# The Somali Pirates



## Bill Mattocks (Apr 8, 2009)

As most of you know, the country of Somali has had no government for over a decade.  There is no one in charge, just a bunch of warlords who battle over turf, and some radical Islamic organizations trying to move in and take over and impose Sharia Law.

And, a lot of pirates have found a fun game, taking over (generally unarmed) cargo vessels of all nations, forcing them to Somali ports, and then ransoming the crew, cargo, and ships.  This has been going on for some time.

Recently, things have stepped up a bit.  Some nations (including ours) have started doing some loose escorts, and they've caught a couple pirate outfits and saved a few ships.  Strangely, the rules of engagement seem to preclude sinking the pirate's vessels, or keeping the crews once they're captured.  They appear to just be letting them go.  Very weird, given how we deal with suspected terrorists (and this was on former President Bush's watch, it's not a recent President Obama thing).

Today, the Somali pirates took over a US-flagged cargo ship, and captured its American citizen crewmembers.  They apparently decided to fight back (haven't heard of that before in these cases) and won the ship back, but the pirates are adrift in a lifeboat with the captain of the vessel.  The nearest US ship is 300 miles away, making steam towards them.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-somali-pirates9-2009apr09,0,4104857.story

My question - why the heck are we not simply attacking and sinking these pirate vessels on sight?  Why are we not lining up the pirates once capture them and shooting them and tossing their bodies overboard?  The law of the sea says capital punishment is quite fine for piracy, and the captain of the vessel has the authority to mete it out.  Why are we not bombing the living crap out the ports in Somalia where these ships are taken once captured (I mean, before they get the ships there)?

I am not getting this.  We should be doing _"The shores of Tripoli"_ thing on their pirate asses.  What's up with that?  I'm not talking about invading, we all saw "Blackhawk Down."  I mean why aren't we blowing up pirates on sight?


----------



## Andy Moynihan (Apr 8, 2009)

I know there have been times we've differed on the finer points of certain discussions here and there, but on this point I am 100% with you.

Were I king, that is exactly what WOULD be happening. But since I'm not, we're stuck with it.


----------



## MA-Caver (Apr 8, 2009)

Well if we wipe out piracy we wipe out a significant portion of the black market which would cut significantly (again) into the pockets funding the black market and we all know who THAT is....


----------



## Gordon Nore (Apr 8, 2009)

Bill Mattocks said:


> I am not getting this.



My question: Why is the world not enraged? 

This has been going on for some time. Other ships have fallen prey to these thugs. The Alabama is on a humanitarian mission. The vessel is not armed. The crew are not military.

I was just watching a report about this on CNN, and the anchor was explaining that area of this waterway is four times that of Texas. What a nightmare to patrol. Surely more can be done.


----------



## Empty Hands (Apr 8, 2009)

Perhaps there are political issues with the state of things in Somalia.  Perhaps we don't want to upset the apple cart there and empower the radical Muslim movements in the region.  Perhaps there are national disagreements between the affected nations on how to handle it that are keeping us from taking action.  Perhaps no warships have met up with these clowns in international waters.

Also, it's not like these guys fly the Jolly Roger.  Until they attack a vessel, there is no way of knowing who are pirates and who aren't.  And when they attack a vessel, armed forces are generally far away, and the taken vessel and crew are in Somali waters before anything can be done about it.


----------



## 5-0 Kenpo (Apr 8, 2009)

This will cause companies like Blackwater, Triple Canopy, etc., to expand their operations.  Some already do training on anti-piracy operation.

Of course, it will only be when the price of goods goes up in American, or a whole crew of Americans is killed that we will put any serious effort into combating this threat.


----------



## grydth (Apr 8, 2009)

Bill Mattocks said:


> As most of you know, the country of Somali has had no government for over a decade.  There is no one in charge, just a bunch of warlords who battle over turf, and some radical Islamic organizations trying to move in and take over and impose Sharia Law.
> 
> And, a lot of pirates have found a fun game, taking over (generally unarmed) cargo vessels of all nations, forcing them to Somali ports, and then ransoming the crew, cargo, and ships.  This has been going on for some time.
> 
> ...



Probably the same loss of will and nerve that's behind our letting the gd Iranians murder and horribly maim our soldiers with their cowardly IEDs for years in Iraq. What price have they paid?

Actually, death was THE sentence for piracy for centuries and pirates caught knew they faced being hung at dockside. Even Jefferson, by no means a warmonger, went into Tripoli and cleaned out that rat's nest.

