News Somali Pirates seize super tanker

[lisab]

So what is stopping us deploying some battleships out to these areas and blasting these pirates out of the water?

Sounds like a silly question I know, but I honestly don't know why any world government is willing to stand for this so easily.

Maybe the occasional million-dollar ransom is cheaper than deploying even one battleship? Just a guess.

 

[JaredJames]

They would need to fire at the Navy vessel first - not likely to happen.

Exactly. So stick a few of them out there to escort the ships through.

 

[JaredJames]

Maybe the occasional million-dollar ransom is cheaper than deploying even one battleship? Just a guess.

Then we're back to stationing a few troops aboard for the journey through the canal.

One thing is certain, these ransoms are becoming more than 'occasional'.

 

[russ_watters]

So what is stopping us deploying some battleships out to these areas and blasting these pirates out of the water?

Sounds like a silly question I know, but I honestly don't know why any world government is willing to stand for this so easily.

Well first we'd need to get us some battleships, but beyond that, I don't know. I certainly think we could at least send a few smaller warships and blow a few out of the water (pirates still aboard).

 

[russ_watters]

Maybe the occasional million-dollar ransom is cheaper than deploying even one battleship? Just a guess.

So it's about the money? Should it be?

 

[JaredJames]

Well first we'd need to get us some battleships, but beyond that, I don't know. I certainly think we could at least send a few smaller warships and blow a few out of the water (pirates still aboard).

When I said battleships I was referring to any form of Navy boat. Apparantely it's a specific type of navy boat. So I'll clarify, why don't the navy just send a few boats?

 

[russ_watters]

They would need to fire at the Navy vessel first - not likely to happen.

It does happen occasionally, and even when it does, they don't get destroyed. Frustrating...

...but stepping back, why do they need to fire on us first? Yeah, apparently them's the rules, but why?

 

[JaredJames]

So it's about the money? Should it be?

If it's about money, I'd rather see the Navy deployed to an area like this than spread out doing sweet f-a elsewhere.

 

[JaredJames]

...but stepping back, why do they need to fire on us first? Yeah, apparently them's the rules, but why?

That's actually my thinking.

I see no valid reason why they need to fire first. If you identify them approaching another boat and they don't respond to your resquests to "kindly bugger off", why should they not be allowed to sink them?

By requiring them to fire first it means you risk taking damage (whether a person or the ship) and you also give them a 'yard stick' so they know what they can and can't do.

Actually, seeing another boat filled with people carrying weapons would be enough to warrant me giving at least a warning shot at them to get the hell out of the way.

 

[lisab]

So it's about the money?

I have no idea who's making the decision to allow these pirates to remain active, or what criteria are used. But I'm not naive enough to think money is not a consideration.

Should it be?

In an ideal world? No, but see above about naivete.

 

[talk2glenn]

If it's about money, I'd rather see the Navy deployed to an area like this than spread out doing sweet f-a elsewhere.

Actually, the US and EU have deployed an entire fleet. It's hard to find good info, but a google search will turn up the occasional article. Famously, the USS Ashland recently returned to home port with a pirate prisoner, ostensibly to be tried in federal court, but the judicial branch is having a hell of a time figuring out how to apply statutes that haven't been used in 200 years.

http://www.euronews.net/2008/12/23/german-navy-joins-anti-pirate-fleet/

http://hamptonroads.com/2010/11/federal-courts-norfolk-wrestle-over-definition-piracy?cid=mc

Like any modern multi-national military venture, the joint US/EU fleet its mostly symbolic and paralyzed by bureaucratic inefficiency. At the end of the day, if you're expecting them to start sinking Somali skiffs unilaterally, you're expecting too much. But they at least make some effort.

 

[Argentum Vulpes]

Well first we'd need to get us some battleships, but beyond that, I don't know. I certainly think we could at least send a few smaller warships and blow a few out of the water (pirates still aboard).

The US navy technically doesn't have any battleships (Iowa class). However of the four Iowas built two (BB-61, BB-63) could be reactivated by Pub.L. 109-163, of the National Defense Authorization Act 2006.

And yes there are several smaller hulls that would be an effective deterrent, or think bigger and send a carrier group.

 

[mheslep]

Actually, the US and EU have deployed an entire fleet. ...

A task force, maybe. The entire US http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Fifth_Fleet" will hardly have have abandoned its job of patrolling the Persian Gulf and Red Sea all for Somali pirates.

 

[zomgwtf]

A task force, maybe. The entire US http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Fifth_Fleet" will hardly have have abandoned its job of patrolling the Persian Gulf and Red Sea all for Somali pirates.

