I beg to differ.
Posted on 04/14/2009 11:25:01 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
Has one...get paid to pretend he’s a student.
White House aides spoke Monday of an interagency group to continue looking at the issue of pirates and of a desire for international cooperation . . .
In other words, they won't do anything but talk and build up the bureaucracy.
Actually, putting an end to piracy would involve going into the pirate centers in Somalia and killing them. That doesn't seem advisable right now, especially since the nations who are the chief victims of piracy refuse to do anything to help. But we could put an end to MOST of it simply by sinking all their ships and boats, which shouldn't take more than a week or so. Then, I suppose, we could do it again next month after they buy more boats--which no doubt the victim countries will happily sell them.
But they won't: a) because they don't want to; b) because they don't want to offend their leftist supporters; and c) because they don't want to offend the "international community," whatever that is. Finally, of course, Obama likes Black African Muslims a lot better than he likes white Europeans or East Asians.
Amen. Other countries saying ‘let Uncle Sam do it’ is a crock. It is past time for these ships with a valuable cargo to go without guards with machine gun capability and hand grenades to repel any pirates. Shotgun riders on the stage.
They could also develop a remote on-shore capability to stall the engines when the ship goes off the chartered course.
Obama should refuse to be the world’s robocop.
Jimmy Carter’s Navy said there was little that could be done to keep the Gulf of Sidra open to U.S. Naval maneuvers and safe for international shipping when Qaddafi extended Libyan waters against our protest.
Ronald Reagan’s Navy felt a little different.
Regan made it clear that American maneuvers in the Gulf of Sidra would proceed as they always had before. Anticipating trouble, Reagan was asked by the Joint Chiefs what American Navy pilots do if attacked? Would Reagan’s orders allow for “hot pursuit”? Reagan’s answer – “All the way into the hanger.” You know the rest of the story.
I beg to differ.
How hard is it to install twin .50s on these ships?
Back to the age of the whining, panty-waisted, liberal
government telling us we are all too helpless to help ourselves.
Bail out Somalia to curb the pirates?
***************************************EXCERPT****************************
from the April 14, 2009 edition
The ultimate solution is Somali nation building.
Every time you shoot a pirate in the head, an angel gets his wings. Way to go, Clarence.
And every time you shoot a pirate in the head, there’s once less POS making trouble in the world.
Why is blasting the motherships outta the water a non-starter....?
THE AUDACITY OF ROPE CRUSH ALL THE PIRATES -- NOW
Works for me :)
However, this is a very big opportunity for the shipping security business. I think the current problem is ships cant port in many countries with armed crews. However, an entrepreneurial company could supply bonded security to merchants at a price. This would be like air marshals on overseas flights. It would lower insurance premiums for the merchants and provide the “home defense” required when the nearest naval vessel is 300 miles away.
Unfortunately that is exactly the case. Our sophisticated Navy was designed to fight other sophisticated Navies. There was a popular science fiction story several years back about a fighter pilot in an F-14 who was thrown back in time to World War I. It turned out that his sensors and weapons were completely useless against low tech fabric and wood technology of the time. Ultimately he figures out that he can damage them by flying close at supersonic speed but I digress. This is the same problem a Burke Class destroyer faces when it takes on a dingy.
I operated extensively north of that area near Socotra in the 1987-89 time frame aboard a Navy frigate. At the time were worried about Iranian suicide missions on small boats (boghammers) and in small private airplanes. Our radars could not pick out fiberglass boats from the surface clutter and we could not determine the intent of a small airplane and we had no weapons that were effective against these low tech threats. We were hell on wheels against Echo Class subs and Backfire bombers but completely flummoxed by those low tech threats. I believe the literature refers to this situation as asymmetrical warfare.
How did we counter this? We had to bring back the venerable M2 heavy machine gun. They came out of mothballs from the Naval Weapons Station in Crane IN and mounts were welded to the deck around the ship. Unfortunately the care and feeding of these Browning designed masterpieces had faded from corporate memory so they had to ask for volunteers of retired Gunners Mates (who responded en masse) to come and teach their successors how to set the timing and headspace. For the aircraft threat the Navy created Stinger detachments that would swap from ship to ship as needed with their gear.
I think the framework necessary for solving this problem exists. We also carried at various times what the US Coast Guard called "Tactical Law Enforcement Teams" (TACLET). This was when the government still pretended to care about the law and wanted to maintain the fiction that DOD was not violating Posse Comitatus in the War on Drugs. These teams of 5-7 petty officers and one junior officer would come aboard with their gear and weapons for as long as the mission dictated. Teams such as these are very effective and could ride ships through the pirate zone without any of the problems of arming crews or hiring contractors.
The only problem with this is that I have just solved a non-existent problem as they say. Why is that you ask? You see we don't have a Merchant Marine any more and thanks to blatant protectionism and union featherbedding we haven't for decades. When you sail the Indian Ocean a US flagged merchantman is a rarity of the highest order.
The only time a US flagged vessel is used is when there is no other way around the protectionist law. Maersk Alabama was delivering humanitarian aid under a US Government contract which specified that a US flag carrier deliver said aid, otherwise she would not have been within 2 or 3 thousand miles of there.
So this is technically not an American problem. The pirates probably won't get their hands on another American vessel because statistically there aren't any (and I am sure this figured into The One's calculus in allowing the action). This is a problem for the open registries like Panama and Liberia and I wish them all success in this endeavor.
All those Blackwater guys are free after losing their Iraq gig.
A bottle to the side of the head for being so fisking stupid.
There have been something like 200 pirate attacks over the last three years, only one on an American ship. There have been 40 or 50 ships seized, none of them American. There has been millions paid out in ransom, not a dollar on an American ship or an American sailor. So why shouldn't the rest of the freakin' world, the part that's having their ships seized and which are paying out the ransom, do something about it? Why us? Is a Greek ship or a Philippine sailor or a Saudi tanker worth a single U.S. life or the cost of blowing half of Somlalia off the face of the earth to U.S. taxpayers? It isn't to me.
Looks to me like the sniper has already proven that the (hopefully civilian) spokesman is wrong. If we simply prevent all acts of piracy from succeeding, we've solved the problem.
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.