Page 25 of 36 FirstFirst ... 15232425262735 ... LastLast
Results 481 to 500 of 715

Thread: More Piracy Near Somalia

  1. #481
    Council Member carl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Denver on occasion
    Posts
    2,460

    Default And now we have Second Guesser Contestant No. 1

    Given the constraints or lack thereof in your hypothetical, I would have carried out the procedures that have been previously thought up and rehearsed, and taken the pirate ship, captured the pirates and freed the kidnapped mariners, all of the kidnapped mariners. This is what the British, Dutch, Indians and Danes did. However unlike what the poor frustrated Royal Navy men were forced to do, I would not have dropped the pirates off on their home shore but dispatched them to North America so they could forthwith begin their study of colloqueil (sic) and legal English.
    "We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again." Gen. Nathanael Greene

  2. #482
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    273

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by carl View Post
    Allowing a boatload of pirates to get away with 12 innocent kidnapped mariners, yeah, I agree, what were they thinking?

    Care to comment on the action by the Danes?
    What's there to say about it? They did it, it worked, hurray. I will point out that the Danes' action was carried out by guys who do this sort of thing for a living, which--from what I've gathered about this class of frigate--the Halyburton doesn't have a complement of. The Halyburton is, as I understand it, basically there to blow up boats. Blowing up a boat full of hostages would seem to me to be counterproductive to the whole 'maritime defense' thing--that whole 'cure worse than the disease' bit that was discussed earlier.

    I find the opinions of some on this topic to be pretty confusing, when taken in comparison to their opinion on Libya and the Ivory Coast. In the latter two (and I recognize that there are many who say we shouldn't be involved in any of the three), there are those who are all for sending in our forces to blow up the bad guys and 'fix what we broke'. When it comes to Somalia, though, many of those same voices say we should just attrit the pirates until they go back to shooting at each other instead of (not, for the most part) shooting at hostages. This, despite that the US has had a far more direct role in Somalia's current condition than Libya's or, for that matter, the Ivory Coast's.
    Last edited by motorfirebox; 04-13-2011 at 06:09 PM.

  3. #483
    Council Member carl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Denver on occasion
    Posts
    2,460

    Default

    Well Motorfirebox, if the FFG doesn't have people who can board, control and shoot if needed, they should. And if not, why don't they? It seems people like that would be the first thing you would ask for if you are going out on such a mission. Or if they are not available, a number of the crew could be trained to do just that, after all, it is just a matter of practice. If the Danes can do it, we can do it.

    The FFG can indeed destroy other vessels. Most Navy ships can. That is why you build them. But because they can, doesn't mean they must. The nice thing about a surface ship is they can do a range of things from hailing other vessels with unaided voice to blowing them to matchsticks.

    I wonder if your comment about the FFG's capabilities and blowing up boatloads of kidnapees falls under the rubric of asked and answered-by the same person in the same sentence. Hmm.
    Last edited by carl; 04-13-2011 at 06:40 PM. Reason: I got mixed up.
    "We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again." Gen. Nathanael Greene

  4. #484
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default If I may intrude.

    Carl, I think motorfirebox asked a valid question, one that occurred to me but which I decided not to ask. Since he asked it and you apparently elected not answer, I guess I might as well piggyback on his question and reiterate it...

    He said:
    I find the opinions of some on this topic to be pretty confusing, when taken in comparison to their opinion on Libya and the Ivory Coast. In the latter two (and I recognize that there are many who say we shouldn't be involved in any of the three), there are those who are all for sending in our forces to blow up the bad guys and 'fix what we broke'. When it comes to Somalia, though, many of those same voices say we should just attrit the pirates until they go back to shooting at each other instead of (not, for the most part) shooting at hostages. This, despite that the US has had a far more direct role in Somalia's current condition than Libya's or, for that matter, the Ivory Coast's.
    That was a dichotomy I thought I'd noticed -- IMO, the attitudes expressed re:Libya and humanitarian interventions in general versus the attitude toward the Pirates does seem to be a bit discordant. Or is it not?

    In the interest of full disclosure, I am one who says we should not be involved in any of the three.

  5. #485
    Council Member carl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Denver on occasion
    Posts
    2,460

    Default

    Ken:

    I am not so sure MFB asked a question as made an observation. But if a question can be inferred, I would answer it thusly. Ivory Coast isn't Libya which isn't the area that used to be Somalia which isn't Ivory Coast and on...

