Pirates... Why don't we shoot them?

[Lewkowski]

http://articles.cnn.com/2011-02-04/w...er?_s=PM:WORLD

Two U.S. Navy warships patrolling the Gulf of Oman disrupted an attack Friday by pirates on an oil tanker, the military said Friday.

The USS Momsen and the USS Bunker Hill responded to a call from the merchant vessel Duqm, whose crew reported pirates were attempting to board their ship.

The U.S. warships arrived to find two pirate skiffs pulled up to the tanker with ladders out to board the ship. The Navy vessels chased off the pirates and tracked their movements back to a larger ship from which they were operating in the Arabian Sea, the Navy said.

Why did we not blow the mother ship to hell? Seriously if our pansy lame culture was like this during WWII we would all be speaking German.

[Lewkowski]

Lewk, it's a civilisation thing. You wouldn't understand.
Pirates are a political left/right issue in your mind?

You really do say the darnedest things.

The left tends to coddle criminals. But even on a far left forum they were calling for the deaths of the pirates.

[Ziggy Stardust]

edit: Fuck it, nevermind.

[rumrunner]

http://articles.cnn.com/2011-02-04/w...er?_s=PM:WORLD



Why did we not blow the mother ship to hell? Seriously if our pansy lame culture was like this during WWII we would all be speaking German.

... and Japanese, don't forget the Japanese. Doesn't acting like civilised human beings make you feel all lame and soft on the inside? C'mon folks, you know it does.

[Illusions]

Why did we not blow the mother ship to hell?

So if a Mexican gang ousted your family from your home using violence, you'd be okay with the Mexican army/police coming in and demolishing it?

Follow up question if you decide to go the "Well they could have at least boarded the ship and shot them..." route. Do you think its intelligent to board a hostile vessel you have very little information about, on a spur of the moment decision, right as you discover it?

[Ziggy Stardust]

By the way, we'd be speaking Russian and we'd be on the moon before the US could get a fruitfly up into Orbit.

[Lewkowski]

So if a Mexican gang ousted your family from your home using violence, you'd be okay with the Mexican army/police coming in and demolishing it?

Follow up question if you decide to go the "Well they could have at least boarded the ship and shot them..." route. Do you think its intelligent to board a hostile vessel you have very little information about, on a spur of the moment decision, right as you discover it?

I believe the US Navy is more then capable of handing pathetic third world pirates. Pirates don't get rights. One American citizen is worth an infinite number of pirates. The fact that the skiffs fled to the larger ship is enough proof for that ship to be sunk without mercy.

[Being]

I believe the US Navy is more then capable of handing pathetic third world pirates. Pirates don't get rights. One American citizen is worth an infinite number of pirates. The fact that the skiffs fled to the larger ship is enough proof for that ship to be sunk without mercy.

Quit with the hillbilly slang or I'm gonna start posting it in the messing with my groove thread. Really Lewk, it's not that hard to learn english.

[Lor]

I believe the US Navy is more then capable of handing pathetic third world pirates. Pirates don't get rights. One American citizen is worth an infinite number of pirates. The fact that the skiffs fled to the larger ship is enough proof for that ship to be sunk without mercy.

If they are so pathetic, then how comes they still managed to seize ships/equipment/people and get large sums of money through demands? If anything, the governments/private contractors and shipping firms are the pathetic ones. Not so capable really .

[Being]

If they are so pathetic, then how comes they still managed to seize ships/equipment/people and get large sums of money through demands? If anything, the governments/private contractors and shipping firms are the pathetic ones. Not so capable really .

The antipathy toward piracy seems largest with those who agrue for unabridged freedom. Unabridged...

[Lor]

Do they have to wear seat belts though Being?

The only thing I cannot get my head around when these pirates are concerned - They already get their own day on September 19th, Christ has his/her own day, various saints have their own day in our calendar .... !

Ungrateful bastards.

[Being]

Do they have to wear seat belts though Being?

The only thing I cannot get my head around when these pirates are concerned - They already get their own day on September 19th, Christ has his/her own day, various saints have their own day in our calendar .... !

Ungrateful bastards.

They are not required to wear seat belts while exercising their unabrideged freedoms to pillage vessels that are not worthy of freedom.

[Lor]

What if they hit something, get ejected from the boat, land in the sea but can't swim? Poor buggers.

[Lewkowski]

If they are so pathetic, then how comes they still managed to seize ships/equipment/people and get large sums of money through demands? If anything, the governments/private contractors and shipping firms are the pathetic ones. Not so capable really .

Because modern day governments lack the spine to take out the trash. So in fact yes, the governments are also acing pathetic. Give the green light for the US military to take out the pirates as a military action instead of a criminal justice action and the pirate problem is solved.

[Being]

Because modern day governments lack the spine to take out the trash. So in fact yes, the governments are also acing pathetic. Give the green light for the US military to take out the pirates as a military action instead of a criminal justice action and the pirate problem is solved.

Now you want the U.S. military to take on China? I feel that would be a poor decision. We haven't even cleaned up in Iraq yet and they were small potatoes. Piracy is piracy and Chinese piracy has a far greater financial impact on the world than the measely tolls charged by Sumali pirates.

[Timbuk2]

Simply not worth the cost.

The cost to governments of having their respective navies patrolling the vast swathes of Ocean the pirates operate within. The EU does have frigates dedicated to this (not sure about the US), but not enough to make more than a negligible impact. Knock out/arrest one group of pirates and there will be 10 to take their place.

Or the cost to corporations to lose their freight/ships in lieu of a ransom.

Frustrating as it is to see pirates getting away with it, get away with it they will.

The only realistic solution is stability on mainland Somalia.

[Steely Glint]

Yeah, you don't solve piracy problems at sea.

Why did we not blow the mother ship to hell? Seriously if our pansy lame culture was like this during WWII we would all be speaking German.

Motherships and other pirate craft are fired on and destroyed all the time by ships operating in the area, so we can assume the US navy captain had good operational reasons for not doing so in this particular case. Also, you're an idiot.

[termite]

Also, you're an idiot.

+1


This piracy situation is bad, it does need some tough action to be taken but it also needs to be sensible and preferably legal.

Avoiding paying ransoms is an obvious one but unfortunately people (and corporations) tend to feel obliged to do everthing they can to get their people back to safety - including paying large sums of cash for hostage releases. Removing the income takes away the incentive. But it isn't even that simple because unfortunately some of the ships these pirates take are also full of millions of dollars worth of fuel, cargo and equipment. So even if we didn't allow ransoms to be paid somehow I don't think the pirates would stop.

Shooting pirates is fine by me, if you are shooting them in the act of committing piracy, attempting to escape the scene or if they give enough indication that they are about to commit piracy. (it is better to not let them on board for obvious reasons).

I don't think anyone that isn't either completely insane or just a fucking troll would seriously expect anyone (any Government, Military or Corporation either) to carry out summary executions of captured pirates.

There is such a thing as due process - even on the high seas.

Perhaps Lewk, we could send them to Quantanamo Bay where they could be forced to listen to Alestorm 24/7 until they reject their pirating ways...then once rehabilitated they could be the night manager at your local Quick-E-Mart.

[agamemnus]

Yeah, you don't solve piracy problems at sea.

Not always...

Also, you're an idiot.

The US Secretary of Defense is saying that we need to destroy all of Libya's anti-aircraft weapons in order to impose a no-fly zone. Those anti-aircraft weapons (the ones on the "rebel" side, at least) can barely hit the old Libyan MiGs...

[Lewkowski]

Yeah, you don't solve piracy problems at sea.



Motherships and other pirate craft are fired on and destroyed all the time by ships operating in the area, so we can assume the US navy captain had good operational reasons for not doing so in this particular case. Also, you're an idiot.

1. Are you referring to bombing the coast line? Somehow I don't think you are. Pray tell what you have in mind that will stop piracy other then force?

2. I'm waiting for a good reason as to why they wouldn't have taken them out. I'm sure they had a reason IE, the ROE set by the government is to not kick ass and take names on the high seas. My beef is that seems to be the policy.

[wiggin]

A functioning government in Somalia would be able to cut down significantly on piracy by patrolling their own coast and denying pirates safe harbor and such. The problem is that the country hasn't had a functioning government for two decades, and the chances for one appearing any time soon are nil.

Theoretically a major international invasion and peace enforcement mission would be able to change that, but it would take an enormous amount of resources and commitment. American voters are likely to be very wary of such an intervention for a number of reasons. First, it's expensive and most of the expense would probably be shouldered by the US. Second, Americans have been leery of intervention in Somalia ever since the bodies of dead Delta Force troops were dragged through the streets of Mogadishu. Third, Americans are weary of two long wars, and are sick and tired of trying to foist working governments on people who don't seem to want one.

