On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:38:13 GMT, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:

On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 08:35:52 -0500, "Eisboch"
wrote:


"Boater" wrote in message
...

...the world's mightiest navy, the US Navy, can't handle the Somali
pirates. It's yet another example of how unprepared for the 21st Century
our military forces are.

That statement is just plain stupid, that's all.

Did you ever notice that on the one hand, Harry is all up in arms
about "boys with their toys" everytime we bring up some new nifty
piece of military hardware, but on the other hand, the military is a
bunch of incompetants because they can't keep pirates, in
international waters, from capturing other country's flag vessels
because they can't get new, low draft, high speed interdiction ships
built because the money has to go to saving UAW jobs or welfare
mothers.

It's perfect liberal thinking.

Yes.

He's a good joke though.
--
John H.

Boater wrote in
:

...the world's mightiest navy, the US Navy, can't handle the Somali
pirates. It's yet another example of how unprepared for the 21st
Century our military forces are.

snip aritcle, except for the last paragraph

In any case, shippers say firepower won't rid the region of piracy.
Naval units must go after the pirates' dens and boats to reduce
piracy, they say, not just patrol the 2,400-kilometer coast waiting
for raiders to make the first move.


Well, 2400 kilometers is a hell of a long chunk of coastline to blockade
effectively - you'd need several hundred UAV drones in the air 24/7 to
give you intelligence on boat movements, then you'd need to distinguish
between pirates and legitimate fishermen (life is hard enough in Somalia
without interdicting a major food source) - always remembering that the
difference between a fisherman and a pirate may not be all that clear
all the time. Then to 'go after the pirate dens' means civiliab
casualties in a country mostly controlled by more-or-less radical
Islamic militants - I could see the problem escalating from piracy-for-
ransom to privateering-to-sink
-commerce as part of a jihad against the Great Satans of the West (never
mind that cargoes may be wheat for Iran). It's not that we can't do it
- we could - it's that we have a couple of other things on our plate
that are consuming military resources at the moment. And, of course, in
order to effectively rid the region of piracy one needs to establish an
effective rule of law in the countryside, and eliminate the support
network in the region - either that or sink every last thing that can go
out of sight of land along the entire coastline, and maintain the
blockade to be sure such craft are not replaced. As I see it,the only
real solution is to somehow establish a peaceful, universally accepted
government in Somalia and make it more profitable to stay home and tend
to business than to go buccaneering.

(In the news today an Indian Talwar-class frigate, the INS Tabar, sunk
a pirate mother ship after being fired on. Wikipedia lists the armament
of a Talwar frigate as being primarily anti-ship cruise missiles, with
one 100 mm gun - excellent for over-the-horizon fighting with other
high-tech navies, but lousy for interdicting dhows. However, one must
wonder about the sanity of men armed with RPGs and small arms starting a
shooting fight with a frigate. Same thing happened a few days ago when
the HMS Cumberland captured a pirate dhow - there must be a 'you'll
never catch me alive' code of honor or something in place, or the
pirates can't tell the difference between a freighter and a frigate.)

On Nov 19, 7:51*am, Boater wrote:
...the world's mightiest navy, the US Navy, can't handle the Somali
pirates. It's yet another example of how unprepared for the 21st Century
our military forces are.


you DO realize the international community...NOT the US navy is
taking the lead on this, right?

and you DO realize they have established protected shipping lanes
through which about 80% of shipping in this area passes, right?

and you DO realize this attack took place 450 miles off somalia's
coast...the first time pirates have ventured this far off somalia's
shores, right?

oh. you didn't know any of this....

uh huh.

Harry,
Some rogue left wing news feed has hacked into your system and is using
it to rebroadcast old news. Just thought I'd warn you before someone
accuses you of violating copyrights.


Boater wrote:
....the world's mightiest navy, the US Navy, can't handle the Somali
pirates. It's yet another example of how unprepared for the 21st Century
our military forces are.

Pirates Ransom Saudi Vessel; Three Ships Seized (Update1)

By Caroline Alexander and Hamsa Omar
Enlarge Image/Details

Nov. 19 (Bloomberg) -- Pirates demanded a ransom for an oil- laden Saudi
supertanker amid reports three other merchant vessels have been hijacked
in one of the worst spates of attacks in the Gulf of Aden and off the
East African coast.

``Negotiators are onboard the ship and on land,'' a man identifying
himself as Farah Abd Jameh, a member of the group that hijacked the
Saudi tanker, said in an audio tape aired by Dubai-based Al Jazeera
television. ``Once they agree on the ransom, it will be taken in cash to
the oil tanker.''