    All are vastly different places which pose different problems which require different responses. In Somalia we have armed teenagers cruising out to sea in little boats and stealing. They are able to do this mainly because of the diffidence of the countries with big navies, or little navies. As soon as that politically correct reluctance to shoot at said yuts goes away, as it seems to be slowly doing, the pirate problem will diminish to mostly not much. That is about it with that.

    If you got ambitious and wanted to fix what was broke in Somalia, it would require imposition of Tom Odom's rule of Somali engagement-if you are seen with a weapon, you are shot, if somebody else picks up that weapon, he is shot and so on. We ain't got the stomach for that and it would essentially be re-colonizing the place. All I want to do is stop the piracy.

    A small point, Roberto Clemente would be very disappointed that you call those slack jawed skiff riding teens "Pirates". He would prefer I think, that they be called "pirates".
    "We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again." Gen. Nathanael Greene

  6. #486
    Council Member davidbfpo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    13,366

    Default Landlubber from an armchair chimes in

    There are two fundamental issues with Somali piracy IMHO, which poses a threat to international shipping in the nearby ocean spaces.

    One, is containment enough? Countering piracy is an international maritime obligation.

    Two, if that policy is not enough - which many here argue - should action be taken ashore?

    For a host of reasons the international enforcement action taken to date has to put it mildly 'gaps', notably of will and as the latest posts suggest capability. Can all those at risk and those who are involved in enforcement tolerate the risk to shipping?

    See this article for some statistics (which advocates action ashore too):http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/pr...gainst-piracy/

    As for action ashore is an option currently no-one seems inclined to follow and I exclude the reports of funding a Somali coastguard. I doubt if there is a real option akin to the Barbary Coast operations: mainly with bombardment and some land raids. Clearly there is no or very little local Somali will and capability to take action against the pirates.

    Somali is a country, not a state with any real governance as we know it, that is simply meandering along and I speculate is emptying of its population, well those who can avoid to pay to escape - to the Yemen of all places till recently.

    My challenge to SWC is what should we do?

    From my faraway, landlocked armchair I would seek:

    1) All commercial shipping is convoyed in high risk areas, not in a convoy no insurance!
    2) A 'No Shipping Zone' set at 'X' miles offshore and no commercial ships go inside
    3) No Somali vessels go beyond 'Y' miles offshore, except in recognised shipping lanes (to Yemen)
    4) Any Somali or other vessels beyond 'Y' are liable to be sunk
    5) Any captured and convicted pirates are held in say Russian jails - OK, similar places

    Now would these points be acceptable? Currently I consider 1 to 3 as sensible.
    Last edited by davidbfpo; 04-13-2011 at 08:04 PM.
    davidbfpo

  7. #487
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    273

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by carl View Post
    Ken:
    All are vastly different places which pose different problems which require different responses. In Somalia we have armed teenagers cruising out to sea in little boats and stealing. They are able to do this mainly because of the diffidence of the countries with big navies, or little navies. As soon as that politically correct reluctance to shoot at said yuts goes away, as it seems to be slowly doing, the pirate problem will diminish to mostly not much. That is about it with that.
    There are a lot of problems with this. The first, I guess, is the pretty insulting idea that this is all about political correctness, as if it's just frippery that someone might see different sides to the whole equation--as if, as in any equation, understanding both sides is paramount to solving it.

    The second major issue is that this isn't about response, this is about underlying motivation. In Libya and the Ivory Coast--speaking of politically correct!--we have this idea that we must help people. That we must fix things, again things which we ourselves broke. And sure, we--whether it's "we" the US or "we" NATO or "we" pretty much any group on the planet that has internet access--did break stuff. But we broke stuff in Somalia, too, and the stuff we broke led directly to our current predicament. But when someone suggests we try to fix that, the response is "screw 'em, they're just pirates." No matter what the ultimate response is, the difference in motivation behind deciding to respond is pretty wide for no apparent reason.