Yeah from the wiki page it states combined task force 151 is responsible for Somali pirates

 

[zomgwtf]

We have to look at why the pirating is such an issue. In my mind it seems simple: A non-effective govn't. The Somali govn't would quickly be toppled if joint forces were not there protecting their asses. Since there is NO effective govn't in Somlia it's automatically a haven for crime.

An international ground force, spreading further than just African forces, needs to be deployed to Somalia and fight to regain control OR all forces should be pulled out and let the rebels take over and form a new govn't. An effective govn't will be needed and forces will need to fight on the ground in Somalia in order to stop the piracy occurring. Patrolling the waters clearly will not work.

Of course the nations with the most powerful militaries in the world (i.e. NATO) are scared due to the lessons learned during the first time American forces were in Somalia (specifically Battle of Mogadishu). I believe last year even Russia called for a ground force to attack Somalia in order to stem piracy and help the nation.

 

[JaredJames]

An international ground force, spreading further than just African forces, needs to be deployed to Somalia and fight to regain control OR all forces should be pulled out and let the rebels take over and form a new govn't. An effective govn't will be needed and forces will need to fight on the ground in Somalia in order to stop the piracy occurring. Patrolling the waters clearly will not work.

But if you show you won't tolerate pirates by putting marines on ships or using the Navy to escort them through the canal, it would certainly stem the flow.

Blow them out of the water and see how long they continue trying to hijack ships.

Looking at it, I'd say they know full well other countries are reluctant to act and that they use this to their advantage.

 

[zomgwtf]

But if you show you won't tolerate pirates by putting marines on ships or using the Navy to escort them through the canal, it would certainly stem the flow.

Blow them out of the water and see how long they continue trying to hijack ships.

Looking at it, I'd say they know full well other countries are reluctant to act and that they use this to their advantage.

It's not so easy, Americans are already not particularly liked in this part of the world. Imagine they started shooting boats outta the water. Since al Qaeda operates in the area it's kinda important to not unnecessarily piss them off too much.

The reason I say it's not that easy is because these pirates consider themselves somewhat of a 'protective' force for the Somalians... The amount of money they take in ransoms is miniscule to how much fish they lose. I've read numbers at a few hundred million dollars. I'm not entirely sure how the Somali public looks at the pirating but I'm extremely doubtful they'd be happy to hear that American forces are shooting Somali ships out of the water... especially when they consider themselves to be doing a good thing.

A ground force to help the govn't get back control would in my mind be viewed differently, but it has to be done properly as in Iraq or Afghanistan. (regardless of what people say the support for American forces in these nations has increased and is quite high according to polls)

 

[JaredJames]

What the people perceive as a good thing is irrelevant. These people are hijacking a boat and using threats to force money out of people/companies.

I don't care if Americans or any country isn't liked that much. It doesn't give them the right to commit these acts.

The fact that we aren't defending our ships says exactly how much we value them. It won't be until costs increase due to the ships taking alternate routes or the companies stop shipping to us that anything will be done. This is the sad reality of it. Until a ship is attacked and sank, very little will be done.

 

[zomgwtf]

What the people perceive as a good thing is irrelevant. These people are hijacking a boat and using threats to force money out of people/companies.

I don't care if Americans or any country isn't liked that much. It doesn't give them the right to commit these acts.

The fact that we aren't defending our ships says exactly how much we value them. It won't be until costs increase due to the ships taking alternate routes or the companies stop shipping to us that anything will be done. This is the sad reality of it. Until a ship is attacked and sank, very little will be done.

Well thankfully there are people in the world who care about harming other nations and maintaining good relations.

 

[JaredJames]

Well thankfully there are people in the world who care about harming other nations and maintaining good relations.

Ah so we allow them to continue in order to maintain good relations? Right with you. Another example of how violent behaviour gets your own way.

Good relations go out of the window when they attack our (or our partners) ships. They've already destroyed any relations we had.

Harming other nations? So far the only ones being harmed by piracy are us. By paying these ransoms. It's about time the governments said "no more" and actually did something for once.
Years ago they would have deployed the navy and wiped them off the face of the Earth. Now we roll over and give in far too easy.

Yeah it sounds harsh, but if it's the only language these people understand then so be it.

 

[WhoWee]

It's not so easy, Americans are already not particularly liked in this part of the world. Imagine they started shooting boats outta the water. Since al Qaeda operates in the area it's kinda important to not unnecessarily piss them off too much.

The reason I say it's not that easy is because these pirates consider themselves somewhat of a 'protective' force for the Somalians... The amount of money they take in ransoms is miniscule to how much fish they lose. I've read numbers at a few hundred million dollars. I'm not entirely sure how the Somali public looks at the pirating but I'm extremely doubtful they'd be happy to hear that American forces are shooting Somali ships out of the water... especially when they consider themselves to be doing a good thing.

A ground force to help the govn't get back control would in my mind be viewed differently, but it has to be done properly as in Iraq or Afghanistan. (regardless of what people say the support for American forces in these nations has increased and is quite high according to polls)

I think the Somalians should be compensated for their efforts. The oil rich countries exporting oil should provide food and shelter to their neighbors. On the other hand, thieves in open waters should be shot dead - give the boats to the fishermen so they can feed their families.

 

[zomgwtf]

You guys are making it sound much, much more easier than it actually is.

The situation in Somalia is not going to be solved by giving some money from oil and the illegal fishing in their waters is not going to stop if you give the fishermen some boats. I agree that we should just kill these pirates on the spot but I don't think this will
a)Deterr any future pirates
or
b)Continue to have a 'useful relationship' with Somalia.

Piracy is not harming any nation at all really. They make a few million big deal it's not worth turning an entire country, which is currently a democracy AGAINST the western world which may promote Islamic extremist even more.

 

[JaredJames]

The situation in Somalia is not going to be solved by giving some money from oil and the illegal fishing in their waters is not going to stop if you give the fishermen some boats. I agree that we should just kill these pirates on the spot but I don't think this will

I don't want to solve the situation in Somalia. I want to protect our ships against these pirates.

a)Deterr any future pirates

If there was an active, and effective presence they'd either have to improve their tactics (beyond that of the Navies), continue trying under current tactics and die or simply give up.

b)Continue to have a 'useful relationship' with Somalia.

Why? Do we have a 'useful relationship' with them already? Or are we so scared they might retaliate it's best to just let them keep ripping us off?
Once again, it is clear that the threat of violence and the knowledge we won't retaliate that is spurring this on.

Piracy is not harming any nation at all really.

It is harming, or are you going to ignore the effects of it on the captured crews? The insurance costs to companies?

 

[zomgwtf]

I'd have to see the figures but for some reason I'm guessing that having a constant patrol (larger and more frequent than already) which is actively fighting against the pirates will cost a lot more than what is lots by insurance and ransom.

I guess I should have said 'building a useful relationship' and yeah I assume that some countries would want to maintain that since Somalia possibly has oil? Who said about retaliating? That is possibly part of the worry but hardly the largest.

 

[turbo]

We don't need to throw destroyers or frigates at that problem. What's wrong with deploying smaller armed ships designed for coastal patrol/drug interdiction, etc? They are cheaper to deploy, and are often quite fast. Certainly, they are capable of taking out skiffs and fishing boats manned by armed pirates. Piracy is not new, nor do we need exotic methods to combat it. People who stand to make a great deal of money will try to make the problem appear more complex and intractable than it really is, but low-tech patrol boats can provide escort services and prevent piracy.

 

[zomgwtf]

turbo, you underestimate the pirates. A small police boat or coastal patrol ship probably won't help the situation and just put lives at risk.

 

[turbo]

turbo, you underestimate the pirates. A small police boat or coastal patrol ship probably won't help the situation and just put lives at risk.

I think you overestimate the pirates. The US coast guard regularly overpowers and boards vessels without blowing them out of the water. We don't need destroyers to take on fishing vessels manned by pirates. That's like using a sledge-hammer to swat a mosquito. Just convoy the trade vessels (tankers, cargo ships, etc) and protect them with small, fast armed patrol ships.

Video the confrontations, and if one pirate in a boat aims an RPG, blow the boat out of the water, and play that video over and over again. Pirates may be desperate, but they are probably not suicidal. Right now, their occupation has a very high ratio of economic potential:personal risk. We can change that.

 

[zomgwtf]

They've shot at US Navy ships before you think a coast guard vessel will do what exactly? There's no point in risking marines/soldiers etc. in this situation. It's clear they will not stop.

As well I don't even know why it's being assumed that pirate ships AREN'T shot, they are shot and they do sink. Pirates are captured on the regular... I fail to see how this is deterring anyone.

 

[zomgwtf]

I suppose you mean propaganda such as this:

Let's just drop it on them from helicopters cause clearly they missed before.

 

[CRGreathouse]

turbo, you underestimate the pirates.

I agree with turbo -- you seem to overestimate the pirates.