Skip to comments.
U.S. Navy Ship Outruns Pursuing Pirates
UPI ^
| May 7, 2009
Posted on 05/07/2009 10:35:54 AM PDT by nickcarraway
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120 ... 161-163 next last
To: nickcarraway
81
posted on
05/07/2009 11:22:44 AM PDT
by
MrLee
(Sha'alu Shalom Yerushalyim!! God bless Eretz Israel.)
To: nickcarraway
How about placing several of these sea going electronic Gatling guns on every Navy ship?
To: Dan Middleton
From Wikipedia: The USS Lewsi and Clark was...”deactivated while still in commission on 1 October 1991” and was “decommissioned on 27 June 1992...”
To: Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears
If it’s in their cargo, I imagine they would. On a bunch of pallets, buried down in a cargo hold...and they may not have the actual tubes to *launch* the ammunition out of. It wouldn’t do them much good to be carrying, say, tons of 155mm howitzer shells if they didn’t have a 155mm howitzer (and a crew who knew how to use it) lying around.
I think they *should* be armed, or at the least be carrying a military contingent that’s got sufficient portable firepower, but because they ride a line between being civilian and military ships, they probably run across many of the same problems that a civilian cargo vessel would have with weapons. Bring a locker full of M16s into many countries’ ports, even if the weapons are locked down and not loaded, and if the local authorities find out, the ship gets impounded and the crew gets detained. It would be better if the ~50 military supposedly on each ship bring their own weapons on, and include some appropriate level of firepower and expertise to handle pirates. Or station Marines on them.
}:-)4
84
posted on
05/07/2009 11:25:15 AM PDT
by
Moose4
(Hey RNC. Don't move toward the middle. MOVE THE MIDDLE TOWARD YOU.)
To: spodefly
Even if it’s not a gun ship they should have run the bastards over.
85
posted on
05/07/2009 11:26:40 AM PDT
by
raybbr
(It's going to get a lot worse now that the anchor babies are voting!)
To: Domandred
USNS = CIVILAN CREW, but Navy owned vessel.
Still that doesn't explain why one of our vessels can be pursued for an hour without some sort of response from a combat vessel or from the air.
To: nickcarraway
Are we practicing for maneuvers with the French?
87
posted on
05/07/2009 11:27:16 AM PDT
by
Waryone
(If the democrats paid taxes like the rest of us, the United States wouldn't have a deficit.)
To: nickcarraway
Lawd Almighty, why aren’t the puckers pish pood?
88
posted on
05/07/2009 11:27:22 AM PDT
by
swarthyguy
("We may be crazy in Pakistan, but not completely out of our minds," ISI Gen. Ahmed Shujaa Pasha)
To: nickcarraway
We are a nation of wimps, I absolutely cannot take it. What a disgrace.
89
posted on
05/07/2009 11:31:22 AM PDT
by
Scythian
To: rockinqsranch
If you are a non-combat vessel that can outrun a skiff armed just with pea shooters, why bother engaging? It isn’t like an AK-47 can pierce the hull or something. Just order all crew indoors and speed on by.
90
posted on
05/07/2009 11:32:50 AM PDT
by
Thane_Banquo
(The GOP: The Big Tent with a Fifth Column.)
To: spodefly
Hep me out here.
A US Navy vessel and it's not armed? No Phalanx? No quad 50s, no nuthin? No M-16s, no pistols? Is this one of those all-female ships?
WTF, over?
91
posted on
05/07/2009 11:34:05 AM PDT
by
Kenny Bunk
(The Election of 2008: Given the choice between stupid and evil, the stupid chose evil.)
To: ETL
Ahh, you need something to shoot the ammo with.
92
posted on
05/07/2009 11:34:34 AM PDT
by
Thane_Banquo
(The GOP: The Big Tent with a Fifth Column.)
To: ETL
Ahh, you need something to shoot the ammo with.
93
posted on
05/07/2009 11:34:35 AM PDT
by
Thane_Banquo
(The GOP: The Big Tent with a Fifth Column.)
To: ETL
Ahh, you need something to shoot the ammo with.
94
posted on
05/07/2009 11:34:37 AM PDT
by
Thane_Banquo
(The GOP: The Big Tent with a Fifth Column.)
To: Kenny Bunk
Fine, what about some active support from the numerous US assets in the area, a precedent like this should be troubling and disturbing, to say the least.
95
posted on
05/07/2009 11:35:43 AM PDT
by
swarthyguy
("We may be crazy in Pakistan, but not completely out of our minds," ISI Gen. Ahmed Shujaa Pasha)
To: nickcarraway
We out ran em??? !!
Huh...
96
posted on
05/07/2009 11:35:54 AM PDT
by
Former MSM Viewer
("We will hunt the terrorists in every dark corner of the earth. We will be relentless." W 2001)
To: nickcarraway
The might U S Navy is turning and running from pirates in skiffs????? WTF????
To: ridesthemiles
Read a bit ... learn the facts ...
Have a nice day
98
posted on
05/07/2009 11:37:15 AM PDT
by
BlueNgold
(... Feed the tree!)
To: BlueNgold
Actual countries (not Somali pirates, clearly) respect the sovereignty of vessels at sea, visual contact with another vessel is rare at sea, they don't carry the really fun ammunition, and most people in their right mind really don't want to piss off the U.S. Navy. Did someone forget about the USS Cole? 17 American sailors dead?
99
posted on
05/07/2009 11:39:18 AM PDT
by
ETL
(ALL the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
To: Thane_Banquo
Ahh, you need something to shoot the ammo with. I meant for guarding the ammo.
100
posted on
05/07/2009 11:41:16 AM PDT
by
ETL
(ALL the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120 ... 161-163 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson