Thunderdome 2015 » Printable Version of Topic » Somali pirates take another oil tanker...

Forum: Internet Links
Topic: Somali pirates take another oil tanker...
started by: GORDON

Posted by GORDON on Apr. 08 2009,12:55

An American one this time...

Except things aren't going to plan when they take Americans prisoner... hehehe.

< http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7990566.stm >

QUOTE

US crew members have retaken their hijacked ship but their captain is still being held by Somali pirates on a lifeboat, reports say.

Fuck yeah.

Pure speculation, but I bet these sailors' absentee ballots for McCain were disqualified for one reason or another.

Posted by Vince on Apr. 08 2009,18:16

Nice to see there are still Americans left that don't wait around for the government to "fix" things.

Posted by GORDON on Apr. 08 2009,18:28

Thomas Jefferson approves.

Posted by Malcolm on Apr. 08 2009,18:48

Someone explain why we can't just send in enough naval ships to escort convoys/hunt the bastards down?

C'mon, we got a half-black dude in the White House now. It's got to be ok.

Posted by GORDON on Apr. 08 2009,20:12

Because we need to go through the UN. Amerikkka is not the world's policeman. International law needs to be taken into consideration. And many, many other liberal platitudes.

On the other hand, it seems American-flagged vessels don't need the navy to take care of their pirate problems.

Posted by Troy on Apr. 08 2009,21:48

The Dread Pirate Roberts would never let this sort of thing happen.

Posted by thibodeaux on Apr. 09 2009,06:03

Good thing those merchant ships are completely unarmed. I mean, somebody might get hurt!

Posted by TheCatt on Apr. 12 2009,11:30

< It's over. >

QUOTE

The American captain of a cargo ship held hostage by pirates jumped overboard from the lifeboat where he was being held, and U.S. Navy SEALs shot and killed three of his four captors, according to a senior U.S. official with knowledge of the situation.

Capt. Richard Phillips was helped out of the water off the Somali coast and is uninjured and in good condition, the official said. He was taken aboard the USS Bainbridge, a nearby naval warship.

At the time of the shootings, the fourth pirate was aboard the USS Bainbridge negotiating with officials, the source said. That pirate was taken into custody.

Maersk Line Limited issued a statement saying it was informed at 1:30 p.m. by the U.S. government that Phillips had been rescued. John Reinhart, president and CEO, called Phillips' wife, Andrea, to tell her the good news.

The ship's crew was "jubilant" when they received word, the statement says.

"We are all absolutely thrilled to learn that Richard is safe and will be re-united with his family," Reinhart said. "Maersk Line Limited is deeply grateful to the Navy, the FBI and so many others for their tireless efforts to secure Richard's freedom."

"We look forward to welcoming him home in the coming days," Reinhart added.

USA! USA! USA!

Posted by Vince on Apr. 12 2009,11:40

Sweet! I was starting to get a little embarassed.

Posted by TheCatt on Apr. 12 2009,18:04

Seriously, things like this are why the USA is better than anyone.

Posted by thibodeaux on Apr. 12 2009,18:18

It's a shame our military has no tradition of destroying African pirates.

Posted by GORDON on Apr. 12 2009,20:15

I was amused when I heard an Marine amphib vessel was called to the scene.

They planning on storming the raft?

Posted by thibodeaux on Apr. 13 2009,04:42

Maybe they'll storm the pirate HQ and wipe 'em out.

By the way, why don't they just let these merchies arm themselves? For heaven's sake, a bunch of dudes in a rubber raft should not be able to take over a big ship. Put a Ma Deuce on the fantail and blow those assholes out of the water.

Posted by GORDON on Apr. 13 2009,08:00

I don't know. Not sure where the maritime authority gets its teeth. I checked the Constitution... nothing there.

Posted by Cakedaddy on Apr. 13 2009,10:35

They say that if you arm one, then the pirates will shoot at all of the others thinking they are armed. As it stands, they know they can just walk on. If some ships have guns, then the pirates will shoot first and find out if they needed to later. Not only does this hurt people, but it could poke holes in the ships making them leak, or blow up.

Posted by thibodeaux on Apr. 13 2009,11:14

Great, they ALL need to be armed anyway. And they can shoot the pirates before they even get close. QED.

Posted by Mommy Dearest on Apr. 13 2009,11:29

(Cakedaddy @ Apr. 13 2009,13:35)

QUOTE

Then the smart ships will not return fire and they can see the whites of their eyes. I think that has happened before

Posted by Leisher on Apr. 13 2009,21:28

< US Navy pirate hunters. >

Coming soon to Spike TV.

