# Somalian Pirates Seize US Crew -- Is It On? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 8, 2009, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397 "2009-04-08T15:10:50Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2009, 10:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397/101 "2009-04-08T22:34:46Z")
[QUOTE=Tymp] Well, the snarky response might be that no one in history has ever been so motivated as the average tough-as-nails message board warrior, but that wouldn’t be helpful. [/QUOTE] It wouldnt be true either (besides being a stupid response…glad you didn’t make it), since, you know, some ships who have been armed have in fact fought off the pirates…or been able to run away. > [@](#): > > For a much more useful presentation of what I’ve been thinking, refer to the second paragraph of Lemur866’s post. Ah…ok, if we both want to take his word for it that’s cool with me. [QUOTE=Lemur866] And the shipping companies pay the ransoms not for the expendable crewmembers, but for the multimillion dollar ships. If the pirates just held the Bangladeshi crews for ransom the shippers would tell them to pound sand. But the shippers want the ship back. The crew wants to live. The pirates want money. [/QUOTE] This is true of course. The shipping companies are willing to pay ransom not for the sake of the crew but for the sake of the cargo and the ship. It’s also true that the crew wants to live and the pirates want money. As long as everyone plays their correct role and nothing goes wrong then the only one who loses is the shipping company who has to pay out the millions…and the crews who have to cool their heals waiting for the negotiations to finish. Of course, he ends with… > [@](#): > > And so paying ransom suits everybody, except the next guy who gets attacked by pirates. And that’s the crux…and of course, the chance you are taking that everything will just work out happily and no one will fuck up. You seem to be under the impression I’m some kind of ‘tough-as-nails message board warrior’ _snark snark_ and I’m just blowing smoke and waving my cock about wishing it was an AK or something just because I’m pointing out that not everyone would be quite as trusting as you are that the pirates would do the right thing. And reality seems to bear me out since there have been reports of some crews that HAVE fought back. Of course, initially I was merely giving you a plausible answer to your question up thread, but you seem to have forgotten that in favor of making assumptions about me and my motives…as you have made assumptions about the possible actions of the crews of these ships if they were armed, and then pointed me at another posters replies to show me the error of my ways. -XT ---
**Author:** ![Tymp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c5a1d2/32.png) [@Tymp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tymp)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2009, 10:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397/102 "2009-04-08T22:35:59Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > Well, it seems a lot of crews in the past have gone with your notion and did not oppose the hijacking. > > The current one the crew did. So, YMMV. > > Dunno if it is just an American thing, a leadership thing (captain was able to motivate the crew) or what. My limited understanding of the situation unfolding is that at least one of the senior officers on board bore some expertise in anti-piracy tactics. This will likely have a significant bearing when all is said and done. My sincere hope is that this ends in such a way that we’ll one day soon hear the details from the crew themselves. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2009, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397/103 "2009-04-08T22:50:13Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > No offense, but do you actually have professional knowledge of maritime surveillance, detection and combat, especially with regards to the use of the unmanned drones whose names you’red bandying about? No offense taken but since I didn’t make any extraordinary claims about their capabilities what are your concerns? ---
**Author:** ![sailor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a587f6/32.png) [@sailor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sailor)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2009, 10:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397/104 "2009-04-08T22:56:35Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > Seems a simpler solution would be to put military on the freighters. Say five guy on each with substantial weaponry capable of easily zapping these pirates as they approach. Each country puts troops on whatever freighters fly their flag. They need only do this for ships traversing hotspots, not the whole world. > > I would presume that would take less manpower and far less expense than fielding fleets of warships in the area and likely be more effective. Except that most ships fly flags of convenience. Liberia is not going to do this because the don’t give a rat’s ass. This incident is an exception because they ship was under American flag and had American crew but the number of such ships is miniscule. Piracy has increased somewhat in that part of the world but piracy has been going on forever there and in aother parts. It’s just that it has increased and started affecting bigger vessels owned by western countries. And now it is an American crew and ship and so suddenly it becomes important for Americans who until now had paid no attention. But this is not new. I remember reading stories years ago about pirates in the south China sea capturing a ship, murdering the entire crew and the ship and cargo disappearing. One reason America does not care much about this is that there are practically no ships registered in the USA any more. It’s just too expensive. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2009, 10:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397/105 "2009-04-08T22:58:00Z")
> [@sailor](#): > > I guess you believe the US Navy and all the other nations who have ships in the area are just incompetent fools who don’t know their way around the ocean because it is so easy to find the pirates and they can’t find their own asses. Since you have such knowledge maybe you should offer your services to the Pentagon. I am sure they would pay well for your knowledge and expertise. I may have you confused with another poster, but isn’t this pretty much exactly the position you take in any thread about Iraq? ---
**Author:** ![sailor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a587f6/32.png) [@sailor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sailor)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2009, 10:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397/106 "2009-04-08T22:59:21Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > No offense taken but since I didn’t make any extraordinary claims about their capabilities what are your concerns? I believe your claims are extraordinary so, the question remains, do you actually have professional knowledge of maritime surveillance, detection and combat, especially with regards to the use of the unmanned drones whose names you’red bandying about? It’s a simple question. ---
**Author:** ![sailor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a587f6/32.png) [@sailor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sailor)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2009, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397/107 "2009-04-08T23:08:00Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > I may have you confused with another poster, but isn’t this pretty much exactly the position you take in any thread about Iraq? You are probably confusing me with someone else as I do not remember taking the position that the US military are bumbling, incompetent fools. If you have any specific posts of mine in mind I’ll be happy to clarify them. I have taken the position that the war in Iraq was a mistake and I think events have proven that. It was a mistake to go in and the military have been the victims as they were used for something they were not suited for. There was no military problem to solve. And the responsability for that is partially Bushs and totally of the American people. But that’s another thread. ---
**Author:** ![Princhester](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2009, 11:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397/108 "2009-04-08T23:11:44Z")
> [@dropzone](#): > > Shows what happens when the crew knows they aren’t getting a cut of the profits. What does this mean? ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2009, 11:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397/109 "2009-04-08T23:23:40Z")
> [@sailor](#): > > I believe your claims are extraordinary so, the question remains, do you actually have professional knowledge of maritime surveillance, detection and combat, especially with regards to the use of the unmanned drones whose names you’red bandying about? It’s a simple question. What is the extraordinary claim about a Global Hawk tracking a large ship or a Predador firing on a small boat that you’re questioning? Keep in mind that I’ve been reading about these aircraft for years out of curiosity because they’re sitting in a local museum. I kept the topic general for a reason. ---
**Author:** ![sailor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a587f6/32.png) [@sailor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sailor)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2009, 11:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397/110 "2009-04-08T23:38:08Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > What is the extraordinary claim about a Global Hawk tracking a large ship or a Predador firing on a small boat that you’re questioning? > > Keep in mind that I’ve been reading about these aircraft for years out of curiosity because they’re sitting in a local museum. I kept the topic general for a reason. There are millions of square miles of ocean, thousands of large ships and even more thousands of small ships. There is just no way it would make sense to try to control all that. Even if it were possible the cost would not be worth the result. It’s like saying you can stamp out crime in Chigago just by putting a cop behind every citizen. It is not possible and even if it were it would not be worth the cost. Do you realize how big the sea is? I think you really do not comprehend this. There are thousands and thousands of boats out there. The bad guys hide among the good guys. They are all out there fishing or going from here to there. As long as naval vessels are around they all behave and what are you going to do? When the naval vessels are far away and the opportunity presents itself they seize a ship. Now, look at the map. We’re talking hundreds of thousands of square miles. How many ships do you reckon would be needed to patrol all that effectively? Who is going to pay for that? Because the USA has no interest as it has practically no ships flying its flag. Is Liberia going to pay for it? Good luck. Panama? Yeah, sure. Sometimes you have a wart and the best solution is to live with it but some people cannot live with that answer and want _something_ to be done to find a definitive answer, one that will resolve the issue for once and for all. And their solutions are something like cutting off a limb to get rid of the wart. ---
**Author:** ![Enginerd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/bcef8e/32.png) [@Enginerd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enginerd)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2009, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397/111 "2009-04-08T23:41:46Z")
The extraordinary claim is that: a) they can locate a particular target in a million square miles of blue ocean, and b) they can distinguish between a pirate vessel and a legitimate ocean-going vessel. The Global Hawk can survey 40,000 square miles a day ([cite](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RQ-4_Global_Hawk)), which sounds impressive… until you consider that it would take a month to cover the area you’re talking about. What are the odds that it finds a particular ship - especially one that’s moving - in that area? If it does, how do you tell what you’re looking at? The highest resolution sensor on it is the SAR (same cite), which gives you 6 foot resolution over almost 4 square miles. The 17,000 ton Alabama is about 500 feet long and 80 feet wide, giving you just over 1,000 pixels (of radar reflections, not visual imagery) to decide whether it’s a friend or foe. It apparently does have on-board optical imaging as well, but it doesn’t give the resolution. Still, how do you decide what you’re looking at? ---
**Author:** ![sqweels](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f19dbf/32.png) [@sqweels](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sqweels)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2009, 11:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397/112 "2009-04-08T23:50:45Z")
If sarcasm were an effective anti-piracy technique, we’d have 'em licked by now. ---