  8. #488
    Council Member Stan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    3,817

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by motorfirebox View Post
    I find the opinions of some on this topic to be pretty confusing, when taken in comparison to their opinion on Libya and the Ivory Coast. In the latter two (and I recognize that there are many who say we shouldn't be involved in any of the three), there are those who are all for sending in our forces to blow up the bad guys and 'fix what we broke'. When it comes to Somalia, though, many of those same voices say we should just attrit the pirates until they go back to shooting at each other instead of (not, for the most part) shooting at hostages. This, despite that the US has had a far more direct role in Somalia's current condition than Libya's or, for that matter, the Ivory Coast's.
    I'll echo Carl's well-put response - piracy is dealt with somewhat differently than civil war and/or a humanitarian crisis regardless of the country of origin.
    As far as US involvement in the three countries goes, we have a lot of colorful history in all three and could be easily viewed as culprits.

    Quote Originally Posted by motorfirebox View Post
    But we broke stuff in Somalia, too, and the stuff we broke led directly to our current predicament.
    I think what we did (or politically hamstrug and failed to do) in Somalia was stay out of yet another internal matter that our administration knew little about and thought we would strong arm for a while and get out. Instead we lost some good people and simply left while the getting was good. That, however, hardly got the pirates started.
    Last edited by Stan; 04-13-2011 at 08:49 PM.
    If you want to blend in, take the bus

  9. #489
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default A fo Fer...

    Carl:

    If you say so. Still seems to be awfully inconsistent to me.

    My belief is that if you want to 'help' Libya, in the end, the Odom rule will also apply. Are we ready for that? Doubt it. That's why it was a dumb idea that will come to no good end. And, yes, I told you so. Not that so doing make me happy, bad ideas do not happy make and one should derive no satisfaction from a prediction of failure that proves to be accurate.

    Who or what is Roberto Clemente? Should I be concerned with his opinion on capitalizing nouns? Why?

    motorfirebox:

    We (the US) did not really break anything in any of those three countries. That's not to say we did everything right in any of them but we didn't really break anything. Still, your point is well taken. People are defending Libyan and Cote d'Ivoire Hoods while castigasting Somali Hoods. 'Tis a bit incongruous...

    Could mass slaughter by the winning side in a civil war be 'better' or less evil than piracy of opportunity with few casualties? Dunno. Kinda doubtful...

    Stan

    We can be and are viewed, more or less correctly, as culprits almost everywhere.

    You're right on Somalia.

    davidbfpo:

    I agree with your points to include implementation of your five acknowledging that number 5 is probably not going to be condoned. Regrettably.

    Numbers 1 through 4 would be beneficial and are probably possible. While a punitive expedition and a rebuild would be required for a semi-permanent fix, I doubt that will occur so what you propose make more sense than most IMO...

  10. #490
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    273

    Default

    Er, a point I could have been clearer on: when I talk about US involvement in Somalia, I'm not talking about 2001; I'm talking about 2006 and Ethiopia.

  11. #491
    Council Member carl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Denver on occasion
    Posts
    2,460

    Default

    Motorfirebox:

    I couldn't care less if someone is insulted by my belief that the unwillingness to shoot the yuts, or threatening to shoot the yuts, is caused by political correctness.

    And I couldn't care less about the underlying motivation. I come at it from a police officer's point of view. You steal something from the that guy and I'll catch you and put you in jail. You resist me and I'll box your ears. You resist me with a weapon and I'll shoot you in the face. The navies are the cops of the sea. I believe things would work better if they behaved that way.

    Still speaking from a cop point of view, you come to me and say you have some trouble or are having a hard time, then I will try to help you. If those put upon yuts ask for help, there is plenty available. In the area that used to be Somalia though they tend to abuse the help offered and steal everything, more than in other places.

    Ken:

    Only inconsistent if all three places are viewed as being more the same than different, which I don't believe they are. Odom's rule as I remember it applied to the area that used to be Somalia. I don't remember reading it applied to other places.

    I am shocked, shocked I say that you don't know who Roberto Clemente was. Why only the greatest Pittsburgh Pirate ever.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roberto_Clemente
    "We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again." Gen. Nathanael Greene

  12. #492
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    273

    Default

    Yes, well, cops who start gang wars to get what they want aren't cops, they're criminals with badges. I don't think I'm going to continue this discussion with you, carl; you're too involved with self-justifying logic like that in your most recent post. And I don't like being insulted.

  13. #493
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default Blame Mrs. Deener

    Quote Originally Posted by carl View Post
    Only inconsistent if all three places are viewed as being more the same than different, which I don't believe they are.
    It's not the places, place is of only minor if any interest. It's the idea that the Somali Pirates are apparently beneath contempt and can -- should -- be virtually shot out of hand for daring to steal with little killing while the Libyan and Ivorian combatants who rape, loot, kill often and rather brutally plus their neighbors and relatives are worth the lives a good many other people to 'protect' at any cost. Its people, not places -- place is immaterial.
    Odom's rule as I remember it applied to the area that used to be Somalia. I don't remember reading it applied to other places.
    He did not apply it elsewhere, I did. I'll take his word for Somalia, haven't been there. Have been to Libya, they are just as brutal, only a tad more sophisticated...
    I am shocked, shocked I say that you don't know who Roberto Clemente was. Why only the greatest Pittsburgh Pirate ever.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roberto_Clemente
    Thanks for the link. Now I know. Not a sports fan and in Clemente's heyday, I was rather busy doing something I perceived as a bit more important than baseball. A Pirate (AGC or MGQ) is a person thus a noun, pirate is a verb.

  14. #494
    Council Member carl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Denver on occasion
    Posts
    2,460

    Default

    Motorfirebox:

    I didn't insult you. If you take offense at my belief about the relation between inaction and political correctness, that is your concern.

    Your citing cops who start gang wars is an attempt to torture an analogy beyond the bounds of semantic decency. If it isn't against the Roget Convention, it should be.

    Ken:

    Who is Mrs. Deener?

    The pirates from the area that used to be Somalia go outside of their place to do their stealing and they steal from passing strangers. That makes it different from the other places, besides the people in each place being vastly different. They are criminals. You handle them like criminals.

    I did like baseball a lot in those bygone days when I could still fool myself into believing I might be able to play well. (insert wistful smiley here)
    Last edited by carl; 04-14-2011 at 02:35 AM.
    "We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again." Gen. Nathanael Greene

  15. #495
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default I could keep 'em out of the middle in Basketball, other'n that...

    Quote Originally Posted by carl View Post
    Who is Mrs. Deener?
    My HS Freshman English Teacher, told me nouns were capitalized -- that's not universally true I now know but habit is turribul thing...
    The pirates from the area that used to be Somalia go outside of their place to do their stealing and they steal from passing strangers. That makes it different from the other places, besides the people in each place being vastly different. They are criminals. You handle them like criminals.
    Ah, I see. So rape, looting and promiscuous killing are okay as long as you do it in your own land? Rhetorical question, I doubt you believe that but I do think those things are occurring and that to me puts many Libyans (both sides) and many Ivorians (both sides) in the same category as the Somali Pirates who may be traveling to work but are really doing far less carnal damage. To be totally down on one crowd of miscreants and give the others a pass still seems to be a dichotomy to me. YMMV...
    I did like baseball a lot in those bygone days when I could still fool myself into believing I might be able to play well. (insert wistful smiley here)
    I'm a klutz so sports weren't an option for me. I'm not totally poor but I would never have been very good -- not least because I was and am lazy and totally uninterested.

  16. #496
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Durban, South Africa
    Posts
    3,902

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by motorfirebox View Post
    I find the opinions of some on this topic to be pretty confusing, when taken in comparison to their opinion on Libya and the Ivory Coast. In the latter two (and I recognize that there are many who say we shouldn't be involved in any of the three), there are those who are all for sending in our forces to blow up the bad guys and 'fix what we broke'. When it comes to Somalia, though, many of those same voices say we should just attrit the pirates until they go back to shooting at each other instead of (not, for the most part) shooting at hostages. This, despite that the US has had a far more direct role in Somalia's current condition than Libya's or, for that matter, the Ivory Coast's.
    Who are you talking about here? There are not many here who post to all three of the mentioned threads. Carl, Stan myself? Be specific, what is the cause of your confusion?

  17. #497
    Council Member carl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Denver on occasion
    Posts
    2,460

    Default

    Ken:

    The pirates prey upon passing strangers, some of those strangers passing by a long long way off, like hundreds of miles off. Those passing strangers, the merchant seaman, have the right to defend themselves, as do all men by virtue of their existence as men. In times past we allowed merchant seaman to exercise that right. In recent times we have deprived them of that right with the understanding that they would not need to exercise it because the navies would protect them, something that has been a primary responsibility of navies since the first group of men decided to use their two coracles in an organized way and one appointed himself admiral. This was also the start of fleet tactics.

    So in essence, fighting pirates is sort of merchant seaman immediately defending themselves once removed; except that the navies have failed to keep up their end of the bargain because they fear Oprah will be cross with them. And that is also a difference between fighting pirates and going into the other places you mentioned. Fighting pirates is continuing a social contract that has been in effect for thousands of years. It is also a lot easier to do since it is on the sea. Practicability has a lot to do with doing good.

    Evil is being done in places, many places. But we have a prior contract to stop the evil on the high seas. This contract has helped to ensure human prosperity over thousands of years. We, hard fact that it is, don't have prior contract in the other places. We may have a moral obligation depending on the circumstances, and we have discussed that at length before. Moral obligations are a little harder to act upon because we didn't tell the people, yes we will defend you, as we have with the merchant sailors over the ages.

    I don't see any dichotomy, just very different problems, places and people.
    Last edited by carl; 04-14-2011 at 05:53 AM.
    "We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again." Gen. Nathanael Greene

  18. #498
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    273

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JMA View Post
    Who are you talking about here? There are not many here who post to all three of the mentioned threads. Carl, Stan myself? Be specific, what is the cause of your confusion?
    Yours was the name I noticed. I don't like calling out specific posters, generally, because it often leads to interpersonal headbutting that gets in the way of clearer exchanges. The invitation to discuss is extended to anyone who thinks that we should intervene against Somalia but for Ivory Coast and/or Libya.

  19. #499
    Council Member davidbfpo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    13,366

    Default Somali 'hostage negotiator' indicted over yacht deaths

    Action taken ashore! A joint FBI-Somali police operation too:
    US prosecutors say the latest Somali man indicted in a hijacking that left four Americans dead is a high ranking "hostage negotiator".
    Link:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13073952

    Hat tip to CLS e-briefing, which has links to US media reports:http://centerlineblog.org/2011/04/14...rism-news-218/

    No response to my earlier post:

    My challenge to SWC is what should we do?

    From my faraway, landlocked armchair I would seek:

    1) All commercial shipping is convoyed in high risk areas, not in a convoy no insurance!
    2) A 'No Shipping Zone' set at 'X' miles offshore and no commercial ships go inside
    3) No Somali vessels go beyond 'Y' miles offshore, except in recognised shipping lanes (to Yemen)
    4) Any Somali or other vessels beyond 'Y' are liable to be sunk
    5) Any captured and convicted pirates are held in say Russian jails - OK, similar places

    Now would these points be acceptable? Currently I consider 1 to 3 as sensible.
    Last edited by davidbfpo; 04-14-2011 at 01:31 PM.
    davidbfpo

  20. #500
    Council Member carl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Denver on occasion
    Posts
    2,460

    Default

    David:

    Point number 1 is a wartime measure that poses a lot of difficulties with organization and imposes a lot of costs. Being that is is a wartime measure, it seems logical to do what you do in wartime and eliminate the threat.

    Point 2, 3 & 4 are components of a blockade. Seems good to me. A blockade is an act of war I think. It might be good to embargo things like expensive cars too.

    Point 5, put them where somebody will take them. Being in 24 hour lock down in a US Federal prison is not pleasant even if there are no bugs and the roof doesn't leak.

    Whatever the FBI did lately keep doing.

    A blockade is a fence. A fence is meant to keep people from getting out but it also can be used to keep people from getting back in. I think every ship that is taken must be taken back immediately or as it approaches the coast. That eliminates much of the hunting in the empty sea. They always have to notify somebody when the ship has been taken and they always have to go back to the same place, the shore of the area that used to be Somalia.

    Publicize to the greatest extent possible the fate of captured pirates. Not the ones who are released of course but the ones who are killed and taking long term but limited travel excursions in other countries.

    Go after the money. There is big money in this and it is somewhere. How to do this somebody else will have to figure. I don't have a clue.

    That leaves the ships and mariners being held. Taking the ships back by force may not be too difficult. The pirates never fight very hard. But you could also buy them back. Their value may decrease in the face of a blockade. If we started to take ships back by force their value would probably fall very fast, so a combined approach may work.

    Which leaves the crewmen. Once all the ships were recovered, they wouldn't be worth much to the pirates and they could be bought back. The danger is once their value fell the pirates would not be inclined to treat them well. So it might be wise pay out fast.

    How's that?
    "We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again." Gen. Nathanael Greene

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •