Org Mobile Site
Thread: Piracy makes a comeback
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.
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.
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...
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
), but our ships could need assistance.
No Norwegian ships have been captured so far (not that the priates havent tried
), but our ships could need assistance. 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
, 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.
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
, 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.Originally Posted by :
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 .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.
So you cannot really blame Americas screw ups in Somalia as a whole for the events in that region of Somalia .
Originally Posted by :
That battleship would be the equivalent to a 17th century frigate, no?
Correct , the answer is no .That battleship would be the equivalent to a 17th century frigate, no?
The New Jersey is a battleship which would be a battleship .
Originally Posted by :
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 .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.
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 .
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.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 .
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?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 .
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.
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?
"Millons for defense but not one penny for tribute". Paying ransom only encourages the criminal element to increase their predation.
Originally Posted by :
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 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 .
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?
Originally Posted by :
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? 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?
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. 
That's also one of the reasons I wouldn't support it.
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.
Originally Posted by CrossLOPER:
Hire pirates to pirate the pirates.
100% WINZ.Hire pirates to pirate the pirates.
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.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
oh NVM
Originally Posted by :
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-officialOn 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.
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.
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
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.
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
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.
Originally Posted by Jolt:
What's with all the ruckus? CrossLOPER has already won the thread with the ideal solution.
100% WINZ.
THANK YOU.What's with all the ruckus? CrossLOPER has already won the thread with the ideal solution.
100% WINZ.
I like your eaglespeak blog Tuff , especially the muppets repeating the we won in Iraq bull
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 ?
Originally Posted by :
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) . 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.
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 ?
Originally Posted by :
Stick Armed People on your Ships...
Another one with no understanding at allStick Armed People on your Ships...
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
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 ?
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...
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?
Originally Posted by Tribesman:
I like your eaglespeak blog Tuff , especially the muppets repeating the we won in Iraq bull
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)."I like your eaglespeak blog Tuff , especially the muppets repeating the we won in Iraq bull
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
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
.
You don't need armed personell onboard. All you need is a Norwegian captain
.Originally Posted by Sigurd Fafnesbane:
Come on ...
You don't need armed personell onboard. All you need is a Norwegian captain.
Nope, they're all busy right now.Come on ...
You don't need armed personell onboard. All you need is a Norwegian captain
.Originally Posted by :
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.
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.
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:They say that we have won/are winning Iraq because it is true. It has been costly, but we have won/are winning.
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.
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.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.
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?
Originally Posted by :
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 .Because then people would get killed.
Originally Posted by :
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 .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...
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
Originally Posted by :
These funds go toward financing extremism and the destabilization of healthy authority in Somalia.
What healthy authority???????These funds go toward financing extremism and the destabilization of healthy authority in Somalia.
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 .
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.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 .
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.
Originally Posted by :
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 ?I'm not saying that rambo should take back the ships, I'm saying that the ships should repel the boarding.
Originally Posted by :
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 .I want our government to recognize Somaliland and any regional governments who get their stuff together within Somalia.
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.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO