Tanker taken to Somali pirate stronghold - Africa

You have to be kidding me.

U.S. and other naval forces decide — for now — against intervention

Sorry, but I for one would board the boat and shoot them all.

In 2008 there should be no pirate 'stronghold'

I was actually watching 'Leave It To Beaver' the other day, yes, that hokey old black & white show and the Beaver threatened to run away, but before he did, he told Wally that he was going to be a pirate or something and Wally told him, "There's no such thing as pirates anymore, Beaver"

Guess Wally was wrong!

__________________

Craig, I understand that you do not know much about tankers. Norway has always had one of the largest merchant fleets in the world. There has been many sea men in my family.

The pirates are aremd with guns and granates. What will happen if these are used on a tanker carrying liquid that takes fire easier than gasoline? You are not allowed to smoke on these vessels.


There are four solutions:

1. Status quo.
2. Escortes by military vessels.
3. Go around Africa.
4. Don't sail that route.

There was a 15 minute program on the topic on our Tv today. Some Norwegian ships are now preferring option 3.

__________________
Mini Network:: Financial information at your fingertips
Learn object oriented programming where it started

I live in NJ, not the Great Plains - I see the tankers off the Jersey shore and see the cruise ships in New York harbor and have seen the port facilities at Port Newark/Elizabeth. I know, its hazardous, but they are counting on your reluctance to respond. Any ship that is pirated, the response should be an 'immediate' boarding (you can demand surrender like they do in certain common law hostage situations). The pirates need to be concerned about what you're going to do to them, not the other way around.

And I agree, this should be a no brainer for the UN to respond to. Members of the UN with destroyers should be escorting ships.

Going around Africa is a solution, of course. But its a 'weak' solution. The solution 'avoids' the problem instead of 'confronting' it. Simply not sailing the route I don't think is feasible, the route from the Mediterranean through the Red Sea into the Indian Ocean is one of the most important trade routes in history.

Sometimes you have to be tough.

I think we can learn a lesson from the German commerce raiders in WWII (decoy targets)

__________________

Yes, but it is not war and civil persons run those tankers. If the vessel blows up, it can disappear in minutes. Think of the pollution and wild life in the area.

There are other solutions than the American. One permanent should be to assist Somalia in having a government that can control the shore line, so the pirates have no way to go.

__________________
Mini Network:: Financial information at your fingertips
Learn object oriented programming where it started

Yes, if the oil spills you have an Exxon Valdez on your hands. If it blows up and it burns, whatever burns would ostensibly have been destined to burn anyway in our gas tanks.

Yes, you do have lives at risk. I can empathize with those innocents who are on board, if I were one of them, I probably would also be clamoring to pay any ransom.

The response must be firm: no ransom, no escape permitted.

Because the corollary are future ships and future crews who are as yet unknown to us.

A similar analogy could be made of a civilian airliner hijacked in the middle of the Atlantic and headed for the US Mainland (or Europe's mainland); they will shoot it down.

I would say my proposed response is more in accordance with my own personal view on crime and disorder; it is not particularly American. I have very little tolerance for violent crime disruptive of legal commerce.

If the pirates anchored this ship in a pirate 'stronghold' - it implies, that at least in that area, the pirates ARE the de facto government. Notwithstanding, while I understand the desire to attack the perceived 'root cause' of the piracy, wouldn't you continue to protect banks from bank robberies despite the fact that bank robberies are increasing because of the weakened economy? You would want to make efforts to strengthen the economy (for other reasons of course), but still, at THIS PRESENT MOMENT, there is still a bank robbery to deal with. Same here, Somalia has a long term, chronic 'anarchy' problem

There are too many excuses in this world for people not to be doing something useful. I will always take a hardline on individuals getting in the way of people doing useful thing (particularly when the motivation is greed/profit) I will always support efforts to take the profit out of the illegal activity as quickly and as swiftly as possible.

Actually, Americans tend to let these things 'fester' while they ponder 'better solutions'

__________________

You have innocent lives at risk and a potential new Exxon Valdez. IMO, you can risk neither.

That could depend on the passengers.

I think there is at least a difference between America and Scandinavia.

That problem has to be solved. Nur Hassan Hussein
prime minister of Somailia since November 2007 says that violence should be used. So he agrees with you. I still mean that violence should not be used on the ships. In a way you say that innocent sailors shall do the job that the military have given up. The sea area in question is bigger than Texas. In my opinion, the only long term solution is to support the Somali government so they can control their own coast line. In a way, with your solution you leave it to civil vessels to "control" the coast line. It is no solution to arm these vessels, because of the explosive cargo that some of them carry. Either the ships should get military escort, the coast line controlled by one or another army or civil ships should be in their full right to go around Africa. Norwegian sailors at least, will not take or accept that they shall take the responsibility that should be taken at the national governmental or international political level. Even bees and ants have soldiers.

Conclusion: As a Norwegian, I will not risk a single civil life or oil tanker. Go around Africa, escort the vessels or help Somalia control their coast line. It is unacceptable that we shall gamble with civil lives and a fragile nature.
Your hard line is in my view a soft one. You leave it to civil seamen to take the risk. In addition we have a responsibility to care about the environmental effects of any action. Those effects should be kept to a minimum.

Leave the problem to the government, UN or any nation to have the rights to escort their ships outside the country border, that is in international water. If not, don't place the burden on civil ships and sailors where the government or international government have given up.

I stand by my conclusion, that assisting the Somali government to get control over their own coast line is the best solution.

__________________
Mini Network:: Financial information at your fingertips
Learn object oriented programming where it started

That is an accurate risk assement but belies the fact that the innocent lives and ship, with potentially harmul cargo', are already 'at risk'


Well, its not a cruise liner, but I see your point, if the person on board is 'important' enough I agree, in reality, it could influence decision making.

Perhaps it is the latent 'Viking' gene (that's a joke, seriously don't take offense)


And on that point we disagree. We both would prefer a peaceful resolution, but that must include the surrender of the pirates, the safe return of the crew and a release of the ship. If those conditions aren't met, then there is no choice but to resort to force.

Come on, you are misconstruing what I have written. It is NOT the job of civilians to enforce the law. Clearly civilians have some right to self-defense, but overall I am advocating that international navies, including the US Navy (which apparently is in the area) should respond to piracy threats in international waters.

Very true, the ocean is a large place. In the face of a piracy threat, you don't need to patrol an area the size of Texas, you only need to protect a certain 'narrow corridor' through the zone of danger.

No, sir, I would reject the notion that civilian vessels could operate in such a manner. I reject the notion that private persons/corporations, etc. are empowered to enforce international law.

In one of my previous posts, I simply referred to the German use, in WWII, of commerce raiders where they made military vessels look like commercial vessels. It was a German trick used in the face of a larger UK Navy. In this case here, you could theoretically 'tempt' the pirates out with a 'merchant' ship which is actually a military ship and 'ambush' them. On the open seas, its difficult to 'disguise' a US Navy destroyer.

I think the situation calls for some sort of military escort here. How many vessels pass through here each day. Would 12 destoyers do the trick?

I am assuming that you mean under a Somali army. Yes, I agree, it would be nice. But at this juncture, considering the recent history of Somalia, isn't the propsect of a stable government capable of exerting control over pirates, at best illusory?

Of course the ships MAY go around Africa is they desire, that is their RIGHT. As a matter of fact, insurance companies will respond to this with potentially increased premiums and perhaps even 'exclusions' which would prohibit a ship from travelling in the 'zone of danger' - so a ship, to be insured, may have to, or risk an uninsurable loss.

In any event, my point is that you cannot simply abandon this important sea route and pack up shop and just direct all traffic around Africa.

OK, so is this a roundabout way of saying that you would pay the inevitable ransom?

What exactly did I write previously to make you think that 'civil' seamen should assume the risk. In this particular instance, we have a pirated ship and a US Naval vessel. I'm not really following that.

And with all due respect, I don't disagree with your last position but respectfully suggest that you're going to be waiting quite a while to accomplish that objective. Its been 16 years since Bush/UN/Mogadishu/Black Hawk Down. In the interim, commerce needs to be able to get ships through there TODAY, TOMORROW, NEXT WEEK, NEXT YEAR.

__________________

Yahoo!

2 more ships: a grain ship and a fishing boat.

7 ships hijacked in the last 12 days.

This is outrageous.

__________________

I agree with cw1865. What the world needs now is a decisive action. The main advantage for the pirates and terrorists is the soft attitude of most democratic governments. If you make them pay for their follies and increase the human cost of their operations they will stop. You have enough fire power available in the nearby region especially from the US Navy and other countries including Russia and India. What we lack is the will to act - decisively and forcefully.

That is the problem. "laissez faire" has been the "solution" for too long. Now it is growing so large that it has to be solved.

Years ago my sisters man, captain of a Norwegian, ship experienced an attack. Pirates bordered the ship. He was strong enough to hold three pirates with knives and axes outside his cabin and trigger the alarm. Today the pirates are armed with machine pistols and grenades. If a problem is allowed to develop, it will escalate. As such it is comparable to the financial crisis. Now everybody call for regulation and often overreact.

The easiest solution is to sit at home and say that force should be used. Force should not be used on the ships (our at least). It would not have been accepted here to use force on Norwegian ships (as told above it is not allowed to smoke on some of these ships), that is why these ships find a second best solution and go around Africa. It is not the task of a small nation thousands of miles away to control the coast line of North East Africa. May be a cynical calculation, but per capita, one dead Norwegian sailor, is comparable to nearly 100 dead US sailors. The average crew on these ships are 25. Excluding the 19 hijackers, 2,974 people died in the nine-eleven attacks.

If the cost line is controlled by a navy, that will temporarily solve the problem. Helping the Somali government can solve the problem permanently.

It has been discussed here, at the political level, to send a destroyer to escort our ships. Norwegian ships have been attacked, but so long our canons loaded with cold water have been strong enough.

Link:

October 2008: United Nations Secretary General supports anti-piracy mandate extension

"United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has pledged his support for an extension of the mandate, given in United Nations Security Council resolution 1816 (2008 ), enabling States co operating with the Transitional Federal Government of Somalia to enter the country's territorial waters and use all necessary means in order to repress acts of piracy and armed robbery at sea, consistent with relevant international law. That mandate is due to expire on 1 December 2008, i.e. six months after the adoption of the resolution, on 2 June 2008".

Related:

"It is of utmost importance that ships transiting the gulf of Aden, and using Maritime Security Patrol Area, remain extremely vigilant and take full preventive measures in line with the ICS/ISF guidance, advice received locally, and the latest updates from bodies such as the International Maritime Bureau and the UK Royal Navy's Maritime Trade Organisation (MTO) in Dubay."

ICS and ISF Mariscene Newsletter - shipping industry news

See: Latest press releases and monthly news letters.

Heard of this project? If not, Google: Dubai Palm Island



Imagine a super tanker blown up in this area.

__________________
Mini Network:: Financial information at your fingertips
Learn object oriented programming where it started

Well, if the Norwegian government, or any other government does not desire international naval support, to support the right of transit for its vessels, I really don't have a problem with that. I wonder what the law of the 'high seas' is on that....canany naval vessel just simply respond? What is the current protocol? Do they even have one?

[quote=kgun;403146]It would not have been accepted here to use force on Norwegian ships[quote=kgun;403146]

This is where I am not quite following you. Are you saying that trouble off the coast of Norway, the equivalent of your coast guard will not respond and board a vessel.

Or are you saying that you just wouldn't board the oil tankers because they're too dangerous? Do you feel the same way about grain ships and fishing trawlers?

