T W A U ... The Chase....today's...
Film, Media & TV3 mins ago
Somali Pirates??
What can we do to stop these smegging Somali Pirates? The powers that be seem to have no effective answer. Surely the septics can track them to land somewhere and do what they normally do, ie bomb the sh1t out of it. Any creative ideas anyone?
Answers
1 to 17 of 17
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by R1Geezer. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I don't understand why it is tolerated. There can't be that many ships plying those waters, so why not allocate a warship to each one for escort, it needn't be a huge one, any pirates appear, blow them out of the water, no questions asked.
Or even, at this acute time, station an aircraft carrier there for very rapid response.
Or even, at this acute time, station an aircraft carrier there for very rapid response.
Gormless, in October last year NATO announced that it would send its Standing Naval Maritime Group 2 to the waters off Somalia within two weeks in an operation called Allied Provider, but this was only to ensure food got into Somalia for humanitarian aid. So there has been a patrol for several months.
The US (Africom) are considering land based attacks to flush out the pirates, as they have a lot of land based support and they are also some international assistance in getting the Somalian Government to set up and maintain its own coast guard services which it currently doesn�t have.
It seems a lack of resource, inclination and coordination might be the issue, as well as preference for diplomacy rather than military action. Any actions, whether diplomatic or military, would need the support of the Somali people, who are traditionally suspicious of foreign intervention. Engaging with the pirates on the sea by military means in isolated instances might save the day � providing it accords with the Geneva Convention, but that protection is only watering one tree, not taking care of the whole forest.
The US (Africom) are considering land based attacks to flush out the pirates, as they have a lot of land based support and they are also some international assistance in getting the Somalian Government to set up and maintain its own coast guard services which it currently doesn�t have.
It seems a lack of resource, inclination and coordination might be the issue, as well as preference for diplomacy rather than military action. Any actions, whether diplomatic or military, would need the support of the Somali people, who are traditionally suspicious of foreign intervention. Engaging with the pirates on the sea by military means in isolated instances might save the day � providing it accords with the Geneva Convention, but that protection is only watering one tree, not taking care of the whole forest.
These ships have valuable cargo.
The Saudi ship hijacked last month had $100million of oil on board. Surely they can take adequate precautions and pay for their own security than expect the British and US navies (paid for my us taxpayers) to look after them.
R1Geezer
You have a very short fuse, maybe we should send you.
What we are dealing with here is guerilla warfare on the high seas. Just like our conventional Armies are useless against this tactic in Iraq and Afghanistan, then our Navies are equally not suited for this at sea.
The Saudi ship hijacked last month had $100million of oil on board. Surely they can take adequate precautions and pay for their own security than expect the British and US navies (paid for my us taxpayers) to look after them.
R1Geezer
You have a very short fuse, maybe we should send you.
What we are dealing with here is guerilla warfare on the high seas. Just like our conventional Armies are useless against this tactic in Iraq and Afghanistan, then our Navies are equally not suited for this at sea.
noknow what an Olympic standard tw&t you are, just read it will you WTF do you think Tw&taviuos ment by is first answer. What a brainless kn0bhead peace if sh1t!
It's got pi55 all to do with agreement or not. Tw&tavius gave his usual lefty sh1te , "they haven't got any oil......na na nana" type horsh1t response. Or did I mis interpret you? Thanks for the later more contructive one by the way.
It's got pi55 all to do with agreement or not. Tw&tavius gave his usual lefty sh1te , "they haven't got any oil......na na nana" type horsh1t response. Or did I mis interpret you? Thanks for the later more contructive one by the way.
Yes Gromit I agree, I was hoping to get a sensible discussion going here but it seems it's been hijacked by numpties.
Anyway I entirely agree it's very difficult to stop them loosing off RPG's at a ship full of oil, even if you aint bothered about the value, we don't want an oil spill.
I'm interested in ideas, you can't blow anything that move out of the water as there is inncocent shipping about too.
