A Sensible Approach to Piracy on the High Seas
Piracy has long been the stuff of song and story. Pirates of Penzance by Gilbert and Sullivan is funny and has a happy ending. We have tended to glorify and to turn pirates of the past into folk heroes. Unfortunately, the pirates of Somalia are neither heroic nor funny. By and large, the ones who attack merchant vessels are very poor young kids who have little in the way of alternative survival mechanisms. If they have a “pirate king,” he is not much like the pirate king invented by Gilbert and Sullivan. Neither, most likely, were the real pirate kings of that era.
It has been reported that piracy in and around the Gulf of Aden and off the coast of Somalia more than doubled during the first half of 2009. Two hundred and sixty-six such attacks have occurred thus far in 2009, 154 of them off the coast of Somalia. Six ships and 104 crew members are currently being held. These numbers require a bit of interpretation, because piracy fluctuates with the seasons. The heavy monsoon rains off Somalia and in the Gulf of Aden normally begin in May or June and last through August. Generally, the pirates take a long holiday from May through August because the small boats they use are unpleasant and dangerous during the monsoons. When the heavy rains, winds, and high seas end, resumption of piracy is expected.
Reasonably effective action taken by the United States Navy early last April when pirates descended upon a U.S.-flag vessel, the Maersk Alabama, was effective, although more could and probably should have been done more quickly. Still, things turned out OK. Then, on April 14, another U.S.-flag vessel, the Liberty Sun, carrying relief supplies to Mombassa was attacked but managed to escape by evasive maneuvers before the cavalry U.S. Navy arrived. She sustained damage from rocket-propelled grenades and automatic weapons but proceeded to her destination. It seems likely that the diminution of pirate attacks since April has had more to do with the weather than with any terror spawned in the hearts of the pirates by their misadventures with the Maersk Alabama, the Liberty Sun, and the U.S. Navy.
On September 11, the State Department issued a statement concerning the fourth plenary meeting of the Contact Group on Piracy off the Coast of Somalia. It was quite congratulatory and took no account of the impact of weather, which has almost certainly had far greater impact than anything the Contact Group might have accomplished. Perhaps the Contact Group, in secret session, performed an anti-rain dance.
On August 26, there was some apparent pirate activity. They fired on a U.S. helicopter making a routine surveillance flight over waters close to Somalia where various hijacked ships and their crews are being held. Heavy rains don’t interfere with that sort of thing, except to the extent that they reduce the frequency of surveillance flights. The helicopter did not return fire. To have done so would probably have endangered the hostages, and the helicopter crew was doubtless under orders not to return fire without permission from higher headquarters which, going up the chain of command as far as the president, would have taken a very long time. Whatever may be his outstanding qualities, President Obama does not make good decisions quickly; he generally does not make good decisions even after long deliberation. It was quicker, easier, and safer for the helicopter simply to haul ass. In any event, this was the first such attack on a U.S. entity since the attempted April hijacking of the Maersk Alabama and the Liberty Sun. On or about August 28, a traditional vessel from India was attacked by pirates in the Persian Gulf. The six crew members were released a few days later. Now, before the piracy season resumes in earnest, seems a good time to consider what, if anything, the United States should do.
There are valid reasons why the U.S. need not do much about the problem. Very few U.S.-flag merchant vessels ply the waters off Somalia — or elsewhere in the world. Most are required by law to be built in the U.S. and that costs lots more than building them elsewhere. Under pending legislation, all would be required to be constructed in the U.S. As of 2006, the U.S.-flag merchant fleet numbered only 465 ships. Seven hundred additional merchant ships were then owned by American interests but carried the flags of other countries and were, therefore, exempt from many of the laws and regulations governing U.S.-flag vessels. Since 2006, the number of U.S.-flag merchant vessels has probably declined. Aside from her navy, the U.S. is simply no longer much of an international seafaring nation.
There are reasonably safe ocean routes to and from the oil-producing countries which do not involve transiting the primary pirate areas, and the few U.S.-flag vessels attacked by pirates have been transporting relief supplies to Africa rather than commercial cargo. Such were the missions of the Maersk Alabama and the Liberty Sun. Noble though it may be to risk U.S.-flag vessels and their crews carrying humanitarian supplies, it has no significant impact on U.S. commerce. Nor does it seem to have done much to enhance the popularity of the U.S.
Somalia has been a dung heap for many years…
And it will continue to be so for so long as the worshipping of mahound and its (not his) imaginary alter-ego allah, and all the failures that come with surrendering a patch of land on planet Earth to that political ideology masquerading as a religion, continue to be the most important thing in that country. A place which offers a mirror-image of what both Saudi Arabia and Yemen will be like once their oil runs out (and, in the case of the latter, we’ll see this prediction become true in the very near future), and a course that might be followed by evefry single place in this world where the majority of the population decides that they do not need hard work, freedom, education, women’s rights and human rights to improve their lives, but mahoundianism’s 7th-century inbred bedouin savage barbarism instead (and isn’t that exactly what islam’s ‘holy’ texts tell those that follow them to do?)
The Western world would do itself great favors by cutting off all of its ties with those mahoundian open sewers and preventing the lower forms of life that inhabit them from ever setting foot on the ground of the civilized world. As for piracy off Somalia, Thomas Jefferson’s strategy for dealing with mahoundian pirates off the Barbary Coast should be replicated in order to show the Somali high-sea crooks what they can expect if they keep up their crap.
What could have been a useful article is significantly damaged by your anti-administration inserts. Sorry, but if you want intelligent people of all political stripes to take you seriously, stick to your issue.
You have no idea what the administration will do. You have no access to the information that the administration has. You characterizations of this administration’s incompetence suggest you might have preferred the foreign policy decisions of Sarah Palin? I’m sure she would do a much better job, perhaps as good as she is doing as Alaska’s governor. I mean, former governor.
Really… do you not see how this approach subtracts from the content?
Piracy experts the world over disagree with your suggestions, with much more sound arguments. Frankly, I’m inclined to take their input over yours, and it has nothing to do with the competent Obama administration or the utterly failed one of G.W. Bush.
Throughout history, the basic patterns of piracy have been repeated over and over again. They are more or less as follows.
First, piracy is generally an aftermath of war. The supposedly-romantic “Buccaneers of the Spanish Main” (the gold convoy route from Central America to Spain) began mostly as privateers acting under letters of marque during Queen Anne’s War, and simply refused to stop “swashbuckling” when it ended. The Barbary States went from a minor problem to a major threat to commerce when the Napoleonic Wars created a naval power vacuum in the Western Mediterranean. And the Somali pirates of today are part of the civil/clan war in Somalia caused by the fall of the kleptocratic regime’ of Mohamed Siad-Barre’ in 1991. If you want to quash piracy, having stable governments in the region you want to eliminate it from is a good start- preferably governments which will not covertly support the pirates.
Second, piracy tends to be as much ideological as pecuniary in nature. The Cilician pirates of the First Century A.D. saw themselves as fighting what would now be termed a “war of liberation” against Rome (which was pretty funny, as prior to that Rome wasn’t even interested in Cilicia). The “Pirates of the Caribbean” styled themselves as the “Brotherhood of the Coast”, fighting against the oppressive regimes of Spain, France, and England. (And a lot of them actually believed it.) The Barbary States saw themselves as imposing the “ordained order of things” on the Med (ordained by the Qu’ran, i.e. all non-Muslims in submission to Islam, that is). And the modern Somali pirates are about evenly split between calling themselves “warriors of the jihad” like their Barbary antecedents- and demanding foreign aid as a prerequisite to ceasing their depredations.
Third, pirates cannot operate without some form of patronage. This can range from friendly states which offer them safe harbor in return for attacking the states’ “enemies” (which takes us right back to privateering) to backers who will arm and equip them in return for a percentage of the take (cf. William Kidd and the “Adventure Galley”- my vote for the most incompetent “pirate” in history, BTW), or even “pirate kings” who control entire fleets and take the profits of their activities (this seems to be the situation in Somalia today, and was the definite state of affairs with the real “Dread Pirate Roberts”, Bartholomew Roberts- who would have eaten both of his movie versions for breakfast). Not to mention states which hold that piracy is a legitimate form of international relations- cf. the Barbary states, yet again. Without patronage, pirates cannot function, period.
This is why President Obama’s proposal to fight piracy off Somalia by funding the local “Coast Guard” probably won’t work. First, most of Somalia doesn’t have any “government” other than the clans who are backing the pirates in the area, and what government there is (up in Puntland) is too weak to put up much of a fight against the few pirates who operate in their jurisdiction. (They don’t operate out of there because it’s too far from the commerce lanes, where the real money is to be made.)
