Pirates fire at U.S. Navy ship off Somalia

Reuters ^ | May 7, 2009

[Eric in the Ozarks]

I sailed the Pacific six times on various MSTS ships, 1951-1961.

[Jeff Head]

These Military Sealift Command vessels are usually unarmed and operated by civilian crews with Naval Officers, or a mix thereof.

The ship was built to commercial specifications and standards and then certified by the American Bureau of Shipping, the United States Coast Guard and other regulatory bodies. it is operated by the Military Sealift Command with civilian mariners crews (123 personnel) augmented by a military department (49 personnel).

That is why its designation is USNS, for US Naval Ship and not "USS", which would be a full US Navy vessel, fully US Navy manned and armed.

IMHO, because of their critical replenishment of US Navy ships and forces function, they should be aremd, and they should be escorted.

[JEC]

Don’t U.S Navy ships carry weapons, including small arms? They ran from these slugs?

In this case it was better to high tail it out of there. They would have gotten absolutely nowhere if they had turned around and sent these little POS's to Davey Jones's locker. Remember, the present administration would have admonished them, demanded that they offer a ask for forgiveness from the international community and gave reparations to the surviving relatives.

[ArrogantBustard]

A pair of M2s?

OK ... that's armed. Technically. If the pirates had pressed their attack, Ma Deuce would have ruined their day.

I'll agree with making distance and calling in the professional trigger-pullers.

That said, maybe one of those helos could be replaced with a Cobra?

[al baby]

I just thought it would be fun and good practice

[Don Corleone]

The small arms fire fell well short of the U.S. ship which speeded up to evade the skiffs.

What? Are we becoming the British Navy now? Running away from pirates! What ever happened to, "I have not yet begun to fight?" Hey Navy,Be all you CAN be!

[Beagle8U]

“The small arms fire fell well short of the U.S. ship which speeded up to evade the skiffs.”

What ignorant A-hole gave our brave naval fleet orders to run like little school girls when fired upon? Gee, I wonder...

[Hodar]

"“USNS Whatever” is a cargo ship, owned by the United States Navy, operated by civilian employees thereof, and unarmed."

And the cargo ship is sailing in pirate infested waters, with no escort and no military support craft in the area? Doesn't that seem the least bit ... oh, I don't know .... incompetent .... stupid .... dangerous?

I'm not a Navy member, but it would seem apparent to me that the US Navy knows this area is patrolled by pirates. They also should know that an unarmed Navy cargo ship is travelling though these wates. Therefore, one could be led to summise that the Navy battleships in the area would keep an 'eye' on an unarmed Navy asset - and intercede any attack on a Navy vessel - out of principle if nothing else.

I'd be really curious as to the Admiral's explaination as to why nothing, apparently was done. If the Navy cargo ship was unable to flee the pirates - do you suppose having the pirates take over a Navy vessel would be just a wee bit embarassing? Do you think the Navy sailors upon that vessel would be killed, in retaliation of our killing of some pirates? Am I the only one that sees the Navy getting caught with their pants around their ankles?

[joe fonebone]

So now the US Navy is running from pirates in speedboats with rifles? I am truly embarassed to be a former sailor.........

[bankcritic]

This was the right move for the tanker to make, they’re not warships and dont handle like one in any case, so very easy to get swarmed. Going to full power and running away was the right call, and anyone who has spent any time whatsoever looking at naval tactics or been in an Ops Room would tell you the same thing.

[ArrogantBustard]

And the cargo ship is sailing in pirate infested waters, with no escort and no military support craft in the area? Doesn't that seem the least bit ... oh, I don't know .... incompetent .... stupid .... dangerous?

It seems a bit shortsighted, to me. It seems to me that they could and should be more heavily armed than they are ... but I think the same of truly civilian cargo ships, as well.

[ArrogantBustard]

I think we both agree everyone is expecting this ship to blow the pirates out of the water when that just isn’t possible.

Quite.

[Cuttnhorse]

USNS Lewis and Clark

The primary role of the Lewis and Clarks is to provide logistic lift from supply sources such as friendly ports, or while at sea, from specially equipped merchant ships by consolidation. Lewis and Clarks will transfer cargo (ammunition, food, limited quantities of fuel, repair parts, ship store items, and expendable supplies and material) to station ships and other naval warfare forces. As auxiliary support ships, Lewis and Clarks will directly contribute to the Navy's ability to maintain a forward presence. When operating together with Henry J. Kaiser-class oilers Lewis and Clarks will provide the carrier battle group and/or amphibious readiness group with product lift equivalent to a Supply-class fast combat support ship.

[An.American.Expatriate]

The small arms fire fell well short of the U.S. ship which speeded up to evade the skiffs.

Has Obama apologized yet for our evading capture?

[GingisK]

Heck one RPG in to the jet fuel or ammo magazine and the ship goes away with a big flash/bang.

I would hazzard a guess that you don't know much about the construction of large ships.

[Smokin' Joe]

Heck one RPG in to the jet fuel or ammo magazine and the ship goes away with a big flash/bang.

If that is even a possibility, the Captain of the vessel did the right thing, all saber rattling aside.

The small arms fire at excessive range was ineffective, distance can be the best 'armor'.

Why risk the vessel, crew, and cargo?

Report the location and let someone come in and clean house.

[Hodar]

It seems a bit shortsighted, to me.

Life is one big game of chess. If you are safe behind your defences, say in the USA, or enroute to Hawaii or non-war zone areas - you can have your cargo ships go about their business without an armed escort.

But, the area of the world we are talking about is well known to be a dangerous area. In the USAF, we send a fighter escort with our bombers. If we have essentail cargo moving though an area, we either provide air support, or we are at 'standby' until those cargo aircraft are through any perceived dangerous airspace.

Silly me, I assumed that the Navy would have more than a passing interest in protecting a fellow Navy cargo ship. If they can ignore a USNS cargo ship that is under attack, they will most certainly ignore a commercial ship with an American flag that is similarily under attack- right?

Here's what I expected to happen. There is a US Navy battleship somewhere. A US Navy cargo ship (unarmed) reports being attacked by pirates. A predator-type aircraft uses downlooking radar to identify the ships. Either aircraft are launched, or a missle is fired, or the UAV engages the pirates and they are decimated. Message sent, don't mess with the Americans.

Obviously, we now look like cowards to the Somali pirates. We did not make any 'good impressions' with our enemies all over the world. We look weak and cowardly. This event, coupled with Pres. Zero's embarassing foreign policy disasters has certainly tarnished the Navy's outstanding reputation.

Please do not misunderstand - I have nothing but the most absolute respect and admiration of those men and women who serve in our armed services, including the Navy. I just find this event particularily disturbing.

[1rudeboy]

I doubt the pirates have much in the way of AA.

[1rudeboy flashes back to 1993]

[vox_freedom]

I'm sure Obama will be asked about this new "cut and run" policy at his next WH press conference.
Oh, and the question will come from MSNBC.//sarc off

[kevinm13]

Blow these slugs out of the water. Keep doing it until there aren’t any more pirates.