SD Jarhead Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 Seriously...is the world helpless against these guys? I know absolutely nothing about shipping, but how can these small crafts assume control of larger ships? arent the crews of these ships armed? Not looking to start an argument, so calm down Elegant Idiot and NozzleNUT...just trying to understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elegantelliotoffen Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 Seriously...is the world helpless against these guys? I know absolutely nothing about shipping, but how can these small crafts assume control of larger ships? arent the crews of these ships armed? Not looking to start an argument, so calm down Elegant Idiot and NozzleNUT...just trying to understand. I actually agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 What's the deal with these irate off Somalia?, Why don't we start mowing them down? Just because they're irate? Linkage The crew of a cruise ship attacked by pirates off the coast of Somalia used a sonic weapon to help ward off the attackers, the Miami-based Seabourn Cruise Line said Monday. The device blasts earsplitting noise in a directed beam. The Seabourn Spirit escaped Saturday's attack also by shifting to high speed and changing course, the cruise line said. The sonic device, known as a Long Range Acoustic Device, or LRAD, is a so-called "non-lethal weapon" developed for the military after the 2000 attack on the USS Cole in Yemen as a way to keep operators of small boats from approaching U.S. warships. Makers of the device compare its shrill tone to that of smoke detectors, only much louder. I'm assuming these guys aren't that easy to find. More ships should have a few of the sonic weapons and make them loud enough to rupture ear drums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 Seriously...is the world helpless against these guys? I know absolutely nothing about shipping, but how can these small crafts assume control of larger ships? arent the crews of these ships armed? Not looking to start an argument, so calm down Elegant Idiot and NozzleNUT...just trying to understand. I'm with you. I'm guessing they could send bait ships out to get hijacked, and operate that way. I don't know how an all-out assault would work, but unless they wire the boats to explode, I don't see why some military operation can't simply go and take back the boats, and give them to their rightful owners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 I'm with you. I'm guessing they could send bait ships out to get hijacked, and operate that way. I don't know how an all-out assault would work, but unless they wire the boats to explode, I don't see why some military operation can't simply go and take back the boats, and give them to their rightful owners. The ocean is big. Once the pirates get the boats, they dock them right where everyone can see, but in a sovereign nation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 The ocean is big. Once the pirates get the boats, they dock them right where everyone can see, but in a sovereign nation. Yes, the US would NEVER go after something in a sovereign nation. I'm surprised that is stopping other countries from going to get their stuff, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 Here's an idea, send the SEALs into Somalia and take the tanker for ourselves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SD Jarhead Posted November 19, 2008 Author Share Posted November 19, 2008 Just because they're irate? Ooops...fixed. We've got enough irate people here...we don't need 'em off Somalia either damnit! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDS Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 Seriously...is the world helpless against these guys? I know absolutely nothing about shipping, but how can these small crafts assume control of larger ships? arent the crews of these ships armed? Not looking to start an argument, so calm down Elegant Idiot and NozzleNUT...just trying to understand. Layoff the pirates... I just applied for a job with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 Don't worry, the Messiah-elect will talk to them and everything will be find. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 Don't worry, the Messiah-elect will talk to them and everything will be find. Find? Considering they have been operating for a while, I would have thought our current president could find them. Best of luck to Obama, they seem elusive since the mighty hunter Bush failed. (note this is directed at only a few really conservative people.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 Find? Considering they have been operating for a while, I would have thought our current president could find them. Best of luck to Obama, they seem elusive since the mighty hunter Bush failed. (note this is directed at only a few really conservative people.) Fine. Big sausage fingers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YellowLinesandArmadillos Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 Find? Considering they have been operating for a while, I would have thought our current president could find them. Best of luck to Obama, they seem elusive since the mighty hunter Bush failed. (note this is directed at only a few really conservative people.) Nice response... Really though, I heard on the news, the crews are unarmed because they don't wan't to be kidnapped and killed, also wasn't this a Saudi ship??? Heck, let them deal with it... they are the one's who are harboring terrorists anyway.... the bin Laden family... hmm. That being said, we probably don't want to give these guys a funding source so instead of letting them redistribute some of the Saudi wealth, I think was should hire some of these pirates and have them move the oil at a discounted price over here. We'll provide the transfer ship... Seriously, Nuke the Whales! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ieatcrayonz Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 Makers of the device compare its shrill tone to that of smoke detectors, only much louder. I'm so conditioned that I was sure the words "Hillary Clinton" were going to be there instead of "smoke detectors". It may in fact work better that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molson_golden2002 Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 I can't figure out if this was the Iroquois, Senaca or Kickapoos, but our Native Americans are not taking this laying down! http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/20/world/af...tml?_r=1&hp NEW DELHI — Days after pirates seized a Saudi-owned supertanker carrying more than $100 million worth of crude oil, the Indian Navy said on Wednesday that one of its warships fought a four-to-five-hour battle at sea with would-be hijackers in the Gulf of Aden, sinking one suspect vessel in flames and forcing the pirates to abandon a second as they fled at high speed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finknottle Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 I can't figure out if this was the Iroquois, Senaca or Kickapoos, but our Native Americans are not taking this laying down! http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/20/world/af...tml?_r=1&hp NEW DELHI — Days after pirates seized a Saudi-owned supertanker carrying more than $100 million worth of crude oil, the Indian Navy said on Wednesday that one of its warships fought a four-to-five-hour battle at sea with would-be hijackers in the Gulf of Aden, sinking one suspect vessel in flames and forcing the pirates to abandon a second as they fled at high speed. Under the left's thinking, under what legal standing could the US sink or a pirate ship pursuing another, or even intervene for that matter? Even the vague mantle of National Security Interests (which the civil liberties lawyers fight tooth and nail) wouldn't apply. Wouldn't we need a UN mandate and congressional approval? If we can intervene there, then can we unilaterally intervene in muggings or carjackings in foreign countries? Drug wars in Mexico? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N.Y. Orangeman Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 Under the left's thinking, under what legal standing could the US sink or a pirate ship pursuing another, or even intervene for that matter? Even the vague mantle of National Security Interests (which the civil liberties lawyers fight tooth and nail) wouldn't apply. Wouldn't we need a UN mandate and congressional approval? If we can intervene there, then can we unilaterally intervene in muggings or carjackings in foreign countries? Drug wars in Mexico? Great non-sequitur Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 Under the left's thinking, under what legal standing could the US sink or a pirate ship pursuing another, or even intervene for that matter? Even the vague mantle of National Security Interests (which the civil liberties lawyers fight tooth and nail) wouldn't apply. Wouldn't we need a UN mandate and congressional approval? If we can intervene there, then can we unilaterally intervene in muggings or carjackings in foreign countries? Drug wars in Mexico? It's in international waters and they are answering a distress call by a ship. That's much different than launching an unapproved attack within a sovereign nation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finknottle Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 It's in international waters and they are answering a distress call by a ship. That's much different than launching an unapproved attack within a sovereign nation. And what if the pirates radio that they were the ones first attacked? Or that it is their ship that they are trying to recover? Do their claims get due process, or can a sailor on a ship make a unilateral decision on who to start firing at? Who makes that decision, and on what is the authority to fire on a vessel based? Claims of another? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 And what if the pirates radio that they were the ones first attacked? Or that it is their ship that they are trying to recover? Do their claims get due process, or can a sailor on a ship make a unilateral decision on who to start firing at? Who makes that decision, and on what is the authority to fire on a vessel based? Claims of another? Are you suggesting that, since there might be some problems, the world should do nothing? The same possibilities you list exist here in the USA with domestic police enforcement...yet, we manage to pull it off. Due process? Of course, why not? If a group of pirates on many small unregistered ships wants to argue, after being apprehended, that the huge, fully legal ship, with papers, on a business or military mission, was trying to pirate THEM, then they are free to try to make that argument fly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts