They fended off an attack by pirates with more ambition than brains who thought taking a warship was a good idea.
I'd prefer to see some smart ones get whacked.
Take a page from WWI & WWII and send some Q-ships out there?
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
The Great Pirates off the Somali Coast thread
- Thread starter Beefalo
- Start date
They fended off an attack by pirates with more ambition than brains who thought taking a warship was a good idea.
I'd prefer to see some smart ones get whacked.
Take a page from WWI & WWII and send some Q-ships out there?
Blackwater, smackwater .....
Retired SEALs (just to cite one example of the "type" of personnel involved) have been doing this -- riding shotgun -- for quite a while -- like over a decade or so ... it just depends on who wants 'em & who wants to pay and grease the local palms and provide the necessary "equipment" ... it happens even in "gun-free" zones such as Singapore & Hong Kong. As always ... money talks.
How do I know? 'Cause I knew 'em & flew 'em to their overseas destinations ...
... AND bumped 'em up to first class, just because I could ... 
Blackwater, smackwater .....
Retired SEALs (just to cite one example of the "type" of personnel involved) have been doing this -- riding shotgun -- for quite a while -- like over a decade or so ... it just depends on who wants 'em & who wants to pay and grease the local palms and provide the necessary "equipment" ... it happens even in "gun-free" zones such as Singapore & Hong Kong. As always ... money talks.
How do I know? 'Cause I knew 'em & flew 'em to their overseas destinations ...
Me thinks they may be more in demand in the future !
blackwater is already in the process of outfitting an anti piracy vessel.
Insurance co's will start offering discounts on the premiums for vessels willing to carry armed security forces onboard when the current scheme of running the pirate gauntlet becomes too expensive. Some companies have started rerouting shipping, and Egypt doesn't want to lose Suez business. This will sort itself out in the end, just a matter of how long we're willing to put up with it.
Insurance co's will start offering discounts on the premiums for vessels willing to carry armed security forces onboard when the current scheme of running the pirate gauntlet becomes too expensive. Some companies have started rerouting shipping, and Egypt doesn't want to lose Suez business. This will sort itself out in the end, just a matter of how long we're willing to put up with it.
So is all this an increase in pirate activity or is it just in the news more often than in the past?
I mean afterall, Afghanistan did exist before 2001 but you could have fooled a lot of people...
It's just that all the major media networks are in the tank for piracy.
I agree w/ Flash on the relative priority of conducting anti-piracy ops, but it is a situation ripe for exploiting the obvious PR points for the US. Seems to me that the best solution would be to beef up security on the merchant vessels themselves AND present a moderate surface presence in the area to serve as a deterrent and rapid response TF in case somebody gets frisky.
Brett
Brett
There is already a 'moderate' presence in the area, US, allied and other navy ships. The problem is that the area where the pirates operate is so huge that it would take a much larger presence to have a bigger impact. That and strikes against the pirate's shore bases, which is not 'authrorized' right now and would present some pretty big targeting challenges.
The easier one would be adding security to the merchant vessels themselves. Some ships transiting through the area do have security already, but the problem is that it is up to the companies that own or lease the ships to add the scurity and most don't do anything. I guess they don't think it is worth it, yet.
Just found this tooling around the internets: http://www.icc-ccs.org/index.php?op...mid=89&phpMyAdmin=F5XY3CeBeymbElbQ8jr4qlxK1J3
The location tags have more info if you click on them...
That should make it pretty obvious the size of the area involved- If a security force boat were to find a mother ship (ala India's ship from yesterday) then game on...but with an area that size...(zoom in a bit...not the whole world).
Security dets on a ship are the way to go- but as with anything- the folks following the rules have to pay out the nose for protection- but a band of 30 or 40 pirates can make 6 figures per pirate for taking one ship hostage...and I think that's conservatative numbers.
The location tags have more info if you click on them...
That should make it pretty obvious the size of the area involved- If a security force boat were to find a mother ship (ala India's ship from yesterday) then game on...but with an area that size...(zoom in a bit...not the whole world).
Security dets on a ship are the way to go- but as with anything- the folks following the rules have to pay out the nose for protection- but a band of 30 or 40 pirates can make 6 figures per pirate for taking one ship hostage...and I think that's conservatative numbers.
If Lloyd's and the other big shipping insurers are willing to cut the premiums for ships with armed security, you can bet yer assets the demand for the security firms will skyrocket. Insurance represents a lot of money the big lines are pissing away every year, not to mention the K&R policies on top, even if you don't have to shell out million-dollar ransoms. I wondered why the hell Blackwater was setting up a maritime division last year; guess they're reading the market right.
Of course, we'll see what happens the first time a private maritime security team lights up a fishing boat because it got too close on a moonless night.
The other alternative would be for the shipping lines to start reflagging their ships in the U.S., a la the Tanker Wars of the '80's. It's one thing under maritime law when a Liberian- or Panamanian-flagged ship gets took, but quite another when it's an American ship.
Of course, we'll see what happens the first time a private maritime security team lights up a fishing boat because it got too close on a moonless night.
The other alternative would be for the shipping lines to start reflagging their ships in the U.S., a la the Tanker Wars of the '80's. It's one thing under maritime law when a Liberian- or Panamanian-flagged ship gets took, but quite another when it's an American ship.
Flash, I do understand that the problem is not as big as portrayed, but what could be a more perfect moral use of resources? Some things have to be done based upon principle, but this is becoming more than just a matter of principle. Global trade is our concern as a nation. Freedom of the seas is our concern as a Navy. If you want to be cynical, then surely you can believe the value of the press coverage of it. The Navy has not had much good press recently, with all of our lovely procurement woes, especially the San Antonio.
Even before the piracy off Somalia became mainstream newsworthy, strike force ships would often take the trek south to see if the opportunity to use their guns would occur. The pirate attacks have increased, and the naval presence there has increased substantially. Perhaps it's because that area is one of the few areas where armed ships can be useful? Other than protecting CVNs or collecting ISR, there aren't too many uses for all the combatants we have. This is, effectively, justification for the size of our Navy.
Besides, the wars you are talking about are nearby, also in CENTCOM AOR. It's not a significant stretch of resources more than what is already expended on those wars. Hell, by some accounts, Iraq has already "been won." I would nuance that more significantly, but there you have it.
Even before the piracy off Somalia became mainstream newsworthy, strike force ships would often take the trek south to see if the opportunity to use their guns would occur. The pirate attacks have increased, and the naval presence there has increased substantially. Perhaps it's because that area is one of the few areas where armed ships can be useful? Other than protecting CVNs or collecting ISR, there aren't too many uses for all the combatants we have. This is, effectively, justification for the size of our Navy.
Besides, the wars you are talking about are nearby, also in CENTCOM AOR. It's not a significant stretch of resources more than what is already expended on those wars. Hell, by some accounts, Iraq has already "been won." I would nuance that more significantly, but there you have it.
I disagree. There is not a big difference at all. You are arguing from a strategic perspective about people who are largely motivated from a more substantive perspective, such as survival. I doubt their motivation is nearly as sinister as their actions.Single Seat said:
Killing terrorists? Protecting Americans?
Do you really think that?
You are sorely mistaken. Did you stop and think that some of that ISR is more valuable that knocking off a few pirates? I think there is a disconnect when it comes to what many of you think we have in terms of resources and what is the reality. We have only so many ships and planes in the Navy and right now we are stretched pretty damn thin. If some of you saw just how few assets we now have available you would probably shake your heads in disappointment. We have nowhere near the number of the ships and airplanes we had just 20 years ago, and that was without fighting two wars at the same time.
And you all might get tired of me talking about priorities but when you are competing with two wars, counterproliferation and other global commitments, piracy off Somalia is pretty far down the list. When the top priorities are not being fully resourced, which is another debate, then there is not a lot left the low hanging fruit. And when you ask a combat commander who doesn't have enough resources to support his troops fighting to give up some to go after thugs in boats, you begin to realize just where this problem is on the 'give a sh!t' scale.
We are already using some significant resources to combat the problem and will likely put some more against the issue soon, but we are 'robbing Peter to pay for Paul'. And what we and the other navies who are patrolling the region is working to a degree, did you stop and think why the pirates would go so far out to seize a the M/T Sirius Star? We have made some of their normal op areas much more difficult to work in.
I am all for trying to 'fix' the problem too, but what many you don't seem to realize is just how hard a target set this is. Do you know any idea how much maritime traffic is in that area? A lot. There are fishermen and smugglers all over the place in addition to the pirates. How can you tell the difference between a dhow carrying 20 pirates, or a cargo of liquor, or one carrying 150 refugees/immigrants? Many times you can't, one piece of crap dhow looks like any other, and there are an awful lot of them in that area. And what their shore bases? These guys are not all that sophisticated and don't need much infrastructure. So how do you know that the collection of huts with skiffs on the beach is a pirate camp or a local fisherman camp? That only scratches the surface.
One of the ironies of warfare is that often the least sophisticated enemies are the most difficult to defeat. Just look at how much trouble we had trying to stop the NVA/VC during Operation Market Time and Saddam from smuggling oil in the 90's. A lot of time, money and effort were put into those operations, and it didn't always work out that well for us.
And what happens when you do capture some pirates? It was significant that Kenya took custody of the pirates that the Royal Navy caught, but can we really depend on Kenya to take the entire burden? Where else are we going to send them? And whose laws are they breaking if they are in international or Somali waters?
You have to give a lot more thought to this than just saying 'we should do something'. We are doing something, and will soon be doing more. But there are serious limits to what the US Navy can do, simple as that.