Lastly, and most importantly, pirates historically have operated until a major naval power (or more than one) have decided that they constitute a serious enough threat to commerce to be worth using serious naval power to smash them, without regard for collateral damage. The Cilicians depredations’ were what changed Rome (more or less against its will) from a purely continental (land) power to the 800-kilogram gorilla of the Med. (Even the Greeks and Egyptians hadn’t managed to do that.)
The “Brotherhood of the Coast” operated high, wide and handsome until the British Navy took them seriously enough to send a large chunk of their Second Rates (60-80 gunned Ships of the Line, equivalent to modern heavy cruisers) from Home Fleet to hunt them down and sink them, bringing the survivors back to be hung below the high-tide mark at Admiralty Dock.
(BTW, under international law, the penalty for piracy, defined as a “crime against humanity”, is still death. And any naval court, anywhere, can legally try the offender, impose the sentence, and carry it out.)
The Barbary States’ depredations continued until, in the 1820s, the United States managed to put together a coalition of states that included several that had previously been paying “protection money” to the Barbary princes to at least reduce their attacks (the “princes” flatly refused to cease and desist altogether). This coalition, consisting of post-Napoleonic France and England, among others, stopped the piracy by the direct method of seizing and burning the pirates’ home ports. Said seizure being led by the then-new United States Navy. (Hence the line “to the shores of Tripoli” in the Marine Corps’ Hymn.)
In short, if you want to stop piracy, negotiations, diplomacy, and good manners generally aren’t sufficient. Sooner or later, you are going to have to draw the sword. And use it.
(Sorry for the length of this post, but there is no “shorthand” way to explain this.)
clear ether
eon
One important factor in dealing with international piracy is that there is an urgent need for bigger and stronger Coast Guards around the world, especially for Third World and developing nations. Coast Guards basically enforce the law on the sea and are much more capable in dealing with pirates than heavily armed naval vessels. The US Coast Guard should be given much more funds and personnel to not only expand and train Coast Guards in other nations, but also to assist these nations in purchasing suitable ships to meet their domestic needs. Larger and better equipped Coast Guards should be encouraged in countries like Kenya, India, Indonesia, and Malaysia, which could be key players in suppressing piracy in their respective parts of the world. For countries that do not have a stable government (such as Somalia), an international task force with punishing Rules of Engagement should be permanently created to patrol the waters of these failed nations. This is basically what the NATO warships are doing off the coast of Somalia right now. The major difference would be that this new international task force must have the legal authority to attack and kill any armed combatants (such as pirates) that pose a threat to unarmed merchant ships. Currently, NATO warships can only kill pirates if the pirates fire on the NATO warships first. This policy is ineffective because, in most cases, the NATO warships simply disarm any Somali pirates they find and then release them, allowing the pirates to re-arm and return another day to terrorize even more unarmed merchant ships. The threat of arresting pirates also does not seem to deter them, since acts of piracy have grown dramatically over the past few years. As in the 18th Century, only the punishment of death seems to deter these violent killers.
Coast Guards around the world also do NOT need “high-end” naval warships to battle pirates armed with automatic rifles, grenade launchers, and speedboats. There are a large number of Offshore Patrol Vessels (OPVs) on the market today that would be more than adequate in dealing with pirates. For wealthier nations, well-equipped ships like the new USCGC Bertholf (WMSL-750) or the Japanese Coast Guard’s Ryukyu class high-endurance helicopter-carrying cutters not only could police local coastal waters, but also could supplement naval units in times of war. For smaller countries, there are a large number of more economical OPVs on the market today, such as Spain’s Serviola class, Italy’s Comandante class, India’s Samar class, Britain’s River class, Malaysia’s Musytari class, or Taiwan’s Jing Chiang class, to name a few. Third World nations will rarely, if ever, need heavily armed naval warships equipped with the latest anti-ship missiles, anti-aircraft missiles, and anti-submarine torpedoes. Those ships are more useful to larger nations that need to project power around the world. But there is a desperate need for a larger number of OPVs to protect the coastal waters of smaller nations from pirates and drug and arms smugglers, and to handle fisheries protection and search and rescue missions. A more robust program of encouraging smaller nations to create their own efficient Coast Guards not only will increase the number of ships needed to patrol the world’s troubled coastal waters, but it also will reduce merchant shipping costs as the frequency of piracy decreases as a result of this policy.
Great article Dan. A little security on our part would go a long way to deter piracy.