[quote=kgun;403146If the cost line is controlled by a navy, that will temporarily solve the problem.[/quote]

It would deter pirates, but I think they would hunker down and hide until they left.

Whether a ship arms itself is going to be up to the company operating the ship. They have a right to defend themselves. The arming should be proportionate to the threat posed.

__________________

"An Indian naval vessel sank a suspected pirate "mother ship" in the Gulf of Aden and chased two attack boats into the night, officials said Wednesday, yet more violence in the lawless seas where brigands are becoming bolder and more violent."

Nice.....see, here's the thing, the Somali pirates can only escalate so far. They do not have the resources to establish a direct threat to a traditional destroyer/escort vessel.

__________________

That is another place and another story. We control our coast line.
Oil tankers are not the most dangerous. There are much more dangerous chemical tankers. I don't know the exact policy of our government if a chemical tanker with high explosives were boarded. Personally, I know enough, that extreme care should be exerted. Neither do I know our policy if a ship with a less explosive cargo were boarded. I think it is our shipping companies that have taken an independent decision to sail around Africa.

Personally, I will not rule out that option when it is a realistic alternative.

I think our shipping companies think like this:

Safety for their crew is priority number one.

Two Norwegian super tankers disappeared completely in the Pacific some years ago:

• MS Berge Istra - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (227,550 metric tons -- There were two survivors)
• MS Berge Vanga - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (227,912 metric tons In November 1979. The ship vanished and the ensuing search operation yielded no results. 40 people lost their lives).

MS Berge Istra was, like its sister ship MS Berge Vanga which disappeared under similar circumstances four years later, a ship which could transport both oil and iron ore. After these two disappearances no more combination ships like this were built, and oil was never again transported alongside ore.

Now there are as far as I know ships with higher explosives, but much more care is taken.

Think of it: ships of more than 227 000 metric tons of dead weight (DWT) disappears from the ocean in minutes in relatively good weather.

Imagine the human and environmental tragedy closer to the coast.

__________________
Mini Network:: Financial information at your fingertips
Learn object oriented programming where it started

The Indian Frigate INS Tabar managed to sink that pirate ship - proving that pirates are no match against traditional well trained well motivated Soldiers. If you escalate the cost of operation for the pirates through search and destroy missions by the World's Navies, it will be a lot safer for the unarmed civilian merchant ships.

>>That is the problem. "laissez faire" has been the "solution" for too long. Now it is growing so large that it has to be solved.

Yes - unfortunately by force. I am as much at pains as you are - Kgun to resort to the use of force. But if the safety of the innocent civilian sailors warrants some hard decision and some harder action, so be it.

Quote from Hindu Bagavad Geetha:

"For the sake of a family an individual can be sacrificed; For the sake of a city, a family can be sacrificed;
For the sake of a country, a city can be sacrificed"

"In New York, the U.N. Security Council voted unanimously to authorize its sanctions committee to recommend people and entities that would be subject to an asset freeze and travel ban for engaging in or supporting acts that threaten peace in Somalia, for violating a U.N. arms embargo, and for obstructing delivery of humanitarian aid."

They voted to permit a committee to make a recomendation. You have to be kidding me. Sanctions...oh boy...its already against the law and they're recommending sanctions....

__________________

I will not tell you (write here) what I were told by Norwegian sailors how Israel and Russia had a tradition for reacting against pirates, and I am not able to confirme that it is true. It may be pure rumours.

But according to Cnn, Russia now strenghten their ships. A short term solution. The long term solution is not on the sea, but on land stabilizing Somalia.

__________________
Mini Network:: Financial information at your fingertips
Learn object oriented programming where it started

UPDATE 3-UN peacekeepers needed in Somalia--African Union - Forbes.com

The African Union is calling for UN peacekeepers.

"Forces from NATO, the European Union and elsewhere are trying to protect vessels on one of the world's busiest shipping routes, linking Europe to Asia, but many analysts say there can be no lasting end to the piracy without peace on land." {so this article essentially agrees with you}

"NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said on Thursday the transatlantic alliance would continue to patrol the seas, but rejected calls from Moscow for international forces to attack the pirates' land bases.
'Piracy is a very serious challenge and we have to fight it, but I think if you come to the part of these operations, for instance on land, then it is first and foremost up to the United Nations and not organisations like NATO to get deeply involved,' he told reporters during a visit to Ghana.
Diplomats say there is little hope of any speedy U.N. intervention. At an emergency meeting on piracy in Cairo, an Egyptian government spokesman said African countries were also unable to deal with the attacks and needed foreign intervention."

There is a general desire to stabilize Somalia, but no genuine political will to actually do something about it. So, yes, I agree that its the ultimate solution, but its not going to happen anytime soon and in the interim we still have a piracy problem.

__________________

Now admitted by the owner: Sun pirate ship was a Thai trawler.

Now Dutch special commander ships that say they can handle any form of piracy are in the area escorting sivil ships.

__________________
Mini Network:: Financial information at your fingertips
Learn object oriented programming where it started

You see, that is a positive development. The Dutch can do a little, the English, French, Indians, Russians, US, etc and before long it will sap the profitability out of piracy....

__________________

I never realized it would be as complicated. One would think a ship set out there as bait with highly-trained special-op forces hiding in every shadow and corner could seize a group of pirates without firing a bullet. I'm talking troops with ninja-like prowess that could make pirates disappear one by one if need be.

[updated]

Or how about ships that can be controlled remotely. Once it's overtaken and filled with pirates, remote-control that thing to a destination where troops are waiting to take them into custody. Or booby-trap it.

__________________
Domain Name Registration and Website Hosting :: DesignerTrade

Surely we should be sending escorts now, if this area has to be navigated then it is a small price to pay for not only the safety of the crews that run these vessels but also for the potential risk to the environment/wildlife/planet.

These pirates need to be treated with force, they are nothing mare than terrorists and as such should be shot without trial, in my humble opinion anyway, life can be crap enough without us putting up with this sort of thing.

