Hugh Conway Posted November 13, 2008 Share Posted November 13, 2008 http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/africa/article5141745.ece Pirates caught redhanded by one of Her Majesty’s warships after trying to hijack a cargo ship off Somalia made the grave mistake of opening fire on two Royal Navy assault craft packed with commandos armed with machineguns and SA80 rifles. In the ensuing gunfight, two Somali pirates in a Yemeni-registered fishing dhow were killed, and a third pirate, believed to be a Yemeni, suffered injuries and subsequently died. It was the first time the Royal Navy had been engaged in a fatal shoot-out on the high seas in living memory. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mtguide Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 What about the Falkland Islands War with Argentina back in the 80's? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary_Yngve Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 sweet! it's frustrating how we've been dealing with the pirates.. we can't fire on them unless they fire on us, we won't hijack the ships back. for the sake of international commerce, i'm all for more aggressively taking out these pirates. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reilly Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 As a former Naval officer I offer the following solution: Why we don't park a frigate off Bab Al-Mandab and get the Brits and Frogs to put a few to the east of Somalia. When the freighters come through the Bab we put 4 gyrenes on board with a couple of M-60's and a credit card swiper. We do take American Express, don't we? When they clear to the east they get to eat French until they're picked up for the return trip. At $2000/day we make money, the gyrenes don't eat sand unless there's a khamsin, and everybody but the somalis is/are happy! I know, it's too simple. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 (edited) A simpler solution might be for the U.S. to just ratify the U.N. Law of the Sea which states: "On the high seas, or in any other place outside the jurisdiction of any State, every State may seize a pirate ship or aircraft, or a ship or aircraft taken by piracy and under the control of pirates, and arrest the persons and seize the property on board." According to Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution, Congress may define punishment for piracy. If pirates are captured: "The courts of the State which carried out the seizure may decide upon the penalties to be imposed, and may also determine the action to be taken with regard to the ships, aircraft or property, subject to the rights of third parties acting in good faith." Pretty clear and simple. No American Express necessary. Edited January 8, 2009 by tvashtarkatena Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reilly Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 What good would that do if the pirates, as is currently being done, are just handed over to the Somali 'authorities'? That is like releasing Al Capone on his own recognizance. Lord Nelson must be rolling over in his grave. If those had been his Marines as soon as they were engaged he would have told them to stand off while the frigate blew the SOB's out of the water. Also, under the Law you have to catch them in the act. Failing that once they are in possession they then have hostages. My solution is cost-effective and wouldn't require as big a naval presence. You might want to put 6 Marines aboard with a little more firepower, like shoulder-launchers, just to make sure they make their point. In that part of the world they don't understand or respect subtlety. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 (edited) Once more, with feeling: "The courts of the State which carried out the seizure may decide upon the penalties to be imposed, and may also determine the action to be taken with regard to the ships, aircraft or property, subject to the rights of third parties acting in good faith." That would be our courts. Your solution would be cheaper, that is true, but more prone to embarrassing failure. What if the pirates kill the marines, either by sinking the vessel or outgunning them? After all, they are acquiring more sophisticated weapons by the month, given their increased success in the past 2 years. All it would take is one such incident, and that would probably be the end of that; black hawk down redux. Probably better to use overwhelming force. I think it would be a good thing if the rules of engagement for our Navy were normalized with most of the rest of the world's fleets. It would remove any ambiguity with regards to going after these fuckers. Heavy patrols for six months, then spot patrols thereafter would probably mop up the problem pretty effectively. Edited January 8, 2009 by tvashtarkatena Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reilly Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 (edited) "The courts of the State which carried out the seizure may decide upon the penalties to be imposed... That would be our courts." See, that is one of the things I am afraid of. "What if the pirates kill the marines, either by sinking the vessel or outgunning them?" The last I read the pirates were packing RPG's and the odd light machine gun. That ain't gonna cut it against a 500' ship especially if the Marines are allowed to fire a shoulder-fired TOW as their first response. End of story! Outgun 6-8 Marines with a couple of M-60's and a TOW? That would be my definition of overwhelming force. Whooeee, I'd pay good money to watch that! You'd better not blink 'cause it sure wouldn't last long. No yahoo bobbing around in a frigging lifeboat/dhow/whatever they cobble together is going to be able to fire accurately enough upwards against coordinated withering and accurate fire from a stable platform to hurt anybody. Surely you've seen how those clowns fire their weapons over their? Every Gyrene I've known would jump at the chance to take those odds. Tvash, you're obviously a good guy so I'm gonna comp you a bonus story. I probably shouldn't but it will probably die a quiet internet death here in the bowels of the CC.com. I know a retired Marine bird colonel whose son is a mega-yacht cap'n. About 4 years ago he had to take one