Piracy makes a comeback

So I check Drudge recently and see this on the left side:

https://i113.photobucket.com/albums/...rudge_whoa.jpg

Yeah, this is a growing threat.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

The top US military officer said Monday he was "stunned" by the reach of the Somali pirates who seized a Saudi supertanker off the east coast of Africa, calling piracy a growing problem that needs to be addressed.
But Admiral Michael Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said there were limits to what the world's navies could do once a ship has been captured because national governments often preferred to pay pirates ransom.

"I'm stunned by the range of it, less so than I am the size," Mullen said of the seizure of the Sirius Star Sunday by armed men.

The huge, oil laden prize, which is three times the size of a US aircraft carrier, was some 450 miles east of Kenya when it was boarded, he said.

That is the farthest out at sea that a ship has been seized in the latest surge of piracies, according to Mullen.

The pirates, he said, are "very good at what they do. They're very well armed. Tactically, they are very good."

"And so, once they get to a point where they can board, it becomes very difficult to get them off, because, clearly, now they hold hostages.

"The question then becomes, well, what do you do about the hostages? And that's where the standoff is.

"That's a national question to ask based on the flag of the vessel. And the countries by and large have been paying the ransom that the pirates have asked," he said.

Mullen said the number of successful piracies have gone down, but the incidence of ship seizures were way up.

"It's got a lot of people's attention and is starting to have impact on the commercial side, which I know countries raise as a concern," he said.

"And so there's a lot more focus on this. It's a very serious issue. It's a growing issue. And we're going to continue to have to deal with it," he said.

As awesome as I think it is that a bunch of Somalians are able to essentially do the same occupation that died out in the 1800s and not get totally annihilated in 5 seconds, who's to blame for this? It's not like the US Navy is bogged down; we're fighting two wars in the desert for God's sake. Perhaps those more informed than me could share what jurisdiction this falls under (i.e. who should deal with it) but for now, I think it's just a neat story to share.

BBC actually had a very good article on this today:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7735144.stm

The summary is that international laws prevent the various nations from dealing with the pirates in the ways that used to work.

Look what you've done General!



By promoting piracy through your mafia game, I hold you personally responsible.:clown:



I'll see if I can find it, but NPR recently did a story and interview on modern pirates.

If I am hauling a bajillion dollars worth of oil around I would hire someone to ride “shotgun” for me (perhaps ninja’s~D). The lost profits from being just a few days late is worth the protection money IMO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yesdachi

If I am hauling a bajillion dollars worth of oil around I would hire someone to ride “shotgun” for me (perhaps ninja’s~D). The lost profits from being just a few days late is worth the protection money IMO.

---

Why don't the Saudi's just use a bit of their oil money and make something super awesome with it, like Robot Ninjas?

Hire pirates to pirate the pirates.

Piracy has NEVER left us entirely, nor will it.

It is difficult to completely stop a phenomenon when the potential for profit is enormous.

$100M cargo all in one place, weakly guarded. No chance to "steal" the cargo, but at the cost per hour of sitting still, it rapidly becomes possible for every pirate in the crew to make more than the average lifetime salary of anyone in their home village in Somalia in less than a week's work.

As always, there are two approaches to dealing with it.

1. Pay the ransom, accept it as part of the cost of doing business, and try to formalize the payments so that risks are minimized all around (Barbary Pirates).

2. Coordinate all naval powers in the region and extirpate them. NOTE: this will only work for a moderate period of time. During the following quiet period, naval attention will draw down and shift elsewhere and the situation will repeat.


The USA will pursue strategy #2, but will lack complete cooperation and will be unable to devote sufficient resources solo to the task (at least without launching highly unpolular ground operations at the various "bases" that exist on foreign territory). This will curtail the piracy somewhat, but only modestly.

Many other international firms will pursue course #1 (quietly) and pass the cost to the consumer while publicly calling for #2

I actually believe this simply part of the natural cycle of nature. As pirates grow in strength, so too will the world cool down. I can see no other possible explanation, here. Pirates benefit the world as a whole, cooling us down.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marshal Murat

I actually believe this simply part of the natural cycle of nature. As pirates grow in strength, so too will the world cool down. I can see no other possible explanation, here. Pirates benefit the world as a whole, cooling us down.

---

Why do I suddenly have a craving for spaghetti and meatballs?

:pirate2:

I heard a little radio documentary like piece where they talked to one of these pirates.

One of the main reason that they keep on doing it is that it is customary for these pirates, after a big score, to spend all or most of their money on booze, girls, gambling, and partying. Basically after a night, they end up with little to no money again and have to go out and jack another ship

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TevashSzat

I heard a little radio documentary like piece where they talked to one of these pirates.

One of the main reason that they keep on doing it is that it is customary for these pirates, after a big score, to spend all or most of their money on booze, girls, gambling, and partying. Basically after a night, they end up with little to no money again and have to go out and jack another ship

---

That sounds SO much better than my career options right now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TevashSzat

I heard a little radio documentary like piece where they talked to one of these pirates.

One of the main reason that they keep on doing it is that it is customary for these pirates, after a big score, to spend all or most of their money on booze, girls, gambling, and partying. Basically after a night, they end up with little to no money again and have to go out and jack another ship

---

So really, they're helping the local economies.

I'm surprised no one posted the story of the Latvian cargo ship that was hijacked with T-72 tanks and RPGs.

Quote:

---

I'm surprised no one posted the story of the Latvian cargo ship that was hijacked with T-72 tanks and RPGs.

---

I understood that to be a Ukrainian ship, and besides, who can use a T-72 without ammunition?

I think we discussed the Ukrainian ship with the T-72s and stuff a while back, though I haven't kept up with it to see if/how it was resolved. They ammo is on board the ship, the thing is more how would the pirates be able to unload the cargo. They need a proper port with a deep enough harbor. I think the ship has a crane on board though.

