Posted on 04/14/2009 4:08:14 AM PDT by Scanian
Piracy never really disappeared; it plagues maritime commerce as much today as it did in the Caribbean in the 18th century and on the Barbary Coast in the 19th century. But until recently, modern-day pirates mostly rustled some cargo and let their captives continue, leaving the crew unharmed.
That's changed. Pirates in the waters off Somalia, and from the Gulf of Aden to south of the equator, are no longer simply interested in seizing ships and cargo. Now they are out for the multimillion dollar ransoms paid by ship operators to rescue their crews. They've come up with a good business model, too, with a low cost of entry: a fishing trawler to serve as a mother ship, a few high-speed inflatable boats, weapons and crews to seize their targets. Very few of these thieves have paid for their crimes despite the presence of a small fleet of warships in the region. One way to deal with the threat is to revive convoys.
To be sure, in different circumstances naval patrols have worked. Towards the end of the 20th century, pirates in the Strait of Malacca, which links the Indian and Pacific Oceans, not only captured ships, but crews that resisted were often murdered and their ships renamed and reflagged. Gradually, naval patrols by Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore made life more dangerous for the pirates and safer for mariners. In 2007, the Strait was declared "piracy free." But those patrols were feasible because the Strait is a long, narrow passage never more than 150 miles wide.
Down by the Horn of Africa, however, patrolling one million square miles of ocean with the 60 vessels on station is an impossibility.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Not cost effective. Arm the sailors!
Q Boats
The oil companies already have a solution and they’ve threatened to implement it. The route down the coast of Africa represents the most efficient way to transport oil but there are other more expensive routes and they will be using them if the pirates aren’t controlled. A report I read a few months ago said the oil companies estimated the price of oil would increase approx. 25% due to the increased cost of transportation if they have to switch routes.
Seems awfully involved and cumbersome compared to just killing enough pirates to make the game less attractive, but I suppose it would keep us from hurting the feelings of a particular group of perpetual predators.
Equating these guys with the wolfpacks of the Kriegsmarine at this stage makes me wonder what will be left to compare them to to once they get hold of one of uncle Ahmedinejad's peaceful nuclear generators.
Mr. niteowl77
What BS. These pirates are ants at the picnic. They are only a problem if you insist on fighting them with tweezers, to “arrest” them.
Chasing pirates on the ocean is a fool’s errand. We have known this for 300 years.
If you want to stop the pirates, you find their nests and destroy them.
Convoys are an option, but I don’t think that will end the game.
Those Somalian Pirates have had a taste of wealth, fame, and notoriety sufficient to feed their persuit of the Pirates lifestyle to the bitter end.
The best tactic is to provide the bitter end.
Eliminate their operational bases.
I was thinking exactly the same thing.
Here’s my idea. A Navy destroyer steams up alongside a merchant vessel, transfers over a squad or two of Marines with anti-tank rockets and heavy machine guns.
The Marines settle in at strategic locations around the hull.
Pirate comes barrelling up on the merchie, Marines blow said pirates to hell and gone.
Since there is no way for the pirates to know which merchie is carrying the Marines, they have to assume that any merchie they approach might have them aboard. Two or three pirate boats get blown out of the water and it might give the rest the idea that a different career choice might not be a bad idea.
The piracy case in Somalia is a perfect example of victim disarmament at sea. Most merchant ships are forbidden by their countries’ laws from having weapons on board (a ban which is enforced by rigorous inspections), which leaves a 20.000tn ship worth hundreds of million of dollars vulnerable to a pirate dinghy with a crew of five armed with AKs and RPGs worth a few hundred bucks. So do we allow owners to spend a few thousand dollars on weapons and private security on board? God forbid! No, much better to send a carrier group, or just nuke the high seas.
Convoys will be resisted by the freighting companies and the US Navy because the cost to both is enormous and the risk of loss is low by comparison, particularly since paying ransom “works”.
They will only be accepted after the pirates are really out of control (i.e. creating real losses comparable to those the US suffered off the E.Coast in the 6 month following Pearl Harbor). Right now, they are not.
There are any number of ways to handle this, but this is a matter of “will”. When the most powerful countries of the world are ruled by Liberals who feel “sorry” for the pirates or by Marxists who see the pirates as the oppressed, these countries won’t act.
What self respecting sailor is going to get in a lifeboat and spend a weekend with his mate and a bucket load of guns while everybody else gets some R&R?
Well, maybe might get a volunteer if you gave ‘um a few thousand rounds to shoot off while they wait.
I probably know as much as you about the red light districts around the ports and military bases as you do. I also know that not all men go to those places. I have been fortunate to know several of them. I consider them to be self respecting men.
Do sailors have to follow orders?
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.