Forrest McGrump, is that you?
Run Forrest, Run!
Run over to your Obamassiah and worship him if you wish. His failed socialist policies will be left in the dungheap of history along with all the other failed socialist states, which would be all of them as socialism has utterly failed wherever its been tried.
Bush inherits a recession coupled with the attacks of 9/11, institutes tax cuts along with sound fiscal policy and the economy recovers. Obama has his inherited financial crisis, wants to raise taxes in every way possible to finance his socialist agenda and the economy withers with ever higher unemployment.
After 9/11 Bush performed his most important duty of keeping our country safe with tough but legal national security policies thus preventing more terrorist attacks. Obama has undone many of these policies and our country is all the more open to attack because of it. I pray to God that we do not suffer another attack but if we do the blood will be on the hands of Obama.
My policy for dealing with pirates would be simple, uncompromising, and draconian; don’t arrest them, don’t read them their rights or get them an attorney, don’t allow them to retreat to sanctuaries on land, and don’t cater to the illusion that Somalia is a civilized country we need to defer to; kill all the pirates we can find and destroy their ships and bases, wherever they may be.
it is a no brainer …shoot them all. and don’t just bing a knife, this is a gun fight.
you cannot reason with these pirate anymore then one could 200 years ago when the US marine expeditionary force was sent to Tripoli
There is an opportunity here for feduciary gain if some enterprising private security company (Blackwater, Wackenhut, & etc.) is interested. It would take no serious effort to station a ship in the vicinity of the Somali coast and hire out security personnel to ride the ships as they pass through the dangerous waters. The simple practice of using helicopters to ferry the men back and forth would make things very easy.
I think the free enterprise method of dealing with this problem is preferred to the idea of using anybody’s Naval vessels. The shipping companies are partly responsible for their ships’ capture because the management refuses to do anything at all about the problem. They cry to their various countries’ navies but they don’t want to fork over a dollar or two pro-actively to protect their own interests.
The Navy should tell the shipping companies that this is their problem. The customers of shipping companies should tell the shipper that they will not ship goods that pass through dangerous waters if there are no security personnel aboard the vessel for those transits.
Note that the coast of Somalia is not the only place where piracy problems exist. The seas around the islands of the southwest pacific also have pirate problems.
I agree with Wolla Dalbo; kill ‘em all, sink their boats and burn their ports. But do as much with private security forces as practical and make the shipping companies shoulder the burden of the lion’s share of the expense. After all, this is a cost of doing business to them. Why should someone else bear the expense in their stead?
Time for gunboat diplomacy and punitive expeditions, with heavy shelling of pirate bases and the villages and towns that are awash in millions of ill-gotten loot. Just flatten it all.
By such means did the Royal Navy stamp out piracy in the 18th and especially the 19th centuries. It takes stern will and zealous purpose, and a willingness to incur substantial civilian casualties.
Once the pirates are loathed by their countrymen for bringing a rain of death down on them, the status-seeking young males left alive will find some other way.
By the way the abandonment of the Iowa class battleships was a real shame. They had very low mileage so to speak and had been updated with modern electronics. Nothing leaves a devastating impact like Volkswagen-sized 16-inch shell. And quantity has a quality all its own – a single Iowa can lay down more ordnance in an hour than a unit of B-52s in a day. Plus the ships are heavily armored, able to shrug off missiles (let alone RPGs) that infest waters of the area far better than the thin-hulled tin can armed with puny popguns we have now.
Here is a short account of a recent pirate attack on a North Korean cargo ship off the coast of Somalia. “[T]he pirates gave chase but the crew threw fire bottles and fired parachute distress rocket flares at the bandits.” It worked, but a few well aimed rifle shots fired at the two pirate speed boats could have sunk them, which strikes me as an improved result.
“Very few U.S.-flag merchant vessels ply the waters off Somalia — or elsewhere in the world. Most are required by law to be built in the U.S”
The problem is worse than merely build requirements: US-flagged vessels have to comply with the Jones Act, and are a Mariners’ Union closed shop. In other words, labor costs make it pretty much unprofitable to fly Old Glory at the peak.
—————–
Eon: excellent post. Unfortunately, right now not only will no-one strike at the bases ashore, the current ROE make it impossible to engage known pirates underway unless they are actually caught in the piratical act. And to top it off, many of our NATO ‘allies’ simply play catch-and-release, being unwilling to prosecute.
For myself- the Navy no longer has ‘yardarms,’ proper: but a signal halliard will certainly work in a pinch.
An Israeli cargo ship simply strung up barbed wire around their gunnels and prevented an attempted takeover by pirates. http://www.leanblog.org/2009/…/error-proofing-against-pirates.html
Wrong, the crew of an American vessel, much less anyother vessel, can be easily and cheaply trained in the use of small arms. Shooting a rifle is not rocket science and can and should be provided to crewmembers. Perhaps restrict it to officers and senior crew. But any crewmember can stand a watch, as they do right now. You obviously know little or nothing about firearms. Federal law enforcement agents usually receive less than 40 hours of firearms training as part of their basic training and that is no problem since the skill set is easily learned. Rifle and pistol training can easily be included in the merchant marine academy or added to the training rotation.
Mr. Miller:
“t has been suggested that the existing crews of ships should receive training to act as security forces. That strikes me as silly. The training of effective security personnel takes lots of time and money, and using crew members who, after a modicum of training, would still be rank amateurs makes no sense. Leaving aside that that’s not the sort of work they had in mind when signing on as crew, they would still be inexperienced and hence quite likely to hurt themselves or other crew members accidentally.”
It strikes you as silly because you have very little idea what you are talking about.
This isn’t rocket science, ace, it’s shooting scumballs who are trying to board, or have boarded your vessel.
I have sailed for over 20 years on blue-water US-flag merchant ships, (including for Maersk Line, but never on he Alabama),have been aboard a vessel that was hit by pirates in Bangladesh, and I happen to have been a US Marine Infantryman before that…but you would blithely dismiss me as a rank amateur.
You went to Yale and UVA, and own a sailboat…frankly, color me underwhelmed.
The answer is Clausewitzian in it’s simplicity but it’s difficulty:
Arm the crews and call off the lawyers if the crew finds it necessary to use their weapons to defend their ships.
That’s it, that’s all that needs be done.
You don’t need the Navy, you don’t need to hire contracted armed mall-cops. Just arm the crews and not second-guess them.
“In the case of a confirmed pirate attack — such confirmation based on the reaction to warning shots fired into the water or well overhead by the guards — they should shoot to disable the small pirate boat. It would probably be easier to aim at the pirates themselves, but we seem to be squeamish about that sort of thing.”
A confirmed pirate attack would be announced by their trying to board. Or their using suppressive fire to make the target vessel heave-to and make their boarding easier and safer for them.
The best way to disable the pirate boat is to kill all its pirates. Worry about sinking it later, because then it’s just a derelict, see?
It is not incumbent upon me or anyone to educate any group of persons intending to commit a felony upon me that I am armed. When I choose to apprise them of this fact, the tuition for this instruction will in all likelihood be fatal.
And your notions of armed security crew standing 4 hours on and four off may explain some of the fantastically poor seamanship that I’ve observed yacht-owners engaging in in my time before the mast. I shudder to think of what kind of errors in judgment and degraded performance would happen with armed men who would be similarly sleep-deprived.
The absolute minimum is 6 hours on and 6 hours off,which happens when a ship is sailing short-handed, and you can do that for no more than a week or so before you turn into a dishrag.
In fact, the 12 hours on/12 hours off is quickly becoming world standard, since it allows you to get 8 hours of uninterrupted sleep.
#13 Federale:
“Rifle and pistol training can easily be included in the merchant marine academy or added to the training rotation.”
It already is. US flag vessels carrying DoD cargoes usually require that the crew be armed and have demonstrated proficiency in both armed and unarmed security techniques.
From my experience, however, the “weak link” is the Captain. I have discussed security flaws with vessel masters who were more afraid of being sued after the fact than they were of losing their ship to a pirate attack.
The Master of the Maersk Alabama did have a revolver in his safe, all Captains do. But he chose not to avail himself of it. It is meant to be used on his crew in quelling mutinies.
Without a clear set of legal protections to heavily favor actions taken in defense of one’s ship, the guns will never be taken out of the lock-box, or even worse, they will be taken out and distributed, but without ammunition.
That’s how bad the lawyers have buffaloed the shipping companies’ policies and “punk-bitched” some of these guys.
Bilgeman,
While I agree with most of your points a few things may need clarification. First given that they hold reserve commissions Merchant Marine Academy graduates should all have basic firearms skills. It should be possible to arrange some course for the few nonveteran merchant seamen on US flag ships. 12 hour shifts sound nice but the standard for naval watches is 4 hours except for the “dog watches.” If we are talking about a limited deployment of a team for up to two weeks then the shorter rotating watch could work. Agreed that after two weeks sleep deprivation becomes a factor. People start acting strange.
Dan Miller,
A professional security team could help IMHO. It should be possible to even deploy containerized 20 mm mounts that could be bolted on and removed after transit. Given the value of the ships some expenditure is reasonable and it should be born by the shipping company or insurer. A 6 man team sounds right if there is a support ship or a helicopter platform no more than 2 hours away. Otherwise the need for an embedded medical corpsman and commander and communications raise the number to at least 8. That would be the size of a SEAL or SOF squad on a detached mission.
The legal issues that inhibit the arming of Merchant ships only arose after WW-II. They are written on paper not in stone and the Congress should task the State Department with entering into agreements with other countries to facilitate the safety of US flagged ships. Other impediments to the US having a merchant shipping industry, such as the Jones Act, need to be addressed.
If I was sailing a yacht around in the Caribbean I would want a couple of guns in hidden sealed built in compartments, just in case.
Re Comment #14, Bilgeman: “I happen to have been a US Marine Infantryman before that…but you would blithely dismiss me as a rank amateur.” Not at all. As a marine infantryman, you presumably know a heck of a lot about firearms and how and when to use them. How many of the crewmen on U.S. flag merchant vessels transiting the areas where pirates feed have such qualifications? If there are enough, if their training has not become stale, and if they are willing to assume the additional duties, that’s fine with me. It’s the rank amateurs who lack such skills who worry me.
As to four hours on and four hours off, that was fine with us sailing in peaceful areas with little more to worry about than weather conditions. As to a voyage lasting months, many have done it but it would probably get tedious. However, U.S. flag vessels transiting the waters off Somalia generally are there for days, not months — long enough to adapt to the situation but not long enough to become too weary to function adequately. If sufficient security types can be hired for six hours on – six hours off, that’s probably better.
I have no personal problem with the notion of shooting the pirates, but they can probably be replaced more readily than can the boats they use. Sinking their boats would probably result in the death of the pirates and the need to replace not only them but their boats. It strikes me that boats are in shorter supply than the teenage pirates who man them, and more valuable to those who send them out to make themselves rich.
The facts are that a very small, maybe even a 2 man team, could be all that is necessary to prevent 99% of these attacks.
You place 2 professional trained men with “Appropriate” weaponry on board one of these large vessels and they would be in a position to defend and probably sink, kill, or badly damage any attacking small boat.
I promise you once the idea gets around that the possible chance of death becomes larger than the chance of success then the rate of occurrence will drop like a rock.
Why should the pirates stop now? There is no deterrent..
Some here are just working too damn hard. The way to stop this is straightforward. Two .50 caliber semi-auto Barretts per ship (e.g. model 82A1), ammo, training and the will to use them are all that is required. Maximum range a bit over a mile (2000 yards). No Coast Guard ships, no punitive expeditions, no highly paid security types required. Cost – approximately $25,000 per ship, paid once, with regular marksmanship training to keep up the skill set. Recurring costs, less than $2000 per year ammo and training. Watchkeeping pretty much like normal on a ship – use your damn binocs and night vision gear if you have it. No trials, no capture of pirates, no shooting to wound. Sink the damn pirates and sail away. Tot of rum all round when the shooting stops.
Whew!,
For a minute there I thought you were going off the rails with your comments on Obama’s great qualities, but you stayed on course.
I think I can sum up your article in a couple of sentences. 1. That area of the world is not getting any better any time soon. 2. So dealing with it must be done on a real world level. 3 Which means understanding the pirates only believe in power and fear. 4. And knowing that any sensible person could come to the conclusion that bringing along a whole lot of power that causes pant wetting fear, will win.
Here is the solution:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TWJp14tkBlU
A great tactical weapon that can disable a boat engine or take an upper body off. Cost is a mere 13,500.00 plus scope and ammo, less than 2,000.00 a piece. Our department ordered two in case they had to stop fleeing vehicles in hostage situations.
This is what they can do.
ttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TOZoYIoyjuM&feature=related
Any boatload of Somali pirates shows up within a thousand yards, and they will never get any closer.
I’m MOT certain what proportion of hijacked vessels are conducting “humanitarian aid” to Africa, but one excellent way to cut down on the likelihood that Ameri an prestige in the region is cjlhallenged is to cease a such American aid programs immediately around the long Somali coast. Think of it – food aid, medical aid, and technical aid is mainly being used to improve the lives of our Islami enemies. Without that aid, these squalid Muslims are weakened, and pose less threat to us in every way.
How long will it take for rational Westerners to take note of the fact that the more aid which we pour into the camp of Islam, the more likely it is that Jihadis will be reared to harm us and wage Jihad for Islam?
Over $2 billion on US aid to Indonesia has been utterly squandered. This tsunami aid was supposedly designed to “win their hearts and minds”, but it has only translated into Sharia totalitarianism enforced fully now across the Aceh region.
Apparently massive US food, massive US medicine, and massive donations of US infrastructure or cash do nothing to persuade those despicable Indonesian Muslims to be our “friends”. The same must be said of more than $15 billion into the evil maw of Pakistan since 9/11, or nearly $1 billion in similar aid pumped into Turkey after their last large earthquake. Thoseuslims hate us as much as ever, and perhaps more than if we’d simply ignored them altogether and left them to their fate.
The same metric applies to all Muslim recipients of US assistance. Whether we discuss the billions funneled to the Palestinian terrorists, or the hundreds of billions squandered in Iraq and Afghanistan, not to mention those thousands of irretrievable lives sent to “help” these enemy civilizations become our friends, all the Western outreach, all the generosity and sacrifice is reduced to ashes and poison in the hands of Islam.
Do what we must to secure the oil lines, and leave Muslims to their various hideous self-imposed fates. Let the trillionaire Saudis, Kuwaitis, etc. honor their so called obligations of “charity” to their fellow denizens of darkness– let THEM deplete their treasuries, let THEM suffer the insults of Islamic terrorism and hatred, let THEM salvage the myriad failing cesspits of Islam.
In addition to preserving our prestige and limiting our exposure to Piracy, admitting Muslim minds and hearts can’t be won by the West yields truly great dividends: there will be significantly less Jihad, fewer Mosques, and lower immigration rates of Muslims into the West. We would stop sending our magnificent military on hopeless missions to civilize Islamic savages. We’d retain more of our wealth, and largely insulate ourselves from the nightmares of Islam and Jihad which are dragging us toward Armageddon.
Here is a heart warming lesson about how to handle pirates. Catch and release. How environmentally sound!
“[F]our men were released after German officials – consulting with the European Union-led Atalanta operation headquarters – decided not to extradite them to Kenya for prosecution.
“EU experts said they were not sufficiently sure that the men would be convicted in Kenya. The German government did not want to prosecute as no German interests had been damaged.
“Consequently, the men were released on Monday afternoon, within sight of the Somali coast.”
It’s not the fault of the German Navy. It’s the fault of those who think the best if not only solution is to have an international naval force patrolling the area, prepared to feed captured criminals for a few days and return them so they can do their thing again.
Bravo!
Sadly we have mistaken “compassionate & civilized” for “gutless & weak” and swallowed the BS psycho-babble about “human rights” rather than respecting real human rights.
Why should a murder, rapist, pedophile, or repeat violent criminal live on societies dollar and often be released to commit further crimes? Where are their victims human rights? Where are my rights not to have the fruits of my labor ripped from me to go towards feeding, housing, clothing, guarding, and providing free cable TV to someone who has forfeited their right to be a part of human society?
Same goes for these pirates, shoot them or their boats and be rid of them. If they persist shell their bases. There seem to be some knowledgeable people here on maritime issues, so what is with the idiocy of these laws regarding small arms for self defense and ships crews?
We should arm the crews, hire private security like Blackwater, and raid their headquarters today without mercy and free as many captives as possible. Anything less is an unforgivable crime against humanity in my opinion. No more paying ransoms. Send in the SAS, the SEALs, the Marines, etc.
Dear Forrest MacG, Piracy is not a foreign policy (i.e. diplomatic) issue. Piracy is an act of war. Thus, I would rather have Sarah Palin calling the shots. Her policy would be simple: kill the pirates. I do not know what Obama’s policy is, but I do give him kudos for giving the order to blow the heads off of those four pirates earlier this year.
You’ve identified the problem. FETEKE is the path to victory.
#16 lifeofthemind:
“It should be possible to arrange some course for the few nonveteran merchant seamen on US flag ships.”