Piracy really didn't disappear it just changed. My dad told me that during his Navy days on an axillary fleet tugboat they'd have to get armed sailors or marines to stay any barges they were hauling when in the South China Sea. Otherwise pirates would boat up to the barge and steal whatever was there within view of the tugboat that could do little to nothing for the barge because it was too far away.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro

So really, they're helping the local economies.

---

Back in the old days, Port Royal and Nassau were booming towns before the British cracked down. Heck, if they make berth in a place that doesn't get its money immediately sucked up by warlords then it's good for everybody (except the traders, of course :tongue:).

If I was a realpolitik US official, I'd work out a UN-sponsored peace-keeping trip to Somali (bankrolled by the shipping magnates who suffer from this) and start delivering plenty of high-explosive peace solutions to the pirate bases. As an added bonus, the expedition can be used to keep the Islamists from gaining control of Mogadishu and even turn back their expansion in places. The only tricky part is getting the manpower - perhaps China could be enticed to help? They would also be less concerned about casaulties, from a historical standpoint...

Of course, I don't really advocate this personally, but it would probably slow down the problem.

If I owned the ships I'd be putting some surplus .50 cal BMG machine guns on the sides. Hire a blackwater guy to go along on the trip and have the crew shoot at any small boat that gets close. Shouldn't be too difficult to add enough armor to deflect bullets and old RPGs.

If I was in charge of a nation I'd go and bombard the pirate base when a ship flying our flag was captured. Perhaps even pay the pirates off before killing them all. I mean, we know where the bases are, and we can crush them easily.

International law? Pfft. If it does nothing against these pirates, how are they going to use it against my country?

CR

Quote:

---

If I owned the ships I'd be putting some surplus .50 cal BMG machine guns on the sides. Hire a blackwater guy to go along on the trip and have the crew shoot at any small boat that gets close. Shouldn't be too difficult to add enough armor to deflect bullets and old RPGs.

---

Makes you wonder why multi millionaire shipping magnates who can easily afford a whole pile of weaponry and a bunch of mercenaries don't go for the Rabbit approach doesn't it
:dizzy2:
Is it because Rabbit would find himself unable to get insurance , unable to get a shipping licence and arrested at the first port he docked at .....errrr actually he wouldn't even have to dock to get himself arrested and his ship siezed .:idea2:
International law pffft:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:some people eh:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:


Alexander , take a look at your post , then do a quick re-run of recent history in Somalia then try and explain how your post isn't bollox

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alexander the Pretty Good

If I was a realpolitik US official, I'd work out a UN-sponsored peace-keeping trip to Somali (bankrolled by the shipping magnates who suffer from this) and start delivering plenty of high-explosive peace solutions to the pirate bases.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

If I was in charge of a nation I'd go and bombard the pirate base when a ship flying our flag was captured. Perhaps even pay the pirates off before killing them all. I mean, we know where the bases are, and we can crush them easily.

---

Didn't you guys see black hawk down?

Sasaki - I'm talking about bombs and bombarding, not sending in a dozen helicoters and no tanks.

CR

Ya know, back in the day they developed a solution for marauding pirates that jacked everyone's cargo.

It was called the Ship of the Line


Modern day version:

http://www.bb62museum.org/images/bb62atpearl.jpg

Folks, the military answer to this is as old as the hills. Gnaeus Pompeius flattened Med piracy for decades. Carribean piracy was almost eradicated in the mid-1700s. The British and Dutch more or less smashed Indonesian piracy.

Lots of boots; lots of patrolling; smash bases; arrest or kill any who support piracy; harsh and swift sentences for any pirate captured and anyone aiding and abetting them; all nation-states following the same basic approach.

HOWEVER, since few of these criteria can be met and others would meet with active opposition by the nation states involved as unethical and overly harsh, it's not going to change. Better patrol efforts by the USN will dial it back a bit for a short while, but that's it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AlexanderSextus

Ya know, back in the day they developed a solution for marauding pirates that jacked everyone's cargo.

It was called the Ship of the Line


Modern day version:

http://www.bb62museum.org/images/bb62atpearl.jpg

---

I admire your style. However, the historian in me is forced to note that the ships that got the job done were sloops and frigates. SOLs were too expensive for that kind of patrol work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

Sasaki - I'm talking about bombs and bombarding, not sending in a dozen helicoters and no tanks.

CR

---

Aren't there going to be civilians nearby though?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

I admire your style. However, the historian in me is forced to note that the ships that got the job done were sloops and frigates. SOLs were too expensive for that kind of patrol work.

---

Well, I didnt say that the SOTL was used for patrol work necessarily, i was under the impression that it was used to intercept pirates that were spotted going somewhere, i.e. a sloop saw a pirate ship headed for a certain port,but didn't have enough men and/or guns to sink it, so they send a SOTL to blow it out of the water while it's still en route.

That battleship would be the equivalent to a 17th century frigate, no?

As for the sloop...

Modern Day Version:

http://www.jmlavelle.com/gunnel/pt_boat.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro

Aren't there going to be civilians nearby though?

---

There weren't in Mogadishu? Didn't over 1000 people die in that day or so of fighting? There's always going to be civilians nearby.

CR

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

Folks, the military answer to this is as old as the hills. Gnaeus Pompeius flattened Med piracy for decades. Carribean piracy was almost eradicated in the mid-1700s. The British and Dutch more or less smashed Indonesian piracy.

Lots of boots; lots of patrolling; smash bases; arrest or kill any who support piracy; harsh and swift sentences for any pirate captured and anyone aiding and abetting them; all nation-states following the same basic approach.

HOWEVER, since few of these criteria can be met and others would meet with active opposition by the nation states involved as unethical and overly harsh, it's not going to change. Better patrol efforts by the USN will dial it back a bit for a short while, but that's it.

---

That would be rather complicated given the Law of the Sea, international trade and the location. Unless we are once again expecting the United States to act as international policeman? I'd rather not sine this recent upsurge has a lot to do with that "mission".

