UN mandate. How quaint.
Pirates as victims. Who’da thunk it?
Do they at least have permission to send stern semaphore messages?
I don't know, but it just doesn't seem like a good idea to keep pissing off other nations. At some point, they're going to say enough's enough and start painting the pirate boats with smart rockets before they get close enough to fire back and that live-die thingie going to be granted. It's just a matter of time...
I don’t pretend to have any sort of knowledge about maritime legal matters, but every time I see one of these Somali pirate stories, I keep wondering why it is that any nation or company would venture into those waters without adequate security personnel on board.
Surely a few sharpshooters and a few RPGs is not too much expense when you are carrying millions of dollars’ worth of cargo. Perhaps their insurance costs might even be lowered because they are protecting the stuff better.
Am I missing something here?
“Bridge Too Far”- US Major Julian Cook, 82nd Airborne, to British tank Commander regarding his stopped column while allied troops without support are being killed and captured by the Germans:
“ Must You Always Do Everything By The Book?!! “
Ships carrying (or simply representing, even empty) substantial stealable wealth need to get more serious about anti-piracy measures, such as (among others),
- marines (not USMC, but still, professional ship-based men)
- sidearms
- high-tech security, such as coded doors/ portals
- booby traps
Also, as someone else on FR said recently, nations already having a sizeable navy should consider “Q ships” — ships that look like vulnerable, tempting quarry but in fact are heavily armed/ armored, fast, “pirate killers” with elite military crews who are perfectly content to shoot armed pirates who do not immediate surrender.