Sea Captain Safe!

[R. Richard]

Pirates dead, Captain Phillips safe, SEALS do their duty, Obama shows leadership qualities...all in all a satisfactory ending to a tense situation.

No more killing ants...now we need to destroy their nests.

You forgot one word, now we need to permanently destroy their nests.

 

[DesertPirate]

You forgot one word, now we need to permanently destroy their nests.

Does the abbreviation MOAB ring a bell?

 

[R. Richard]

Does the abbreviation MOAB ring a bell?

Ther are a plethora of possible targets. However, done right, only one target needs to be hit, ever.

 

[DesertPirate]

Ther are a plethora of possible targets. However, done right, only one target needs to be hit, ever.

A MOAB does it right, obliteration

 

[R. Richard]

A MOAB does it right, obliteration

Actually, obliteration isn't the best strategy. Somalia is largely desert. If the residents of a pirate town are driven naked out of he town, with enough water and food to make it to the next town and the men are forced to fill in all of the water wells befroe they leave, then the town is empty and unusable. The naked people then arrive at the next town and the subtle message is propagated, 'Don't let this happen to you.'

The bank account numbers and access codes of the pirates are first extracted from the pirates, under persuasion. The accounts are drained and the ransom money recovered. The ransom money can then be used to build a life for law abiding citizens.

The capital of Mogadishu is ruled by warlords. The warlords must be removed. The removal is easy, if you don't care about the people around the warlords.

 

[JackLuis]

The ultimate solution is a stable government in Somali that allows people to earn a living.

That will take a major effort. The international community is willing to help but Somalia is a cluster-fuck.

Og

If you get on Google earth and look at these towns along the Somali coast it is inconceivable that anyone could operate large ships from their poor harbors. I would guess that the number of goats in their villages exceeds the people by a factor of ten. If you wiped Ely off the map it wouldn't matter. It could be rebuilt in six weeks complete with new people and fresh goats.

A stable government is hardly likely in Somalia any time soon. 90 percent of the towns noted as being Pirate havens could be carpet bombed by one A-10 in ten seconds. The biggest might take four A-10 with Cluster bomb units to make it kindling.

I think it is at the point where the Government might just figure that one or two good hard strikes, maybe from the AV-8's from the Boxer. might solve 80% of the pirate problem?

The Bainbridge has a five inch 62 caliber gun that could clear down town Ely in less that 50 rounds and it might take ten minutes to serve them up in the one mount. Seems like a fair bargin, after all the Bainbridge has alr4eady hauled that ammo halfway around the world. might as well unload it where it might do some good.

 

[R. Richard]

If you get on Google earth and look at these towns along the Somali coast it is inconceivable that anyone could operate large ships from their poor harbors. I would guess that the number of goats in their villages exceeds the people by a factor of ten. If you wiped Ely off the map it wouldn't matter. It could be rebuilt in six weeks complete with new people and fresh goats.

A stable government is hardly likely in Somalia any time soon. 90 percent of the towns noted as being Pirate havens could be carpet bombed by one A-10 in ten seconds. The biggest might take four A-10 with Cluster bomb units to make it kindling.

I think it is at the point where the Government might just figure that one or two good hard strikes, maybe from the AV-8's from the Boxer. might solve 80% of the pirate problem?

The Bainbridge has a five inch 62 caliber gun that could clear down town Ely in less that 50 rounds and it might take ten minutes to serve them up in the one mount. Seems like a fair bargin, after all the Bainbridge has alr4eady hauled that ammo halfway around the world. might as well unload it where it might do some good.

The wiping out of pirate bases by air strike alone isn't practical, as there are hostages involved. What would be required is a combined land/sea/air operation.

In addition, just wiping out the pirate bases really solves nothing. The problem would disappear for a few years and then the pirates would return. The pirates do need to be stopped, but the situation that causes the piracy needs to be addressed. The root cause of the piracy is poverty. If the warlords who rule Somalia are wiped out and a government formed, then the money the pirates have earned can be seized and used to create jobs. People who have decent jobs don't turn to piracy when piracy has been proved to lead to death.

 

[sr71plt]

*Sigh* You are rattling rockets we don't have and voicing strategy that you've gotten from comic books. What we have to commit is already over committed (something the previous administration should have taken into account before they overcommitted our capabilities).

Doing anything on land is just getting us into yet another draining, unaffordable bog-down that we're already in elsewhere--besides having all sorts of international law ramifications that make allies fall off like autumn leaves from a tree in a late-season hurricane.

A declared sea embargo, getting as much other-nation help as possible (and realizing even then that less than half of the pirate vessels will be detected and located), and then interdicting all known/suspected pirate vessels as they enter international waters (along with convoying shipping going through the area), is probably the most sensible approach for now.

 

[JackLuis]

The wiping out of pirate bases by air strike alone isn't practical, as there are hostages involved. What would be required is a combined land/sea/air operation.

In addition, just wiping out the pirate bases really solves nothing. The problem would disappear for a few years and then the pirates would return. --People who have decent jobs don't turn to piracy when piracy has been proved to lead to death.

Well I think that they ought to hang the fourth pirate on the Bainbridge or Boxer, Bury him at sea and get on with it. When the tribal elders realize that Piracy is not a "Sport" things may change.

 

[R. Richard]

*Sigh* You are rattling rockets we don't have and voicing strategy that you've gotten from comic books. What we have to commit is already over committed (something the previous administration should have taken into account before they overcommitted our capabilities).

Doing anything on land is just getting us into yet another draining, unaffordable bog-down that we're already in elsewhere--besides having all sorts of international law ramifications that make allies fall off like autumn leaves from a tree in a late-season hurricane.

A declared sea embargo, getting as much other-nation help as possible (and realizing even then that less than half of the pirate vessels will be detected and located), and then interdicting all known/suspected pirate vessels as they enter international waters (along with convoying shipping going through the area), is probably the most sensible approach for now.

Since you know more than me and the US military, you should definitely call your congressperson and let them in on your expert opinion. Please let me know the response.

U.S. military already prepared with battle plans for Somalia pirates, say intelligence sources
DAILY NEWS WASHINGTON BUREAU Thursday, April 9th 2009, 5:06 AM

WASHINGTON - U.S. military commanders have already prepared battle plans for ending the scourge of piracy on the high seas off Somalia if President Obama pulls the trigger, sources told the Daily News Wednesday.

The Navy sent a warship to intercept Somali pirates Wednesday who hijacked a U.S.-flagged freighter, as commanders weighed military options for nailing the brigands' bases.

Retired U.S. Ambassador Robert Oakley, who was special envoy to Somalia in the 1990s, said U.S. special operations forces have drawn up detailed plans to attack piracy groups where they live on land, but are awaiting orders from the Obama national security team.

"Our special operations people have been itching to clean them up. So far, no one has let them," Oakley told the Daily News.

The veteran diplomat, who also was ambassador to Pakistan, said teams of Army Delta Force or Navy SEALs "could take care of the pirates in 72 hours" if given the order to strike.

"They have plans on the table but are waiting for the green light," Oakley said.

A Special Operations Command spokesman at McDill Air Force Base in Tampa, Fla., declined comment.

A U.S. intelligence official, though dismissive of the pirates having any terrorism links, said "there is a more intense focus" now on these criminal gangs.

America's stealthiest warriors have been involved in combat operations in the Horn of Africa for years - operating from secret bases in Djibouti, Ethiopia, Somalia and Manda Bay, Kenya.

The Navy launched an antipiracy command in January, Joint Task Force 151, which includes contingents of SEALs and Marines who specialize in boarding and seizing hijacked ships.

But Somalia-based pirates terrorizing shipping lanes on the high seas have expanded their zone of fear in recent weeks beyond the Gulf of Aden into waters off Somalia, a failed state providing them a lawless sanctuary.

That prompted the commander of the Navy's Combined Maritime Forces, Vice Adm. Bill Gortney, to issue a special maritime advisory this week warning his forces "are unlikely to be close enough to provide support to vessels under attack."

"The closest military ship could be days away," he said.

The Gulf of Aden and waters off Somalia and Kenya equal an area roughly four times the size of Texas, the Navy pointed out.

Meanwhile, Navy officials said the guided missile destroyer Bainbridge steamed toward the Maersk Alabama - which is owned by a Danish firm but has a 20-man American crew and flies the Stars and Stripes - which was seized 280 miles southeast of Somalia.

 

[sr71plt]

Since you know more than me and the US military, you should definitely call your congressperson and let them in on your expert opinion. Please let me know the response.

U.S. military already prepared with battle plans for Somalia pirates, say intelligence sources
DAILY NEWS WASHINGTON BUREAU Thursday, April 9th 2009, 5:06 AM

WASHINGTON - U.S. military commanders have already prepared battle plans for ending the scourge of piracy on the high seas off Somalia if President Obama pulls the trigger, sources told the Daily News Wednesday.

