U.S. Navy Ships Return Fire on Suspected Pirates

Navy NewsStand ^ | 3/18/2006

[glorgau]

We'll just rename this area of the Indian ocean off Sudan to be the "Gulf of Tonkin".

[El Gato]

Small arms? I'd have preferred they use the Mk 45 5-inch/54 caliber lightweight guns, or at least the two Phalanx CIWS, the 2 triple 12.75 inch torpedo tubes (Mk46 torpedoes), the 2 25mm Bushmaster low-angle or the 4 12.7mm MG. (that's the .50 cals) that the both the Cape St. George mounts and the Gonzales mounts. (USS Gonzales is named after a Texas Marine!)

I think if the pirate ship was large enough, I'd go for the torpedos (that would be real shock and awe!), but otherwise the 5" and the 25mm Bushmaster. (Same gun used on the Bradely fighting vehicles by the Army).

[FreedomWatcher]

"Cape St. George, a guided-missile cruiser, and Gonzalez, a guided-missile destroyer, were conducting maritime security operations in the area as part of Combined Task Force 150, a maritime coalition task force currently led by Royal Netherlands Navy Commodore Hank Ort..."

Did anyone miss the fact that our United States Navy was operating under the command of a foreign government? Who authorized this?

[buccaneer81]

Did anyone miss the fact that our United States Navy was operating under the command of a foreign government?

Happens all the time in Colorado Springs. A Canadian general is in command of NORAD from time to time. In fact, I believe this was the case on 9-11.

[robowombat]

This is part of ongoing NATO and US coalition ops in the Indian Ocean. Unseen by the MSM a large part of the navies of the NATO states and Japan have been patrolling a large block of the NW Indian Ocean and the Arabian Sea since a few months after 9-11. The operation is divided into task elements and just as in NATO naval ops some times US warships are a segment of a task element commanded by a British or Dutch or German flog officer. The French, naturally, insist on operating a separate self contained task force, which it must be said is a large one. This maritime interdiction operation has stopped a lot of AQ movement from SW Asia onto west Africa or points east.

[tanknetter]

Did anyone miss the fact that our United States Navy was operating under the command of a foreign government? Who authorized this?

It's not unusual at all with joint operations. Sound like there's one CG and one DDG assigned to a combined forc - not a big deal.

[Junior]

The U.S. isn't always in charge in coalition arrangements.

[Arthalion]

It's a NATO task force, and it has a rotating command. Like all military task forces, our commanders have the treaty-bound right to refuse participation in any order or exercise that contravenes the will or laws of the United States. It's really not a big deal.

[FreedomWatcher]

If it's not a big deal, why have people complained about US ground troops being assigned to a UN contingent in Europe during Clinton's term?

I just happen to think our Constitution states that our troops, ground, air or naval, should answer to our President and only our President, not some officer or leader of another country.

[Arthalion]

That's the difference between the UN and these NATO arrangements. In the UN deals, our soldiers are wearing blue helmets and are taking orders directly from foreign commanders. In these coalition deals, American soldiers are taking orders only from American commanders, and those commanders are participating with a group of other nations soldiers. It's not "under the command", it's "working alongside". Big difference.

The leader in charge of the task force is simply deciding the best course of action for the task force to take to accomplish its goals. If the US commanders don't want to participate in one of those actions, they can leave or bow out at any point they want. The coalition commander is basically saying "I think group x should go here, and group Y should go here". He's not giving orders, just direction to the group.