Not wishing to offend anyone but it has to be dealt with and now

AreWeThereYet

A Somali pirate speks exclusively to Cnn.

1. Cirius star. 5 pirates were killed and USD 1/2 million lost in the sea, because their friends started firing from the beach on misunderstandings. Sirius Star left.
2. Hijacking is all about money. We will risk our life.
3. No ship is safe.

The solution lies on the beach / land.

__________________
Mini Network:: Financial information at your fingertips
Learn object oriented programming where it started

Really? What is your source on that one. I had read a completely different article on it.

Pirates on the Sirius Star drown with $3 million ransom | Herald Sun

Abukar Haji, the uncle of one of the dead men, said the deaths were an accident.

"The boat the pirates were travelling in capsized because it was running at high speed because the pirates were afraid of an attack from the warships patrolling around," he said.

Did you hear something different?

__________________

Completely different? It was from Cnn (Europe?).

I can only see that the numbers are different.

... because their friends started firing from the beach on misunderstandings.

That can be a misunderstanding since it is not my native language and sometimes I am multitasking.

__________________
Mini Network:: Financial information at your fingertips
Learn object oriented programming where it started

The problem is that -for example- Royal Marine SBS and USN SEALS could do the job and destroy the pirates. However, there's a lack of will in the governments, sadly.

__________________
http://thatsnews.blogspot.com http://thats-business.blogspot.com/ http://thatschristmas.blogspot.com

No word from Norwegian tanker hijacked off Somalia

"Salhus Shipping AS says its last communication with the ship was an e-mail Thursday saying 16-18 pirates carrying machine guns had gained control.

The company also released a breakdown of the nationalities of the crew.

Salhus Shipping says the Bow Asir has a Norwegian captain. Of the other 26 crew members, 19 are from the Philippines, five from Poland, one from Russia and one from Lithuania.

The Bow Asir was one of two ships hijacked Thursday in the same area off Somalia".

Salhus Shipping, company from my hometown.

EU NAVFOR ? ATALANTA / Two european ships hijacked Database of Press Releases related to Africa

"The 9 000-tonne Greek-owned and Panama-registered NIPAYIA was attacked 450 miles east of the southern Somali port of Kismayo on Wednesday afternoon and the BOW ASIR, a 23 000-tonne, Norwegian-owned and Bahamian-registered ship, was seized 250 miles east of Kismayo on Thursday morning".

Kismayo

kismayo somalia - Google Maps

is close to the border of Kenya. Our news reported that the ship was hijacked 400 Km off the coast of Kenya.

Related:

Greek and Norwegian tanker hijacked

__________________
Mini Network:: Financial information at your fingertips
Learn object oriented programming where it started

For the sake of a boat with commercial cargo, you can scafrifice a crew.

Don't mean that if your brother is piloting he SHOULD be sacraficed.

Does the letter from Albert Einstein men anything to you? You say you don't like violence, yet you continually espouse it. You 'don't like it' a lot less that others.

Yeah, let's up and blow away a few vessels and innocent crews.

Who are going to get to pilot ships after that?

It really pisses me off that not enough action is taken. There is something wrong.

My buddy who drives cab here just told me about another one got piped and stabbed four nights ago. The doctors said not to work for at least a week. The cab company told him to get back to work after two days. They will not pay him whatsoever for time missed.

Why the F*** don't BP buy escort vessels? There are police, of course, in society, I see them all the time we all do ofcourse. I also see security guards all the time.

Just to address cw, it doesn't have to take civilians to man weapons on a ship, I am sure mercenaries could be hired.



In any event, I am sure pirates have more tham small arms. I am sure that they sophisticated electronics as well. Jamming equipment etc. Rocket launcher. Tasers(inside joke to canadians). Joybuzzers(inside joke to your palm)

Nerve gas.

They(pirates) aren't risking their lives because they are just taking a small chance. It is all easy and well to talk about using shock and awe against them, but this is the marine equivalent of guerrala warfare. I haven't even mentioned the most obvious weapon/tactic. Try and guess what that shit is.
Nasty people do not **** around. They do not **** around. Another weapon they have is sheer numbers. See: war on drugs

Sigh... I should go read some links, I suppose, but on the surface (pun intended) it is the crews that make the decisions to take these risks and when they decide not to, well, then maybe some stronger action will get taken by the shipping companies.

People only let themselves get used. If they don't, then they don't.
BTW quote mean nothing. Even the one I alluded to

But

"For the sake of a family an individual can be sacrificed; For the sake of a city, a family can be sacrificed;
For the sake of a country, a city can be sacrificed"

Easy to say:

1. Civil sailors are not soldiers.
2. The solution is on land. That is the responsibility of the international community.

To repeat:

1. Civil sailors are not soldiers.
2. If that is your preferred solution, board some ships with marine soldiers clothed as civilians.

"Take thees risks"

1. The ship I am talking about was 400 km off the coast of Kenya.
2. Soon they will dominate the free ocean if action is not taken by the international community.

The permanent solution is on land. According to our news there are improvement on land, but the development is slow.

__________________
Mini Network:: Financial information at your fingertips
Learn object oriented programming where it started

"Just to address cw, it doesn't have to take civilians to man weapons on a ship, I am sure mercenaries could be hired." - mikmik

"Civil sailors are not soldiers." - kgun

Yes, indeed, they are not soldiers. Nevertheless, individuals have an inherent right of self-defense which should be proportional to the actual threat imposed by others. So, for instance if I were to take a row-boat out into the middle of a pond and I took an AK-47 for 'self-defense' it would be completely absurd, but on the other hand we do have instances in history where there are rational threats posed to merchant fleets. An excellent example is the Battle of the Atlantic where the US Merchant Marine were in combat situations against German U-boats. To train merchantmen in anti-submarine warfare in the context of WWII is rational.

