|
Any latest news on the pirates and the oil tanker?
On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 21:18:23 -0400, "Don White"
wrote: "DK" wrote in message m... Don White wrote: "Calif Bill" wrote in message ... wrote in message ... On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 10:49:33 -0500, JohnH wrote: Harry, we're talking about ways to do in the pirates here I think the answer as air power. Don't the Saudis have a few AWACs planes. Loiter over the water off Somalia and profile any small boats shadowing their ships. Call in some "air" with 500 lb IR guided bombs to blow them out of the water from altitude. If these pirates discover their boats are simply disappearing without a trace they might stop going out. For that matter the US could do that but we should do it covertly. Officially we don't know why pirate boats are suddenly blowing up at sea. Must be some kind of accident handling munitions or something. Maybe they just have a batch of defective bilge blowers. I am still not sure how these guys are sneaking up on a tanker. Don't they have RADAR? They do understand extreme violence. Air power is the answer. Find out what village or town the pirates are from. Then just tell the pirates that the village / town is going to be removed from the desert sands via big bomb method. Then do it. I say the world navies should declare a 'no go' zone to use as a shipping channel. Any unauthorized boats step over the line...kaboom. They'll get the message. Click on this, dumbass, and tell me how that will work... http://www.sailwx.info/shiptrack/shiplocations.phtml I believe we're just talking about one particular area numbnuts. Quit OD'n on those 'stupid pills'. That one particular little area, according to NBC news, is over two million square miles. Here's a map for you. Check out the 'one particular area' numbnuts. Quit OD'n on your 'stupid pills'. http://tinyurl.com/5t74hd -- John H. |
Any latest news on the pirates and the oil tanker?
On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 20:07:39 -0500, DK wrote:
Don White wrote: "JohnH" wrote in message ... On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:03:41 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote: "Boater" wrote in message ... Johnson was gone by January 1969. Nixon expanded the war and also bombed the crap out of Cambodia and Laos. Then, with peace in sight, Nixon intiated operation linebacker 2, a bombing campaign against north vietnam, the biggest bombing campaign engaged in by the US since world war ii. We got our ass kicked in vietnam. Your delusions about the war won't change that. Holy Crap Harry! I normally give you credit for some intelligence, but this one really makes me wonder if Alzheimer's is setting in. I won't even bother giving you details of the correct historical account. You can research them for yourself if you want to, which I doubt. But, here's the highlights: Kennedy and especially LBJ micro managed a "limited" war. In spite of this, the military held it's own, even though not designed, equipped or trained for this type of warfare. Nixon came to office vowing to end the war. Fruitless attempts to negotiate were just that .... fruitless. Call in the big guns and the big airplanes..... and start bombing the crap out of 'em. Next thing you know, we are at the table, seriously negotiating. Bombings stop. The North pulls an about face and a fast one .... Bombings start again. Mad rush back to the table, and a cease fire is negotiated. There's a book, written by someone who was "there" (and on the North's side) who gives a very interesting and detailed account of what was happening at this critical point. Damned if I can remember the name of it, but when it comes to me, I'll forward it. Bottom line was that unknown to us, the North was virtually on the brink of collapse when the bombings were restarted. They were just about ready to surrender. We blew it at the negotiating table, not recognizing this because the focus was on a cease fire due to all the political pressure back in the States to end the war. It was a war poorly managed politically. It was a war that the military did, as usual, what they were asked to do, despite the constraints and handicaps imposed by the politicians. I wish you had more experience with the military and it's capabilities. It's an amazing organization that can take people from all walks of life, smart and not so smart, black, white, rich, poor and somehow convert myriad backgrounds into a cohesive, organized and motivated organization. It's not perfect by any means, but the concept of being a equal member of a team, rather than a standout produces an amazingly competent and efficient (for it's size) organization. And the new, "volunteer" military is 10 times better than the old one I am familiar with. Eisboch Ten times better, my ass. Maybe eight and a half. No more. -- John H. He was referring to the officer ranks. You really should learn when to refrain from posting. That made you look dumber than usual. Impossible. -- John H. |
Any latest news on the pirates and the oil tanker?
On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 01:49:30 GMT, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote: My good friend Harold Foskett has a T-15 and a T-20 dozer. Fully restored. Good to know. I googled them out of curiosity a while back and saw some for sale. I was there almost nine years and had my hand in making a lot of parts, from track chain bushings and links to track shoes to bucket arms and a lot in-beween. Good possibility some of that is still doing work. I value the work I did there. --Vic |
Any latest news on the pirates and the oil tanker?
"Tom Francis - SWSports" wrote in message ... On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 19:29:17 -0600, Vic Smith wrote: On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 01:01:42 GMT, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 17:13:30 -0600, Vic Smith wrote: On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 22:57:56 GMT, (Richard Casady) wrote: On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 13:22:53 -0500, Boater wrote: Call in some "air" with 500 lb IR guided bombs to blow them out of the water from altitude. If these pirates discover their boats are simply disappearing without a trace they might stop going out. Use 250 lb bombs, they will vaporize a small boat just as thoroughly, and you can carry more of them. You can get six to a pylon, two triple ejector racks one behind the other. With an A-10 that's sixty of them. them. Tons lighter. More fuel. Your bomb load and milage may vary. Ed Zeiben. That reminds me of Ed Zeiben. Worked with him at IH in 1968. We were heat treaters. Big, wiry guy. WWII vet. The yippies and other trash were rioting in Grant Park, a few miles away from IH Tractor Works. He had the answer to the riots. "One 500-pounder. That'll take care of 'em." But he was an optimistic kinda guy. You worked at IH in the sixties? Kewl. That would have been during the era of the number series tractors - 544, 656, 756, 856 and 1256 models if I'm not mistaken. That was Farmall. Canton, IL I think. I worked making dozers, so the models were T-15,20, etc. Old McCormack works on the south side of Chicago, later Melrose Park, IL when they shut down Tractor Works. My good friend Harold Foskett has a T-15 and a T-20 dozer. Fully restored. McCormick is now owned by a Italian holding company - ARGO who also make Landini orchard tractors. Weren't those TD- numbers. I drove a TD-15 while in high school for a friends top soil company. |
Any latest news on the pirates and the oil tanker?
On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 19:37:14 -0800, "Calif Bill"
wrote: "Tom Francis - SWSports" wrote in message ... On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 19:29:17 -0600, Vic Smith wrote: On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 01:01:42 GMT, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 17:13:30 -0600, Vic Smith wrote: On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 22:57:56 GMT, (Richard Casady) wrote: On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 13:22:53 -0500, Boater wrote: Call in some "air" with 500 lb IR guided bombs to blow them out of the water from altitude. If these pirates discover their boats are simply disappearing without a trace they might stop going out. Use 250 lb bombs, they will vaporize a small boat just as thoroughly, and you can carry more of them. You can get six to a pylon, two triple ejector racks one behind the other. With an A-10 that's sixty of them. them. Tons lighter. More fuel. Your bomb load and milage may vary. Ed Zeiben. That reminds me of Ed Zeiben. Worked with him at IH in 1968. We were heat treaters. Big, wiry guy. WWII vet. The yippies and other trash were rioting in Grant Park, a few miles away from IH Tractor Works. He had the answer to the riots. "One 500-pounder. That'll take care of 'em." But he was an optimistic kinda guy. You worked at IH in the sixties? Kewl. That would have been during the era of the number series tractors - 544, 656, 756, 856 and 1256 models if I'm not mistaken. That was Farmall. Canton, IL I think. I worked making dozers, so the models were T-15,20, etc. Old McCormack works on the south side of Chicago, later Melrose Park, IL when they shut down Tractor Works. My good friend Harold Foskett has a T-15 and a T-20 dozer. Fully restored. McCormick is now owned by a Italian holding company - ARGO who also make Landini orchard tractors. Weren't those TD- numbers. I drove a TD-15 while in high school for a friends top soil company. Think you're right. Rings a bell. What I remember is the T(D)-25 single-cleat shoes weighed about 80 pounds. Pulled about 18 tons a shift of them yellow-hot out of a furnace at the end of tongs, spinning around to ram them through the press, which punched the bolt holes and extruded for the link slots. That's 450 shoes, which I liked. You could only pull a few dozen before you had to let the furnace catch up, so you got to relax a bit. The furnace could keep up better with the lighter shoes of 50-40-30 pounds, and the constant motion all night was more tedious. My guys wanted max piecework, and I always kept them happy. Four man crew. Pressman/diesetter, a loader. quencher and a grinder/unloader. Plus I usually had an audience of guys on break. That crew was later automated to one guy, with no heavy lifting. --Vic |
Any latest news on the pirates and the oil tanker?
On Nov 19, 7:05*pm, DK wrote:
Boater wrote: JohnH wrote: On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 15:21:07 -0500, Boater wrote: Eisboch wrote: "Boater" wrote in message ... Whatever the solution is, it should not involved killing uninvolved civilians. We've done enough of that in Iraq and Afghanistan. What gives us the right to kill innocent civilians? Cheney-ism? I agree. *We should never intentionally plan to kill uninvolved, innocent civilians, and I don't believe for a minute that any administration has since Truman authorized the atomic bomb drops. But warfare is not perfect. *To do nothing only empowers the enemy.. Sometimes the risk of collateral damage has to be taken. Eisboch Whether it plans to kill them or not, I think the Bush Administration doesn't give a damn about uninvolved, innocent civilians. Besides, we're not at the point of bombing Somali villages yet and we apparently don't have the assets to interdict *Somali pirate ships. Hey, DS, what's Obama goin' to do? Round up all the right-wing useless old farts like you and send them into battle. National defense and public service, rolled up into one. Typical stupid response from a...writer! Not typically a mere writer, but a union agitator as well. |
Any latest news on the pirates and the oil tanker?
On Nov 19, 9:37*pm, "Calif Bill" wrote:
"Tom Francis - SWSports" wrote in messagenews:o7g9i49ds8bjfvqi61mq77ec651ufeclc9@4ax .com... On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 19:29:17 -0600, Vic Smith wrote: On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 01:01:42 GMT, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 17:13:30 -0600, Vic Smith wrote: On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 22:57:56 GMT, (Richard Casady) wrote: On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 13:22:53 -0500, Boater wrote: Call in some "air" with 500 lb IR guided bombs to blow them out of the water from altitude. If these pirates discover their boats are simply disappearing without a trace they might stop going out. Use 250 lb bombs, they will vaporize a small boat just as thoroughly, and you can carry more of them. You can get six to a pylon, two triple ejector racks one behind the other. With an A-10 that's sixty of them. them. Tons lighter. More fuel. Your bomb load and milage may vary. Ed Zeiben. *That reminds me of Ed Zeiben. *Worked with him at IH in 1968. *We were heat treaters. *Big, wiry guy. *WWII vet. The yippies and other trash were rioting in Grant Park, a few miles away from IH Tractor Works. He had the answer to the riots. "One 500-pounder. *That'll take care of 'em." But he was an optimistic kinda guy. You worked at IH in the sixties? *Kewl. *That would have been during the era of the number series tractors - 544, 656, 756, 856 and 1256 models if I'm not mistaken. That was Farmall. *Canton, IL I think. *I worked making dozers, so the models were T-15,20, etc. *Old McCormack works on the south side of Chicago, later Melrose Park, IL when they shut down Tractor Works. My good friend Harold Foskett has a T-15 and a T-20 dozer. Fully restored. McCormick is now owned by a Italian holding company - ARGO who also make Landini orchard tractors. Weren't those TD- numbers. *I drove a TD-15 while in high school for a friends top soil company. Yes. The T stood for tractor, and the D was for diesel. However in the farm machinery like you had a different set. And example would be an M, MD, MDTA. M (Standard tractor) MD (M Diesel) MTA (M torque amplified) MDTA (M diesel, torque amplified) etc. |
Any latest news on the pirates and the oil tanker?
wrote in message ... On Nov 19, 9:37 pm, "Calif Bill" wrote: "Tom Francis - SWSports" wrote in messagenews:o7g9i49ds8bjfvqi61mq77ec651ufeclc9@4ax .com... On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 19:29:17 -0600, Vic Smith wrote: On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 01:01:42 GMT, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 17:13:30 -0600, Vic Smith wrote: On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 22:57:56 GMT, (Richard Casady) wrote: On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 13:22:53 -0500, Boater wrote: Call in some "air" with 500 lb IR guided bombs to blow them out of the water from altitude. If these pirates discover their boats are simply disappearing without a trace they might stop going out. Use 250 lb bombs, they will vaporize a small boat just as thoroughly, and you can carry more of them. You can get six to a pylon, two triple ejector racks one behind the other. With an A-10 that's sixty of them. them. Tons lighter. More fuel. Your bomb load and milage may vary. Ed Zeiben. That reminds me of Ed Zeiben. Worked with him at IH in 1968. We were heat treaters. Big, wiry guy. WWII vet. The yippies and other trash were rioting in Grant Park, a few miles away from IH Tractor Works. He had the answer to the riots. "One 500-pounder. That'll take care of 'em." But he was an optimistic kinda guy. You worked at IH in the sixties? Kewl. That would have been during the era of the number series tractors - 544, 656, 756, 856 and 1256 models if I'm not mistaken. That was Farmall. Canton, IL I think. I worked making dozers, so the models were T-15,20, etc. Old McCormack works on the south side of Chicago, later Melrose Park, IL when they shut down Tractor Works. My good friend Harold Foskett has a T-15 and a T-20 dozer. Fully restored. McCormick is now owned by a Italian holding company - ARGO who also make Landini orchard tractors. Weren't those TD- numbers. I drove a TD-15 while in high school for a friends top soil company. Yes. The T stood for tractor, and the D was for diesel. However in the farm machinery like you had a different set. And example would be an M, MD, MDTA. M (Standard tractor) MD (M Diesel) MTA (M torque amplified) MDTA (M diesel, torque amplified) etc. Was a diesel and was a T. Was a skip loader basically for loading dirt in the and moving dirt piles in the storage yard. Droitt 5 (4) in 1 bucket. |
Any latest news on the pirates and the oil tanker?
On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 15:12:36 -0500, Eisboch wrote:
Good in theory, but just not realistically enforceable in a dependable way. The area would still be immense and very difficult to monitor, even with aircraft. These clowns are using very small boats in a very large ocean. The problem isn't really military capabilities. The problem is the navies are hamstrung by international law. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7735144.stm |
Any latest news on the pirates and the oil tanker?
On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 05:58:42 -0600, wrote:
On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 15:12:36 -0500, Eisboch wrote: Good in theory, but just not realistically enforceable in a dependable way. The area would still be immense and very difficult to monitor, even with aircraft. These clowns are using very small boats in a very large ocean. The problem isn't really military capabilities. The problem is the navies are hamstrung by international law. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7735144.stm This part is total bull****. "I have also heard from someone who used to advise British forces in the region and he says you cannot under international law convert a commercial ship into a kind of warship." While true that you can't turn a, say, tanker into a battleship, you certainly have the right by international law to protect yourself, the cargo and the vessel. If that means carying anti-tank weapons, automatic rifles or hiring mercenaries to protect you, your cargo and your ship, that's perfectly legal. Shakespeare was right - kill all the lawyers. |
Any latest news on the pirates and the oil tanker?
On Nov 20, 6:59*am, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote: On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 05:58:42 -0600, wrote: On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 15:12:36 -0500, Eisboch wrote: Good in theory, but just not realistically enforceable in a dependable way. The area would still be immense and very difficult to monitor, even with aircraft. These clowns are using very small boats in a very large ocean. The problem isn't really military capabilities. *The problem is the navies are hamstrung by international law. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7735144.stm This part is total bull****. "I have also heard from someone who used to advise British forces in the region and he says you cannot under international law convert a commercial ship into a kind of warship." While true that you can't turn a, say, tanker into a battleship, you certainly have the right by international law to protect yourself, the cargo and the vessel. If that means carying anti-tank weapons, automatic rifles or hiring mercenaries to protect you, your cargo and your ship, that's perfectly legal. Shakespeare was right - kill all the lawyers. i agre! That fore- deck on a carrier is huge enough to hold a couple choppers. something light for observance, then something like a huey (double mini-guns!) or a Blackhawk (Mu-ha-a-a-a-a-H!) for clean up. And let it be known that nothing (unless previously authorized) is allowed within two miles of the tanker. |
Any latest news on the pirates and the oil tanker?
On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 12:59:53 +0000, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7735144.stm While true that you can't turn a, say, tanker into a battleship, you certainly have the right by international law to protect yourself, the cargo and the vessel. If that means carying anti-tank weapons, automatic rifles or hiring mercenaries to protect you, your cargo and your ship, that's perfectly legal. Absolutely, but protecting yourself is only a band-aid. If you want to drastically reduce piracy, you have to take it to them, keep them locked up in port. A few ships blockading their home ports, is worth many ships on the high seas. However, under international law, a blockade is illegal, and whether we like it or not, we do have an obligation to follow international law. |
Any latest news on the pirates and the oil tanker?
wrote:
On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 12:59:53 +0000, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7735144.stm While true that you can't turn a, say, tanker into a battleship, you certainly have the right by international law to protect yourself, the cargo and the vessel. If that means carying anti-tank weapons, automatic rifles or hiring mercenaries to protect you, your cargo and your ship, that's perfectly legal. Absolutely, but protecting yourself is only a band-aid. If you want to drastically reduce piracy, you have to take it to them, keep them locked up in port. A few ships blockading their home ports, is worth many ships on the high seas. However, under international law, a blockade is illegal, and whether we like it or not, we do have an obligation to follow international law. It's not illegal for a nation to defend its merchant ships by patrolling the seas from the and by having gunships accompany the merchants. |
Any latest news on the pirates and the oil tanker?
On Nov 19, 8:58*pm, Vic Smith wrote:
On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 01:49:30 GMT, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: My good friend Harold Foskett has a T-15 and a T-20 dozer. Fully restored. Good to know. *I googled them out of curiosity a while back and saw some for sale. *I was there almost nine years and had my hand in making a lot of parts, from track chain bushings and links to track shoes to bucket arms and a lot in-beween. Good possibility some of that is still doing work. I value the work I did there. --Vic As you should. I hope Harry don't dis you for you honest hard work like he does so many others. |
Any latest news on the pirates and the oil tanker?
On Nov 19, 11:48*pm, wrote:
On Nov 19, 7:05*pm, DK wrote: Boater wrote: JohnH wrote: On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 15:21:07 -0500, Boater wrote: Eisboch wrote: "Boater" wrote in message ... Whatever the solution is, it should not involved killing uninvolved civilians. We've done enough of that in Iraq and Afghanistan. What gives us the right to kill innocent civilians? Cheney-ism? I agree. *We should never intentionally plan to kill uninvolved, innocent civilians, and I don't believe for a minute that any administration has since Truman authorized the atomic bomb drops. But warfare is not perfect. *To do nothing only empowers the enemy. Sometimes the risk of collateral damage has to be taken. Eisboch Whether it plans to kill them or not, I think the Bush Administration doesn't give a damn about uninvolved, innocent civilians. Besides, we're not at the point of bombing Somali villages yet and we apparently don't have the assets to interdict *Somali pirate ships. Hey, DS, what's Obama goin' to do? Round up all the right-wing useless old farts like you and send them into battle. National defense and public service, rolled up into one. Typical stupid response from a...writer! Not typically a mere writer, but a union agitator as well.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - nah, he's not employable, his wife works. |
Any latest news on the pirates and the oil tanker?
Don White wrote:
"DK" wrote in message ... Don White wrote: "Calif Bill" wrote in message ... wrote in message ... On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 10:49:33 -0500, JohnH wrote: Harry, we're talking about ways to do in the pirates here I think the answer as air power. Don't the Saudis have a few AWACs planes. Loiter over the water off Somalia and profile any small boats shadowing their ships. Call in some "air" with 500 lb IR guided bombs to blow them out of the water from altitude. If these pirates discover their boats are simply disappearing without a trace they might stop going out. For that matter the US could do that but we should do it covertly. Officially we don't know why pirate boats are suddenly blowing up at sea. Must be some kind of accident handling munitions or something. Maybe they just have a batch of defective bilge blowers. I am still not sure how these guys are sneaking up on a tanker. Don't they have RADAR? They do understand extreme violence. Air power is the answer. Find out what village or town the pirates are from. Then just tell the pirates that the village / town is going to be removed from the desert sands via big bomb method. Then do it. I say the world navies should declare a 'no go' zone to use as a shipping channel. Any unauthorized boats step over the line...kaboom. They'll get the message. Click on this, dumbass, and tell me how that will work... http://www.sailwx.info/shiptrack/shiplocations.phtml I believe we're just talking about one particular area numbnuts. Quit OD'n on those 'stupid pills'. That map covers the entire world, dip****. Show us where you would draw your moronic "No go zones". |
Any latest news on the pirates and the oil tanker?
DK wrote:
Don White wrote: "DK" wrote in message ... Don White wrote: "Calif Bill" wrote in message ... wrote in message ... On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 10:49:33 -0500, JohnH wrote: Harry, we're talking about ways to do in the pirates here I think the answer as air power. Don't the Saudis have a few AWACs planes. Loiter over the water off Somalia and profile any small boats shadowing their ships. Call in some "air" with 500 lb IR guided bombs to blow them out of the water from altitude. If these pirates discover their boats are simply disappearing without a trace they might stop going out. For that matter the US could do that but we should do it covertly. Officially we don't know why pirate boats are suddenly blowing up at sea. Must be some kind of accident handling munitions or something. Maybe they just have a batch of defective bilge blowers. I am still not sure how these guys are sneaking up on a tanker. Don't they have RADAR? They do understand extreme violence. Air power is the answer. Find out what village or town the pirates are from. Then just tell the pirates that the village / town is going to be removed from the desert sands via big bomb method. Then do it. I say the world navies should declare a 'no go' zone to use as a shipping channel. Any unauthorized boats step over the line...kaboom. They'll get the message. Click on this, dumbass, and tell me how that will work... http://www.sailwx.info/shiptrack/shiplocations.phtml I believe we're just talking about one particular area numbnuts. Quit OD'n on those 'stupid pills'. That map covers the entire world, dip****. Show us where you would draw your moronic "No go zones". Get back in your casket, stinko... http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b2...0/a87173e4.jpg |
Any latest news on the pirates and the oil tanker?
"DK" wrote in message ... Don White wrote: "DK" wrote in message ... Don White wrote: "Calif Bill" wrote in message ... wrote in message ... On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 10:49:33 -0500, JohnH wrote: Harry, we're talking about ways to do in the pirates here I think the answer as air power. Don't the Saudis have a few AWACs planes. Loiter over the water off Somalia and profile any small boats shadowing their ships. Call in some "air" with 500 lb IR guided bombs to blow them out of the water from altitude. If these pirates discover their boats are simply disappearing without a trace they might stop going out. For that matter the US could do that but we should do it covertly. Officially we don't know why pirate boats are suddenly blowing up at sea. Must be some kind of accident handling munitions or something. Maybe they just have a batch of defective bilge blowers. I am still not sure how these guys are sneaking up on a tanker. Don't they have RADAR? They do understand extreme violence. Air power is the answer. Find out what village or town the pirates are from. Then just tell the pirates that the village / town is going to be removed from the desert sands via big bomb method. Then do it. I say the world navies should declare a 'no go' zone to use as a shipping channel. Any unauthorized boats step over the line...kaboom. They'll get the message. Click on this, dumbass, and tell me how that will work... http://www.sailwx.info/shiptrack/shiplocations.phtml I believe we're just talking about one particular area numbnuts. Quit OD'n on those 'stupid pills'. That map covers the entire world, dip****. Show us where you would draw your moronic "No go zones". Right around your 'Hillbilly Heaven' would be a good start. |
Any latest news on the pirates and the oil tanker?
"Boater" wrote in message ... DK wrote: Don White wrote: "DK" wrote in message ... Don White wrote: "Calif Bill" wrote in message ... wrote in message ... On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 10:49:33 -0500, JohnH wrote: Harry, we're talking about ways to do in the pirates here I think the answer as air power. Don't the Saudis have a few AWACs planes. Loiter over the water off Somalia and profile any small boats shadowing their ships. Call in some "air" with 500 lb IR guided bombs to blow them out of the water from altitude. If these pirates discover their boats are simply disappearing without a trace they might stop going out. For that matter the US could do that but we should do it covertly. Officially we don't know why pirate boats are suddenly blowing up at sea. Must be some kind of accident handling munitions or something. Maybe they just have a batch of defective bilge blowers. I am still not sure how these guys are sneaking up on a tanker. Don't they have RADAR? They do understand extreme violence. Air power is the answer. Find out what village or town the pirates are from. Then just tell the pirates that the village / town is going to be removed from the desert sands via big bomb method. Then do it. I say the world navies should declare a 'no go' zone to use as a shipping channel. Any unauthorized boats step over the line...kaboom. They'll get the message. Click on this, dumbass, and tell me how that will work... http://www.sailwx.info/shiptrack/shiplocations.phtml I believe we're just talking about one particular area numbnuts. Quit OD'n on those 'stupid pills'. That map covers the entire world, dip****. Show us where you would draw your moronic "No go zones". Get back in your casket, stinko... http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b2...0/a87173e4.jpg Wonder how often Diaper Dan gets his Depends changed? |
Any latest news on the pirates and the oil tanker?
DK wrote:
Boater wrote: DK wrote: Don White wrote: "DK" wrote in message ... Don White wrote: "Calif Bill" wrote in message ... wrote in message ... On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 10:49:33 -0500, JohnH wrote: Harry, we're talking about ways to do in the pirates here I think the answer as air power. Don't the Saudis have a few AWACs planes. Loiter over the water off Somalia and profile any small boats shadowing their ships. Call in some "air" with 500 lb IR guided bombs to blow them out of the water from altitude. If these pirates discover their boats are simply disappearing without a trace they might stop going out. For that matter the US could do that but we should do it covertly. Officially we don't know why pirate boats are suddenly blowing up at sea. Must be some kind of accident handling munitions or something. Maybe they just have a batch of defective bilge blowers. I am still not sure how these guys are sneaking up on a tanker. Don't they have RADAR? They do understand extreme violence. Air power is the answer. Find out what village or town the pirates are from. Then just tell the pirates that the village / town is going to be removed from the desert sands via big bomb method. Then do it. I say the world navies should declare a 'no go' zone to use as a shipping channel. Any unauthorized boats step over the line...kaboom. They'll get the message. Click on this, dumbass, and tell me how that will work... http://www.sailwx.info/shiptrack/shiplocations.phtml I believe we're just talking about one particular area numbnuts. Quit OD'n on those 'stupid pills'. That map covers the entire world, dip****. Show us where you would draw your moronic "No go zones". Get back in your casket, stinko... http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b2...0/a87173e4.jpg You should be commended for sticking up for your lame little puppy Donnie. My comments about you and your stench have nothing to do with anyone but you. |
Any latest news on the pirates and the oil tanker?
Don White wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message ... DK wrote: Don White wrote: "DK" wrote in message ... Don White wrote: "Calif Bill" wrote in message ... wrote in message ... On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 10:49:33 -0500, JohnH wrote: Harry, we're talking about ways to do in the pirates here I think the answer as air power. Don't the Saudis have a few AWACs planes. Loiter over the water off Somalia and profile any small boats shadowing their ships. Call in some "air" with 500 lb IR guided bombs to blow them out of the water from altitude. If these pirates discover their boats are simply disappearing without a trace they might stop going out. For that matter the US could do that but we should do it covertly. Officially we don't know why pirate boats are suddenly blowing up at sea. Must be some kind of accident handling munitions or something. Maybe they just have a batch of defective bilge blowers. I am still not sure how these guys are sneaking up on a tanker. Don't they have RADAR? They do understand extreme violence. Air power is the answer. Find out what village or town the pirates are from. Then just tell the pirates that the village / town is going to be removed from the desert sands via big bomb method. Then do it. I say the world navies should declare a 'no go' zone to use as a shipping channel. Any unauthorized boats step over the line...kaboom. They'll get the message. Click on this, dumbass, and tell me how that will work... http://www.sailwx.info/shiptrack/shiplocations.phtml I believe we're just talking about one particular area numbnuts. Quit OD'n on those 'stupid pills'. That map covers the entire world, dip****. Show us where you would draw your moronic "No go zones". Get back in your casket, stinko... http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b2...0/a87173e4.jpg Wonder how often Diaper Dan gets his Depends changed? And who does it? |
Any latest news on the pirates and the oil tanker?
Don White wrote:
"DK" wrote in message ... Don White wrote: "DK" wrote in message ... Don White wrote: "Calif Bill" wrote in message ... wrote in message ... On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 10:49:33 -0500, JohnH wrote: Harry, we're talking about ways to do in the pirates here I think the answer as air power. Don't the Saudis have a few AWACs planes. Loiter over the water off Somalia and profile any small boats shadowing their ships. Call in some "air" with 500 lb IR guided bombs to blow them out of the water from altitude. If these pirates discover their boats are simply disappearing without a trace they might stop going out. For that matter the US could do that but we should do it covertly. Officially we don't know why pirate boats are suddenly blowing up at sea. Must be some kind of accident handling munitions or something. Maybe they just have a batch of defective bilge blowers. I am still not sure how these guys are sneaking up on a tanker. Don't they have RADAR? They do understand extreme violence. Air power is the answer. Find out what village or town the pirates are from. Then just tell the pirates that the village / town is going to be removed from the desert sands via big bomb method. Then do it. I say the world navies should declare a 'no go' zone to use as a shipping channel. Any unauthorized boats step over the line...kaboom. They'll get the message. Click on this, dumbass, and tell me how that will work... http://www.sailwx.info/shiptrack/shiplocations.phtml I believe we're just talking about one particular area numbnuts. Quit OD'n on those 'stupid pills'. That map covers the entire world, dip****. Show us where you would draw your moronic "No go zones". Right around your 'Hillbilly Heaven' would be a good start. Non-responsive. |
Any latest news on the pirates and the oil tanker?
Boater wrote:
DK wrote: Boater wrote: DK wrote: Don White wrote: "DK" wrote in message ... Don White wrote: "Calif Bill" wrote in message ... wrote in message ... On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 10:49:33 -0500, JohnH wrote: Harry, we're talking about ways to do in the pirates here I think the answer as air power. Don't the Saudis have a few AWACs planes. Loiter over the water off Somalia and profile any small boats shadowing their ships. Call in some "air" with 500 lb IR guided bombs to blow them out of the water from altitude. If these pirates discover their boats are simply disappearing without a trace they might stop going out. For that matter the US could do that but we should do it covertly. Officially we don't know why pirate boats are suddenly blowing up at sea. Must be some kind of accident handling munitions or something. Maybe they just have a batch of defective bilge blowers. I am still not sure how these guys are sneaking up on a tanker. Don't they have RADAR? They do understand extreme violence. Air power is the answer. Find out what village or town the pirates are from. Then just tell the pirates that the village / town is going to be removed from the desert sands via big bomb method. Then do it. I say the world navies should declare a 'no go' zone to use as a shipping channel. Any unauthorized boats step over the line...kaboom. They'll get the message. Click on this, dumbass, and tell me how that will work... http://www.sailwx.info/shiptrack/shiplocations.phtml I believe we're just talking about one particular area numbnuts. Quit OD'n on those 'stupid pills'. That map covers the entire world, dip****. Show us where you would draw your moronic "No go zones". Get back in your casket, stinko... http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b2...0/a87173e4.jpg You should be commended for sticking up for your lame little puppy Donnie. My comments about you and your stench have nothing to do with anyone but you. Is Karen impressed with those comments? |
Any latest news on the pirates and the oil tanker?
Don White wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message ... DK wrote: Don White wrote: "DK" wrote in message ... Don White wrote: "Calif Bill" wrote in message ... wrote in message ... On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 10:49:33 -0500, JohnH wrote: Harry, we're talking about ways to do in the pirates here I think the answer as air power. Don't the Saudis have a few AWACs planes. Loiter over the water off Somalia and profile any small boats shadowing their ships. Call in some "air" with 500 lb IR guided bombs to blow them out of the water from altitude. If these pirates discover their boats are simply disappearing without a trace they might stop going out. For that matter the US could do that but we should do it covertly. Officially we don't know why pirate boats are suddenly blowing up at sea. Must be some kind of accident handling munitions or something. Maybe they just have a batch of defective bilge blowers. I am still not sure how these guys are sneaking up on a tanker. Don't they have RADAR? They do understand extreme violence. Air power is the answer. Find out what village or town the pirates are from. Then just tell the pirates that the village / town is going to be removed from the desert sands via big bomb method. Then do it. I say the world navies should declare a 'no go' zone to use as a shipping channel. Any unauthorized boats step over the line...kaboom. They'll get the message. Click on this, dumbass, and tell me how that will work... http://www.sailwx.info/shiptrack/shiplocations.phtml I believe we're just talking about one particular area numbnuts. Quit OD'n on those 'stupid pills'. That map covers the entire world, dip****. Show us where you would draw your moronic "No go zones". Get back in your casket, stinko... http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b2...0/a87173e4.jpg Wonder how often Diaper Dan gets his Depends changed? Try a complete sentence next time, dummy. It will still be stupid as hell but at least you will show an improvement. |
Any latest news on the pirates and the oil tanker?
wrote:
On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 12:59:53 +0000, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7735144.stm While true that you can't turn a, say, tanker into a battleship, you certainly have the right by international law to protect yourself, the cargo and the vessel. If that means carying anti-tank weapons, automatic rifles or hiring mercenaries to protect you, your cargo and your ship, that's perfectly legal. Absolutely, but protecting yourself is only a band-aid. If you want to drastically reduce piracy, you have to take it to them, keep them locked up in port. A few ships blockading their home ports, is worth many ships on the high seas. However, under international law, a blockade is illegal, and whether we like it or not, we do have an obligation to follow international law. Pirate ships don't come from "home" ports. A mother ship can stay off shore for years being replenished by smaller boats from villages and beaches. |
Any latest news on the pirates and the oil tanker?
My gosh!
That tanker looks like it holds more under the water than above! http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph...r_1115972c.jpg i wonder what the balast is like when it's empty? |
Any latest news on the pirates and the oil tanker?
On Nov 20, 11:04*am, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote: On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 07:30:13 -0600, wrote: On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 12:59:53 +0000, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7735144.stm While true that you can't turn a, say, tanker into a battleship, you certainly have the right by international law to protect yourself, the cargo and the vessel. If that means carying anti-tank weapons, automatic rifles or hiring mercenaries to protect you, your cargo and your ship, that's perfectly legal. Absolutely, but protecting yourself is only a band-aid. *If you want to drastically reduce piracy, you have to take it to them, keep them locked up in port. *A few ships blockading their home ports, is worth many ships on the high seas. *However, under international law, a blockade is illegal, and whether we like it or not, we do have an obligation to follow international law. Ok, let's take that last one first. Why? *It's obvious that international law doesn't apply to the pirates -and I hesitate to call them pirates, but that's the way of it or perhaps the lack of international response to the crisis is giving them idea that they can do pretty much anything they want. Well, what happens when you are met with force? *Do you just sit back and take it on the chin or do you reply with overwhelming force? To my mind, if they are going to act illegally on the high seas, then it's incumbent on the organized and civilized nations to take similar action only with LOTS of force - legal beagle crap be damned. And it's not like there is a lot of ambuguity as to who the perps are. Tim's idea is a good one - declare an exclusion zone of two miles in this area - anyone entering that zone without authorization will be met with deadly force. *Assign an international escort force aboard these vessels and enforce the Law of The Sea - namely, blow the *******s out of the water and feed 'em to the sharks. *Do that once or twice and I don't think this "piracy" will continue. And no, I don't have a lot of sympathy for thieves or other criminals so my opinion is necessarily colored by that. *:) With respect to blockades - eh, they'll just move the base of operations. *Why give 'em an excuse - get 'em where they live doesn't seem exactly applicable in this situation. Getting them while in the act - that's the way to go around it. Tom, something like that might be in the brewing now. http://yalibnan.com/site/archives/20...an_warship.php "...These days, there is no question of a bombardment of the port of Eyl, the main pirate base on the Somali coast. That might be the most effective response but it would require a UN Security Council resolution. There is a resolution (1838, passed in October) which authorizes the use of "necessary means", meaning force if need be, to stop piracy in international waters. There is also another resolution (1816) which allows anti-pirate operations within Somali waters, but only with the agreement of the Somali transitional government...." |
Any latest news on the pirates and the oil tanker?
Tim wrote:
My gosh! That tanker looks like it holds more under the water than above! http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph...r_1115972c.jpg i wonder what the balast is like when it's empty? The question is how much sea water do they have to take on to make the vessel sea worthy on its voyage back to the gulf to get refilled with oil? |
Any latest news on the pirates and the oil tanker?
Tim wrote:
On Nov 20, 11:04 am, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 07:30:13 -0600, wrote: On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 12:59:53 +0000, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7735144.stm While true that you can't turn a, say, tanker into a battleship, you certainly have the right by international law to protect yourself, the cargo and the vessel. If that means carying anti-tank weapons, automatic rifles or hiring mercenaries to protect you, your cargo and your ship, that's perfectly legal. Absolutely, but protecting yourself is only a band-aid. If you want to drastically reduce piracy, you have to take it to them, keep them locked up in port. A few ships blockading their home ports, is worth many ships on the high seas. However, under international law, a blockade is illegal, and whether we like it or not, we do have an obligation to follow international law. Ok, let's take that last one first. Why? It's obvious that international law doesn't apply to the pirates -and I hesitate to call them pirates, but that's the way of it or perhaps the lack of international response to the crisis is giving them idea that they can do pretty much anything they want. Well, what happens when you are met with force? Do you just sit back and take it on the chin or do you reply with overwhelming force? To my mind, if they are going to act illegally on the high seas, then it's incumbent on the organized and civilized nations to take similar action only with LOTS of force - legal beagle crap be damned. And it's not like there is a lot of ambuguity as to who the perps are. Tim's idea is a good one - declare an exclusion zone of two miles in this area - anyone entering that zone without authorization will be met with deadly force. Assign an international escort force aboard these vessels and enforce the Law of The Sea - namely, blow the *******s out of the water and feed 'em to the sharks. Do that once or twice and I don't think this "piracy" will continue. And no, I don't have a lot of sympathy for thieves or other criminals so my opinion is necessarily colored by that. :) With respect to blockades - eh, they'll just move the base of operations. Why give 'em an excuse - get 'em where they live doesn't seem exactly applicable in this situation. Getting them while in the act - that's the way to go around it. Tom, something like that might be in the brewing now. http://yalibnan.com/site/archives/20...an_warship.php "...These days, there is no question of a bombardment of the port of Eyl, the main pirate base on the Somali coast. That might be the most effective response but it would require a UN Security Council resolution. There is a resolution (1838, passed in October) which authorizes the use of "necessary means", meaning force if need be, to stop piracy in international waters. There is also another resolution (1816) which allows anti-pirate operations within Somali waters, but only with the agreement of the Somali transitional government...." Man of war vessels just need to ride the seas where the pirates ply their trade and challenge them and stop them and board and inspect them. If the suspected pirate vessels are found to be carrying contraband they can be seized or sunk. |
Any latest news on the pirates and the oil tanker?
"Tim" wrote in message ... "...These days, there is no question of a bombardment of the port of Eyl, the main pirate base on the Somali coast. That might be the most effective response but it would require a UN Security Council resolution. There is a resolution (1838, passed in October) which authorizes the use of "necessary means", meaning force if need be, to stop piracy in international waters. There is also another resolution (1816) which allows anti-pirate operations within Somali waters, but only with the agreement of the Somali transitional government...." -------------------------------- I watched a discussion on one of the cable news networks regarding this issue. Apparently the Somali "pirates" are basically a renegade group who have no allegiance to any government or laws. They don't even consider what they are doing as breaking a law because they don't have any laws to break. Eisboch |
Any latest news on the pirates and the oil tanker?
On Nov 21, 12:51*am, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Tim" wrote in message ... "...These days, there is no question of a bombardment of the port of Eyl, the main pirate base on the Somali coast. That might be the most effective response but it would require a UN Security Council resolution. There is a resolution (1838, passed in October) which authorizes the use of "necessary means", meaning force if need be, to stop piracy in international waters. There is also another resolution (1816) which allows anti-pirate operations within Somali waters, but only with the agreement of the Somali transitional government...." -------------------------------- I watched a discussion on one of the cable news networks regarding this issue. *Apparently the Somali "pirates" are basically a renegade group who have no allegiance to any government or laws. * They don't even consider what they are doing as breaking a law because they don't have any laws to break. Eisboch hmmmmm. Now that makes sense. How can you break a law, when there is no law to break? Marvel concept. |
Any latest news on the pirates and the oil tanker?
wrote in message ... On Nov 21, 12:51 am, "Eisboch" wrote: "Tim" wrote in message ... "...These days, there is no question of a bombardment of the port of Eyl, the main pirate base on the Somali coast. That might be the most effective response but it would require a UN Security Council resolution. There is a resolution (1838, passed in October) which authorizes the use of "necessary means", meaning force if need be, to stop piracy in international waters. There is also another resolution (1816) which allows anti-pirate operations within Somali waters, but only with the agreement of the Somali transitional government...." -------------------------------- I watched a discussion on one of the cable news networks regarding this issue. Apparently the Somali "pirates" are basically a renegade group who have no allegiance to any government or laws. They don't even consider what they are doing as breaking a law because they don't have any laws to break. Eisboch hmmmmm. Now that makes sense. How can you break a law, when there is no law to break? Marvel concept. -------------------------------- Exactly. They are merely "sharing the wealth". Eisboch |
Any latest news on the pirates and the oil tanker?
On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 01:51:22 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Tim" wrote in message ... "...These days, there is no question of a bombardment of the port of Eyl, the main pirate base on the Somali coast. That might be the most effective response but it would require a UN Security Council resolution. There is a resolution (1838, passed in October) which authorizes the use of "necessary means", meaning force if need be, to stop piracy in international waters. There is also another resolution (1816) which allows anti-pirate operations within Somali waters, but only with the agreement of the Somali transitional government...." -------------------------------- I watched a discussion on one of the cable news networks regarding this issue. Apparently the Somali "pirates" are basically a renegade group who have no allegiance to any government or laws. They don't even consider what they are doing as breaking a law because they don't have any laws to break. Not to get into a detailed discussion, but... In days of old when men were bold and all the sheep were nervous, piracy could be considered as a national policy by use of Letters of Marque. It was legitimate in a sense because essentially, the Letter of Marque gave the legal cover needed to board, seize and confiscate vessels and cargo. The British Admirality established this process as a legal method and it became the defacto International standard - same with the fired upon rule which is still a legal standard. The pirates who didn't have a Letter of Marque were considered as criminals and fair game. In this case, I would consider them as fair game. So let's drop a MOAB and get it over with. :) |
Any latest news on the pirates and the oil tanker?
On Nov 21, 3:24*am, "Eisboch" wrote:
wrote in message ... On Nov 21, 12:51 am, "Eisboch" wrote: "Tim" wrote in message ... "...These days, there is no question of a bombardment of the port of Eyl, the main pirate base on the Somali coast. That might be the most effective response but it would require a UN Security Council resolution. There is a resolution (1838, passed in October) which authorizes the use of "necessary means", meaning force if need be, to stop piracy in international waters. There is also another resolution (1816) which allows anti-pirate operations within Somali waters, but only with the agreement of the Somali transitional government...." -------------------------------- I watched a discussion on one of the cable news networks regarding this issue. Apparently the Somali "pirates" are basically a renegade group who have no allegiance to any government or laws. They don't even consider what they are doing as breaking a law because they don't have any laws to break. Eisboch hmmmmm. Now that makes sense. How can you break a law, when there is no law to break? Marvel concept. -------------------------------- Exactly. *They are merely "sharing the wealth". Eisboch In one article I've read they call themselves the "Coast Guard" |
Any latest news on the pirates and the oil tanker?
On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 23:25:46 -0500, BAR wrote:
Man of war vessels just need to ride the seas where the pirates ply their trade and challenge them and stop them and board and inspect them. If the suspected pirate vessels are found to be carrying contraband they can be seized or sunk. Uh, no. If you catch them in the act of piracy, yes. To stop and board *suspected* pirate vessels, you are discarding several hundred years of legal precedents (Mare liberum). Consider, do you really want every two- bit country to have the precedent to board and search legal sea commerce? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mare_liberum |
Any latest news on the pirates and the oil tanker?
On Nov 21, 6:33*am, wrote:
On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 23:25:46 -0500, BAR wrote: Man of war vessels just need to ride the seas where the pirates ply their trade and challenge them and stop them and board and inspect them.. If the suspected pirate vessels are found to be carrying contraband they can be seized or sunk. Uh, no. *If you catch them in the act of piracy, yes. *To stop and board *suspected* pirate vessels, you are discarding several hundred years of legal precedents (Mare liberum). *Consider, do you really want every two- bit country to have the precedent to board and search legal sea commerce? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mare_liberum France has a "catch 'n release" policy http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LAIj-aLLBTY "Smile for the camera and we'lll see you next time...." |
Any latest news on the pirates and the oil tanker?
"Tim" wrote in message ... On Nov 21, 6:33 am, wrote: On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 23:25:46 -0500, BAR wrote: Man of war vessels just need to ride the seas where the pirates ply their trade and challenge them and stop them and board and inspect them. If the suspected pirate vessels are found to be carrying contraband they can be seized or sunk. Uh, no. If you catch them in the act of piracy, yes. To stop and board *suspected* pirate vessels, you are discarding several hundred years of legal precedents (Mare liberum). Consider, do you really want every two- bit country to have the precedent to board and search legal sea commerce? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mare_liberum France has a "catch 'n release" policy http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LAIj-aLLBTY "Smile for the camera and we'lll see you next time...." Would a Danforth or a plow anchor be better? Or just cheap buckets of concrete? |
Any latest news on the pirates and the oil tanker?
On Nov 21, 11:44*pm, "Calif Bill" wrote:
"Tim" wrote in message ... On Nov 21, 6:33 am, wrote: On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 23:25:46 -0500, BAR wrote: Man of war vessels just need to ride the seas where the pirates ply their trade and challenge them and stop them and board and inspect them. If the suspected pirate vessels are found to be carrying contraband they can be seized or sunk. Uh, no. If you catch them in the act of piracy, yes. To stop and board *suspected* pirate vessels, you are discarding several hundred years of legal precedents (Mare liberum). Consider, do you really want every two- bit country to have the precedent to board and search legal sea commerce? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mare_liberum France has a "catch 'n release" policy http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LAIj-aLLBTY "Smile for the camera and we'lll see you next time...." Would a Danforth or a plow anchor be better? *Or just cheap buckets of concrete? Scrap Iron has dropped way low now, from about $200+/- a ton to about $14 bucks. Steel plate and rope works well. |
Any latest news on the pirates and the oil tanker?
On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 21:44:47 -0800, "Calif Bill"
wrote: "Tim" wrote in message ... On Nov 21, 6:33 am, wrote: On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 23:25:46 -0500, BAR wrote: Man of war vessels just need to ride the seas where the pirates ply their trade and challenge them and stop them and board and inspect them. If the suspected pirate vessels are found to be carrying contraband they can be seized or sunk. Uh, no. If you catch them in the act of piracy, yes. To stop and board *suspected* pirate vessels, you are discarding several hundred years of legal precedents (Mare liberum). Consider, do you really want every two- bit country to have the precedent to board and search legal sea commerce? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mare_liberum France has a "catch 'n release" policy http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LAIj-aLLBTY "Smile for the camera and we'lll see you next time...." Would a Danforth or a plow anchor be better? Or just cheap buckets of concrete? Use a couple of cable ties to secure their hands to their AK 47's, and toss them in. Have a creative tieing contest, last one's victim to drown wins. Be sure and remove their shoes and trousers so that they can tread water longer. Bush legalized torture, right? Casady |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:24 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com