Absent American leadership I can't see anyone else taking on that task. It would need a serious force and a significant amount of money. Currently piracy costs on the order of $10 billion a year and a few lives. Absent an escalation, it's likely that the problem will continue to be 'managed' indefinitely without a real solution.

[termite]

It still amazes me how many, retired wealthy people decide to sail through those waters despite the imminent danger of piracy, hostage taking and death....

[Ziggy Stardust]

"kick ass and take names"?

Oh please ...

[Steely Glint]

1. Are you referring to bombing the coast line? Somehow I don't think you are. Pray tell what you have in mind that will stop piracy other then force?

No, I'm referring to putting boots on the ground and eliminating pirate strongholds/ports/safehavens. That's really the only way the problem could be stopped outright, and given the insignificant effect piracy has on global trade, I somehow doubt anyone's going to be prepared to open that particular can of worms.

2. I'm waiting for a good reason as to why they wouldn't have taken them out.

Well, here's a reason: A lot of pirate motherships are in fact previously hijacked vessels, which sometimes have hostages on board. Other pirate motherships are... well, little more than dingies full of fuel and supplies. If such a "mothership" was far enough away from the US ship, I doubt the captain would have considered it worth spending a missile on. I mean, can you imagine using a $1,200,000 harpoon anti-ship missile to sink this?

kick ass and take names on the high seas

What are you, 14?

[rumrunner]

The "kill 'em all, let god sort 'em out" attitude is little stale. Oh, and Lewk, they're called human rights not American citizen rights. That is,after all, one of the reasons we have things like the Geneva convention and U.N. Come on, man, it says "All men are created equal" it does not go on to say that Americans are intrinsically more equal than {insert group name here}. Your just kicking sand into the wind.

[Nessus]

If such a "mothership" was far enough away from the US ship, I doubt the captain would have considered it worth spending a missile on. I mean, can you imagine using a $1,200,000 harpoon anti-ship missile to sink this?

Can't spend seven dollar figures on poor people unless it's to kill them, be it in a Texas jailhouse or on the high seas.

[rumrunner]

1.
2. I'm waiting for a good reason as to why they wouldn't have taken them out. I'm sure they had a reason IE, the ROE set by the government is to not kick ass and take names on the high seas. My beef is that seems to be the policy.

Because we don't fire on vessels that may have, among the pirates, hostages or other innocents on-board. Do you not have the common sense to realize that in a free and civilized society their are risks and sacrifices? You can't just maim and kill everyone you have an issue with.
Edit: and before you ask why not. It's because these action are the antithesis of law an order. You know Law and order, you claim to be all for them in other threads.

[Lewkowski]

Because we don't fire on vessels that may have, among the pirates, hostages or other innocents on-board. Do you not have the common sense to realize that in a free and civilized society their are risks and sacrifices? You can't just maim and kill everyone you have an issue with.
Edit: and before you ask why not. It's because these action are the antithesis of law an order. You know Law and order, you claim to be all for them in other threads.

Again you are trying to have us deal with is like it was a criminal matter. With international pirates involved its clearly war. War is nuking Hiroshima. War is fire bombing Dresden. War is Sherman's march. You don't "play nice" during war. You destroy the enemy as violently and as quickly as possible. Anyone that has the gall to attack an American vessel needs to be dealt with.

Sadly today's society doesn't put much store in American lives. Instead it considers murderer's lives to be of equal or comparable worth. Its pathetic but its the way it is.

[Steely Glint]

After the incident on the USS Bainbridge, where the SEAL sharpshooters killed three pirates and freed Richard Phillips, what was the reaction of other Somali pirates?

[wiggin]

Well, here's a reason: A lot of pirate motherships are in fact previously hijacked vessels, which sometimes have hostages on board. Other pirate motherships are... well, little more than dingies full of fuel and supplies. If such a "mothership" was far enough away from the US ship, I doubt the captain would have considered it worth spending a missile on. I mean, can you imagine using a $1,200,000 harpoon anti-ship missile to sink this?

To be fair, we do need the target practice. There's only so many rusting Navy hulks left to sink.

Realistically, I rather suspect that for some of these boats there are levels in between a Harpoon and a machine gun that might be useful; for example, have SeaCobras been used in an antiship role?