Anyway I entirely agree it's very difficult to stop them loosing off RPG's at a ship full of oil, even if you aint bothered about the value, we don't want an oil spill.
I'm interested in ideas, you can't blow anything that move out of the water as there is inncocent shipping about too.
can't be many ships around there?
Yes it's not like it's anywhere important like at the mouth of the Red Sea!!!
And a quick look at Google Earth makes it look something like a 500 mile stretch of coast
I'd suggest the answer is for the boats to take a route through Yemen territorial waters.
Don't know about the politics of that though
Yes it's not like it's anywhere important like at the mouth of the Red Sea!!!
And a quick look at Google Earth makes it look something like a 500 mile stretch of coast
I'd suggest the answer is for the boats to take a route through Yemen territorial waters.
Don't know about the politics of that though
Valuable cargo should have armed guards paid for by the shipping companies. At the moments the ships are sitting ducks to this kind of attack.
As 75% of the worlds oil production comes out of the Arabian Gulf, and has to pass the Somali coast, you might think that they might do something to protect their property and market.
Of course, the solution you do not want to hear is the political one. We should work on solving Somalia's civil war and help to build their economy. The people doing the hijacking were previously fishermen and farmers, who have found their trade disrupted by the war. End the war and you end the reasons for the piracy.
As 75% of the worlds oil production comes out of the Arabian Gulf, and has to pass the Somali coast, you might think that they might do something to protect their property and market.
Of course, the solution you do not want to hear is the political one. We should work on solving Somalia's civil war and help to build their economy. The people doing the hijacking were previously fishermen and farmers, who have found their trade disrupted by the war. End the war and you end the reasons for the piracy.
Has the first post been removed???
But in answer to the question posed -my guess is that the most effective response would be to deploy available technology.
GPS satellites could be used to track ships carrying valuable cargo, which would also have to be fitted with equipment which would send alerts to shore of they were being approached by any ship which wasn't registed with an international database of 'friendly' units.
Once danger was identified, then the appropriate measures would have to be exercised.
The cost would be high, and putting the infrastructure in place would be an organisational nightmare, but it would be worth it.
It would have to work like the high seas version of the tracking system you have on your car. If pirates knew that there would be no way of taking over a ship (because it was being tracked) then they would have to look elsewhere for their criminal activities.
Voila.
But in answer to the question posed -my guess is that the most effective response would be to deploy available technology.
GPS satellites could be used to track ships carrying valuable cargo, which would also have to be fitted with equipment which would send alerts to shore of they were being approached by any ship which wasn't registed with an international database of 'friendly' units.
Once danger was identified, then the appropriate measures would have to be exercised.
The cost would be high, and putting the infrastructure in place would be an organisational nightmare, but it would be worth it.
It would have to work like the high seas version of the tracking system you have on your car. If pirates knew that there would be no way of taking over a ship (because it was being tracked) then they would have to look elsewhere for their criminal activities.
Voila.
Not sure ending the war will mean trhese people go back to being Fishermen. I suspect the hard tough life of a fisherman is no where near as lucrative as a pirate.
Protecting with ships is useless, you need to use high speed jet fighters and put an exclusion zone around all ships, but this would be extortionalty expensive and would probably only lead to attacks on small boats instead.
Much as I hate to admit it, sorting out the civil war may be the best way forward, so lets get those tanks a rollin'
Protecting with ships is useless, you need to use high speed jet fighters and put an exclusion zone around all ships, but this would be extortionalty expensive and would probably only lead to attacks on small boats instead.
Much as I hate to admit it, sorting out the civil war may be the best way forward, so lets get those tanks a rollin'
They already do track ships with GPS, that is part of the problem. The pirates are able to access this data and pick out the vunerable ships.
There is a pdf of an article about combating piracy here
http://www.zinio.com/pages/ScienceIllustrated/ Mar-Apr-08/350454173/pg-72
There is a pdf of an article about combating piracy here
http://www.zinio.com/pages/ScienceIllustrated/ Mar-Apr-08/350454173/pg-72
1 to 17 of 17
