American crew retakes ship
 

wrote:
On Apr 10, 9:42 am, HK wrote:
Richard Casady wrote:
On Thu, 9 Apr 2009 08:25:08 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:
On Apr 9, 12:23 am, wrote:
Simply train and arm the crew with 50 cal. and 20 m.m. automatic weapons to
defend themselves. A 20 m.m. Vulcan gatlin gun mounted amidships with quad
50's fore and aft would stop all the nonsense. As a former destroyer
shipmate, I assure you the firepower in the aforementioned is sufficient to
strike terror in the hearts of any so called Pirates."Eisboch" wrote in message
...
Betcha there are a few in Wash DC breathing a sigh of relief.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/piracy-Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Agreed.
At least a couple Ma-deuces, and even mini-guns would help
Arm that 13 man crew. The ones who have a half mile of railings to
watch for ladders and grappling irons.[Emma Maersk]
It is true that there are many smaller ships, with bigger crews.
It cost about 2 to 3 million bucks for a stabilized 20mm mount.
That leaves spray and pray, and the Gatling doesn't need to be bigger
than 5,56mm. No armor on those outboard motors. Shoot if you see guns
and ladders.
Casady
Alternately, we could give our mighty military forces and the mighty
military forces of other interested countries something useful to do for
a change. A few carriers and protective ships in the area, helped by
satellites and flyovers from carrier jets and prop planes, would do it.
We can easily keep track of the merchant vessels, and we can in real
time keep track of suspicious activities by the dinky boats and ships
the pirates operate.

--
Palin & Bachmann in 2012 -
Bring Integerity back to Washington.


Pffftt. Hopefully, nobody here is litening to you as your assumption
is way off. According to Navy officials it would take 60 ships to
handle that area. Do you know how many ships we currently have in our
Navy? C'mon Harry, get some facts then come back and talk snerk
Here's a hint, think 300...


D'oh. You missed the part about satellites and military forces from
other countries, eh, plus the force multiplier of planes? And it
wouldn't necessarily have to be lots of large "ships," since fast and
heavily armed patrol craft can cover a lot of ocean. Many, many
countries produce small, ocean-going, high speed patrol and interdiction
craft.

Our navy, of course, is mostly interested in bigger and better. Well,
that isn't necessarily the way to go in catching Somali pirates.

You should stick to drinking squeeze all day...and stop typing in
between sips.






--
Palin & Bachmann in 2012 -
All Stupidity All the Time

American crew retakes ship
 

"Richard Casady" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 9 Apr 2009 08:25:08 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

On Apr 9, 12:23 am, wrote:
Simply train and arm the crew with 50 cal. and 20 m.m. automatic weapons
to
defend themselves. A 20 m.m. Vulcan gatlin gun mounted amidships with
quad
50's fore and aft would stop all the nonsense. As a former destroyer
shipmate, I assure you the firepower in the aforementioned is sufficient
to
strike terror in the hearts of any so called Pirates."Eisboch"
wrote in message

...





Betcha there are a few in Wash DC breathing a sigh of relief.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/piracy- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Agreed.

At least a couple Ma-deuces, and even mini-guns would help

Arm that 13 man crew. The ones who have a half mile of railings to
watch for ladders and grappling irons.[Emma Maersk]

It is true that there are many smaller ships, with bigger crews.

It cost about 2 to 3 million bucks for a stabilized 20mm mount.

That leaves spray and pray, and the Gatling doesn't need to be bigger
than 5,56mm. No armor on those outboard motors. Shoot if you see guns
and ladders.

Casady



I read last night that there a two major reasons why merchant ships are not
legally armed with much more than side arms.

The first is that they often carry cargo like oil or other flammables, the
vapors of which can be explosive.

The second is that many ports will not allow an armed civilian ship to
enter.

Eisboch

American crew retakes ship
 

"HK" wrote in message
...


Alternately, we could give our mighty military forces and the mighty
military forces of other interested countries something useful to do for a
change. A few carriers and protective ships in the area, helped by
satellites and flyovers from carrier jets and prop planes, would do it. We
can easily keep track of the merchant vessels, and we can in real time
keep track of suspicious activities by the dinky boats and ships the
pirates operate.


Not enough ships for too big of an ocean. Fast as they may be, they
couldn't respond to a boarding 200 miles away in time to prevent it, even at
30-35 kts. Maybe they all need to be retrofitted with a bank of Etecs on
their transoms to get there faster.

