was hit with a cruise missile because it was a base used by the Mafia? You could bet New Yorkers wouldn't be vary happy with Obama after that one.

I'd say if the people in Somalia aren't excited by metal rain then they might want to rethink embracing a pirate economy.

Of course our own government has more devastating weapons at its disposal than cruise missiles for the Mafia. They have the IRS.

 

[NeoDevin]

I'd say if the people in Somalia aren't excited by metal rain then they might want to rethink embracing a pirate economy.

So you think your country should be able to decide their laws? I'd say the easier action would be to avoid those areas frequented by pirates.

 

[LowlyPion]

So you think your country should be able to decide their laws? I'd say the easier action would be to avoid those areas frequented by pirates.

The latest Saudi Tanker was taken more than 700 km out in the Indian Ocean.

Something has to police them. This would look like the perfect thing for the UN to deal with. I don't expect to decide the laws in their country - that's up to them. If they choose to act in anti-social ways however they should as well be ready to live with the consequences of it. If Piracy is their national policy then that would look like their problem. If it's not then they must do something about it.

I'd offer them the same advice that I would offer kids biking into the sides of birck walls - if it hurts stop doing it.

 

[NeoDevin]

I'd say if the people in Somalia aren't excited by metal rain then they might want to rethink embracing a pirate economy.

Something has to police them.

There's a difference between policing international waters and "metal rain" on the "people in Somalia".

 

[LowlyPion]

There's a difference between policing international waters and "metal rain" on the "people in Somalia".

Right you are. One is a metaphor.

 

[turbo]

So you think your country should be able to decide their laws? I'd say the easier action would be to avoid those areas frequented by pirates.

To avoid the pirates, ships would have to avoid using the Suez Canal to get to ME and eastern ports. This is not inconsequential, especially for European shippers, since it involves routing ship traffic all the way around Africa.

 

[mgb_phys]

The latest Saudi Tanker was taken more than 100 km out in the Indian Ocean.
...
Something has to police them. This would look like the perfect thing for the UN to deal with. I don't expect to decide the laws in their country

Strickly speaking it's only piracy if it's in international waters.
Any ship military or civil has a right to do pretty much anything they want against pirates.
That's why it's normaly a good idea to stop when a coastgaurd or navy vessel asks you.

Upto now it hasn't been a big priority, a typical raid on a freighter gets away with <$5K and so the ship owners weren't interested in fitting $M of weapons and counter measures. There has been a low level of violence, if the crew don't fight back the pirates don't kill anyone so insurers have been wary about putting trigger happy blackhawk mercenaries with rockets on an oil tanker.

It's also been viewed as somebody elses problem. why should a country risk a $Bn warship chasing down pirates who attacked a ship that is registered in Liberia to avoid paying taxes to the country that paid for the warship?
The Royal (ie British) Navy was rather embarrased at being ordered not to deliberatly engage pirates. The concern was that a lucky shot from a pirate would damage some equipement on a very expensive warship and mean it was unable to perform it's main and more important task (cruising up and down the gulf in case Al-Queda turns out to have a battleship).

Hoping to cash in on the headlines, BAE are suddenly claiming that piracy is a role for a new class of very expensive frigets it would like the Navy to order. The problem with current wars is that it's difficult to justify building battleships to fight terrorism, so battleship makers are suffering. And since the current ships were only built to take on the Russian Navy they obviously wouldn't be upto dealing with some speed boats.

 

[LowlyPion]

To avoid the pirates, ships would have to avoid using the Suez Canal to get to ME and eastern ports. This is not inconsequential, especially for European shippers, since it involves routing ship traffic all the way around Africa.

Yes, but ...

The announcement followed Monday's news that the 300,000-metric-ton oil tanker Sirius Star was captured by pirates in the Indian Ocean over the weekend. The hijacking took place more than 720 km (450 miles) off the Kenyan port of Mombasa, well south of the zone patrolled by international warships in an effort to clamp down on the pirates.

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/africa/11/18/pirates.norway/

That's already a pretty far chunk of ocean away.

 

[turbo]

Yes, but ...

That's already a pretty far chunk of ocean away.

Too bad the A-10 warthog has such a short range. With its Gatling cannon and a load of 8 Mavericks, it would be a great anti piracy tool. The cannon slugs are depleted uranium for armor-penetration, and would turn the Somali "mother ships" to Swiss cheese in seconds.

 

[edward]

They are now using priviouly capture ships to base the smaller boats farther out at sea.

Yesterday, an Indian warship destroyed a pirate "mothership" in the Gulf of Aden. The Indian navy said its frigate, one of the numerous international warships dispatched to patrol the waters around the Horn of Africa, had approached the suspicious vessel on Tuesday evening.

It turned out to be a previously captured ship being used by pirates as a base to launch their speedboats far out to sea.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/20/piracy-somalia1

MOGADISHU, Somalia — Somalia's increasingly brazen pirates are building sprawling stone houses, cruising in luxury cars, marrying beautiful women — even hiring caterers to prepare Western-style food for their hostages.

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2008/nov/19/pirates-live-high-life-transform-villages-boomtown/

 

[LowlyPion]

Too bad the A-10 warthog has such a short range. With its Gatling cannon and a load of 8 Mavericks, it would be a great anti piracy tool. The cannon slugs are depleted uranium for armor-penetration, and would turn the Somali "mother ships" to Swiss cheese in seconds.

On a tanker there would be plenty of room to land an Apache. Not a lot of topside rigging to foul the props. After wiping out a few bands of pirates and mother ships then they could all just carry dummied up Apache silhouettes and they would never be certain what they would be dealing with.