That’s what I’m trying to tell y’all, man.
Many of us already ARE! Small arms and security training is already given at the union schools and many of the private schools as well. The nation already HAS a cadre of mariners trained to arms and ready to be employed. All we need are the tools and the permission to use them, and then the Piracy Problem becomes SEP-Someone Else’s Problem.
“12 hour shifts sound nice but the standard for naval watches is 4 hours except for the “dog watches.” ”
That’s where you are in error, the Merchant Service is distinct and separate from the Naval Service. Put what you might know from the Navy or the Coast Guard out of your head, it does not necessarily apply on a merchant vessel, and until pirates start hitting destroyers and cruisers, as opposed to freighters and tankers, the Merchant Service is the arena to deal with.
“If we are talking about a limited deployment of a team for up to two weeks then the shorter rotating watch could work. Agreed that after two weeks sleep deprivation becomes a factor. People start acting strange”"
They start acting strange regardless, once you’re south of the Suez, but that’s neither here nor there. 3 guys, each standing 4 on and 8 off, or 2 guys doing the 12-12 “Swiss Watch”, (don’t ask me why it’s called that), are the minimum.
Mr. Miller:
“I have no personal problem with the notion of shooting the pirates, but they can probably be replaced more readily than can the boats they use. Sinking their boats would probably result in the death of the pirates and the need to replace not only them but their boats. It strikes me that boats are in shorter supply than the teenage pirates who man them, and more valuable to those who send them out to make themselves rich.”
People become pirates for the same reason that they rob banks…because they make money doing it.
When the people who set sail to go a-piratin’ simply no longer return, then a lot less guys will be willing to take to the racket, see?
There’s another factor that I’d look into. Flag of Convenience 3rd World seamen are paid so little and treated so poorly, that it would not surprise me a bit if some of them are quite willing to become “hostages” in exchange for a cut of the swag.
Look at it this way, if going to sea and working 18 hour days like a dog for six months on some rust-bucket, eating bad food and not getting any shore leave is only going to net you 10 grand, but you knew of some cats in Somalia who would pay you the same amount just to sit around and drink beer, scratch your behind, and catch fish for a few weeks, wouldn’t you do it?
I betcha some of these vessels are “scheduled” for a pirate takeover by their own crews or by the shipping agents up and down the east African “Scary Plumbing Fixture” coast.
The Maritime industry is ancient, and there ain’t a scam any and all of us could dream up here that hasn’t already been run hundreds and thousands of times.
This is my hot-zone solution to piracy that gets around those tricky ‘no weapons’ port regulations.
Armed government or contracted guards board ships entering the pirate zone likely using a small boat like a zodiac. They protect the ship while it passes through pirate waters and disembark into their towed zodiac when the danger has passed. Then they board another vessel going into the opposite direction through the hot-zone. Repeat ad nasum. The guards would either need a friendly port nearby or a floating mothership to handle logistics and other noncombat functions.
Its a winner because:
a) Guards are only aboard the ship when needed.
b) Guards aren’t wasting time or money in the middle of nowhere.
c) No changes are required in the regulations of foreign ports.
surprising ! Constantino Mendez, Spanish Defense State Secretary, authorise private guard on tuna boats, hmm, already French marine “fusilliers” were hired on french tuna boats…
not in the medias, or so discretly !
http://www.marine-marchande.com/v2/information/information_maritime-20090915-4591.php3
I agree with E: above, but it can be even simpler.
For US flagged ships, one .50 caliber rifle with a Marine behind it is all that is needed. Chopper him off before he reaches port, like harbor pilots.
One round would do it.
Sometimes the obvious escapes the bureaucrats.
It appears that the solution is simple enough. Besides authorization to use force by the respective countries of harbor, I’m willing to bet that shipping companies are reluctant to go this route for fear that they will have a PR disaster if things go awry.
It’s a sad state of affairs that our world is in when executives choose to risk the capture of their ships and crew along with million dollar ransoms just to avoid some negative news articles.
Hopefully someone will have the guts to start arming their crews. My guess is that if one company does it with any amount of success, others will follow.
there’s a new revolt among the high schools girl students, they are forbidden to wear shorts and or miniskirts too.
So seems that behaviours are the topics, one can’t forbid veils and authorise miniskirts !
http://bit.ly/8LwQc
sorry, wrong place
If Congress or the President had enough cajones to issue Letters of Marque, the world would be a different place today.