Saudi Arabia's state-owned shipping line, Vela International Marine
Ltd., yesterday said it had set up negotiation teams to free the tanker,
Sirius Star, and its crew of 25, seized on Nov. 15 about 420 nautical
miles (833 kilometers) off Somalia. The vessel is carrying more than 2
million barrels of crude valued at $110 million.

Since January, at least 88 vessels have been attacked in the Gulf of
Aden, an area of 1 million square miles (2.6 million square kilometers)
flanked by Yemen and Somalia and leading to the Suez Canal. Ransom
payments have spurred raiders to step up their activities, the
International Maritime Bureau says, even as NATO, European Union,
Indian, Malaysian and Russian naval fleets patrol the area in an
anti-piracy mission.

The pirates' representative didn't say how much money his group wants
for the Sirius Star, which is anchored near Harardhare, a town in
Somalia's semi-autonomous northern Puntland region. ``We assure the
safety of the ship carrying the ransom,'' the man said in the Al Jazeera
broadcast, warning against any attempts to use counterfeit cash.

War-Torn Somalia

Pirates from war-torn Somalia, which hasn't had an effective government
since the 1991 fall of the Siad Barre regime, have asked for $1 million
ransoms on average this year, according to Chatham House, a London-based
research organization that advises mainly European governments.

Since the hijacking of the Saudi vessel, pirates in the region have
taken control of ships from Hong Kong, Greece and Thailand, Andrew
Mwangura, head of the East African Seafarers Association, said in a
phone interview from Kenya. Pirates generally use captured fishing
trawlers as staging posts for attacks further out to sea, according to
an October report by Chatham House.

Today, pirates released a Hong Kong-flagged ship and 25 crew members
captured two months ago, Agence France-Presse said.

An Indian Navy ship fired at a pirate vessel in the Gulf of Aden
yesterday, the government in New Delhi said today. The Navy's Tabar
encountered the pirate vessel 285 nautical miles southwest of Salalah in
Oman. The Tabar has been on an anti- piracy mission in the Gulf of Aden
since Nov. 2, according to the government.

Pirate Ship Fire

A fire broke out on the pirate ship ``possibly due to exploding
ammunition that was stored on the vessel,'' it said in a statement.

The clash came a week after the Indian frigate rescued the Saudi
Arabia-registered merchant vessel Timaha and a 38,000 metric-ton Indian
bulk carrier from pirates.

The Hong Kong-flagged Delight was hijacked in the Gulf of Aden
yesterday. It was carrying 36,000 metric tons of wheat to the Iranian
port of Bandar Abbas and had a crew of 25. The Thai- operated boat was
also taken yesterday off the coast of Yemen as it sailed toward the Red
Sea. The Greek Merchant Marine Ministry in Athens said it couldn't
confirm a Greek-flagged or Greek-owned vessel had been seized.

`Message to the World'

``The pirates really demonstrate unexpected things and are sending a
message to the world that they can do what they need to,'' the seafarers
association's Mwangura said.

More than 14 vessels and 250 crew members remain hostage, according to
the IMB, including a Ukrainian-crewed vessel carrying at least 30
Soviet-designed T-72 tanks bound for Kenya. That ship is anchored near
the Sirius Star in Harardhare, Colonel Abshir Abdi Jama, a national
security official in Puntland said yesterday.

Pirates are honing their techniques and using Global Positioning System
navigational aids and satellite phones to find potential targets,
according to Chatham House.

The Sirius Star, bigger than the Chrysler Building, a 77- story
Manhattan skyscraper, is the largest ship seized and the hijacking was
the farthest out to sea that Somali pirates have struck, according to
the U.S. Navy. Analysts said the chances of a military response to
rescue the ship are slim.

``Everything is possible but it would take extraordinary means and
organization, and the risk of an ecological disaster is very high,''
Dominique Montecer, director of operations at GEOS, a French risk
management company, said by phone from Paris yesterday. ``They are
sitting on a bomb.''

The U.S. Navy Fifth Fleet hasn't had any communication with the pirates
or the ship, spokesman Lieutenant Nate Christensen said by phone from
Bahrain today.

Force Shippers

Hijackers may force shippers to divert vessels from the Gulf of Aden, to
take the longer route to Europe and North America around South Africa's
Cape of Good Hope, delaying deliveries to Europe and the U.S. and adding
to costs.

Still, the Indian Ocean is vast and patrolling it is extremely
difficult, the Fifth Fleet's Christensen said.

``We patrol an area of 2.5 million square miles, from Pakistan to Kenya.
The area is extensively large and we can't be everywhere at once,'' he
said.

When asked why the Sirius Star wasn't being taken back by force, he said
an armed response would require a great deal of international agreement
and cooperation.

``It's certainly a very complex environment to work in -- a
Liberian-flagged vessel, owned by a Saudi company, in Somali waters,
with so many different nationalities on board,'' Christensen said.

Firing Grappling Hooks

The pirates probably fired grappling hooks onto the supertanker's deck,
allowing them to scale the ship's 10-meter- high (33-foot) side using
rope ladders, said Roger Middleton, an analyst at Chatham House.

Ships are normally attacked by five or six pirates, though as many as 15
may have been involved this time, Middleton said. Once the pirates are
on board they're normally joined by others, he said.

Frontline Ltd., the world's largest owner of tanker ships, said it has
yet to make a final decision about sending carriers away from Somalia,
Jens Martin Jensen, interim chief executive officer of the company's
management unit, said by mobile phone from Singapore today.

Sirius Star Crew

The crew of the Sirius Star, 19 Filipinos, two Britons, two Poles, a
Saudi and a Croatian, is ``believed to be safe'' and Vela is ``working
toward their safe and speedy return,'' Vela said in a statement.

Saudi Arabia is unlikely to be considering an armed response to the
hijacking because it may endanger the crew, according to Nick Day,
London-based chief executive officer of Diligence Inc., a security and
intelligence group.

``Once in port you've got several hundred people around there, heavily
armed,'' said Day, a former member of the U.K. military's Special Boat
Service.

In any case, shippers say firepower won't rid the region of piracy.
Naval units must go after the pirates' dens and boats to reduce piracy,
they say, not just patrol the 2,400-kilometer coast waiting for raiders
to make the first move.

On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 07:51:22 -0500, Boater
wrote:

...the world's mightiest navy, the US Navy, can't handle the Somali
pirates. It's yet another example of how unprepared for the 21st Century
our military forces are.

This ship was taken 500 miles off a coastline that's 2000 miles long.
There's only a couple of US ships patrolling an area of ocean five
times the size of Texas.

Fortunately, this is an international effort. You know, today an
Indian Navy vessel happened upon a Somali pirate mothership with two
speedboats in tow and attacked it, leaving it in flames with secondary
explosions on board.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/africa...tes/index.html

You like international efforts, right? Or do you want to commit the
US Navy alone to patrolling that 1 million square miles of ocean?

Then again, I believe you might want to do that since you're the one
who said, after 9/11, that the US should carpet bomb Saudi Arabia.

For someone with so much disdain of the military, you really like
commiting them to action.

What will probably end up happening to solve the problem is that
either the shipping companies will tell all their captains to give
that area a much wider berth or they'll start hiring security forces
to protect the ships and not make them such easy targets. A 24 hour
watch with a few mounted and armored .50 cal machine guns will ruin
the day of those pirates in their speedboats.

When you're hauling $100,000,000 in cargo, the cost of a few extra
crew and some machine guns is irrelevant and is probably cheaper than
going around the area.

Steve

On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 14:49:00 GMT, Steve wrote:




What will probably end up happening to solve the problem is that
either the shipping companies will tell all their captains to give
that area a much wider berth or they'll start hiring security forces
to protect the ships and not make them such easy targets. A 24 hour
watch with a few mounted and armored .50 cal machine guns will ruin
the day of those pirates in their speedboats.

When you're hauling $100,000,000 in cargo, the cost of a few extra
crew and some machine guns is irrelevant and is probably cheaper than
going around the area.

Think they're going to need more than .50's.
These Somali idiots are pretty well armed, and nutso.
They could have blasted that oil tanker with RPG rounds at the least.
And like I said, they're nuts.
It's going to take some serious killing of Somali pirates before it
stops. Probably land bombing/missile strikes.
There will be collateral damage.

--Vic

On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 11:31:40 -0600, Vic Smith
wrote:

On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 14:49:00 GMT, Steve wrote:




What will probably end up happening to solve the problem is that
either the shipping companies will tell all their captains to give
that area a much wider berth or they'll start hiring security forces
to protect the ships and not make them such easy targets. A 24 hour
watch with a few mounted and armored .50 cal machine guns will ruin
the day of those pirates in their speedboats.

When you're hauling $100,000,000 in cargo, the cost of a few extra
crew and some machine guns is irrelevant and is probably cheaper than
going around the area.

Think they're going to need more than .50's.
These Somali idiots are pretty well armed, and nutso.
They could have blasted that oil tanker with RPG rounds at the least.
And like I said, they're nuts.
It's going to take some serious killing of Somali pirates before it
stops. Probably land bombing/missile strikes.
There will be collateral damage.

They're looking for easy targets. If you're a bunch of pirates in a
little speedboat coming up to a tanker the size of an aircraft carrier
and while you're thinking of having to climb up a hundred foot rope
ladder there are guys on deck a hundred feet above you manning a few
mounted armored .50's and raining rounds into your boat while you're
still a mile out, you're gonna turn around real quick.

They weren't carrying anything to counter that. RPGs don't have
enough range. The rocket dies after only around 500m and they are
designed to self explode after less than 1000m of flight. An M2 .50
cal machine gun has an effective range (good enough to disable or sink
the speedboat) of twice that and a max range (good enough to let the
pirates know they are under fire) of over 4 miles.

And a huge freighter/tanker makes a great stable gun platform. A fast
moving speedboat does not.

Steve

On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 00:15:37 GMT, Steve wrote:




They're looking for easy targets. If you're a bunch of pirates in a
little speedboat coming up to a tanker the size of an aircraft carrier
and while you're thinking of having to climb up a hundred foot rope
ladder there are guys on deck a hundred feet above you manning a few
mounted armored .50's and raining rounds into your boat while you're
still a mile out, you're gonna turn around real quick.

They weren't carrying anything to counter that. RPGs don't have
enough range. The rocket dies after only around 500m and they are
designed to self explode after less than 1000m of flight. An M2 .50
cal machine gun has an effective range (good enough to disable or sink
the speedboat) of twice that and a max range (good enough to let the
pirates know they are under fire) of over 4 miles.

And a huge freighter/tanker makes a great stable gun platform. A fast
moving speedboat does not.

You might be right about the .50's.
Still, that's a lot of gunners and watchkeepers.
I suspect the ship operators will get the military to handle it.
Saw a clip of some captured pirates today on the news.
It's a mistake "capturing" these guys.
Take no prisoners.

--Vic

On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 21:35:10 -0600, Vic Smith
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 00:15:37 GMT, Steve wrote:




They're looking for easy targets. If you're a bunch of pirates in a
little speedboat coming up to a tanker the size of an aircraft carrier
and while you're thinking of having to climb up a hundred foot rope
ladder there are guys on deck a hundred feet above you manning a few
mounted armored .50's and raining rounds into your boat while you're
still a mile out, you're gonna turn around real quick.

They weren't carrying anything to counter that. RPGs don't have
enough range. The rocket dies after only around 500m and they are
designed to self explode after less than 1000m of flight. An M2 .50
cal machine gun has an effective range (good enough to disable or sink
the speedboat) of twice that and a max range (good enough to let the
pirates know they are under fire) of over 4 miles.

And a huge freighter/tanker makes a great stable gun platform. A fast
moving speedboat does not.

You might be right about the .50's.
Still, that's a lot of gunners and watchkeepers.
I suspect the ship operators will get the military to handle it.

The only way the military can do it is to escort the ships. What
they'll have to end up doing to make it an efficient use of resources
is just like in WWII, set up a convoy of a bunch of freighters/tankers
and have a military ship run with them through that area of ocean.

Another way is to attack the pirates on shore, which involves us or
someone going into Somalia (again) and doing that.

I see one shipping company has told their captians to avoid the area,
adding thousands of miles and many days to the trip:

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk...6908-20906776/

You know how much it costs to take a supertanker an extra few thousand
miles? Much much cheaper to weld on some gun mounts and guns and hire
an extra 4 or 5 security people for watches and to man them.

Steve

On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 00:15:37 +0000, Steve wrote:


They're looking for easy targets. If you're a bunch of pirates in a
little speedboat coming up to a tanker the size of an aircraft carrier
and while you're thinking of having to climb up a hundred foot rope
ladder there are guys on deck a hundred feet above you manning a few
mounted armored .50's and raining rounds into your boat while you're
still a mile out, you're gonna turn around real quick.

No one said they were smart pirates. Apparently, they, the pirates, were
the first to open fire on the Tabar.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/INS_Tabar_(F44)