from the Right Coast to the Far East and the owner said it was cool if mom and pop came along (the owner couldn't make the trip). They whooped it up through the Med, down the Red Sea, and pulled into Aden for a fill-up. The local harbormaster-cum-extortionist wanted the son's first born plus a large herd of goats for a night's moorage so they said seeya and headed down the coast. Lotsa details so I'll cut to the chase, literally. The yahoos weren't making great speed but they were gaining on our friends. The good guys had some pretty good heat aboard of the automatic variety (and I don't mean the type you stick in your waistband) but it appeared they might still be outgunned. The cap dials up the owner on the sat and wakes him in his Alexandria, VA mansion. He says "Mr Ambassador (yeah!), we're being pursued, can you call in some favors?" The good ambassador says, "I'll call you back ASAP." Good to his word he's back in a few, "The Vinson's (CVN 70 was on its way to the Gulf) CAP is on their way on full AB. ETA about 15, are you good til then?" The colonel was a little miffed to hear this I think but with the wife aboard he decided it was a good thing. I'm afraid I must report that no shots were actually fired as the sonic boom of the two F-18's rolling in was enough to put paid to that little contretemps; what a pity, it would have topped the charts at YouTube. It is good to have friends in high places! Edited January 9, 2009 by Reilly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 (edited) Nothing says "I Love You" quite like an F18. I agree that you'd have to be insane not to trade your boring gig guarding the nukes with a chance to drink your way through a few cases of Bordeaux with a chance to blow some Somalian ganstas into the bright equitorial sunshine for a digestif. Still, these jokers took in over $50 million in booty last year (from a remembered radio report, sorry, no linky); that could buy them some fancy fireworks on the black market. What the pirates are really after is ransom, actually; that's why they've been jonesing for a cruise ship lately. The problem would be jarheads killing each other for that duty. If it makes you feel any better, the laws on the books I could find call for the death penalty for piracy, but that shit might also be a bit dated...internutz and all. Anyway, the problem is circumvented if the pirates accidentally on purpose take a bit of well placed ordnance. Gotta be careful, though. Last year a Thai fishing boat was mistakenly sunk by an Indian naval vessel in just such an exchange. Edited January 9, 2009 by tvashtarkatena Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 im surprised that the shipping companies don't invest in their own security. How hard could it be to repel boarders with a couple of deck-mounted heavy guns? Obviously, I'm not a sailor. I like girls too much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reilly Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Nothing says "I Love You" quite like an F18. Yeah, baby, you know those two jocks' right thumbs were twitchin' to flip the Vulcan's trigger cover! But, you have to think of your career and gettin' that not-so-prized-anymore airline job. Still, these jokers took in over $50 million in booty last year (from a remembered radio report, sorry, no linky); that could buy them some fancy fireworks on the black market. That's a lot of khat, isn't it? I don't think they are real big on investing for the future. Besides, there is a point of diminishing returns if it means you're going to waste the ship you're trying to seize. But since you want to play it safe let's give the boys a pair of 50's they can mount on the bridge wings. That ought to keep the yahoos' heads down long enough to get a good bead on 'em with the TOW. The problem would be jarheads killing each other for that duty. You're right again, unfortunately and literally. Gotta be careful, though. Last year a Thai fishing boat was mistakenly sunk by an Indian naval vessel in just such an exchange. They were probably poaching anyway. Rob, im surprised that the shipping companies don't invest in their own security. Why should they when they know they can get the gov to do it for free? What do you think FEMA is? Welfare for State Farm and Allstate, et al. How hard could it be to repel boarders with a couple of deck-mounted heavy guns? They ain't doin' no stinkin' boardin' with 2-50's and a TOW aboard! Obviously, I'm not a sailor. I like girls too much. Watch it bub, you're cruising way inshore now! :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sobo Posted January 10, 2009 Share Posted January 10, 2009 Gotta be careful, though. Last year a Thai fishing boat was mistakenly sunk by an Indian naval vessel in just such an exchange. They were probably poaching anyway. that's a good one. So Reilly, from tvash's comment above (boring gig guarding the nukes), I gather you're a babysitter of nukes? SLBMs or land-based types? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reilly Posted January 10, 2009 Share Posted January 10, 2009 Sobo, I wasn't too clear on Tvash's drift (to stay in theme) there either. No, I'm just old Navy, not the clothing, real old Navy. Now, just old :: but still pissed off (since 'Nam) at the politicos. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sobo Posted January 10, 2009 Share Posted January 10, 2009 Old or not, I still salute you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted January 10, 2009 Share Posted January 10, 2009 CLARIFICATION: When I was in the Navy about 500 years ago marines guarded any movement (loading, unloading, etc) of tactical nuclear weapons. Not that I could confirm nor deny there were nukes on board. In any case, it wasn't the most exciting duty in the world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted January 10, 2009 Share Posted January 10, 2009 im surprised that the shipping companies don't invest in their own security. How hard could it be to repel boarders with a couple of deck-mounted heavy guns? Obviously, I'm not a sailor. I like girls too much. Who would man them? No training for that kind of fun in the merchant fleet. Plus, what if the deck hands get board and shoot up a beach resort? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.