Posted on 07/22/2005 4:11:15 PM PDT by QQQQQ
When 35 pirates carrying machine guns and rocket launchers boarded a tanker laden with methane in the Malacca Strait in March, it sent a shudder through the crew, and a ripple of fear from Tokyo to Washington.
It also served as a reminder of the risks to world trade, and of the potential for terrorism in the region.
The attack on the tanker turned out to be routine highway robbery in the strait, whose waters are shared by Singapore, Indonesia and Malaysia.
But in the nightmare scenario, terrorists using the methods of modern-day pirates seize a gas tanker and use it as floating bomb, which experts say could explode with the force of a small nuclear weapon. The damage from such an attack could go well beyond the immediate bloodshed and environmental damage, hobbling U.S. trade with Asia and cutting off essential energy supplies shipped through the narrow channel to China, South Korea and Japan.
"The threat is real and urgent," Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong told a regional security conference in June. "We know that terrorists have been studying maritime targets across the region."
Each year, 60,000 ships ply the Malacca Strait, carrying about half of the world's oil and one-third of its trade. That includes nearly all of U.S. imports from China and 80 percent of the oil used by economic powers Japan, South Korea and Taiwan.
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
Why would a ship going from China to the US go through the Malacca Straits?
How about having a few of these ships carry hidden Navy or Marine detachments with heavy weapons? Ought to put a real dent in the popularity of piracy.
Answer:
....To...Re-supply... 'those in need'.....?
/sarcasm?
It's oil and liquefied natural gas tankers going from the Gulf to the Asian markets. They all have to pass through these straits. Blocking the strait would constitute a lethal choke hold on half the world economy.
Yeah I know about that, but the article said China-to-US trade went through the Malacca Straits, and I just can't see why a ship would go that route. Even if they were heading to the east coast of the US, the Panama Canal (or even the southern passage) is a faster route than going west through the Indian Ocean.
Mahan Bump.
Answer:
There 'called'....CONTRACTS!
:-)
Headed for an East Coast destination Via the Suez canal.
Panama can't take some boats and it's pretty booked up anyway.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.