Sure they can make up plans for action on the pirate's land bases--the intell community makes up a whole spectrum of contingency plans for this sort of thing. This will include all those contingencies of what can be done and who can be brought together to do it. And in doing so, they will have to take into account what personal, equipment, and delivery power we have left within budget and constraints of existing operations. If they manage to pull together the support/materiel needed for a strategic strike, that's fine with me. If they do it the same way the Bush administration did it in Iraq the second time (the second Bush), I'll tell them the same thing I said within advisory meetings on the Iraq invasion--that they aren't thinking ahead or straight.

This article speaks mostly of actions on the high seas--just as I did in my postings.

I am, in fact, an expert on these matters, and I've sat in on many a contingency planning task force for such action. Congressional representatives call me for advice on these matters--I don't call them.

And I still say you get your "fire from the hip" responses from the comic books. Your pistol-happy postings clearly identify you as an armchair cowboy--and make you sound just like George Bush the Lesser in his "somewhat" premature victory speech during the Iraq invasion.

 

[sr71plt]

Oh, and, PS, of course the line given publicly is that land strikes are on the table. That's how the intelligence game works. Of course we want to scare the wadding out of them.

You can bet that whatever we do, though, there's isn't going to be an announcement/vote in the public media to begin with.

 

[Dragonlipz]

Tell me again daddy

How the 'free market system' is the solution to: ending the pirate scourge, defeating the Obama agenda, promoting a healthier economy, and my dry skin.......

 

[trysail]

France Seizes 11 Pirates; U.S. Aid Ship Foils Hijack
By Thomas Penny and Caroline Alexander

April 15 -- The French navy captured 11 pirates off Kenya and a U.S. cargo vessel evaded rocket fire as Somali hijackers followed through on a threat to increase attacks.

The pirates were seized after their attempt to hijack the Safmarine Asia, a Liberian-registered cargo ship, was thwarted by a helicopter from the frigate Nivose late yesterday, France’s Defense Ministry said in a statement. They were tracked overnight and were picked up along with their three boats at dawn, 900 kilometers (560 miles) east of Kenya’s port of Mombasa.

Shortly before the attack on the Safmarine Asia, the crew of the U.S.-flagged Liberty Sun, taking food aid to Africa, used evasive maneuvers to foil a hijack attempt by Somali pirates who fired rocket-propelled grenades and automatic weapons.

[Full quotation of copyrighted material reduced per our forum guidelines.]

 

[trysail]

Somali Pirate Exclusion Zone Backed by Shipper Group
By Alaric Nightingale

April 16 (Bloomberg) -- A group representing half the world’s merchant-ship operators backed a plan to exclude vessels from an area 600 miles (965 kilometers) wide off Somalia’s coast because of an escalation in attacks by pirates.

Ships shouldn’t sail within the zone extending from the east coast of Somalia down to the Seychelles, Peter Hinchcliffe, London-based marine director at the International Chamber of Shipping, said by phone today. He confirmed the contents of a circular sent to the group’s members yesterday.

“The sensible thing to do is go further off the coast and travel faster,” Nick Day, chief executive officer of Washington-based Diligience Inc., a security and intelligence group, said by phone.

[Full quotation of copyrighted material reduced per our forum guidelines.]

 

[R. Richard]

The world shipping organizations are doing what seems sensible. However, it just means that the Somali pirates will escalate and begin usi8ng oicean going 'mother ships.'

The only cure is to wipe out the pirates on land.

 

[fieryjen]

Is it bad that every time I read the thread title all I imagine is Safe_Bet in a little sailor's outfit?

 

[sr71plt]

The only cure is to wipe out the pirates on land.

And why do you think that's better or more doable than wiping out the mother ships on the high seas? There has been plenty of discussion dropped on this thread of the great difficulty of a land action as opposed to a high seas action. (The discussion is even in the material you've linked here yourself.) Have you not read any of it?

Again I question your ability to be realistic and for doing most of your reading in comic books.

 

[R. Richard]

And why do you think that's better or more doable than wiping out the mother ships on the high seas? There has been plenty of discussion dropped on this thread of the great difficulty of a land action as opposed to a high seas action. (The discussion is even in the material you've linked here yourself.) Have you not read any of it?

Again I question your ability to be realistic and for doing most of your reading in comic books.

If you wipe out a mother ship on the high seas, you inflict serious financial damage on the people financing the pirates and you kill a few pirates. You also ignore the matter of the hostages held by the pirates in their land bases. Ignoring the hostages isn't realistic, is it sr71plt?