Eisboch

Eisboch

American crew retakes ship
 

Eisboch wrote:

"Richard Casady" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 9 Apr 2009 08:25:08 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

On Apr 9, 12:23 am, wrote:
Simply train and arm the crew with 50 cal. and 20 m.m. automatic
weapons to
defend themselves. A 20 m.m. Vulcan gatlin gun mounted amidships
with quad
50's fore and aft would stop all the nonsense. As a former destroyer
shipmate, I assure you the firepower in the aforementioned is
sufficient to
strike terror in the hearts of any so called Pirates."Eisboch"
wrote in message

...





Betcha there are a few in Wash DC breathing a sigh of relief.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/piracy- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Agreed.

At least a couple Ma-deuces, and even mini-guns would help

Arm that 13 man crew. The ones who have a half mile of railings to
watch for ladders and grappling irons.[Emma Maersk]

It is true that there are many smaller ships, with bigger crews.

It cost about 2 to 3 million bucks for a stabilized 20mm mount.

That leaves spray and pray, and the Gatling doesn't need to be bigger
than 5,56mm. No armor on those outboard motors. Shoot if you see guns
and ladders.

Casady



I read last night that there a two major reasons why merchant ships are
not legally armed with much more than side arms.

The first is that they often carry cargo like oil or other flammables,
the vapors of which can be explosive.

The second is that many ports will not allow an armed civilian ship to
enter.

Eisboch



Both of which make sense, and I've read in several places that armed
civilian ships are indeed not allowed in many ports.

It's the job of governments to keep the sea lanes safe. There are plenty
of small offshore patrol boats available in the free world. Our U.S.
Navy could be buying some of these from friendly nations if we don't
have enough, or we could build a few dozen for a fraction of the cost of
another useless and vulnerable aircraft carrier.




--
Palin & Bachmann in 2012 -
All Stupidity All the Time

American crew retakes ship
 

wrote:
On Apr 10, 9:42 am, HK wrote:
Richard Casady wrote:
On Thu, 9 Apr 2009 08:25:08 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:
On Apr 9, 12:23 am, wrote:
Simply train and arm the crew with 50 cal. and 20 m.m. automatic weapons to
defend themselves. A 20 m.m. Vulcan gatlin gun mounted amidships with quad
50's fore and aft would stop all the nonsense. As a former destroyer
shipmate, I assure you the firepower in the aforementioned is sufficient to
strike terror in the hearts of any so called Pirates."Eisboch" wrote in message
...
Betcha there are a few in Wash DC breathing a sigh of relief.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/piracy-Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Agreed.
At least a couple Ma-deuces, and even mini-guns would help
Arm that 13 man crew. The ones who have a half mile of railings to
watch for ladders and grappling irons.[Emma Maersk]
It is true that there are many smaller ships, with bigger crews.
It cost about 2 to 3 million bucks for a stabilized 20mm mount.
That leaves spray and pray, and the Gatling doesn't need to be bigger
than 5,56mm. No armor on those outboard motors. Shoot if you see guns
and ladders.
Casady
Alternately, we could give our mighty military forces and the mighty
military forces of other interested countries something useful to do for
a change. A few carriers and protective ships in the area, helped by
satellites and flyovers from carrier jets and prop planes, would do it.
We can easily keep track of the merchant vessels, and we can in real
time keep track of suspicious activities by the dinky boats and ships
the pirates operate.

--
Palin & Bachmann in 2012 -
Bring Integerity back to Washington.


Pffftt. Hopefully, nobody here is litening to you as your assumption
is way off. According to Navy officials it would take 60 ships to
handle that area. Do you know how many ships we currently have in our
Navy? C'mon Harry, get some facts then come back and talk snerk
Here's a hint, think 300...

Notice he said "keep track". That's an important part of liberal
thinking. Next step after keeping track is "study commission". In a few
years you might get some findings which will lead to appropriations to
do more studies. Etc. etc. etc.

What we need to do is eliminate the threats by any means at our disposal.

American crew retakes ship
 

Eisboch wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...


Alternately, we could give our mighty military forces and the mighty
military forces of other interested countries something useful to do
for a change. A few carriers and protective ships in the area, helped
by satellites and flyovers from carrier jets and prop planes, would do
it. We can easily keep track of the merchant vessels, and we can in
real time keep track of suspicious activities by the dinky boats and
ships the pirates operate.


Not enough ships for too big of an ocean. Fast as they may be, they
couldn't respond to a boarding 200 miles away in time to prevent it,
even at 30-35 kts. Maybe they all need to be retrofitted with a bank
of Etecs on their transoms to get there faster.

Eisboch

Eisboch


Or eTec launchers, to toss all the dead eTechs at the pirate boats.

A U.S. and other nation carrier, stationed strategically, could easily
be the mainstay of a force designed to keep the waters clear of pirates.
Remember, satellite technology makes it possible to track these pirate
craft from the moment they leave port.

Lots of small patrol craft are the real answer, all hooked up in a
communications network, with fighter jet backup. Do it the right way,
and no bitty pirate boats are going to be able to get close to the
freighters.




--
Palin & Bachmann in 2012 -
All Stupidity All the Time

American crew retakes ship
 

"HK" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...


Alternately, we could give our mighty military forces and the mighty
military forces of other interested countries something useful to do for
a change. A few carriers and protective ships in the area, helped by
satellites and flyovers from carrier jets and prop planes, would do it.
We can easily keep track of the merchant vessels, and we can in real
time keep track of suspicious activities by the dinky boats and ships
the pirates operate.


Not enough ships for too big of an ocean. Fast as they may be, they
couldn't respond to a boarding 200 miles away in time to prevent it, even
at 30-35 kts. Maybe they all need to be retrofitted with a bank of
Etecs on their transoms to get there faster.

Eisboch

Eisboch


Or eTec launchers, to toss all the dead eTechs at the pirate boats.

A U.S. and other nation carrier, stationed strategically, could easily be
the mainstay of a force designed to keep the waters clear of pirates.
Remember, satellite technology makes it possible to track these pirate
craft from the moment they leave port.

Lots of small patrol craft are the real answer, all hooked up in a
communications network, with fighter jet backup. Do it the right way, and
no bitty pirate boats are going to be able to get close to the freighters.





Catching these guys at sea is like trying to capture a bunch of bees that
have left their nest.
Better to destroy the nest.

The problem with your idea is that as soon as you relax a bit, they will be
back. It would require constant, endless surveillance to control it. (it's
been going on for many, many years).

Better to fix the problem than the symptoms.

Eisboch

American crew retakes ship
 

Eisboch wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...


Alternately, we could give our mighty military forces and the mighty
military forces of other interested countries something useful to do
for a change. A few carriers and protective ships in the area,
helped by satellites and flyovers from carrier jets and prop planes,
would do it. We can easily keep track of the merchant vessels, and
we can in real time keep track of suspicious activities by the dinky
boats and ships the pirates operate.


Not enough ships for too big of an ocean. Fast as they may be, they
couldn't respond to a boarding 200 miles away in time to prevent it,
even at 30-35 kts. Maybe they all need to be retrofitted with a
bank of Etecs on their transoms to get there faster.

Eisboch

Eisboch


Or eTec launchers, to toss all the dead eTechs at the pirate boats.

A U.S. and other nation carrier, stationed strategically, could easily
be the mainstay of a force designed to keep the waters clear of pirates.
Remember, satellite technology makes it possible to track these pirate
craft from the moment they leave port.

Lots of small patrol craft are the real answer, all hooked up in a
communications network, with fighter jet backup. Do it the right way,
and no bitty pirate boats are going to be able to get close to the
freighters.





Catching these guys at sea is like trying to capture a bunch of bees
that have left their nest.
Better to destroy the nest.

The problem with your idea is that as soon as you relax a bit, they will
be back. It would require constant, endless surveillance to control
it. (it's been going on for many, many years).

Better to fix the problem than the symptoms.

Eisboch


A. They have several nests.
B. Destroying the nests would mean destroying the ports in a starving
nation.
C. Interdicting the pirates for a considerable period of time would give
our Navy something useful to do.
D. We supposedly are doing constant, endless surveillance in a number of
areas in the world, with huge flotillas. Most of what I envision could
be done with one U.S. carrier task force and a carrier or two from
another friendly nation, plus lots of small patrol boats and satellite
surveilliance.
E. Really fixing the problem would require rebuilding Somalia.

We always have at least one carrier group in the Indian Ocean, by the way.










--
Palin & Bachmann in 2012 -
All Stupidity All the Time

American crew retakes ship
 

On Apr 10, 10:55*am, HK wrote:
Eisboch wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...

Alternately, we could give our mighty military forces and the mighty
military forces of other interested countries something useful to do
for a change. A few carriers and protective ships in the area, helped
by satellites and flyovers from carrier jets and prop planes, would do
it. We can easily keep track of the merchant vessels, and we can in
real time keep track of suspicious activities by the dinky boats and
ships the pirates operate.

Not enough ships for too big of an ocean. *Fast as they may be, they
couldn't respond to a boarding 200 miles away in time to prevent it,
even at 30-35 kts. * Maybe they all need to be retrofitted with a bank
of Etecs on their transoms to get there faster.

Eisboch

Eisboch

Or eTec launchers, to toss all the dead eTechs at the pirate boats.

A U.S. and other nation carrier, stationed strategically, could easily
be the mainstay of a force designed to keep the waters clear of pirates.
Remember, satellite technology makes it possible to track these pirate
craft from the moment they leave port.

Lots of small patrol craft are the real answer, all hooked up in a
communications network, with fighter jet backup. Do it the right way,
and no bitty pirate boats are going to be able to get close to the
freighters.

--
Palin & Bachmann in 2012 -
All Stupidity All the Time- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You sure are dumb.. First off you talk about all these other countries
as if they are going to put their ships in harms way. As we have seen
all around the world is that we and a few other countries are the only
ones with the guts to stand up for ourselves, certainly not any of our
UN partners.. Second, you say we should buy ships from them, pffffttt,
how does that square with all of your other bull**** about more
intelligence and less armement? Forget it, I don't need to read your
dodge...

Another thing you seem to forget is "innocent until proven guilty".
What are you going to do, wipe out every small armed ship in the area.
The UN would immediately take us to the Haige (sp?) for killing
"innocent" fishermen, simply carrying arms to protect themselves from
Pirates.. The list goes on, but we know you rarely think these things
out, you just spew, what a waste of time you are...

American crew retakes ship
 

On Apr 10, 11:29*am, HK wrote:
Eisboch wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...

Alternately, we could give our mighty military forces and the mighty
military forces of other interested countries something useful to do
for a change. A few carriers and protective ships in the area,
helped by satellites and flyovers from carrier jets and prop planes,
would do it. We can easily keep track of the merchant vessels, and
we can in real time keep track of suspicious activities by the dinky
boats and ships the pirates operate.

Not enough ships for too big of an ocean. *Fast as they may be, they
couldn't respond to a boarding 200 miles away in time to prevent it,
even at 30-35 kts. * Maybe they all need to be retrofitted with a
bank of Etecs on their transoms to get there faster.

Eisboch

Eisboch

Or eTec launchers, to toss all the dead eTechs at the pirate boats.

A U.S. and other nation carrier, stationed strategically, could easily
be the mainstay of a force designed to keep the waters clear of pirates.
Remember, satellite technology makes it possible to track these pirate
craft from the moment they leave port.

Lots of small patrol craft are the real answer, all hooked up in a
communications network, with fighter jet backup. Do it the right way,
and no bitty pirate boats are going to be able to get close to the
freighters.

Catching these guys at sea is like trying to capture a bunch of bees
that have left their nest.
Better to destroy the nest.

The problem with your idea is that as soon as you relax a bit, they will
be back. *It would require constant, endless surveillance to control
it. *(it's been going on for many, many years).

Better to fix the problem than the symptoms.

Eisboch

A. They have several nests.
B. Destroying the nests would mean destroying the ports in a starving
nation.
C. Interdicting the pirates for a considerable period of time would give
our Navy something useful to do.

More of your useless babble..

D. We supposedly are doing constant, endless surveillance in a number of
areas in the world, with huge flotillas. Most of what I envision could
be done with one U.S. carrier task force and a carrier or two from
another friendly nation,

That's because you really don't have a clue beyond your own trolling
agenda...

plus lots of small patrol boats and satellite
surveilliance.

Again, what are we looking for, are we going to attack every small
armed ship? What if they are only fishermen trying to protect
themselves?

E. Really fixing the problem would require rebuilding Somalia.

You mean "nation building"? Talk about a double standard...


We always have at least one carrier group in the Indian Ocean, by the way..

Wow, one carrier group. Hardly enough area covered to do any good...
But of course, facts don't really mean much to you anyway;)

--
Palin & Bachmann in 2012 -
Bring integerity back to the Whitehouse


- Show quoted text -