Posted by Leisher on Apr. 14 2009,05:35

< Somali pirates back at work. >

Three more ships overnight. Remember the old days when this would have been Bush's fault for provoking the pirates with violence?

By the way, I watched a hijacking on one of the morning shows. These clowns rode up to a tanker in an inflatable life raft. You don't need to arm these crews like commandos to stop these pirates. A grenade dropped in the raft when they come to dock would have stopped that hijacking. A high powered rifle would sink their boat long before they got close to the ship.

Posted by thibodeaux on Apr. 14 2009,06:07

Exactly. "onoez we can't have guns on our shipz somebody might get hurt!!1!!"

Now you're vulnerable to a bunch of assholes armed with slingshots.

Posted by GORDON on Apr. 14 2009,12:43

Pirates vow revenge.

< http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/africa/04/13/somalia.pirates.revenge/ >

I'd be one personal-firearm-smuggling-mofo.

Posted by Leisher on Apr. 14 2009,12:55

QUOTE

"The killing of our boys was aggression, and the U.S. will see what they get from their operation," he said.

Seriously, he's right. We're the assholes.

All they want to do is kidnap people, hold them against their will for an undetermined length of time, demand money for their safe release, and do the same with their ships and cargo. Sure, maybe sometimes a hostage gets killed, but that's business.

How dare we try to stop this completely legal enterprise?!? What right do we have to use violence to stop their violence!?

Seriously, one trained man with a high powered rifle ends these bullshit hijackings. He'd be able to tear them and their boats up before they even got into range to shoot back.

Posted by Malcolm on Apr. 14 2009,14:26

RPG-7 reaches a bit over 900m.

Posted by Leisher on Apr. 14 2009,15:44

It's hard to aim an RPG from 900m out while riding in an inflatable life raft, in the ocean, and with a sniper picking you off one by one.

Posted by Malcolm on Apr. 14 2009,15:50

(Leisher @ Apr. 14 2009,17:44)

QUOTE

It's hard to aim an RPG from 900m out while riding in an inflatable life raft, in the ocean, and with a sniper picking you off one by one.

Still sounds like better odds than fighting in one of the many guerrilla groups elsewhere.

Posted by TPRJones on Apr. 14 2009,16:19

Given the area involved, and the number of merchant vessels, wouldn't it be easier to just blockade the Somalia coast until we either kill all the pirates or Somalia lets us go in and take them out?

Posted by Malcolm on Apr. 14 2009,16:45

(TPRJones @ Apr. 14 2009,18:19)

QUOTE

Given the area involved, and the number of merchant vessels, wouldn't it be easier to just blockade the Somalia coast until we either kill all the pirates or Somalia lets us go in and take them out?

The problem w\ the second option is that we don't know who to ask. There's no stable gov't in that region which can claim to exercise authority for the entire country.

I'm all for going in & wasting them.

Posted by GORDON on Apr. 14 2009,18:33

I just thought of the simplest solution.... one squad of regular-ol'-ground-pounding Marines per American-flagged boat is more than overkill, but probably the smallest Marine unit you'd want to go with. That's 3 4-man fire teams, one to be alert on each shift, and the rest ready for action with 30 second's notice.

You'd probably have a waiting list of Marines wanting to go on 90-days Temporary Additional Duty of chilling and working out on an ocean freighter.

Posted by Troy on Apr. 15 2009,06:41

(GORDON @ Apr. 14 2009,18:33)

QUOTE

I had that thought as well, and then read your post.

Probably means it's already being considered, at least for the big boats.

Posted by Leisher on Apr. 15 2009,07:36

QUOTE

You'd probably have a waiting list of Marines wanting to go on 90-days Temporary Additional Duty of chilling and working out on an ocean freighter.

A bunch of men anxiously trying to volunteer to go be on a ship for 90 days with other men? You can take the Marines out of the Navy, but you can't take the Navy out of the Marines.

In other news, < Somalis tried to capture an American ship this morning. > They fired on it with assault rifles and RPGs. The ship was damaged, but escaped.

Posted by GORDON on Apr. 15 2009,08:04

(Leisher @ Apr. 15 2009,10:36)

QUOTE

You'd probably have a waiting list of Marines wanting to go on 90-days Temporary Additional Duty of chilling and working out on an ocean freighter.

A bunch of men anxiously trying to volunteer to go be on a ship for 90 days with other men? You can take the Marines out of the Navy, but you can't take the Navy out of the Marines.

Trust me... compared to the typical life in a grunt unit, 3 months on a ship surrounded by only men would be heaven.

There's always porn.

Posted by TPRJones on Apr. 16 2009,07:17

You know, there is one way to stop pirates.

Ninjas.

Posted by thibodeaux on Apr. 16 2009,07:30

And Navy Seals are the closest thing to Ninja we got.

Posted by thibodeaux on Apr. 25 2009,03:07

< DUH >.

Posted by Leisher on Oct. 07 2009,19:58

< Dumbfucks. >

Posted by TPRJones on Oct. 07 2009,20:35

Maybe they assumed they'd surrender.

Posted by GORDON on Oct. 08 2009,12:09

That piece of shit is the flagship of the French Navy?

What happened to their carrier?

Posted by Malcolm on Oct. 08 2009,12:18

(GORDON @ Oct. 08 2009,14:09)

QUOTE

That piece of shit is the flagship of the French Navy?

What happened to their carrier?

Apparently replaced w\ a logistics ship. Yeah, wow. Wtf?

Posted by GORDON on Oct. 08 2009,12:26

I last personally saw their carrier in 1992. Maybe they decommissioned it.

Posted by thibodeaux on Oct. 08 2009,16:47

Dude, it's the media. They'll show a cop holding an AR-15 and call it an "AK-47 semi-automatic assault weapon." For all we know, that's a picture of a Swiss Coast Guard rescue cutter.

Posted by thibodeaux on Oct. 08 2009,16:48

< just in case you thought that was hyperbole >

Posted by Malcolm on Oct. 08 2009,16:54

(thibodeaux @ Oct. 08 2009,18:47)

QUOTE

Dude, it's the media. They'll show a cop holding an AR-15 and call it an "AK-47 semi-automatic assault weapon." For all we know, that's a picture of a Swiss Coast Guard rescue cutter.

It said "AK-47-type." Which, granted, is about as helpful as saying "assault rifle-type."

Posted by Leisher on Oct. 08 2009,19:44

(thibodeaux @ Oct. 08 2009,19:48)

QUOTE

< just in case you thought that was hyperbole >

If you have no idea what it is, how difficult is it to simply ask?

Remember when the media actually investigated things and did fact checking?

Posted by TPRJones on Oct. 08 2009,19:58

(Leisher @ Oct. 08 2009,21:44)

QUOTE

Remember when the media actually investigated things and did fact checking?

I'm starting to wonder if they ever did. Perhaps they never really did and since they were the only major delivery channel for information people calling them on it never got heard.

Posted by GORDON on Oct. 09 2009,07:08

Even Ben Franklin, when he was the only game (newspaper) in town, used to sock puppet and write under different personas in order to sway the public.

We could probably find MSM propaganda from the Roman Empire if we looked.

Posted by Malcolm on Oct. 09 2009,11:05

Probably my ass. The Gracchus brothers.

Posted by GORDON on Oct. 09 2009,12:08

(Malcolm @ Oct. 09 2009,14:05)

QUOTE

Probably my ass. The Gracchus brothers.

I am not familiar with the minutia of world history; I generally just know the broad strokes. Please, expand.

Posted by Malcolm on Oct. 09 2009,12:14

(GORDON @ Oct. 09 2009,14:08)

QUOTE

(Malcolm @ Oct. 09 2009,14:05)

QUOTE

Probably my ass. The Gracchus brothers.

I am not familiar with the minutia of world history; I generally just know the broad strokes. Please, expand.

< Complete story here >.

The dime tour ...
The Senate was screwing over Roman legionaries. Tiberius opposed them & got quite a popular following. The other Senators made accusations of him wanting to be king. He went to chat w\ them in the Senate & was beaten to death w\ their chairs.

Recorded political propaganda, if you want to read all the shit the Senators said about him & vice-versa.

Posted by Troy on Oct. 09 2009,12:18

This is probably a good time to point out that in every news report I've seen it says "Flagship of the Indian Fleet"

Posted by GORDON on Oct. 09 2009,12:20

(Malcolm @ Oct. 09 2009,15:14)

QUOTE

(GORDON @ Oct. 09 2009,14:08)

QUOTE

(Malcolm @ Oct. 09 2009,14:05)

QUOTE

Probably my ass. The Gracchus brothers.

I am not familiar with the minutia of world history; I generally just know the broad strokes. Please, expand.

Makes "You lie!" sound fairly tame.

Posted by Malcolm on Oct. 09 2009,12:23

(GORDON @ Oct. 09 2009,14:20)

QUOTE

Makes "You lie!" sound fairly tame.