If you conduct a properly done land raid, it's more difficult than wiping out a mother ship on the high seas. However, a land raid, properly done, can rescue the hostages. Planning for the rescue of the hostages is realistic, since the court of world opinion is watching.

In addition, a land raid can permanently wipe out a pirate base. Wiping out a mother ship on the high seas can't permanently wipe out a pirate base. The reason why a land raid can permanently wipe out a pirate base has to do with desert warfare. You see, water in a desert area, such as Somalia, comes from wells. If the wells are filled in, a pirate base becomes unusable for at least a very long period of time. You see, re-digging the wells requires water. However, there's no water, because all of the wells are filled in as a result of a land raid. If the pirates start to re-dig a well, using water brought in from far away, over dry desert, the new well can be wiped out with a single bombing run.

OK, sr71plt, I analyzed the situation and answered your sneering little post. Now, answer the questions questiosn I pose or STFU.

 

[freshface]

If you wipe out a mother ship on the high seas, you inflict serious financial damage on the people financing the pirates and you kill a few pirates. You also ignore the matter of the hostages held by the pirates in their land bases. Ignoring the hostages isn't realistic, is it sr71plt?

If you conduct a properly done land raid, it's more difficult than wiping out a mother ship on the high seas. However, a land raid, properly done, can rescue the hostages. Planning for the rescue of the hostages is realistic, since the court of world opinion is watching.

In addition, a land raid can permanently wipe out a pirate base. Wiping out a mother ship on the high seas can't permanently wipe out a pirate base. The reason why a land raid can permanently wipe out a pirate base has to do with desert warfare. You see, water in a desert area, such as Somalia, comes from wells. If the wells are filled in, a pirate base becomes unusable for at least a very long period of time. You see, re-digging the wells requires water. However, there's no water, because all of the wells are filled in as a result of a land raid. If the pirates start to re-dig a well, using water brought in from far away, over dry desert, the new well can be wiped out with a single bombing run.

OK, sr71plt, I analyzed the situation and answered your sneering little post. Now, answer the questions questiosn I pose or STFU.

But they're already using ocean going mother ships. How do you think they attack so far from shore? You appear to have two goals confused with each other-rescuing the hostages and stopping the piracy. Rescuing the hostages is a valid goal, but would do nothing to stop future attacks. Do you really believe that pirates making millions in ransoms care about wells? Do you really believe that you can identify the bad guys on land and kill them without killing bystanders? For some odd reason, people the world over get hostile when their innocent family members are killed by other people's militaries. You think that wouldn't happen in a shore excursion? Did you sleep through our last attempt at ground forces in Somalia? The one thing we did very well that time was to unite the warring factions-against us. Of course, we had an army that wasn't pinned down in two land wars that time. We're sort of out of forces this time. Also, the pirate bases on land are not exactly brimming with infrastructure. We're not talking Norfolk here, so destroy one and they have a whole coastline of alternatives.

You want to stop the piracy? Destroy the mother ships. Those don't grow on trees. Destroy enough of them and it becomes difficult for the pirates to replace them. Operate in convoys guarded by naval vessels. Require the merchant marines in these convoys to stand watches and defend their ships with high pressure hoses. Make it clear to the merchant vessels that if they go into pirate infested waters on their own, it's at their own risk. Get a mandate that permits those navies to destroy hostile appearing ships in the international shipping lanes. The piracy happens at sea and will be solved there.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

Unless there's been a significant upgrade in pirate infrastructure, those 'motherships' are merely local dhows. I agree that the should be subject to search and, if resisting, destruction but that doesn't mean that they will shortly dry up and disappear. The coast is full of dhows. Finding the right ones won't be easy and if you sink a few, there are plenty more where those came from.

 

[sr71plt]

Freshface has responded to better than I could, RR. At the base, you just don't have a clue about the real world and counteroperations planning/execution. You obviously don't have any sense of the capabilities, downstream ramifications, and responsibilities involved.

That's a basic problem of an open representative democracy such as ours. Most of the voters are clueless armchair warriors.

 

[R. Richard]

But they're already using ocean going mother ships. How do you think they attack so far from shore? You appear to have two goals confused with each other-rescuing the hostages and stopping the piracy. Rescuing the hostages is a valid goal, but would do nothing to stop future attacks. Do you really believe that pirates making millions in ransoms care about wells? Do you really believe that you can identify the bad guys on land and kill them without killing bystanders? For some odd reason, people the world over get hostile when their innocent family members are killed by other people's militaries. You think that wouldn't happen in a shore excursion? Did you sleep through our last attempt at ground forces in Somalia? The one thing we did very well that time was to unite the warring factions-against us. Of course, we had an army that wasn't pinned down in two land wars that time. We're sort of out of forces this time. Also, the pirate bases on land are not exactly brimming with infrastructure. We're not talking Norfolk here, so destroy one and they have a whole coastline of alternatives.

