Piracy makes a comeback

[Crazed Rabbit]

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

[Sasaki Kojiro]

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.

[Strike For The South]

oh NVM

[Yoyoma1910]

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

[ICantSpellDawg]

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.

[Tribesman]

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

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 ?

Stick Armed People on your Ships...

Another one with no understanding at all

[Seamus Fermanagh]

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.

[ICantSpellDawg]

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)."

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.

[ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88]

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

Someone who has touble with the armed guard argument .

See, using non-lethal weapons to defend your ships are nice, but what happen if they don't work? You screwed Tribes. Sure, people will get killed, but you think it be any different if the crew don't have any weapons, + the pirates are violent and their demands are not met? How they to defend themselves? Throw Rocks at the pirates Tribes ?

[Crazed Rabbit]

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.

[Tribesman]

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

[JR-]

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.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

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.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

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


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?

[yesdachi]

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

Is scurvy a chemical weapon?

[Seamus Fermanagh]

These thugs don't attack cruise liners. Though go after cargo vessels.

They do not want a confrontation, they want the first moment you notice they're on board to be the moment they tap you on the shoulder with the muzzle of their Kalishnikov.

Given the crew size on modern merchant shippping, the idea of an active defense is laughable. They've been working hard to get the crew of a mega-merchant BELOW 30 people. A half dozen zodiacs mean the pirates outnumber their opposition. Arm the merchies all you want, they don't have the crew to both sail and defend the ship anymore. In fact, history suggests that they seldom did even in the old ragwagon era.

Moreover, does anyone here understand just how difficult it is to mount a successful defensive watch under the varied conditions involved? Suffice to say, I believe the answer is "more than those 30 crew can reliably do in their spare time." Remember, the only ones on those ships now have busy jobs -- there is no need for "waisters" to haul ropes and run capstans. So any active armed defense would involve each merchant shipping, effectively, a group of marines. Some companies may be willing to go to such an expense, but most will just get the insurance and transfer the bulk of the risk that way.

The most effective "defense" is observant watchstanders and a radio. Manuever to make intercepts difficult and call in the "cavalry."

If their is a military solution to piracy, it does NOT rely on merchant ships trying active defense. Too impractical on a number of levels. Now, a navy Q-ship might make for a lot of fun....


Side notes: RPGs are a great weapon for pirates precisely BECAUSE they can't do significant damage to the ship. Their weapons are strictly anti-crew. They'd prefer to ransom you back with the ship/cargo, but any defense and they'll just chum you.

[yesdachi]

These thugs don't attack cruise liners.

Side thought: Think of the haul if they just picked up the cash and personal effects of the passengers.

[rory_20_uk]

Convoys.

I imagine one Frigate would be able to supervise several ships under most circumstances. Seeing as how at a distance from shore motherships would be required these would be detectable at a distance. These could be intercepted as required and nutralised as required.

I would have thought that this is better than several ships blindly trawling the area hoping to almost stumble over the somali pirates.

The cost would be no higher than having the ships there at the moment. I imagine that with the number of ships being taken is rising, insurance will eventually increase and so the cost of being in a convoy would be offset.

[Strike For The South]

Y'all see that? It's a golden opportunity passing right through our fingers.

Metaphorically AND literally

[Tribesman]

These thugs don't attack cruise liners. Though go after cargo vessels.

Well there was that Seabourn Spirit cruise liner , that was attacked by pirates with RPGs and machine guns , funny though since the heavily armed pirates were beaten by hoses and a loud siren .

They do not want a confrontation, they want the first moment you notice they're on board to be the moment they tap you on the shoulder with the muzzle of their Kalishnikov.

Yep , in the same way that a mugger couldn't give a damn if you have a concealed gun because he intends that you won't notice until it is too late for you to do anything .
Now I suppose an example might be needed for those that still can't grasp that guns might be the answer , and what better example than that kiwi Blake , a person whose actions have been described by some of his crew and the local police as not only very silly but downright stupid as they put the rest of his crewat serious risk , silly actions of course that led to his own death for the sake of an inflatable boat and a couple of watches ....So heres to Peter Blake , a great sailor but a bit of a silly bugger

Is scurvy a chemical weapon?

Nice
I wouldn't know about lime juice but that concentrated lemon juice that comes in a handy little squeezy bottle can work wonders if you want to give someone a good kicking but are unsure if you are able for the job

[JR-]

Yep , in the same way that a mugger couldn't give a damn if you have a concealed gun because he intends that you won't notice until it is too late for you to do anything .
Now I suppose an example might be needed for those that still can't grasp that guns might be the answer...........

that is a choice that some nations make, their decision, their consequences. i'm sure they're quite happy with it regardless of what people of other nations 'feel' on the matter.