The horse has somewhat bolted now, but the the best way to minimise anarchy like this is perhaps for the US administration not to interfere to overthrow regimes they don't like. Let's hope this kind of short-sightedness is drawing to a close, but I doubt.

Piracy will always and has always existed, but not recently as a national sport.

I am referring to the Bush Administration's intervention in Somalia in the name of the War on Terror. It has helped to destroy that wretched country's best chance of peace in a generation, left more than a million Somalis dead, homeless or starving, and achieved the precise opposite of its original goal. Far from stamping out an Islamic militancy that scarcely existed, the intervention has turned Somalia into a breeding ground for Islamic extremists and given al-Qaeda a valuable foothold in the Horn of Africa.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SwedishFish

I'm surprised no one posted the story of the Latvian cargo ship that was hijacked with T-72 tanks and RPGs.

---

It was mentioned in another thread.

According to wiki, it hasn't been resolved yet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wikipedia

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...-8623S-002.jpg

The German-owned, Antigua and Barbuda-flagged MV BBC Trinidad is hijacked. It is released on September 11, along with its 13-person crew consisting of a Slovakian captain, ten Filipinos, and two Russians, after a ransom of US$1.1 million is paid.[71] The MT Irene, a Japanese-owned with a crew of three Croatians and 16 Filipinos is also seized on the same day. It is released around the same time as the MV BBC Trinidad for US$1.5 million. Both were held near the town of Eyl.[72] The MV Iran Deyanat was also hijacked and brought to Eyl on the same day. The Iranian-owned ship and its crew of 14 Iranians, three Indians, two Filipinos, and 10 Eastern Europeans, possibly Croatian, is being held for ransom. Pirates have suffered health problems including hair loss and even death, suggesting that could be carrying chemical munitions or radioactive materials.

---

3 ships were hijacked that day! ~:eek:

:hijacked: <- nice emoticon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wikipedia

The MY Le Ponant was seized in the Gulf of Aden. The French-owned luxury yacht had no passengers on board, but there were 30 crew members: one Cameroonian, six Filipinos, 22 French, and one Ukrainian. The FS Commandant Bouan, a French D'Estienne d'Orves-class aviso, and the HMCS Charlottetown, a Canadian Halifax-class frigate, were dispatched to the yacht. On April 12 the crew and the ship were released, apparently after the owner, CMA CGM, paid a ransom. After the crew was released, French soldiers tracked the pirates, who were then on land. According to the French military a sniper in a helicopter disabled the engine of a car transporting the pirates, while another helicopter landed and captured six pirates and recovered some ransom money. On April 13 the six appeared in a French court in Paris and were charged with, among other things, hostage-taking, hijacking, and theft.

---

:jawdrop: Will any other pirates touch a French ship after that?

There has been a surge in piracy lately and because of it Somali growth rates are higher than ever :P

Piracy has been a millenia old problem but, till the latest surge it was largely confined in SE Asia and with rather primitive methods.

Now it seems that the Somali Pirates have established a multi million dollar business and I wouldnt be surprised if they use some of their ransom funds to equip their ships with enough juice to combat small-medium army vessels.

Recently a Saudi owned tanker with 100m worth of oil was captured. Today I also read that a greek-interests cargo ship was captured with 25 people on board.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7736885.stm

I am concerned that soon the situation will get out of control, other semi-failed states will get their own pirate fleets and, as I mentioned before, their technology will improve.

It seems to be that the international effort to control the problem is limited, disjointed, without real puprose and full of disagreements. Many countries have ships and troops there but noone says 'Lets do something'. All this presence does not seem to be doing anything since the pirates are getting even bolder.

I for once would like to see a couple greek frigates going down there and kicking some ass because the shipping industry is the lifeblood of our economy


I am not sure how to solve this problems but I would prpose:

a) Something not many people know is that Insurance companies offer Kidnap and Ransom policies. Consequently it is very easy for companies to call on these policies to pay. As a result they do not pressure the governments as much as they would if they would have to cough up all the money in one go. Such policies should be reduced.

b) A real Nato-like joint force with Land Support . The pirates work as a beehive and the current effort is just chasing the bees ( the small pirate ships) away. To kill a beehive you need to strike at it and not the bees. Generaly an argument such as ' If you dont release the ship we will flatten your pirate port to the ground' works better. U need to arrest the Pirate lords, capture the ports and destroy their infrastructure to succeed.

Some spec-ops operations to kill a few pirate lords should work quite well too

c) The Somali government is incapable of acting and is largely restricted to Mogadishu nowadays. Maybe we should give the Islamists a chance since they showed in the past that they have the military muscle to handle things. Sure they ll chop of a few heads and will stone a few rape victims to death but we westerners are happily allied with other countries that follow such lovely customs (Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Afghanistan etc). Its not ideal, its not moral, but its practical.

My two eurocents...

It has been decided that we will be sending this to the area this coming spring.
No Norwegian ships have been captured so far (not that the priates havent tried :mellow:), but our ships could need assistance.

https://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y2...x-FR_KNMFN.jpg

It's reward verses risk.

Currently the risks appear to be slight, as even if captured getting a trial would be tough - then they might even demand asylum...

The Indian Navy had the right idea: sink the bastards; the French and British for some reason took prisoners.

I would have thought using radar / satelite to locate likely staging ships these should then be challenged, and searched. Any resistance they're sunk. This would rather quickly mean that the only ships would be land launched and these have pretty poor range.

It isn't a beehive and bees, it is a latrine and horseflies. There is nothing of value in that :daisy:, and jumping into that mess will only get us up to our necks in crap. We swat at the flies that come close to the picnic and hold our noses to the smell.

~:smoking:

Quote:

---

but the the best way to minimise anarchy like this is perhaps for the US administration not to interfere to overthrow regimes they don't like.

---

Strictly speaking that ain't fair Banquo , the area most of these pirates are coming out of isn't part of the country that was run by Adid or the coilition of warlords , neither is it a part that the Islamic courts ran , for that atter it isn't a part that the US backed Ethiopian invasion took over before the new Islamic groups started kicking their arse back towards the border , its just one of the regions in the country that no one has really bothered with .
So you cannot really blame Americas screw ups in Somalia as a whole for the events in that region of Somalia .

Quote:

---

That battleship would be the equivalent to a 17th century frigate, no?

---

Correct , the answer is no .
The New Jersey is a battleship which would be a battleship .

Quote:

---

The pirates work as a beehive and the current effort is just chasing the bees ( the small pirate ships) away. To kill a beehive you need to strike at it and not the bees. Generaly an argument such as ' If you dont release the ship we will flatten your pirate port to the ground' works better. U need to arrest the Pirate lords, capture the ports and destroy their infrastructure to succeed.

---

The problem there is that the people running this are sitting in a luxury villa in Mombasa or Dubai collecting the ransoms and couldn't really give a damn if you flattened a town in somalia and killed all their gunmen , they would just buy another town and hire more gunmen .
What you need is a small international police operation to arrest the financiers , plus of course you need relative stability in the area of North-East africa so any that escape the net don't have a bunch of local warlords and armed people looking for jobs that the financiers can hire easily .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Strictly speaking that ain't fair Banquo , the area most of these pirates are coming out of isn't part of the country that was run by Adid or the coilition of warlords , neither is it a part that the Islamic courts ran , for that atter it isn't a part that the US backed Ethiopian invasion took over before the new Islamic groups started kicking their arse back towards the border , its just one of the regions in the country that no one has really bothered with .
So you cannot really blame Americas screw ups in Somalia as a whole for the events in that region of Somalia .

---

I stand corrected. Though I still believe that interference has delayed the development of a stable government that might have begun to build control over the area sooner rather than later. Interventions in other countries' affairs is invariably wrong, but unthinking interventions without even an analysis of likely future impacts is foolish - and the War on Terror does tend to follow the Fragony Fallacy - everything Islamic is dangerous and monolithic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

The problem there is that the people running this are sitting in a luxury villa in Mombasa or Dubai collecting the ransoms and couldn't really give a damn if you flattened a town in somalia and killed all their gunmen , they would just buy another town and hire more gunmen .
What you need is a small international police operation to arrest the financiers , plus of course you need relative stability in the area of North-East africa so any that escape the net don't have a bunch of local warlords and armed people looking for jobs that the financiers can hire easily .

---

Interesting. I had suspected that there would be a "kingpin" type of approach, but hadn't found any corroboration or analysis. I know I'm not going to get a link, but any chance of a bit of direction to useful sources?

Indian Navy destroys pirate boat.

"Millons for defense but not one penny for tribute". Paying ransom only encourages the criminal element to increase their predation.

Quote:

---

The problem there is that the people running this are sitting in a luxury villa in Mombasa or Dubai collecting the ransoms and couldn't really give a damn if you flattened a town in somalia and killed all their gunmen , they would just buy another town and hire more gunmen .
What you need is a small international police operation to arrest the financiers , plus of course you need relative stability in the area of North-East africa so any that escape the net don't have a bunch of local warlords and armed people looking for jobs that the financiers can hire easily .

---

I agree. Follow the money and take out the organizers just like any other organized crime syndicate. The pirates could give a fig about religion. They're attacking any and all ships irregardless of religious sect or affiliation. The only criteria is if they can attack and board them. Make this more difficult and expensive for them to do so.

The pirates aren't using ships just small swift coastal boats, and like any guerrilla war, the hardest part is identifying the foe. Boarding a large tanker or container ship wouldn't be so easy if they employed anti-boarding devices and armed security teams for the most valuable cargos.
As the cost of shipping insurance goes up more resources for defense and police action will be spent to minimise the losses. It can't be stopped, and as far as stability in that area of the world goes...has it ever really been stable?

Quote:

---

Interesting. I had suspected that there would be a "kingpin" type of approach, but hadn't found any corroboration or analysis. I know I'm not going to get a link, but any chance of a bit of direction to useful sources?

---

Well BG what sort of banking system does Somalia have?
Is it a case of when a ransom is paid you get a shipping courier going into a lawless dump carrying a big big of cash or do they make deposits into the UAE and Kenya to get their boats and staff back ?
if you want direction then since this involves ships the international maritime organisation is a good start , or for more localised stuff go to the East African merchant mariners association .

Sasaki/Tribesy - my realpolitik approach would be far more sanguinary than the previous attempts at peace-keeping in Somalia. For starters, it wouldn't really be about keeping the peace. ~;p

That's also one of the reasons I wouldn't support it.

What's with all the ruckus? CrossLOPER has already won the thread with the ideal solution.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CrossLOPER

Hire pirates to pirate the pirates.

---

100% WINZ.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

There weren't in Mogadishu? Didn't over 1000 people die in that day or so of fighting? There's always going to be civilians nearby.

CR

---

Stamping out piracy isn't worth 1000's of civilian deaths.

oh NVM

Quote:

---

On Monday, the European Union launched a security operation off the coast of Somalia -- its first-ever naval mission -- to combat growing acts of piracy and protect ships carrying aid agency deliveries.

Dubbed Operation Atalanta, the mission, endorsed by the bloc's defence ministers at talks in Brussels, will be led by Britain, with its headquarters in Northwood, near London.

---

http://www.france24.com/en/20081111-...ghter-official

Here are two naval-centric blogs that are obsessed with Piracy around the Horn.

http://www.eaglespeak.us/

http://informationdissemination.blogspot.com/

You can expect one or two articles per day about the unfolding situation.

They focus primarily on naval strategy, rather than land based initiatives.

Stick Armed People on your Ships...

Oh Wait, nevermind. If you kill Pirates while defending yourself and your cargo, the UN might send you a letter saying you a bad shipping person :juggle2: :laugh4:

I can understand if the cargo is flammable and such, like Oil, but come on. These ships are getting taked over by these ill-displinced pirates while some of the best navies in the world are just sitting there doing now... I guess America doesn't want to re live another 1993 Somilia event.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jolt

What's with all the ruckus? CrossLOPER has already won the thread with the ideal solution.

