Piracy...Why So Hard To Defend Against?

Devil505 wrote:

ErikLaurence wrote:There is basically no US flag commercial shipping in the region. Flags of convenience make this someone elses problem. I don't think the Liberians have many air assets or satellite technology.

But U.S. citizens are on ships all over the world & with terrorism ....our most dangerous threat today & the emergence of Piracy becoming a serious world-wide threat to U.S. citizens & interests, why not use our multi-billion dollar "Overhead" assets ( Spy satellites & recon aircraft....designed to defeat a threat that has been gone for many years now....The Soviet Union) to counter the REAL threats we now face? Following a few skiffs back to their pirate mother ship should be simple & then send in the A-10 Warthogs & AC130 Gunships to "Chum" the waters a bit!!

No objection from me. But it's not a simple problem to track a boat that is the size of the waves around it. There's a reason you use a radar reflector on a small craft. Your radar signature sucks.

I do a lot of long distance sailing in international waters. I am armed. Most sailors I know are.

Paulie wrote:Stamp it out the way it was stamped out 150 odd years ago. Hunt them down and kill them. Kill them in the water, kill them when they try to board, kill them when they leave, kill them at their home base. The pirates are taking advantage of a 'lawless" area. Well, that is a two way street. No law at home to stop you, but also no law to save your ass when someone comes for you. Bring the fight to the Pirate.

One of the major problems with that approach is that in Somalia where most of the pirates come from is that they are so poor that it easy to recruit them. After a ship is hijacked and the ransom is paid, each man may get a couple of thousand (if that) which is more money than they could possibly earn in a year by legal means.

To stamp them out would be like trying to stamp out a nest of ants while wearing hiking boots.

There is no easy answer to stopping this madness.

ErikLaurence wrote:No objection from me. But it's not a simple problem to track a boat that is the size of the waves around it. There's a reason you use a radar reflector on a small craft. Your radar signature sucks.

I hear that & I'm really just venting frustration here....... but Space based or aircraft based overhead imaging is capable of reading a newspaper headline from 100's of miles away. Is it even conceivable that, with our entire military now focused on this little lifeboat in the middle of the ocean...that these punks could possibly get away??
Regardless of the fate of their hostage (& I obviously pray for his safety) these pirate punks had better not be breathing the same air I'm breathing in a day or so... or...........I'll lose my temper!

beemerboy wrote:To stamp them out would be like trying to stamp out a nest of ants while wearing hiking boots.

There is no easy answer to stopping this madness.

That's why you have to kill them all at sea....where they are relatively easy targets. (& they'll provide a ready food source for the dwindling fish population that we need to help!)

It is not a hard problem to make go away.

1) Adequately crew ships. 25 crew members on a 165,000 GT ship is ridiculous.

2) Stick a Nimitz in the area. The E2C can cover the area and a carrier keeps them in the air all the time.

It's an issue of priorities. The US Navy has other stuff to do with it's carriers. The shippers are cheap and don't want to double crew sizes (and apparently piracy has not become enough of a problem for Lloyds of London to insist yet).

ErikLaurence wrote:It is not a hard problem to make go away.

1) Adequately crew ships. 25 crew members on a 165,000 GT ship is ridiculous.

2) Stick a Nimitz in the area. The E2C can cover the area and a carrier keeps them in the air all the time.

It's an issue of priorities. The US Navy has other stuff to do with it's carriers. The shippers are cheap and don't want to double crew sizes (and apparently piracy has not become enough of a problem for Lloyds of London to insist yet).

So what the Hell are we doing with our expensive carrier groups??? This is the stuff they need to be doing! (we can attack targets in Pakistan/Afghanistan from friendly ground runways.

& why wasn't I named Sec. Of Defense!!??

6:18am..Latest update. Situation still unresolved & CNN just interviewed a Massachusetts Maritime security instructor who was asked why these ships don't have armed guards aboard. He said that some do but the expense of training security forces is what deters many companies from arming their ships...so....it sounds again like GREED is the usual culprit here, not international law. (I wonder if the CEO's of these shipping companies get huge bonuses for their incompetence?!)
Many of these companies appear more interested in their bottom line than in protecting their employees! Once this situation is resolved, I think the U.S. Navy should charge these companies for security services rendered, to send a message to all shipping companies!
Here's my new U.S. law:.... Should your shipping company provide no (or obviously inadequate) measures for self defense & should one of your ships be seized by pirates, requiring assistance from the U.S. military to resolve the situation, you will be charged for services rendered so that U.S. taxpayers are not forced to underwrite your company/'s security.


To me sending ships into dangerous areas with valuable cargo & not providing "reasonable" security is like having "Brinks" pick up cash from banks in Harlem using radio flyer carts (like the pic below) & depending on the NYPD to provide security for free.

Devil505 wrote:so....it sounds again like GREED is the usual culprit here, not international law

Then you'll bitch when prices go up because it's greed right?

The best solution I have heard so far would be to send out a Trojan horse.

A non descriptive, low riding container ship that is actually a porcupine of gunnery, military hardware and personnel.

Consider it a roach motel for would be pirates, they check in but they don't check out.

Richard S. wrote:

Devil505 wrote:so....it sounds again like GREED is the usual culprit here, not international law

Then you'll bitch when prices go up because it's greed right?

How much MORE tax money is this U.S. Navy operation costing us taxpayers than would the additional cost a few M16's have cost to prevent the crime in the first place? (Security is a cost of doing business that any company has to pay & always includes in their price/fee anyway)

Black_And_Blue wrote:The best solution I have heard so far would be to send out a Trojan horse.

A non descriptive, low riding container ship that is actually a porcupine of gunnery, military hardware and personnel.

Consider it a roach motel for would be pirates, they check in but they don't check out.

I agree they may help but would not be the answer in & of themselves.

Q-Ships
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q-ship

Devil505 wrote:6:18am..Latest update. Situation still unresolved & CNN just interviewed a Massachusetts Maritime security instructor who was asked why these ships don't have armed guards aboard. He said that some do but the expense of training security forces is what deters many companies from arming their ships...so....it sounds again like GREED is the usual culprit here, not international law. (I wonder if the CEO's of these shipping companies get huge bonuses for their incompetence?!)
Many of these companies appear more interested in their bottom line than in protecting their employees! Once this situation is resolved, I think the U.S. Navy should charge these companies for security services rendered, to send a message to all shipping companies!
Here's my new U.S. law:.... Should your shipping company provide no (or obviously inadequate) measures for self defense & should one of your ships be seized by pirates, requiring assistance from the U.S. military to resolve the situation, you will be charged for services rendered so that U.S. taxpayers are not forced to underwrite your company/'s security.


To me sending ships into dangerous areas with valuable cargo, & not providing "reasonable" security is like having "Brinks" pick up cash from banks in Harlem using radio flyer carts (like the pic below) & depending on the NYPD to provide security for free.

You're new US law would only apply to US flag ships. There are essentially no US flag commercial ships operating in the region. Only 4% of commercial ships worldwide are US Flag. As for US crew members, these days you've got a lot of eastern europeans, a lot of asian subcontinent, a lot of asians, but not many Americans.

The US is not going to do anything until a cruise ship full of Americans get taken.

Edit: The reason the US Navy is involved in the current situation is there actually is an American flagged ship involved with an American capitan.

ErikLaurence wrote:You're new US law would only apply to US flag ships. There are essentially no US flag commercial ships operating in the region.

Am I incorrect in my understanding that the ship in question is a U.S. flagged ship?

(Other countries can do what they want & we are not the world's police force, but we can certainly tell OUR ships what they must do)

Devil505 wrote:

ErikLaurence wrote:You're new US law would only apply to US flag ships. There are essentially no US flag commercial ships operating in the region.

Am I incorrect in my understanding that the ship in question is a U.S. flagged ship?

(Other countries can do what they want & we are not the world's police force, but we can certainly tell OUR ships what they must do)

You are correct. But this has been going on for 10 years. This is the first American ship hit.

ErikLaurence wrote:The US is not going to do anything until a cruise ship full of Americans get taken.

Unfortunately, I think you are absolutely correct!
Al Quieda could mount no more effective, dramatic, inexpensive & "Low Tech" new horror than to send 30-50 terrorists out to seize a cruise ship full of U.S. citizens. (probably in port somewhere in the world, but on the high seas if necessary)
If a few coal forum members can clearly see this threat, I certainly hope our government & Royal Caribbean, Princess Lines & others see it as well!

Edit: I just had a horrible thought that sent shivers down my spine!

Having been on 2 cruises to the Caribbean, I know it is almost a daily occurrence to have multiple cruise ships tied up to one long dock on some of these islands. Imagine what would happen if multiple ships were seized at the same time, with thousands of American citizens held hostage!?!

I hope someone is considering this stuff!