Now, the "civilized" nations answer pirate RPGs and MGs, if at all,  with noise, smoke and water hoses. Wonder why the piracy plague is spreading at such a rate..... We may ultimately decide to get really tough and tell the UN on 'em, a tactic that has succeeded admirably with Iran and North Korea.:uhohh:

I think it all has something to do with complete loss of bone mass at the spinal column.


----------



## Deaf Smith (Apr 8, 2009)

I'm beginning to think the old 'escort carrier' ought to be brought back. No, not with F4Fs but with UAVs. 

Yes a small 500 ton ship with a flat top. UAVs armed with HellFires. The 'pilots' can be back in the USA and fly them from there. Each UAV would have 12 hr flight time and at last 1000 mile range. The carrier would be able to cover any ship within say 600 mile radius. 

Just station one ever 600 miles in the danger area, several hundreds of miles off shore. With night vision, radar, infared, and other goodies they should be able to pick up any pirate ship or destress signal from a ship and go rain some bad news on the pirates.

Neat thing is, using the same technology the cargo ships use, the UAV escort carrier would have only 20 or 30 crew members (but most definatly armed!)

Deaf


----------



## grydth (Apr 8, 2009)

An inspired idea..... but for even the best weapon to be successful requires the will to use it.

Could you just see us whimpering to the UN after the pirates hijacked one of the new ships?


----------



## jarrod (Apr 9, 2009)

most of you know i'm not exactly hawkish, but like bill i don't understand why the navy isn't on a constant search & destroy against pirates.  this isn't like fighting insurgents.  are they in a boat?  check.  do they have an RPG?  check.  fire away.  

jf


----------



## Makalakumu (Apr 9, 2009)

This is probably the most appropriate use of the US military that I can think of.  I disagree with all of the imperialistic cowboy stuff, but in this instance, our Constitution is clear, these *******s need to go to the bottom.


----------



## CoryKS (Apr 9, 2009)

Empty Hands said:


> Also, it's not like these guys fly the Jolly Roger. Until they attack a vessel, there is no way of knowing who are pirates and who aren't. And when they attack a vessel, armed forces are generally far away, and the taken vessel and crew are in Somali waters before anything can be done about it.


 
Maybe we could have Jeff Foxworthy write up a list for them.

If you are in a speedboat in the middle of the ocean... you might be a pirate.

If you are driving your speedboat toward a freighter... you might be a pirate.

If your crew consists of four skinny guys in t-shirts holding AK-47s... you might be a pirate.


----------



## jim777 (Apr 10, 2009)

The ransoms usually paid are in the tens of millions; I think it is rather more cost effective to simply have 6 or 8 VERY heavily armed guys on each possible targer ship working in the area. If an outboard motor powered raft approaches your tanker 300 miles off the coast, blow it out of the water. It seems easy enough.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Apr 10, 2009)

The captain tried to escape, got caught again.

Someone tell me why we didn't have snipers on the bridge of the frigate to pick off the pirates as they neared the captain in the water until we could get a rope to him.  I'm so not getting this.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/10/AR2009041000881.html


----------



## Omar B (Apr 10, 2009)

I've always wondered how these guys get close enough to these ships to board.  Radar does not see them?  Men not walking the deck?  Plus when they sidle up by the ship it's easily 20 feet up to the deck, that's no easy climb in a rolling sea, how can they take the ship so easily?  

Seems you keep hearing about these things.  This is not a US military problem, it's a world problem.  where are all the other countries, why are they not manning up?  It's a huge area of sea to watch, we cannot be the world's guardians when it's international commerce.


----------



## Makalakumu (Apr 10, 2009)

I listened to a US Navy Colonel on NPR yesterday and he explained that the pirate situation really wasn't that important that the US Navy had other things to do.


----------



## seasoned (Apr 10, 2009)

Bill Mattocks said:


> The captain tried to escape, got caught again.
> 
> Someone tell me why we didn't have snipers on the bridge of the frigate to pick off the pirates as they neared the captain in the water until we could get a rope to him. *I'm so not getting this.*
> 
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/10/AR2009041000881.html


 
Its the new era Bill of lets all just get along. Big ships picking on little ones would be bad press around the world, I suspect.


----------



## seasoned (Apr 10, 2009)

jim777 said:


> The ransoms usually paid are in the tens of millions; I think it is rather more cost effective to simply have 6 or 8 VERY heavily armed guys on each possible targer ship working in the area. If an outboard motor powered raft approaches your tanker 300 miles off the coast, blow it out of the water. It seems easy enough.


 

If they board the ship they are pirates, if we blow them out of the water as they approach, they are tourist, out for a boat ride. I dont think you can win either way.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Apr 10, 2009)

maunakumu said:


> I listened to a US Navy Colonel on NPR yesterday and he explained that the pirate situation really wasn't that important that the US Navy had other things to do.



No Colonels in the Navy.  Perhaps a Captain or a Commander?


----------



## elder999 (Apr 10, 2009)

seasoned said:


> If they board the ship they are pirates, if we blow them out of the water as they approach, they are tourist, out for a boat ride. I dont think you can win either way.


 
Piracy is as old as sailing the seas. The best way to deal with it is also as old as sailing the seas:_Prepare to repel boarders._%-}iratebooiratewheirate5:irate2:


Seriously, merchant vessels are going to have to be armed, stand watch, and be prepared to defend themselves. It might mean more work for Blackwater, or Xe or whatever they're calling themselves, since they've got the training, and can give the training, and can hire out personnel,  but there it is. It's not the U.S. Navy's job to patrol waters off the coast of Somalia, or to protect U.S. merchant vessels-however few of them there actually are.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Apr 10, 2009)

I say Bomb the ports that unload pirated cargo.
Sean


----------



## Empty Hands (Apr 10, 2009)

Omar B said:


> I've always wondered how these guys get close enough to these ships to board.  Radar does not see them?  Men not walking the deck?



Radar for a small boat, sometimes outboards, on heavy seas?  Not a chance.  As for standing watch, these huge ships nearly run themselves.  Crews are kept at a minimum as a cost saving measure.  That and the crewmembers rather prefer to stay inside where the ships are equipped with world class luxuries.



Omar B said:


> Plus when they sidle up by the ship it's easily 20 feet up to the deck, that's no easy climb in a rolling sea, how can they take the ship so easily?



Now that I don't know.


----------



## Ninjamom (Apr 10, 2009)

Anyone see the movie, "Master and Commander"?

Would love to see a 'merchant vessel' fully armed and loaded with marines waiting for the hapless pirate who dares to try n board.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Apr 10, 2009)

Ninjamom said:


> Anyone see the movie, "Master and Commander"?
> 
> Would love to see a 'merchant vessel' fully armed and loaded with marines waiting for the hapless pirate who dares to try n board.



WWI and WWII: Q-Ships:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q-ship


----------



## Makalakumu (Apr 10, 2009)

Bill Mattocks said:


> No Colonels in the Navy.  Perhaps a Captain or a Commander?



LOL its pretty easy to tell I was never in the military!  I was grading papers at the time.  He talked like he was some hoi poloi though and he had written a piece about the pirates that basically said they were not much to worry about and that it was more trouble to go after them.

His points, (that I remember) were...

1.  The US has not ratified the 1982 Law of the Sea treaty so it makes it very difficult to justify what we are doing to other countries who have.

2.  It's harder then you think to tell a pirate from a non-pirate.

3.  Blasting the Somalians again wouldn't look so good in the Muslim world...we are trying to win their hearts and minds remember?

4.  The US Navy has more important things to do like support two wars and extend American Hegemony across the globe.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Apr 10, 2009)

maunakumu said:


> LOL its pretty easy to tell I was never in the military!  I was grading papers at the time.  He talked like he was some hoi poloi though and he had written a piece about the pirates that basically said they were not much to worry about and that it was more trouble to go after them.
> 
> His points, (that I remember) were...



Just FYI, 'hoi polloi' means 'common people'.  Lots of people get it backwards.



> 1.  The US has not ratified the 1982 Law of the Sea treaty so it makes it very difficult to justify what we are doing to other countries who have.



Don't need to justify it to others.  Our ship, our problem.



> 2.  It's harder then you think to tell a pirate from a non-pirate.



I suggest that the lack of an actual 'Jolly Roger' does not make it too difficult to tell when armed people make speed towards a cargo ship hundreds of miles from the coast of any nation.



> 3.  Blasting the Somalians again wouldn't look so good in the Muslim world...we are trying to win their hearts and minds remember?



Somalia is not a Muslim nation.  Somalia has no central government, and the warlords that control various parts of it are trying to fight off a unified Islamic extremist group intent on imposing Sharia law.  In this case, the pirates are actually against the Muslims, so blasting them should make the Islamists happy.



> 4.  The US Navy has more important things to do like support two wars and extend American Hegemony across the globe.



Protecting our ships and citizens from being hijacked is extending hegemony?  Well, forgive the crap out of me, but I find that about as idiotic a statement as I've ever heard of a gold-plated squid's mouth, and that's for sure.  That rear-echelon rust-picker is really full of it.  No offense to you, my ire is directed at the deck ape who doesn't know his a-hole from his elbow.


----------



## Omar B (Apr 10, 2009)

Ninjamom said:


> Anyone see the movie, "Master and Commander?"  Would love to see a 'merchant vessel' fully armed and loaded with marines waiting for the hapless pirate who dares to try n board.



I love love love that movie (and the books for that matter).  It's like the Star Trek movie that never got made.  Funny thing is, a lot of people  have come to that same ST/M&C connection.


----------



## Andy Moynihan (Apr 10, 2009)

I'd like the pirates killed now, please.


----------



## Big Don (Apr 10, 2009)

Andy Moynihan said:


> I'd like the pirates killed now, please.


Well, we're waiting...
Send in the Ninjas


----------



## Makalakumu (Apr 10, 2009)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Just FYI, 'hoi polloi' means 'common people'.  Lots of people get it backwards.



Good comments, Bill.  I agree.  This surprised me because I've only ever heard the word in our current cultural context and I thought I knew what it meant.  I wonder how the meaning got completely flipped?  Anyway, I learned something new!  Danke!

Oh yeah, kill the pirates.


----------



## jonbey (Apr 10, 2009)

Bill Mattocks said:


> My question - why the heck are we not simply attacking and sinking these pirate vessels on sight?



The Indian navy did sink a pirate ship (apparently the pirates opened fire on a Navy ship, so they fired back). And on the BBC news this evening they reported that the US Navy is heading over, so maybe a war on pirates is about to start.

I was wondering last year after hearing about these pirates, is how did pirates manage to get so cool? All through my childhood pirates were considered a jolly bunch of slightly criminal, mostly drunk, sailors. Hollywood has made many films about them, portraying them as loveable rogues. I even have a pirate pop-up book! However, history has always seen them as nothing more than cruel, heartless, murdering thieves. Why did we make them cool? Is this part of the reason why no-one took them seriously for so many years?


----------



## grydth (Apr 10, 2009)

Yet another Hollyweird fiction. Not too all different from their faux romanticizing of Depression era gangsters and Western outlaws.... most of whom were murderous psychotics.

You did not want to be on a ship pirates captured. For every actual 'gentleman' pirate, there were scores who'd as soon skin you alive as look at you.


----------



## Omar B (Apr 10, 2009)

Yeah, where are the ninjas?  Every time I read a Clancy book like rainbow 6 or Teeth Of The Tiger I secretly hope there's a team of dudes out there secretly keeping stuff in check.  So no Rainbow, no ninjas?  Whatever shall we do?

Oh, and don't get me started on Hollyweird.  Pirates are cool?  Robin Hood cool?  A thief, you kidding me.


----------



## Andy Moynihan (Apr 11, 2009)

Somebody page Chuck Norris.......


----------



## Omar B (Apr 11, 2009)

Andy Moynihan said:


> Somebody page Chuck Norris.......



He just left Texas to go handle this, and he's swimmin' ... dude's gotta warm up right.


----------



## Wild Bill (Apr 12, 2009)

The captain is free and most of the pirates are dead.  It's about damn time.  

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/piracy


----------



## Omar B (Apr 12, 2009)

Damn right!  They are playing it close to the chest but I'm guessing Seals.


----------



## arnisador (Apr 12, 2009)

Omar B said:


> Damn right!  They are playing it close to the chest but I'm guessing Seals.



Me too. I'd been expecting them to go that way.

Let me take this opportunity to exhort all those pirates out there to NOT GIVE UP! Pursue the captain back to the USS Bainbridge and take him back! Send every man you have--set every dinghy, lifeboat, and raft to sail! Don't let them intimidate you with all that talk of it being an "Arleigh Burke-class guided missile destroyer" or whatever. You can do it!


----------



## Omar B (Apr 12, 2009)

When I saw that article about them being freed all I could think of was when I read the book Rainbow 6 and thinking how they could have pulled this off.  Let me tell you, this could be a movie.


----------



## grydth (Apr 12, 2009)

Perhaps the actions of the French Commandos and the US Navy Seals will signal the era of playing patty cake with pirates is over.

It isn't hard to fathom: 

Don't use deadly force, pay huge ransoms = scourge of piracy.  
The only pirates who return are bodies washed ashore = let's go back to fishing.

Here's to a speedy reunion of that merchant captain and his crew - who showed that warships don't have a monopoly on courage.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Apr 12, 2009)

Wild Bill said:


> The captain is free and most of the pirates are dead.  It's about damn time.
> 
> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/piracy



Ooh-rah.  Made my day.


----------



## KenpoTex (Apr 12, 2009)

I dunno why the US government doesn't just issue Letters of Marque  irate:


----------



## arnisador (Apr 12, 2009)

Seriously, I think it may well have come to that.


----------



## Deaf Smith (Apr 12, 2009)

KenpoTex said:


> I dunno why the US government doesn't just issue Letters of Marque irate:


 
I don't know why we just covertly kill them all. We did it with the Phoenix project... It might be rough, but this is a rough world. But if we won't go that far then try this:

I've always wanted a UAV aircraft carrier. 5000 ton flat top with just UAVs. All the pilots can be sitting in the USA munching cheeseburgers. The CV-UAV (as I call it) could patrol a good 500 to 1000 mile radius and act just as the escort carriers did in the Battle of the Atlantic (consider the U boats pirates in a way.) 

UAVs can see at night, can fly for 12 hrs or more, are very quiet, and the pilots can take a leek anytime. And also carry HellFire missiles. 

Might not take 100 people to man such a ship using the same methods container ships use to keep the crew size down. And I bet even wood decks can be uses for takeoffs.

The only fly in the ointment I can see is it would be cheep. And you know how the government does not like cheep weapons.

Deaf


----------



## Big Don (Apr 12, 2009)

KenpoTex said:


> I dunno why the US government doesn't just issue Letters of Marque  irate:


Because that would be way too much fun for some of us...


----------



## matt.m (Apr 12, 2009)

Sorry,

This is going to seem course.  However: Haiti, Albania, etc. were like Somalia.  Bosnia, no different.  I loved my time in the Marines in the early to late 90's.  Look all we had to do was qwell disturbance for lack of a more political correct way of saying things.  I swear I am one of the most liberal people on the planet but it just makes me hang my head hang when I see how much crap is just let alone.  No gumption any longer.  Oh please before someone flames me, do me a favor......be a combat vet before you do flame me ok?


----------



## Andy Moynihan (Apr 12, 2009)

I'm glad at least some of the pirates are dead now.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Apr 12, 2009)

matt.m said:


> Sorry,
> 
> This is going to seem course.  However: Haiti, Albania, etc. were like Somalia.  Bosnia, no different.  I loved my time in the Marines in the early to late 90's.  Look all we had to do was qwell disturbance for lack of a more political correct way of saying things.  I swear I am one of the most liberal people on the planet but it just makes me hang my head hang when I see how much crap is just let alone.  No gumption any longer.  Oh please before someone flames me, do me a favor......be a combat vet before you do flame me ok?



Why flame?  I agree with you.

Semper Fi!


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Apr 12, 2009)

KenpoTex said:


> I dunno why the US government doesn't just issue Letters of Marque  irate:



You know, that could be part of the Economic Stimulus Package!  New companies springing up, hiring and training, and going out in search of booty.  And no, I do not mean boo-tay, I mean booty.  As in 'sighted ship, sank same'.


----------



## Omar B (Apr 12, 2009)

Dude, earlier there was a guy on Fox News being interviewed by Geroldo who once paid a ransom for his captured ship!  I'm not kidding, an American who's ship was seized by Somali pirates and he paid the ransom.  His reason?  He doesn't want to put anyone in danger by putting security on his ships, that just invites escalation.  So his rational is basically rolling over because he likes being passive.  Whatever happened to the balls?

Seriously, I would rather pay a buncha rednecks in a row boat to go over there and handle it that pay ransom that ends up buying bullets to create more victims.  If they rerun geroldo tonight you guys need to watch this joker.


----------



## matt.m (Apr 12, 2009)

Omar B said:


> Dude, earlier there was a guy on Fox News being interviewed by Geroldo who once paid a ransom for his captured ship! I'm not kidding, an American who's ship was seized by Somali pirates and he paid the ransom. His reason? He doesn't want to put anyone in danger by putting security on his ships, that just invites escalation. So his rational is basically rolling over because he likes being passive. Whatever happened to the balls?
> 
> Seriously, I would rather pay a buncha rednecks in a row boat to go over there and handle it that pay ransom that ends up buying bullets to create more victims. If they rerun geroldo tonight you guys need to watch this joker.


 

It is all this "Oh leave it alone and it will pass" "Don't egg it on by having security."  Nonsense "Do nothing and invite danger" is more like it.  Sometimes I miss my mark-19 and squad automatic weapon.  Still have K-Bar.


----------



## Archangel M (Apr 12, 2009)

I have to give it to the SEALS...that was a kick *** job.


----------



## Big Don (Apr 12, 2009)

matt.m said:


> It is all this "Oh leave it alone and it will pass" "Don't egg it on by having security."  Nonsense "Do nothing and invite danger" is more like it.  Sometimes I miss my mark-19 and squad automatic weapon.  Still have K-Bar.


Had there been a SAW on that ship from the beginning, the Captain would likely not needed rescuing... people, even armed people, hesitate in the face of force.


----------



## Gordon Nore (Apr 12, 2009)

Omar B said:


> Dude, earlier there was a guy on Fox News being interviewed by Geroldo who once paid a ransom for his captured ship!  I'm not kidding, an American who's ship was seized by Somali pirates and he paid the ransom.  His reason?  He doesn't want to put anyone in danger by putting security on his ships, that just invites escalation.  So his rational is basically rolling over because he likes being passive.  Whatever happened to the balls?
> 
> Seriously, I would rather pay a buncha rednecks in a row boat to go over there and handle it that pay ransom that ends up buying bullets to create more victims.  If they rerun geroldo tonight you guys need to watch this joker.



You would need sever bunches of rednecks. The Gulf of Aden / Indian Ocean territory, where the pirate ships are working, is one million square miles, five times the area of Texas. Think about how difficult it has been for Texans to monitor the boarder -- that's how big we're talking here.

The ship that rescued the captain was patrolling this region, but it's so vast, it took some hours to get there. Following this incident and another involving the French, it may well be that patrolling this region will become a greater military priority for many countries.

It won't be easy.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Apr 13, 2009)

Gordon Nore said:


> You would need sever bunches of rednecks. The Gulf of Aden / Indian Ocean territory, where the pirate ships are working, is one million square miles, five times the area of Texas. Think about how difficult it has been for Texans to monitor the boarder -- that's how big we're talking here.
> 
> The ship that rescued the captain was patrolling this region, but it's so vast, it took some hours to get there. Following this incident and another involving the French, it may well be that patrolling this region will become a greater military priority for many countries.
> 
> It won't be easy.



It's very easy.  You don't have to monitor the region, you don't care where the pirates are if your ships are not there.  You don't have to have a US Navy ship on station, either. Monitor the ships.  Put a platoon of Marines on every US-flagged ship with mortars and whatever the equivalent of the LAWS rocket are now, basic automatic weaponry, and no more problems.  Withdraw the Marines when the pirates decide that attacking US-flagged vessels gets them blown the hell up, each and every time.

It worked on the 'Shores of Tripoli' and it will work on the Shores of Somalia.  

http://www.grunt.com/scuttlebutt/corps-stories/proud/mailguards.asp


----------



## Omar B (Apr 13, 2009)

matt.m said:


> It is all this "Oh leave it alone and it will pass" "Don't egg it on by having security."  Nonsense "Do nothing and invite danger" is more like it.  Sometimes I miss my mark-19 and squad automatic weapon.  Still have K-Bar.



I hear you man.  Rolling over to demands does not assuage your attacker, it emboldens them!  The barrel of a gun is not an argument and it should not be treated as if it were, it's an invitation for your (the attacker) own death.  Pulling a gun is equal to "This is how I choose to deal with reality, please kill me."


----------



## 5-0 Kenpo (Apr 13, 2009)

From what I understand, the commander of the task force was under orders to shoot only if the captain's life was in danger.  The pirates put an AK-47 up against his head, and then they shot.

My question is, if they had this capability the whole time, why didn't they take it earlier? What was the purpose/necessity of negotiating with people they did not have to?


----------



## Big Don (Apr 13, 2009)

5-0 Kenpo said:


> From what I understand, the commander of the task force was under orders to shoot only if the captain's life was in danger.  The pirates put an AK-47 up against his head, and then they shot.
> 
> My question is, if they had this capability the whole time, why didn't they take it earlier? What was the purpose/necessity of negotiating with people they did not have to?


Because, for some reason, doing the right thing is never enough for the US, we also have to look like "NICE PEOPLE" when we do the right thing.
IMHO, we'd be better served with a reputation as those you do NOT want to piss off...


----------



## Big Don (Apr 13, 2009)

5-0 Kenpo said:


> From what I understand, the commander of the task force was under orders to shoot only if the captain's life was in danger.  The pirates put an AK-47 up against his head, and then they shot.
> 
> My question is, if they had this capability the whole time, why didn't they take it earlier? What was the purpose/necessity of negotiating with people they did not have to?


Because, for some reason, doing the right thing is never enough for the US, we also have to look like "NICE PEOPLE" when we do the right thing.
IMHO, we'd be better served with a reputation as those you do NOT want to piss off... Kinda like the treatment Islam gets in Europe...


----------



## astrobiologist (Apr 13, 2009)

Heyz ya for the U.S. Navy SEALS!!!!

That's how it should be done.  Go in, blast the pirates away (or slit their throats if necessary), rescue as many hostages as possible, and return the goods to the merchants.

I grew up loving the romanticism of pirate lore.  Indeed, when Disney released Pirates of the Caribbean so many Americans started sporting pirate shirts and quoting pirate lines and such.  The hard truth though is that most of the pirates of old were rapists and murderers, on top of being theives.  There may have been some who stuck to a code of honor and tried to be as kind to their hostages/victims as possible, but they were still robbing them and ruining their lives.  Piracy like that being conducted by the Somalis is wrong.  It's about time our militaries really started fighting back!

The French and the Americans have shown that we're not going to stand for it.  The Filipinos and Taiwainese and others need to start doing the same thing.  Negotiating with pirates does not solve a problem.  It reassures the pirates that they can continue to do what they've been doing.  If you give a mouse a cookie...  In this case, we need to say 'no'.  Forget giving money to the pirates, we should use our funds to actively fight them.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Apr 13, 2009)

5-0 Kenpo said:


> From what I understand, the commander of the task force was under orders to shoot only if the captain's life was in danger.  The pirates put an AK-47 up against his head, and then they shot.
> 
> My question is, if they had this capability the whole time, why didn't they take it earlier? What was the purpose/necessity of negotiating with people they did not have to?



Direct orders from the CiC, President Obama.

http://www.slate.com/id/2216003/



> President Obama had given standing orders for the Navy to take action if the captain's life was in danger, and as the situation seemed to grow tenser by the minute, Cmdr. Frank Castellano decided he had no choice and gave permission to fire.



With sniper activity, you have to have two things - a green light and the opportunity.  Apparently they had the green light subject to certain conditions.  As soon as those conditions were achieved, when they had all three remaining pirates clear, the Commander gave the order, and the President's order was fulfilled.

Let no one doubt that sniping is difficult.  Sniping from a ship to another ship is amazingly difficult.  Waiting for three head shots to present themselves cleanly AND the prisoner to be threatened at that moment - wow.


----------



## astrobiologist (Apr 13, 2009)

Like I said, thumbs up to the U.S. Navy SEALS who sniped those d-bags out!

I cannot stand the idea of negotiating with pirates (or terrorists or bank robbers or any criminals).


----------



## MA-Caver (Apr 14, 2009)

Well getting pwned by Navy Seals doesn't seem to do the trick for these guys. 


> *Somali pirates hijack 4 ships, take 60 hostages*
> 
> By ELIZABETH A. KENNEDY, Associated Press Writer        Elizabeth A. Kennedy, Associated Press Writer               10 mins ago
> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/piracyMOMBASA, Kenya  Somali pirates captured four ships and took more than 60 crew members hostage in a brazen hijacking spree, while the American captain freed from their grip planned to reunite with his crew and fly home Wednesday to the United States.
> ...


Hey, if they're willing to die for their lands... then lets start blowing them outta the water... and I mean blow them and their ships outta the waters. Less pirates and less ships/boats to do pirating from. 
These guys are going to keep going on until they get their way... 
Question now is how to rescue 60 people in one piece... not to mention dozens of others still being held hostage/captive by these cutthroats.


----------



## Gordon Nore (Apr 14, 2009)

Big Don said:


> Because, for some reason, doing the right thing is never enough for the US, we also have to look like "NICE PEOPLE" when we do the right thing.
> IMHO, we'd be better served with a reputation as those you do NOT want to piss off... Kinda like the treatment Islam gets in Europe...


 
Sigh.

Maybe, just maybe, this is not because of some liberal, do-gooder philosophy. Maybe it is preferable to begin with a negotiation -- or simply waiting them out -- because once the operation escalates to use of force, it's difficult (say, impossible) to return to a negotiating posture.

Maybe that was a really tricky shot those SEAL sharpshooters pulled off, in less than perfect visability from the back of a Navy vessel through a small window of a lifeboat, and it could have gone through the captain's skull.

Just sayin'.


----------



## arnisador (Apr 14, 2009)

MA-Caver said:


> Well getting pwned by Navy Seals doesn't seem to do the trick for these guys.



They're not organized. They may not even know.



> Hey, if they're willing to die for their lands...



They're dying for their next meal. Somalia is a political fiction.


----------



## CoryKS (Apr 14, 2009)

I like a dead pirate as well as the next guy, but as a Pastafarian I am compelled to point out that President Obama's reckless actions come at a terribly high price - the hastening of the global warming crisis.  Killing pirates make baby Al Gore cry.

http://www.americanthinker.com/piratesarecool4.jpg

/ramen


----------



## arnisador (Apr 14, 2009)

Seen on FMAT:


----------



## redantstyle (Apr 14, 2009)

awesome ^




> My question is, if they had this capability the whole time, why didn't they take it earlier? What was the purpose/necessity of negotiating with people they did not have to?


 
occurs to me it betters the odds if you can get one guy off the boat.


----------



## 5-0 Kenpo (Apr 15, 2009)

I certainly understand negotiations being a viable tactic.  Hell, shoot one guy and tell them that if anything happens to the Captain, the same thing will happen to them.  It's not like they were in this for the ideology.  Then, at least, I could understand that.

I just believe that if the opportunity might have presented itself prior to this, but without the specific threat to the Captain, why wouldn't we have taken it?


----------



## matt.m (Apr 17, 2009)

Man, if I was still serving in the Corps I would have been court martialed for sure.  Look, imminent domain man.  First and foremost is never let the ship get boarded under any circumstances.  That was so stupid.  Look the rules of engagement clearly state "Use of force when necessary".  That means if gloom and doom are coming then do what you need to send gloom and doom packing.

This is why not everyone is meant to be a Marine, a S.E.A.L, Ranger, whatever.  If you can't pull the trigger without hesitation for what is necessary then for the love of god don't do anything to go into harms way.


----------



## kaizasosei (Apr 18, 2009)

I too have wondered how on earth it is still possible, in this day and age, to pirate the seas in such a way.  Even if the area is vast, i was stunned to see the western world putting up with piracy issue in that they were not invading or setting up major security operations. 

Most likely, these pirates don't just fall off the couch, get together and decide to go out pirating.  There are probably, warlords that are responsible.  Not saying this is the case with all the incidents, but i'm guessing there is a strategic aspect to these occurances rather than merely a desperate cry for attention.  As we know that many of the terrorists are often, if not completely brainwashed, people that have lost much.  That means, some losing their family or their home.  These are pissed off people and they are probably more than eager to die at the hands of the west.  Being eager to kill always at least slightly questionable and one needs to wonder what the repercussions would be to your karma, your concience or more importantly your family as well as your general interests. 
Furthermore, some already have had a taste of blood and are aware of what they're up against.  So that means, they don't care the odds are against them.  They're hungry and envious if not indignant about the state of world affairs.
Also, one has to try and stop this problem at the source because the pirates that carry out the seiges are expendable and chances are there are hords and hords of wouldbe new pirates ready to rock.  

What baffles me is that with all the technology we have, i can imagine a number of ways to deal with this problem many of which are relatively nonviolent or at least not in such a position to be scrutinized.

Hey, have you guys ever seen american ninja 1. I know this is silly but you need to examine the storyline of that oscarwinner(not). 
Here's some lines from the movie....
  'We've got a touchy situation with these rebels.  We're understanding orders not to provoke any incidents.  There was nothing in that convoy Worth protecting.'

Keep in mind, it is not easy detetcting pirates, because they can easily see to it that they have countless unarmed squads roaming around for the single purpose of creating confusion and misdirection.  So that means, that by the time they hoist the jolly roger, it's already too late.

j


----------



## kaizasosei (Apr 18, 2009)

Sorry for double posting.  

Hold them horses jeeves!
I just was told by a friend of mine that the reason for this piracy issue and why it exists in the first place is that the huge commercial fishing liners have emptied out the sea of fish.  The fishermen who are poor to begin with, turn to piracy because it is an easy buisiness to get into and the potential profit is high.
  So they aren't really pirates at all.  They are angry and desperate fishermen as far as i have been told.

Sure it doesn't justify their actions, but apparently they first started targeting the foreign fishing vessels and when they saw how profitable piracy can be, they expanded.  It's not just the pirates.  The millions that they have extorted has been disperesed throughout the area, so that many people are now actually living of the pirated loot and consequently produce more pressure to continue the pirating and bring forth more pirates.



j




j


----------



## redantstyle (May 10, 2009)

"hungry people dont stay hungry for long"


----------