You want to stop the piracy? Destroy the mother ships. Those don't grow on trees. Destroy enough of them and it becomes difficult for the pirates to replace them. Operate in convoys guarded by naval vessels. Require the merchant marines in these convoys to stand watches and defend their ships with high pressure hoses. Make it clear to the merchant vessels that if they go into pirate infested waters on their own, it's at their own risk. Get a mandate that permits those navies to destroy hostile appearing ships in the international shipping lanes. The piracy happens at sea and will be solved there.

The problem is that a lot of the world's merchant traffic passes off the Somalia coast. It's not economic to have escort ships to protect each and every merchant ship. If you try to put together a group of ships to be escorted, then you have the problem of the different speed capabilities of the ships.

If an indivdual ship tries to fight off pirates with high pressure water hoses, then you have two problems. First, the sailors are merchant sailors, not navy sailors. Their contracts don't include pay for fighting off AK-47 armed pirates. Second, the pirates would soon begin multiple point attacks on the merchant ships. A ship can use a high pressure water hose, but perhaps not several high pressure water hoses.

Again, you have netirely avoided dealing with the problem off the hostages.

"Do you really believe that pirates making millions in ransoms care about wells?" In a desert land, water is life. If a community loses its wells, the people who try to remain die. There's no community water system, except the wells. If an invasion force fills in the wells, the community dies permanently. If I set you in the middle of the tanzerouft with a million dollars in cash, please tell me how you survive. TIA.

Who said anything about killing people? A night land attack by trained professionals could secure a port town. A few amateur pirates are no match for armed, night vision soldiers. Once the town has been more or less secured, then helicopters can use knockout gas mixed with oxygen to subdue the holdouts in a few houses. [You aren't allowed to use gas in warefare, but warfare requires a government.] Once the town has been secured, the women, children and older men can be turned loose, naked, with sufficient water and food to get them to the next town. The pirate men will then be forced to fill in the wells, except for one well that will be filled in by your invasion force. If a pirate man refuses to work, he'll be turned over to the hired soldiers. After the first refusal to work, there won't be a second refusal to work. [Wazzat? No, they don't use waterboarding. They use fire.] Once the wells are filled in, the pirates are then interrogated for their bank account numbers and access codes. The bank accounts are looted. They're then turned loose, naked, with sufficient water and food to get them to the next town. The town boats and outboard motors are burned. The people of the town arrive at the next town, naked and without money. They are then enslaved by their own people.

You have no idea at all of how to conduct a coastal attack. The people who do know how to conduct a coastal attack have no idea of the politics of such an operation. [Let me remind you, the US sent in highly trained idiots to negotiate with the illiterate tribesmen of Somalia. Our highly trained idiots failed and failed miserably. If the US schools are turning out people who can't even negotiate a deal with illiterate tribesmen, then our educational system needs a complete re-do.]

You and sr71plt live in a dream world(s), where you try to invent solutions for problems that you don't understand at all.

I have been in Africa and I know how things work there. You don't.

 

[R. Richard]

Freshface has responded to better than I could, RR. At the base, you just don't have a clue about the real world and counteroperations planning/execution. You obviously don't have any sense of the capabilities, downstream ramifications, and responsibilities involved.

That's a basic problem of an open representative democracy such as ours. Most of the voters are clueless armchair warriors.

The basic problem of an open representative democracy such as ours is that people are vomited out of our educational system thinking that they understand the world as it is. A simple example is the Jimmy Carter handling of the Shah of Iran and then the takeover of our Iranian Embassy by armed hoodlums. Carter failed in all respect, including the loss of life by troops he sent on a 'clever mission' to rescue the hostages.

Someone with an IQ that at least rose into the double digits would have at least consulted the Israelis about the Iran rescue mission. Among governments, the Israelis are the best in the world at such rescue missions. [The KGB rescued a kidnapped Russian diplomat in Beruit, without any involvement by high level Russian politicians. The armed hoodlums in Beruit never again molested a Russian.]

After Jimmy Caters miserable failure, the Iranians released the hostages just before the much maligned Reagan came into office. Then again, maybe it was just a coincidence. Strange how the coincidences seem to favor the bold.

 

[sr71plt]

OK, I don't think you'll be consulted on this anyway.