“I get the importance of keeping the sea lanes open. But once again the US is left with the bill. Since this ship was flying a Liberian flag, maybe let Liberia go rescue it. You made your choice, ship owner. Now live with it.”
Your comment reminds me of a remark a boss once made in the late 70’s when there were no wars going on. A B52 from a nearby airbase flew over us. And his remark was “Just why do they need to fly those things and waste all that fuel when there is no war going on?”
The obvious answer is to keep the crews trained and ready and the aircraft fully functional. Can you imagine a war cropping up, needed or not, then have to unmothball the B52’s from the desert and get the crews back into uniform and hurry up and go bomb something?
The same applies to this destroyer. The crews are getting valuable experience in dealing with an enemy. It all costs. it’s all worth it. This little skirmish readies them for the bigger ones. Not to mention showing China we can still deal with terrorists while their warships look on.
You make a good point with your training and readiness argument. But I would suggest looking at the financial end as well. One reason shipowners do not fly the American flag is that they don’t want to pay the higher American taxes.
It’s those taxes that are used to build American warships, and pay American crews. So the shipowners are getting a service without having to pay for it.
Maybe that’s the way it has to be. After all, a Navy ship cannot ignore another ship in distress. Nevertheless, an unbalance does exist here.
The US could send the ship owner a bill and if they didn’t pay it the US could put a lien on the ship. Naturally, that would be contested but it needs to be tested.
During discussions, the US lawyer could tell the owners “ok” next time your own your own”.
Si vis pacem, para bellum
No need to unmothball B-52s, as they are still flying and some are stationed nearby.