ARRRRR,,,More Pirates!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Let's not forget that tiny boats put a big hole in the USS COLE killing a number of sailors.

On the flip side, do we need a cruiser and destroyer to handle a fishing smack?
 
The International Maritime Organization has warned ships to stay away from the Somali coast because of pirate attacks, which surged to 35 last year from two in 2004.
Click to expand...


The IMO advises ships' crews to do everything possible to prevent pirates boarding them and reaching the crew, and making their cargos unattractive to thieves.

"Everything possible" generally meaning use of hoses, electric fences, and other non-lethal weapons, and "Making them unattractive targets" meaning radiotagging your cargo.

Carrying firearms is advised against, as it would probably just provoke the pirates.

If attacked, you are advised to radio for help. Unless the pirates actually board you and tell you not to use any radios, because they may pick up the transmission, and get mad at you.



I read in a yachting magazine about two American yachts that were cruising of Yemen when they were attacked by pirates in two small motor boats. Clearly they hadn't read the IMO advice, because one yacht returned fire at one of the boats, wounding one of the pirates, while the other the yacht rammed their attackers. Surprisingly, despite this clear flouting of IMO guidlines, the yachts and there crew came to no harm.


Edited to add:
Link to IMO piracy guidelines:
http://www.imo.org/includes/blast_bindoc.asp?doc_id=941&format=PDF
 
I'm not defending the pirates here, and my question will probably expose my ignorance about how maritime operations work. But here it is:

What gives the US Navy the right to attempt to board a 30' fishing boat off the coast of Somalia? From what I can tell from the article, the US ships were operating under the aegis (pardon the pun) of a "Dutch task force," ostensibly at the behest of the UN security council.

I understand that pirates are making things difficult for the UN to ship food to various places in Africa, but I'm just trying to sort out the legality of what our Naval forces are doing over there. Is it "right" because pirates are bad guys? Is it "right" because people in Africa are hungry? Is it "right" because the Dutch said so? Is it "right" because the UN security council said so?

I want to re-emphasize that I'm not some anti-US, pirate-loving troll. But I have seen many freedoms abridged in the name of security, and that's why I'm somewhat leery of what's going on here.
 
I am a big believer in the concept that if anyone starts shooting at our pointy gray ships, the ships should shoot back. I wonder if the fire was returned with the M-2 .50 cals, or the 25 mm Bushmasters? I suspect it was the .50 cals.
 
AFS and MillCreek -

I wasn't addressing whether it was OK to fire back when fired upon. That part I agree with 100%. I was talking about whether it was "right" to attempt to board the fishing boat in the first place. From the article:

"The battle started after the USS Cape St. George and USS Gonzalez, which were patrolling as part of a Dutch-led task force, spotted a 30-foot fishing boat towing smaller skiffs and prepared to board and inspect the vessels."

In general, when is it kosher for a foreign government's military to board and inspect private vessels on the open sea?
 
It has been a few years since I did boardings like that, but standard procedure when I was doing it was 4 50cal M2's mounted, 2 on each side of the ship. Bad guys were looking at at LEAST 2 50's opening up on them when they got stupid, possibly 4 50's if the other boat was in position to cover as well. Distance from the boarded vessel was usually about 800-1000 yards.

A couple AK's and an RPG against at least 2 50's locked and loaded, distance of about 1000 yards. BAD idea to start shooting LOL.

The only time we had the 5" guns and CIWS 'ready' doing boardings was in a hot area like the Persian Gulf or if a potentially unfriendly warship or aircraft were in the area.
Click to expand...
Yep, the folks that ticked are the helo crews, they didn't get to play...:evil:
The HSL folks are in the process of getting certified as snipers with Barrett's and M218's, so that should make things even MORE interesting if they have a bird up. I get to go "play" off SOCAL for the next three days, and will see how they are doing.
 
In general, when is it kosher for a foreign government's military to board and inspect private vessels on the open sea?
Click to expand...

You can research that by googling 'international maritime law'.

I'm not a big believer in "international law" myself. A couple defaults of not following international law however are isolationism and 'might makes right', neither of which are that great either.
 
what are a few guys in two 20' wooden boats going to do against naval warships other than get blown out of the water?
Click to expand...
We're talking about Somalia, famous for poorly disciplined, drug addled "militias". These guys were just the same problem in a boat. There was probably one guy in the front of the boat going, "everybody stay calm" while some jackass in the back started shooting, probably with the rifle held sideways over his head. At which point, karma made its grand entrance...

:neener:
 
I coulda swore piracy was covered...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

by international law? That any navy can board a known pirate?
Click to expand...

Under international law (or agreement, if you prefer to call it that) all military/government ships are supposed to take action against any pirate they encounter, if it is outside territorial waters*. Inside territorial waters, they cannot act without permission from the nation concerned.


So if the suspects were clearly pirates, then what they did was legitimate provided either a) they were more than 12nm from Somalia, or b) they were acting with the agreement of the Somali government. (Of course, this is further complicated by the fact that Somalia has a government only in the loosest definitions of both "has" and "government").

I don't know what the laws/principles involved would be if the boat concerned was not "clearly" a pirate.


* Defined as 12nm from a coastal nation's baseline**
** The line - typically lowest tide - that they use on their charts to indicate zero depth.



Edited to add:
Further complications:
According to this BBC report, the suspected pirates claim the navy fired first.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/4822722.stm
 
Bssic rules apply...

On the open ocean (25 miles out qualifies) MIGHT MAKES RIGHT, all the time in all circumstances. While trying to manuever into a tight harbor, don't expect the aricraft carrier to yield the right of way.. When the big grey boats say "Pull over" , pull over! ie: stand by to be boarded Last time I sent .50cal rounds (tracers) into a 35' junk it turned into junk! Same deal different ocean, same result. Imagine Teddy's "Big Stick" and these were just little switches!!!
 
For WT

When the Cole got hurt it was tied to the pier, try and research when the last time a U.S Navy vessel underway was damaged and you'll probably be off the coast of Viet Nam.
 
Well done to the Navy. I have heard too many stories about these Somalian pirates attacking and killing innocent people, so it's good to read about the good guys winning for a change!

Congratulations to the US Navy...bloody good job!

:)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

SSN Vet
  • Locked
Pirate surprise!
2 3 4 5
Replies
100
Views
5K
gym
G
R
  • Locked
More pirates, arghhhhhhhh
2
Replies
37
Views
2K
nfl1990
N
G
  • Locked
US navy sinks pirate ships, about time
Replies
9
Views
762
Jorg Nysgerrig
J
D
  • Locked
Tell me again why they shouldn't be armed?
2 3 4
Replies
98
Views
4K
thesolidus
T
2
  • Locked
U.S. Navy captures suspected pirates
2 3
Replies
56
Views
2K
oweno
O
Back
Top