100% WINZ.

---

THANK YOU.

I like your eaglespeak blog Tuff , especially the muppets repeating the we won in Iraq bull:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:

Quote:

---

Boarding a large tanker or container ship wouldn't be so easy if they employed anti-boarding devices and armed security teams for the most valuable cargos.

---

Most ships do have anti boarding devices , all are supposed to follow a very long and constantly revised list of proceedures to avoid being boarded(or in the case of being boarded to retain control of the vessel for safety of the crew the cargo the ship and other ships) .
Yet you come to armed guards again , all national and international shipping organisations oppose it , all the officers and seamans organisations and unions oppose it , the insurers oppose it , even the lawyers oppose it ...can you think why they all oppose it ?

Quote:

---

Stick Armed People on your Ships...

---

Another one with no understanding at all

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

I
Yet you come to armed guards again , all national and international shipping organisations oppose it , all the officers and seamans organisations and unions oppose it , the insurers oppose it , even the lawyers oppose it ...can you think why they all oppose it ?

---

Because then people would get killed.

I can understand maybe the seamens union and several of the smaller players.... but i would have thought the big companies would rather a few deaths and a lot less piracy... or do they think this would cause more financial loss ?

I have trouble accepting a multi national corporation would worry about a few deaths...

Does anyone know specifics about the boarding process? How soon do the captains become aware of the gunboats tailing them, how long to close to range, do the little boats show up on ships radar, that sort of thing?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

I like your eaglespeak blog Tuff , especially the muppets repeating the we won in Iraq bull:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:


Most ships do have anti boarding devices , all are supposed to follow a very long and constantly revised list of proceedures to avoid being boarded(or in the case of being boarded to retain control of the vessel for safety of the crew the cargo the ship and other ships) .
Yet you come to armed guards again , all national and international shipping organisations oppose it , all the officers and seamans organisations and unions oppose it , the insurers oppose it , even the lawyers oppose it ...can you think why they all oppose it ?


Another one with no understanding at all

---

Eaglespeak - "The main focus of this blog is maritime security. Other matters may appear. I am an attorney, a retired Navy Reserve Captain (Surface Warfare)."

Informationdissemination - An industry insider blog.

They say that we have won/are winning Iraq because it is true. It has been costly, but we have won/are winning.

As for armed guards on ships and other security measures - they suggest them because they make sense. They believe that deterrence should begin with not paying ransom and follow up with returning fire. Yes people could and probably will die as a result in the short term. The costs will reduce piracy as an option (although it won't destroy it completely). Right now the U.S. Navy and, increasingly the navies from other interested nations are footing the security bill. Maybe it wouldn't be an absurd move to ask private companies to hire private security firms and foot the bill. We should find a way to make corporate self defense legally practical in dangerous waters.

This is bigger than shipping. These funds go toward financing extremism and the destabilization of healthy authority in Somalia. The more we pay in ransom the less power government in Somalia has - in a vicious continuum. This isn't power for powers sake - this is common agricultural policy to feed people, policy to protect them from murder and theft.

What makes you an expert again? An expert that is more reliable than these guys? Does anyone know what you do for a living? You seem to have quite a bit of time for the Org.

Come on ...
You don't need armed personell onboard. All you need is a Norwegian captain :smash:.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sigurd Fafnesbane

Come on ...
You don't need armed personell onboard. All you need is a Norwegian captain :smash:.

---

Nope, they're all busy right now.

Quote:

---

On Tuesday, a major Norwegian shipping group, Odfjell SE, ordered its more than 90 tankers to sail around Africa rather than use the Suez Canal after the seizure of the Saudi tanker Saturday.

"We will no longer expose our crew to the risk of being hijacked and held for ransom by pirates in the Gulf of Aden," said Terje Storeng, Odfjell's president and chief executive.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

They say that we have won/are winning Iraq because it is true. It has been costly, but we have won/are winning.

---

TSM:

Tribes' thesis on Iraq is that any success we have is ephemeral at best. He believes that we are only holding a lid on it, and that 30 days or less after we leave it will become a 4+ way civil war. He believes this to be the case whether we stay there for a century or 20 minutes.

Sadly, I think he may be correct.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

TSM:

Tribes' thesis on Iraq is that any success we have is ephemeral at best. He believes that we are only holding a lid on it, and that 30 days or less after we leave it will become a 4+ way civil war. He believes this to be the case whether we stay there for a century or 20 minutes.

Sadly, I think he may be correct.

---

I get what he thinks. Only time will tell.

There have been hundreds of reasons that people have put forward about why we should pull out because we have already lost or cannot possibly win.

We shouldn't be there; therefore we should get out now

Iraq needs us to leave so that they can spend their own money and make it work; therefore we should get out now.

Nothing that we do will help to create a stable and democratic Iraq, now or in 50 years; therefore we should get out now.

People in the middle east are not capable of ruling themselves; therefore we should get out now.

I view each step as a success, failure or something in between based on various objectives. Invasion? Massive historical success. Occupation? Quagmire turned right by Army led police action and coalition building among parties. If you believe that insurgents are just biding their time until we leave, I understand the sentiment, but I doubt that passionate , murderous extremism can contain itself on such a large scale for so long.

We will see, and in lieu of our successes up to this point (admittedly costly) and the importance of believing that people can do this, I will stay optimistic. I see as many or more reasons to look positively on the situation than negatively.

So all those governments are talking and acting tough on terror but noone cares about even having some armed guards to protect their ships during economic and oil crises? So what makes a pirate any more legal than an "enemy combatant"? Aren't those by Bushian definition inherently the same?

Quote:

---

Because then people would get killed.

---

Well done Seamus , so bloody obvious it makes you wonder why some people think that guns in that situation would be any help at all . Since in most of these cases the boarding isn't noticed until after it has happened it is a hostage situation , and the last thing anyone needs in a hostage situation is some idiot playing rambo .

Quote:

---

I can understand maybe the seamens union and several of the smaller players.... but i would have thought the big companies would rather a few deaths and a lot less piracy... or do they think this would cause more financial loss ?

I have trouble accepting a multi national corporation would worry about a few deaths...

---

Deaths can be expensive very expensive , plus its a big legal minefield , corporations would rather pay the excess insurance and pass the costs on than risk the legal penalties .
Its a legal minefield because it has to comply with all the laws of a territory any time it is in territorial waters , and it has to comply with all the laws in the nation that it is registered in (plus the laws of the charter nation if it is under contract) plus of course it has to comply with international law.

Now of course some muppet might say "international law pffft" which would be a bit silly because if international law is pfffft then piracy is not illegal and these pirates are doing nothing wrong :2thumbsup:

Quote:

---

These funds go toward financing extremism and the destabilization of healthy authority in Somalia.

---

What healthy authority???????
The healthiest authority Somalia has had for years was financed by local businessmen to cut down on crime and your government overthrew it by paying ethiopia to invade and putting the tribal criminal warlords back in power , a power they are now losing to some real nasty extremists .
You seem to get nearly all your details backwards Tuff .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

What healthy authority???????
The healthiest authority Somalia has had for years was financed by local businessmen to cut down on crime and your government overthrew it by paying ethiopia to invade and putting the tribal criminal warlords back in power , a power they are now losing to some real nasty extremists .
You seem to get nearly all your details backwards Tuff .

---

Good question. There is no breeding ground for healthy authority in Somalia. There is a semblance of it in Somaliland, but the rest is undercut by the big business generated by illegitimate piracy.
Pulling the rug from under piracy will force the people to choose a new door to walk through.

I'm not saying that rambo should take back the ships, I'm saying that the ships should repel the boarding. I'm saying that this will help dramatically reduce the instances of hostage situations, increase the cost of piracy and increase the built in cost of transportation in proximity to the horn. For some reason, companies don't calculate the likelihood of paying ransom into their bottom line because it sounds cheaper and it isn't a given. Built in security costs would satisfy the permanent cost of doing business and would divert ships elsewhere.

I want our government to recognize Somaliland and any regional governments who get their stuff together within Somalia. The concept of a whole Somalia is unnecessary and too much of an "all or nothing "approach to such a "nothing" scenario.

I just don't believe that Muslims are a lost cause just because they are Muslim. Somalia is a Centrally located nation with quite a bit of natural resources - Agriculture and proximity to the Indian Ocean being major examples. This is another example of a nation with feet to stand on lying flat on its back.

Quote:

---

I'm not saying that rambo should take back the ships, I'm saying that the ships should repel the boarding.

---

Did you miss that in most cases the boarding is accomplished before the crew are aware of it ?

Quote:

---

I want our government to recognize Somaliland and any regional governments who get their stuff together within Somalia.

---

Interesting , yet Somaliland is disputed territory and they havn't got their act together anymore than Puntland or any other of the clan based fiefdoms in Somalia , in fact Somaliland might end up worse since the clan that claims power there makes up only 1/3 of the population and the other clans and their warlords are not happy bunnies over the situation .:yes:
A nice idea Tuff but full of problems , do you go for the federal approach or the confederation ? Independance or autonomy ?
How do you recognise clan based states when all the clans have overlapping claims ?
How do you recognise them when their claims include other countries territory ?
As I said Tuff , an interesting thought , a very interesting one indeed .
But would you like to think about it a bit more?

Arming the crew is not desirable unless one wants the Wild Wild West on the High Seas. Using firearms on an oil tanker would be akin to lighting a match in a powder magazine. However non-lethal means are available and have been used to repel some attacks. Fire hoses, bright spot lights, and the ship's klaxon are the most common. Bulkhead doors that can't be opened from the outside for the bridge, engine room, and crew compartments are also cost effective defense mechanisms. There's even electrified fencing. However, a security system and procedures are only as good as the captain & crew's diligence and training in following them. Security procedures, done properly, are inconvenient, which is what makes them effective. Complacency, inadequate training and human error will compromise the best system every time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Did you miss that in most cases the boarding is accomplished before the crew are aware of it ?

---

Why are they not aware of it? Maybe people who are professionally "Aware of it" should travel aboard those ships.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Interesting , yet Somaliland is disputed territory and they havn't got their act together anymore than Puntland or any other of the clan based fiefdoms in Somalia , in fact Somaliland might end up worse since the clan that claims power there makes up only 1/3 of the population and the other clans and their warlords are not happy bunnies over the situation .:yes:
A nice idea Tuff but full of problems , do you go for the federal approach or the confederation ? Independance or autonomy ?
How do you recognise clan based states when all the clans have overlapping claims ?
How do you recognise them when their claims include other countries territory ?
As I said Tuff , an interesting thought , a very interesting one indeed .
But would you like to think about it a bit more?

---

All territory is disputed. I say that we side with the areas that seem to have options beyond piracy. We can side with areas that have a tourism industry.

We could help create a Federal Government in Exile centered in Hargeysa. There would be overlap, but it would help ensure that Somaliland was technically part of a future effective Somalia. Somaliland would operate as it does while Somalian coalitions in exile experimented in the safety of a functional nation. Puntland would be invited to sit at that table.

What is your solution? There has to be one. Comfortable people have a moral obligation to help the uncomfortable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hosakawa Tito

Arming the crew is not desirable unless one wants the Wild Wild West on the High Seas. Using firearms on an oil tanker would be akin to lighting a match in a powder magazine. However non-lethal means are available and have been used to repel some attacks. Fire hoses, bright spot lights, and the ship's klaxon are the most common. Bulkhead doors that can't be opened from the outside for the bridge, engine room, and crew compartments are also cost effective defense mechanisms. There's even electrified fencing. However, a security system and procedures are only as good as the captain & crew's diligence and training in following them. Security procedures, done properly, are inconvenient, which is what makes them effective. Complacency, inadequate training and human error will compromise the best system every time.

---

How would fire hoses in anyway reduce gunfire in the direction of the ship? Yes, as an option it would reduce the number of bullets traveling away from the ship, but who cares about those? Pirates would be shooting at the boat aiming at guys controlling hoses instead of guys shooting firearms.

Good sentiment, though - something needs to be done and simply nay saying anyone's ideas isn't going to get anyone anywhere.

(ASIDE - Hosa: what do you think about Giuliani and his possibility of picking up Hillary's or Patterson's seat? There is a discussion going on in the election thread.)

Quote:

---

Why are they not aware of it? Maybe people who are professionally "Aware of it" should travel aboard those ships.

---

:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:
What you mean like people who are professionally trained about the safety of the ship and its crew ...like errrrrrr.....ships officers .

Quote:

---

How would fire hoses in anyway reduce gunfire in the direction of the ship?

---

Gunfire isn't the problem :idea2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sigurd Fafnesbane

Come on ...
You don't need armed personell onboard. All you need is a Norwegian captain :smash:.

---

Because as we all know, if a Norwegian captain is in trouble he will soon have Australian SAS 'protecting him' ...:viking: :laugh4:

We could also simply protect American Traders. If Pirate towns are booming, sooner or later Pirate Lords will have assets and savings to protect. In order to better protect those assets they will probably prefer agreements between themselves instead of land based extremists taking their share of pirate booty- thus the beginning of government. Let those nations foolish enough to move goods through the region contribute to illegitimate Somali growth.

This is one option, but it requires selfishness and washes hands of responsibility. This is most likely the one Tribesman approves of.

Quote:

---

Let those nations foolish enough to move goods through the region contribute to illegitimate Somali growth.

---

OK , since the Sirius Star was carrying oil to the United States let them contribute for their foolishness:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:
Now I don't know if you heard of this recent development Tuff but it appears some fellow got a shovel and dug a hole just up the coast from where these attacks are happening , they are thinking of calling it the sewers carnal or something , they reckon if you get a bucket and fill the hole with water you might just be able to float a boat in it .
So it appears these boaty people are just in the area to see if this new fangled hole really can float their boats and that is why them pirates are taking the oppertunity to rob the silly sightseers .
It does pose a bit of a problem doesn't it , but there is helpfull advice at hand .
The IMB suggests that if you want to look at this hole in your boat you should try and stay as far from the Somali coast as possible...unfortunately the locals heard about this too so most of the piracy they inflict on the sightseers is off the Yemeni coastline not the Somali one .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

OK , since the Sirius Star was carrying oil to the United States let them contribute for their foolishness:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:
Now I don't know if you heard of this recent development Tuff but it appears some fellow got a shovel and dug a hole just up the coast from where these attacks are happening , they are thinking of calling it the sewers carnal or something , they reckon if you get a bucket and fill the hole with water you might just be able to float a boat in it .
So it appears these boaty people are just in the area to see if this new fangled hole really can float their boats and that is why them pirates are taking the oppertunity to rob the silly sightseers .
It does pose a bit of a problem doesn't it , but there is helpfull advice at hand .
The IMB suggests that if you want to look at this hole in your boat you should try and stay as far from the Somali coast as possible...unfortunately the locals heard about this too so most of the piracy they inflict on the sightseers is off the Yemeni coastline not the Somali one .

---

The Yemeni Coast IS off of the Somali coast. The pirates have a 250 mile reach max (and unlikely beyond sight of shore) at the moment. Captains should obey that border and anywhere else that absolutely needs to be traversed that is closer in should occupy the interest of the fleets.

Link to Map of Attacks/Hijackings

This is a pretty straight forward map. It shows areas where shipping lanes absolutely should not be. These areas are off the coast of Nugaal, Mudug and Puntland primarily - not directly across from Yemen.

Quote:

---

The Yemeni Coast IS off of the Somali coast.

---

I suggest you check out the IMB, nearly all this years attacks have been on the Yemeni side of the Gulf. That is because most shipping is staying away from the Somali coast .

Quote:

---

The pirates have a 250 mile reach max at the moment.

---

Errrrrrr...how far out was that ship that was carrying oil to America ? Was it within 250 miles of Somalia or was it perhaps a long long way south east of Kenya :laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:

Have a map as your link doesn't have much information at allhttp://www.icc-ccs.org/index.php?opt...emap&Itemid=89

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

I suggest you check out the IMB, nearly all this years attacks have been on the Yemeni side of the Gulf. That is because most shipping is staying away from the Somali coast .

Errrrrrr...how far out was that ship that was carrying oil to America ? Was it within 250 miles of Somalia or was it perhaps a long long way south east of Kenya :laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:

Have a map as your link doesn't have much information at allhttp://www.icc-ccs.org/index.php?opt...emap&Itemid=89

---

That map doesnt work. I went to the IMB and I don't understand what the map I posted means in relation.

Maybe that is just where the ships are being held. I'm daft.

Quote:

---

That map doesnt work.

---

:oops: sorry , it dead links .
from that>home >piracy report>zoom on the Gulf and then you can get locations and details of all this years reported incidents .

But anyway , nice to see the French have started a convoy system isn't it .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro

Stamping out piracy isn't worth 1000's of civilian deaths.

---

Who says 1000s of civilians would die? We've got smart bombs and everything.

And if one was an international shipping conglomerate, I am sure there might be ways around the wussy attitude so many ports have about guns, like having other ships to store the guns on legally outside of port while the main ship docks. That idea is the result of a couple minutes of typing, and I'm sure prolonged thought on the matter could yield more ways for powerful corporations to deal with those problems.

However, one method that even control freak sissies couldn't ban* would be steam hoses - like water, but ever so hot and scalding. Get some nice nozzles set up around the ladders, points of boarding, and some mobile ones as well. Get lime too. Should be alright even on oil tankers. Of course, this might not work for wussy countries that fret about pirate's human rights.

Oh, and since tribesy has malfed up the whole linking to a site process again, here's a link that does work.

CR
*Maybe. The sissiness of sissies knows no bounds.

Well first a suggestion of guns being the answer now he suggests chemical warfare .
But OK ...what problems do the use of lime as a weapon in any environment let alone a maritime environment pose to the defenders who use it :dizzy2:

I have a lot of sympathy for the view expressed here:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/m.../19/do1908.xml
that we brought this piracy on ourselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hosakawa Tito

Arming the crew is not desirable unless one wants the Wild Wild West on the High Seas. Using firearms on an oil tanker would be akin to lighting a match in a powder magazine. However non-lethal means are available and have been used to repel some attacks. Fire hoses, bright spot lights, and the ship's klaxon are the most common. Bulkhead doors that can't be opened from the outside for the bridge, engine room, and crew compartments are also cost effective defense mechanisms. There's even electrified fencing. However, a security system and procedures are only as good as the captain & crew's diligence and training in following them. Security procedures, done properly, are inconvenient, which is what makes them effective. Complacency, inadequate training and human error will compromise the best system every time.

---

Pirates are likely to give the ultimatum: "let us in or we'll sink you"

How many merchant ships can survive RPGs fired at them?

~:smoking:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

How would fire hoses in anyway reduce gunfire in the direction of the ship? Yes, as an option it would reduce the number of bullets traveling away from the ship, but who cares about those? Pirates would be shooting at the boat aiming at guys controlling hoses instead of guys shooting firearms.

Good sentiment, though - something needs to be done and simply nay saying anyone's ideas isn't going to get anyone anywhere.

(ASIDE - Hosa: what do you think about Giuliani and his possibility of picking up Hillary's or Patterson's seat? There is a discussion going on in the election thread.)

---

Here's a link describing some of the methods used. Scroll down to the heading, Combating Piracy. The pirates involved in taking these big ships aren't fools, just the opposite. Boarding a huge ship from a small boat is best accomplished by stealth or guile not with guns blazing. Shooting at an oil or lpg tanker is risking suicide by fire and/or explosion, not much profit in that.
The latest seizure demonstrates that these pirate syndicates are adjusting their tactics by expanding their area of operations farther out to sea. Probably because of the increased awareness of pirate activity by crews when closer to shore, and the relaxation of vigilance when farther out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rory_20_uk

Pirates are likely to give the ultimatum: "let us in or we'll sink you"

How many merchant ships can survive RPGs fired at them?

~:smoking:

---

Erm...quite a few actually.

My Father was an engineer onboard merchant ships during the 80's, and was paid danger money due to the fact that an oil-tanker he worked on during the Iran-Iraq war was frequently courting danger. He says that his ship's sister-ship got hit by an anti-tank missile, straight to the bridge, among other things.

Basically, large merchant ships can survive a hit from rusty old RPG's. Sure, it leaves an unsightly hole in the side of the hull, but they don't sink, and there's a low probability of it causing damage to essential system. That, and they couldn't hit the side of a barn, nevermind a giant ship, with an innaccurate RPG, from a few hundred metres away.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hosakawa Tito

Here's a link describing some of the methods used. Scroll down to the heading, Combating Piracy. The pirates involved in taking these big ships aren't fools, just the opposite. Boarding a huge ship from a small boat is best accomplished by stealth or guile not with guns blazing. Shooting at an oil or lpg tanker is risking suicide by fire and/or explosion, not much profit in that.
The latest seizure demonstrates that these pirate syndicates are adjusting their tactics by expanding their area of operations farther out to sea. Probably because of the increased awareness of pirate activity by crews when closer to shore, and the relaxation of vigilance when farther out.

---

How expensive would a centrally located body heat sensor be? Are these ships picked up at night or during the day?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Well first a silly suggestion of guns being the answer now he suggests chemical warfare .
But OK lets humour the creature ...what problems do the use of lime as a weapon in any environment let alone a maritime environment pose to the defenders who use it :dizzy2:


have you ever considered thinking before you type ?

---

Did you consider, prior to posting this one, that the English language contains many ways to indicate you believe someone is wrong without being personally insulting at the same time? :shame:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mikeus Caesar

Erm...quite a few actually.

My Father was an engineer onboard merchant ships during the 80's, and was paid danger money due to the fact that an oil-tanker he worked on during the Iran-Iraq war was frequently courting danger. He says that his ship's sister-ship got hit by an anti-tank missile, straight to the bridge, among other things.

Basically, large merchant ships can survive a hit from rusty old RPG's. Sure, it leaves an unsightly hole in the side of the hull, but they don't sink, and there's a low probability of it causing damage to essential system. That, and they couldn't hit the side of a barn, nevermind a giant ship, with an innaccurate RPG, from a few hundred metres away.

---

Apart from your obvious almost racist comments you're forgetting that they don't just have one single round to fire. Noone even said their weaponry is old and outdated, remember some of them made millions before and can afford more modern weaponry as well as bigger ships for themselves.

IIRC they also have motherships they use to launch operations from etc so it's not just a bunch of Untermenschen in a paddle boat armed with rusty old kitchen knives trying to look for a ladder the crew has conveniently let down for them. :dizzy2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Furunculu5

I have a lot of sympathy for the view expressed here:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/m.../19/do1908.xml
that we brought this piracy on ourselves.

---

I think the opinion expressed by that writer is wrong.

Piracy is nearly as old as shipping. Banditry is older only because ships were developed later in history than were feet.

Anywhere where the "powers that be" do not patrol and work to prevent this craft it will flourish. After all, piracy -- from the pirate's perspective -- has always had a great cost-benefit ratio. Greed has always been a component of human nature.

So, what will this author pin on Bush43 once they've run out of current events to characterize? WW2? The Crusades? Stuff and piffle.