The Senate used to be the place where people could die if they did something sufficiently stupid. Guess they wised up & figured it'd be easier to fuck over everyone else who wasn't in the room.

Posted by Malcolm on Mar. 30 2010,08:13

< Seriously, eight ships in three days >?

Posted by TPRJones on Mar. 30 2010,09:08

QUOTE

Private security guards shot a Somali pirate dead last week, which was the first recorded instance of its kind.

Hey, look! Progress!

Posted by Malcolm on Mar. 30 2010,11:04

(TPRJones @ Mar. 30 2010,11:08)

QUOTE

Private security guards shot a Somali pirate dead last week, which was the first recorded instance of its kind.

Hey, look! Progress!

I'm still dumbfounded at either ...

(i) the lack of escort ships, either from private agencies or governments

(ii) if (i) is being prevented by some type of bullshit, hippie maritime law, why hasn't that law been set aside for a bit?

How many more fucking ships do they get to cherry pick?

Posted by TPRJones on Mar. 30 2010,11:57

My guess is that it's currently cheaper to pay some pirates from time to time than to pay a bunch of mercenary escorts. For the big corporations at least.

That will probably change soon, if present trends continue.

Posted by GORDON on Mar. 30 2010,12:02

Another problem solved by "Eat the poor."

Interesting.

Posted by TPRJones on Mar. 30 2010,12:10

The thing the pirates should keep in mind is that at some point, when the scales tip, it'll still be cheaper to higher some mercs to go into Somali and take care of the problem at the source than to higher bunches of escorts.

Posted by Malcolm on Mar. 30 2010,14:22

(TPRJones @ Mar. 30 2010,14:10)

QUOTE

The problem in Somalia is that the national infrastructure can't support the populous. The economy is damn near nonexistent & the citizens appear to think their time is better spent holding rich folks' ships for ransom than propping up their laughable government. Expensive either way.

Posted by Malcolm on Apr. 06 2010,10:48

< Why ships don't have more security >.

In short, the cost is high & the probability of your shipped getting jacked is still low. But possibly the worst logic imaginable creeps in at the end of the article.

QUOTE

On March 23, private security guards protecting a commercial ship shot dead a Somali pirate, the first recorded incident of its kind.

As the Monitor reported, the incident could be a glimpse of dicey times ahead.

“This could be the beginning of a violent period,” says E.J. Hogendoorn, head of the Horn of Africa program at the International Crisis Group’s office in Nairobi. “If [the pirates] see guys with shiny barrels pointing at them, they might fire first.”

They might fire first anyway, dickweed.

Posted by GORDON on Apr. 06 2010,12:44

So official weenies have fear that if we show the pirates guns they will have fear and they fear that fear will cause the pirates to have less fear and fire first.

Ok.

Posted by Malcolm on Apr. 06 2010,12:56

Putting an actual stop to this would require going in & tearing the problem out at the root. Till then, I say it's open season.

Posted by GORDON on Apr. 06 2010,15:00

(Malcolm @ Apr. 06 2010,15:56)

QUOTE

Putting an actual stop to this would require going in & tearing the problem out at the root. Till then, I say it's open season.

I disagree. Putting a stop to this only requires we expend a couple pounds of lead every time one of them tries to board a tanker. Make it a zero-profit game.

Why does it seem so obvious to me?

Posted by TPRJones on Apr. 07 2010,07:06

You can't solve this problem at the root, because there is no root now. Originally this was caused by the political upheaval and economic collapse of a country, sure. But even if you put those pieces back together there's still a lot of profit for not much work in this as long as we let the pussies set the rules of engagement.

Piracy can only be stopped one bullet at a time. Fortunately you do eventually run out of pirates.

Posted by Leisher on May 07 2010,10:52

Russia is writing the "How to" book on dealing with pirates.

We didn't kill them, < we just set them out to sea without navigation equipment or supplies. >

Posted by Malcolm on May 07 2010,13:39

I thought they actually shot one of them, too, though.

QUOTE

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev had hinted Thursday at tough punishment for the pirates, saying "perhaps we should get back to the idea of establishing an international court and other legal tools" to prosecute pirates. "Until then, we'll have to do what our forefathers did when they met the pirates," he said.

Bang on.

Posted by Leisher on May 13 2010,22:37

< They're dead. >

Posted by Malcolm on May 14 2010,08:24

(Leisher @ May 14 2010,00:37)

QUOTE

< They're dead. >

Posted by Troy on May 14 2010,11:13

If slowly dying in the hot sun surrounded by water you can't drink isn't a good enough deterrent, I don't think anything will work.

Also, sharks.