Under the circumstances, it would seem to me that the overall threat posed by piracy at the very least demands some type of naval presence, perhaps even a carrier. The lesson learned from kgun's recent post is that the Somali pirates have adapted their tactics to operate farther from the coast into areas which hitherto had not been in the sphere of danger.

While I think that the 'ultimate' solution is 'on land' or rather a viable government able to execute the laws in Somalia, the political will simply does not exist in the international community to make this happen. In the interim, this valuable sea lane remains under threat.

The US and the UK have fantastic naval traditions with a standing navy clearly capable of dealing with this threat and yet they continue to permit the situation to fester. Why do my taxpayer dollars fund a Navy to begin with?

shame shame

Yet another crew and ship has been taken hostage until the owner or the insurance company behind the ship pays the ransom.

__________________

I would pack. The problem is getting dead the animals before gas you. Just saying, you know, escalation. Effin right I would have a weapon. If we can think it, WTF do you think these crewmen have thought of??? They know what's up dude. I forgot to wear my Devilskin today?

This is the major point I have against NRA shit.

If I think you are packing an rocket launcher and nreve gas and AK47thousand and Kung fu and chuck norris. Hmmm. What do I do next(heavy sarcasm).
You think I give a 3eff?

What do you think sociopathic psychotics will do to you, walk up and tell you they are going to hold you up give me your wallet and watch while you pull out your pea shooter??

Folks that think packing metal protects them scare me you knwo why?! If they are that fucking stupid they are my toy.

Don't ever think that being tough is a good idea, please. It is not. Please, I mean this with good intentions. Never let on. If ever one is packing, everone is gettin piped from behind, even the ones that ain't packin. My mom would never know hot to handle a six pound 9 mm, or whatevevr the heck they are called. She wouldn't have one.

Goof ball with IQ 84 been rpaed since day one by dad stitchin and twaeking at the best of times, what he doing to mom?
See, every one packing, that is the assumption. Poor feeble lady? Drop her first, akx where money is next. Big mouth proud of his sidearm? Nobody goin introduce self, dog. You guys got to understand that scary fucks thought of everything before you were born, let alone stalked you comin/goin.

That is just goofs that I hate with all my guts are like on downtown edm streets.

Pirates, they kiiled ther dads while they were sleeping. Perhaps. When I tell you guys about scary, you don't know. And then I can only imagine what nice boys can think up.

I am not intentionally just trying to be obtuse. I been scared before. And it happens just saying hi to some people.

That is why I project into these nightmares, or to me they are, and yes, I will never write a serial killer novel!

So, street shit one thing. lets get boat and arm up. Scary fuckers with logic.

Just trying to brainztorm here. You wait till you have AK47 pointed at you you didn't even consider could be there and then you turn around. It happenned me. Not nice feeling staring at that guy that means business. Thats stupid. He probably means 'you make one mistake, and I am deciding this shit, and I will be forced, son.
.

I will bet heavy that all crews do pack side arms. That is a bad idea. They may get lucky, but mostly they will just be giving a present to blackbeard. I don't know how to say how bad it feels when an asshole and his crew find a knife on you and start getting thamselves worked up the fact that I would use that on them if I could, and I was obviously planning that shit or I woulldn't have a knife on me in the first place.

I am just trying to impress about how nasty simple idiots are, so what about pirates? They are smart, well planned out, and nasty is probably putting it lightly.

Anybody gonna guess the weapon I am thinking of? I actually just thought of a better one. Bribery.

mikmik, I suspect you of jumping into this thread without reading from the beginning. Forgive me if I am wrong. Read above:

1. It is not allowed to smoke on some of these ships. Some of them are potential bombs.
2. Read about the two Norwegian super tankers that disappeared in the Pacific.
3. The least you wish on some of these ships is a gun fire.

I have thought of this:

1. There are marine ships in the area. Norway will send one in September.
2. Why is it not easier to identify these ships and use planes or helicopters before they reach the ship?
3. Is satellite identification impossible?

Exercise:

Try to estimate the human and environmental damages of a big ship blowing up in these fragile environments?

__________________
Mini Network:: Financial information at your fingertips
Learn object oriented programming where it started

The ships with dangerous cargo should be going around. You have to take them out of the equation.

Whatever naval task force is there absolutely requires air support, this is why I think a carrier is appropriate here.

The most important 'weapon' the merchant vessel has is its radio. It shouldn't need firepower sufficient to 'win' the battle, it needs firepower sufficient until support can arrive. In a theater as large as what we're talking about, by the time a destroyer were to arrive, it would be too late.

If a ship is boarded and taken I don't see this as being any different than if some person walks into a bank with a gun and holds hostages when the police surround it. The police will try to talk the perpetrator down, but if the perpetrator opens fire, the police will force entry. At no point do they simply 'let the guy go'

If a ship gets taken, the destroyers should then show up. If they shoot one hostage, you have to board the ship.

Your point about ships with dangerous cargo is well taken and they should be temporarily diverted until the situation is under control.

__________________

I agree to that, but it is not a permanent solution.

Is this Home Page what you mean? I agree to that to. The appearance may be enough to stop them until there is a permanent solution on land. The USA should supply the ship and other nations like Norway pay the operating costs. Dubay (see above map and the consequence of a ship blast) and other oil producing nations in the area should pay too. They pirates should pay the final price:

1. Disarm and stop them.
2. Then put them in jail.

Agree to that. The good old L60 should suffice. Radar steered L70 is overkill. I was a shooter on these canons when in my military service. Our hit percent on a moving air target were nearly as accurate as the radar steered L70. Easy to hit the target if you are a duck hunter (used to shoot ducks in the air). Very similar technique. It should not be difficult to change these canons from ship to ship while in the harbor.

Agree to that.

The permanent solution is on land.

The pirates have gambled too long with civil lives and fragile environments.

Note that Fn have made a resolution that the ships can take all the necessary steps to defend them self.

__________________
Mini Network:: Financial information at your fingertips
Learn object oriented programming where it started

You are correct, I don't read through enough.

Just reading this: cbc news - Do today's pirates have inalienable human rights?
Something I read in the comments there mentions convoys.

"Do pirates have inalienable rights?"

Yes.

I see no compelling reason why the pirates couldn't be tried. I don't even see why they couldn't use prosecutorial tactics similar to those employed against organized crime/mafia, ie. have 'privates' in the organization plea to lesser offenses and identify and testify against 'generals' in the organization.

"Why is it not easier to identify these ships and use planes or helicopters before they reach the ship?"

Well, something tells me that they're not flying the Jolly Roger

But in all seriousness, part of piracy is concealing your intentions as long as possible. Something tells me that they're probably pretty good at it.

Check out: German auxiliary cruiser Kormoran - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This merchant ship took out an Australian cruiser. Since it was a war, they called them 'commerce raiders' - point is they relied on guise and trickery to lure their target into a sense of security. If the pirates go out on a fishing trawler, area they fishing or are they pirating? THEY KNOW, but you don't....at least not for sure.

__________________

That implies large time losses. Ships may wait days. Neither a permanent solution like going around Africa.

Fishing 400 km off the coast of Kenya in small open speed boats? They are not suited for fishing and they burn too much gasoline to be profitable.

Professional fisherman don't normally (never) use speed boats. I have never seen a professional fisher using a speed boat in Norway.

1. One look at the boat should be enough for a trained eye.
2. You need fast boats to move faster than these ships.
3. Normal fishermens boats have no chance of following the ships.

__________________
Mini Network:: Financial information at your fingertips
Learn object oriented programming where it started

Hence my reference to electronics knowledge.

me, = I am just trying to impress about how nasty simple idiots are, so what about pirates? They are smart, well planned out, and nasty is probably putting it lightly.

Anybody gonna guess the weapon I am thinking of? I actually just thought of a better one. Bribery.

The nasty weapons are not arms. But I am thinking kidnapping ships crews. When a crew is reporting all's well will the ship be watched and checked?

I don't know, it seems there are so many ways for psychopaths to gain the upper hand.

The point is, is that security has to become cumbersome to cover all the bases.

I was just thinking about mines. Like a fishing trawler, but robots under water. A twenty foot shark like they used for filming jaws, now it has attatched to the ship's hull with however much explosive.

Reading to much about drones, I guess.

$5 billion(cost for piaticism a year) vs what in profits, I wonder.

When the Indian frigate destroyed the ship, they suspected that it was a 'mother' pirate ship. I think it turned out to have been mistargeted (that's a big oops)


No, you're right, they use fishing trawlers of course.

Perhaps, but my point is: don't underestimate the tactical abilities of your pirate adversary. Even in the 'age' of pirates, the pirates would fly various flags to appear benign.

OR you simply need to be in a place that you know your target will be. One method is by chance, ie. you're simply encountering targets. The other is sighting a target and relaying information about projected course/speed and then getting to an anticipated spot and lying in wait.

Do you really believe that they're 400 clicks off the coast of Kenya in a speed boat? I found the below article, probably written before the attack occured 400 clicks off the coast of Kenya referring to 'mother' ships and a range of 200 nautical miles (still pretty far)

Somali Pirates Changing Tactics

"Somali pirates, who are now holding a record 13 ships hostage, are attacking further out to sea and on two fronts to evade international security, a maritime watchdog said on Monday.
Noel Choong, head of the International Maritime Bureau's Piracy Reporting Centre, said the change in tactics increased the problems facing the multinational task force patrolling the Gulf of Aden and the Red Sea.
"As we advise the ships to sail further from the shore, the pirates are also doing the same. Now pirates are attacking on two fronts, it will be more difficult for coalition forces to patrol two areas effectively," he told AFP.
Choong said the heavily armed attackers were now operating simultaneously in the Gulf of Aden and on the eastern coast of Somalia and extending their range by operating from larger vessels.
"Pirates are now venturing 200 nautical miles or more from shore to attack and hijack ships. They are using a mother ship which could be a big boat like an ocean-going trawler, from where they launch smaller boats to attack ships."

__________________

It must be a question of logistics.
Here I am talking about electronics, I omitted visuals!
Oh, that was my reference to mercanaries perhaps using infrared scopes(or whatever) to watch the water. That might be an idea.
I did mention jamming electronics. That might have something to do with it.

These 'fast boats' do not just suddenly appear. Sure, they launch from benign(looking) boats.
I just think there is a lot more going on than a buch of sneaky dudes cruising up to a tanker and boarding it.
That does not make the slightest bit of sense to me.

Sure, there are 'spark free' enviournments. The pirates play buy the same rules, OKAY?
How do they gain control without threat of gunplay.
Whatever it is, they must be able to be countered by the same shaet, knives or whatever.

Plus, I doubt this is very relevent. I haven't ever heard of ships blowing up etc in storms where there is lightening. If there are flammable fumes escaping into immediate enviournment, everyone has the same field to deal with. My point is that you can still arm security guards with whatever the pirates are armed with.

In my opinion there are only (three) two and in the end one realistic solution(s). In order of priority:

1. The Somalis find a solution themself on land and the pirates (criminals) put in jail. That is the only acceptable long term solution.
2. One, two or three carriers with planes and helicopters are sent to the area.
3. (Intervention by Fn on land to establish a stable normal regime. But that may be a break on international law and for that reason not a solution).

Regarding 2. The carriers have to sail until a stable solution is found on land, so in reality there is only one solution, 1 above. The longer the problem lasts, the better equipped the pirates get and the problem escalates. If you don't use carriers with planes and helicopters the alternative is enough marine vessels in the area. That may be a little armada covering larger and larger parts of the Gulf and the Indian Ocean.

P.S. You can not wait with a ship in the open Ocean. It will be discovered long before they can attack. Earlier, Norwegian ships used water canons to stop them. The hijacked ship was most probably sailing round Africa and thought it was safe so far off the coast ot the Kenya. The international community can make resolutions, statements, talk and write. Only firm action will stop the increasing,

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27811485/

so long profitable, activity. Can the final goal be "control" of the world's ocean? I pose the question.

"But U.S. Navy Commander Jane Campbell of the 5th Fleet said naval patrols simply cannot prevent attacks given the vastness of the sea and the 21,000 vessels passing through the Gulf of Aden every year".

Source: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27766333/page/2/

Again:

1. How deep is the Ocean?
2. Is it natural to fish there?
3. What about the position and direction of the mother ship?

If a big mother ship was used, it would be natural for the captain and his crew to think that the ship was from Kenya. We have had very little information here of what exactly happened.

Latest news:
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...4-H2wD978EB703

"Somali pirates currently hold 11 ships hostage, with the oldest pirate hijacking dating back to last August, Christensen said.
Yemeni fishermen have also been targeted by pirates, and Yemeni media reported about 50 fishing boats were attacked over the past year. On Saturday, pirates opened fire on a Yemeni fishing boat, killing one fisherman and wounding two others, a Yemeni interior ministry official said. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because he wasn't authorized to speak to the press.
Somali pirates currently hold 11 ships hostage, with the oldest pirate hijacking dating back to last August, Christensen said.
Yemeni fishermen have also been targeted by pirates, and Yemeni media reported about 50 fishing boats were attacked over the past year. On Saturday, pirates opened fire on a Yemeni fishing boat, killing one fisherman and wounding two others, a Yemeni interior ministry official said. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because he wasn't authorized to speak to the press".

My bolding

__________________
Mini Network:: Financial information at your fingertips
Learn object oriented programming where it started

That is a lot of carriers! Reading through the National Geographic they had a picture of US Soldiers in Djibouti at a base that used to be occupied by the French military. The UK owns Diego Garcia which has a UK/US naval presence, but that is a little far away. Mayotte is owned by France, but that is pretty far to the south.

United States Central Command - New CENTCOM unit makes it tough to be a pirate
"When the activity spiked in the middle of August, we knew ... our current process wasn't working, and we had to take a new look at it," the admiral said.


And it is working. In the last six weeks there have been only four successful piracy attacks, the admiral said."

In what world is limiting the number of successful pirate attacks to four in a six week period a success?

__________________

<quote>
WASHINGTON (Jan. 16, 2009) - A new patrol in the U.S. Central Command is working to make it unprofitable to be a pirate, the commander of U.S. Navy Central Command and 5th Fleet said Jan. 15.
</quote>
I doubt that.

<quote>
"The problem of piracy started ashore," the admiral said during a Pentagon news conference. "It's because there is no rule of law. There isn't a government. There isn't economic stability. There isn't a court system that will hold these criminals responsible for their actions."
</quote>
That is the root of the problem that has to be solved.

<quote>
The coalition group works with all concerned nations to deter the pirates and it has had some success. "I think, it's really a fascinating story to watch unfold as, at this point, 14 nations have sent their navies to work against this destabilizing activity," he said.
</quote>
No, it is not a facinating story. It is a tragic story.

<quote>
"When we capture a pirate, where do we take him? Where do we hold him? What court system tries him and holds him?" Gortney asked.
</quote>

Take a look at the above map. That legal system should have been in place more than 100 years ago. It can not be difficult for Fn to set up such a system. It should be possible to establish an international court in some weeks / months. Cybercrime is similar. The pirates operates in international water. The same with cybercrime, their room of action is borderless.

<quote>
"We have to make it unpleasant to be a pirate, and that's where, when we can capture them and try them and hold them accountable for their actions," he said.
</quote>
The aim should be to find a stable solution on land and stop piracy. The best solution would be if the legal system in their own country could handle the cases. There was a short program from Kenya that told that in Kenya, a pirate got about 7 years in jail. IMO 7 years in jail is too little for the large risks involved. But now, they are killing innocent fishermen in international and other countries water. It is no longer only piracy. My uncle was a fisherman operating on his own, fishing to feed his family. I can not think of a more peaceful man with a hard earnest work.

Our ad hoc solution: Norwegian ships shall sail further from the shore. The earlier dangerous zone was 4 times the area of Texas. Now it may have increased to 10 times that area. They are better equipped. Some of them are trained soildiers from the war in Somalia.

It is a delicate problem for the international community:

1. No legal system.
2. Lack of international coordination.
3. Inability to find a solution on land.
4. This is april first 2009 and no joke.

May be you find the answer above in one of his statements.

P.S. When the international community can not coordinate forces and solve this regional crisis. How should we be able to coordinate forces and solve the global financial and economic crisis?

__________________
Mini Network:: Financial information at your fingertips
Learn object oriented programming where it started

Very interesting article mikmik.

"In its weekly piracy report, the IMB notes that in the first two weeks of 2009, there were more than a dozen pirate sightings, not only off Somalia but also in shipping lanes across the globe, from Togo to Brazil to Haiti and Vietnam".

Highly recommended reading for everybody that reads this thread.


And it is obvious, ships can not go in convoy on every ocean in the world. The problem spans most of the globe and it will increase and spread to other parts unless it is treated globally.

1. Lives are at risk.
2. Wildlife and fragile environments are at risk.
3. Ships and cargo are at risk.
4. In the end, the consumer pays the price (economic costs).

__________________
Mini Network:: Financial information at your fingertips
Learn object oriented programming where it started

Perhaps, but in any case there can be aggravating factors and mitigating factors. Without knowing the full story it is difficulty to tell.

How would you feel if he were 16 years old and simply following his father?
How would you feel if he were 20 years old and he was made to participate because his wife was being held hostage on shore?
How would you feel if he willingly partcipated out of a sense of greed?

But yes, 7 years for piracy does seem light. The maximum Federal penalty for robbing a bank is 25 years.....if you add a killing, it is of course murder. If somebody dies during the commision of the felony, the felony-murder rule applies (you can be convicted of murder even if the actual homicide was accidental)

__________________

Craig, look at your first post.

Personally I am against death penalty, except in war, simply because the price for some actions in war has to be high. My son, studying law is against death penalty in war, too. One of our retired defense ministers shared his view. You never kill a disarmed enemy. Their view may be the best.

Killing innocent fishermen are cold blooded murder and should according to Norwegian law give up to 21 years in jail. That is too mild in most parts of the world.

__________________
Mini Network:: Financial information at your fingertips
Learn object oriented programming where it started

"Sorry, but I for one would board the boat and shoot them all."

Yes, I wrote this, but the assumption is that the pirates are actively resisting with the potential to inflict lethal force. If they surrender, naturally you take the surrender. I do not believe in 'summary executions'

In the US, many people look at the issue as a single issue, but its a little bit more complex than that.

The first issue is whether the death penalty constitutes 'cruel and unusual' punishment under the US Constitution; prohibiting both the Federal and state governments from imposing the death penalty. I do not believe that the death penalty should be ruled unconstitutional at the Federal level because it seems quite clear to me that the Founding Fathers wrote the prohibition against 'cruel and unusual' punishment but were still hanging people.

The second issue is whether a particular state should impose the death penalty for state based crimes. I reside in NJ, and the state has prohibited the use of the death penalty. That is fine by me and actually I support it because the cost to impose the death penalty (legal fees, appeals, etc) exceeded the cost of life in prison without parole. Plus to be perfectly honest with you, it would seem to me that life in prison without parole is a worse punishment (but that is just me)

Finally, there are states that currently do employ the death penalty, aka Texas. As far as I am concerned, that is a question for the people of Texas. If a person robs a gas station and shoots a clerk in Houston, TX, as far as I am concerned, that is a matter of local concern to the people of Texas and I see no compelling need for the Federal government to intervene.

Here, life without parole, in some jurisdictions it would carry a potential for the death penalty

__________________

Perhaps if people were a little more capitalist about it... They could drop people off a 10 meter plank into a meat grinder running at 2000MPH and charge admission on pay-per-view...

It would certainly be a quicker and more humane death that lethal injection, electrocution, ect... plus... instant fertilizer... very eco-friendly.

The profits from the televised sales could go towards the innocents families whose siblings will be blown up on all future sea transport pirate boardings!

I feel like watching the running man... maybe gladiator...

Of course... I'm just kidding... I really haven't the slightest idea as to what's really happening over there... I don't get it... If they can afford a pirate fleet. Can they not afford to buy the cargo they are hijacking?

Sounds to me like the governments in the area are collapsing if they can't control their own shores or at the very least patrol them... Is this a naive viewpoint?

This is certainly a pattern...

http://www.icc-ccs.org/index.php?opt...emap&Itemid=89

What do you know... I Might be right...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008...nsurgents-news

I hope nobody sold them nukes and I hope the pirates attacked enough different nationalities for a joint effort to "confiscate" the country. Governments do that... Don't they? I guess perhaps everybody is taking their sweet time because Somalia might be a fairly worthless third world country?

Give it some time... eventually it will be more cost effective to go in there and clean it up rather than leave them to thier own devices... jmo... I am no political analysis, social, economic, or what have you... ( I don't even really know if Somalia is in Africa or the Middle East or Asia... )

Keeping my fingers crossed that nobody initiates a draft...

__________________
James Weisbrod - programmer

Interesting map. Send the link to the American general

"A diplomat in Nairobi said that western governments, including his own, had been guilty of viewing Somalia as "too difficult too solve and not important enough to matter". But the failure of Yusuf's government meant fresh thinking was required on what type of authority in Somalia was acceptable to the international community".

Now all pay the price. Ignorance is sometimes expensive. IMO we don't understand enough. The American general I cited above used the word exciting solution. Has he seen the map in your first link? The best way to solve the problems is to build on stable regimes in the region and help them build infrastructure, schools and social security. Developement will have positive ripple effects. When there is a fire, sometimes you have to light a counter fire, that means social and economic development. The operations cost's at least USD 4 Bn / year, probably much more if you compute all the indirect costs. These amounts could have been used on developing the countries in the region. The Western World have a great responsibility in exploiting the resources of these countris. The trade has been unfair for a long time.


To sum up:

1. Establishing international law and court on the Ocean. Neutral, Switzerland without a sea border has long traditions for such institutions.
2. Coordinated actions to not accept a single hijack on any ocean. If aircrafts are used, It should be enough to fly over their head or in the worst case shoot in front of the hijackers boats. I doubt that direct fire to sink the boat is needed. If that is done, life jackets / boats have to be dropped from the same planes. Helicopters should be used to pick them up and bring them to court.
3. Responsibility by the actual country where the pirates live and anchor the ship.
4. A global determined long term work to solve the problems on land. It may take many years. Building on stable regimes in the region and contributing to economic and social development.
5. Desperate refugees, many from Somalia, drown in the Mediterranean on their way to Europe. It is part of the same problem and best solved in the respective countries.

__________________
Mini Network:: Financial information at your fingertips
Learn object oriented programming where it started

Yes, it is a global increasing problem. The ocean is 80 per cent of the earth's surface and there is in 2009 still no international law and court to handle the cases. Piracy on the ocean has been a problem for centuries.

__________________
Mini Network:: Financial information at your fingertips
Learn object oriented programming where it started

He used the word 'fascinating' {peole like to ascribe the word to positive things of interest, but there are negative things of interest too, ie. the study of WWII is fascinating, of course millions of people died}- the admiral received his orders 'disrupt and deter' (the man won't even capture)

I think you make a good point about this; but the admiral takes orders; he cannot simply act on his own authority.

__________________