**Author:** ![Fuzzy\_Wombats](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d6d6ee/32.png) [@Fuzzy\_Wombats](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fuzzy_Wombats)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2009, 11:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397/113 "2009-04-08T23:54:01Z")
Except, it seems you can’t just go blowing up every suspect pirate these days. Those ships tasked with controlling piracy are hampered by international law and the domestic law of their home country. The BBC has a few interesting stories highlighting this. > **[BBC NEWS | Africa | Rules frustrate anti-piracy efforts](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7735144.stm)** > > The BBC's Paul Reynolds looks at measures being taken against Somali pirates and wonders if they are enough. They can’t just attack suspected pirates, and even if they do detain them, there’s significant difficulty in finding a court with appropriate jurisdiction to try them. So, we tied our own hands on this one. ---
**Author:** ![Princhester](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2009, 11:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397/114 "2009-04-08T23:57:52Z")
**Magiver** , sooner or later a basic fact may or may not sink in with you: there is already a very signficant naval presence in the region. The political will not only exists, it has been exercised. The naval presence has not stopped the piracy. Your armchair speculation about how easy it would all be if the technology you know about so intimately is wrong. It’s been proven in the field. Give it up before your arguments go from looking silly to positively wilfully dumbass, fer cryin’ out loud. ---
**Author:** ![Tom\_Tildrum](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e95f7d/32.png) [@Tom\_Tildrum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tom_Tildrum)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 12:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397/115 "2009-04-09T00:29:45Z")
> [@Fuzzy\_Wombats](#): > > They can’t just attack suspected pirates, and even if they do detain them, there’s significant difficulty in finding a court with appropriate jurisdiction to try them. Plus, the pirates may try to claim asylum in the capturing country. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 12:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397/116 "2009-04-09T00:42:44Z")
> [@Fuzzy\_Wombats](#): > > Except, it seems you can’t just go blowing up every suspect pirate these days. > > Those ships tasked with controlling piracy are hampered by international law and the domestic law of their home country. > > The BBC has a few interesting stories highlighting this. > [BBC NEWS | Africa | Rules frustrate anti-piracy efforts](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7735144.stm) > > They can’t just attack suspected pirates, and even if they do detain them, there’s significant difficulty in finding a court with appropriate jurisdiction to try them. > So, we tied our own hands on this one. this what I pointed out earlier. It takes political will (IE, a UN resolution) to provide the jurisdiction. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 12:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397/117 "2009-04-09T00:47:36Z")
Actually I think that there are provisions already in effect using standard Admiralty Law wrt pirates. Sovereign nations don’t need a court order to patrol or even board, inspect or prosecute piracy. This stuff has been around for a couple of centuries and I don’t think any of it is off the books. The only thing lacking is a serious fleet commitment to the region…a long term commitment of some serious forces that could meaningfully patrol the area in a systematic fashion to deter the pirates and make it less attractive and more risky to venture forth in search of booty, plunder and all that kind of stuff. Arrrrggghhh. Oh, it also takes a serious message board warrior attitude… -XT ---
**Author:** ![sailor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a587f6/32.png) [@sailor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sailor)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397/118 "2009-04-09T00:51:07Z")
There already are several UN resolutions and a multinational force. > [@](#): > > [http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090409/ap\_on\_go\_ca\_st\_pe/us\_piracy](http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090409/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_piracy) > > For US, few military options to deter piracy > > The U.S. sent warships speeding to the scene. But they were hours away when the brazen pirates attacked, and the world’s greatest sea power had to face the fact that it had only limited options to respond to the startling seizure of American merchant seamen. > … > The limits of U.S. power are a hard reality > … > Despite America’s technical and firepower edge, there is too much ocean to cover, and too many commercial vessels to protect, for full-time patrols or escorts for threatened ships. > … > “The military component here is always going to be marginal,” said Peter Chalk, an expert on maritime national security at the private Rand Corp. > > According to the Navy, it would take 61 ships to control the shipping route in the Gulf of Aden, which is just a fraction of the 1.1 million square miles where the pirates have operated. A U.S.-backed international anti-piracy coalition currently has 12 to 16 ships patrolling the region at any one time. > … > Oceans of that immense size cannot be patrolled completely, even with high-tech detection equipment doing some of the work. > > “Wherever the police are, the robbers will go somewhere else,” Chalk said. > … > In December, alarmed by increases in hijacking incidents, the Bush administration sought and won U.N. Security Council authorization to expand international naval operations against Somali pirates to allow the pursuit of suspects on the ground in Somalia. > > The move, which came at a special session attended by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and other foreign ministers, was the fourth taken by the council in the second half of 2008 alone to combat the pirates. > > Three months into the international anti-piracy campaign, as many as 17 nations are participating in increased patrols, and more are expected to join. > > But U.S. defense officials say the only realistic solution is on shore in Somalia, where money from the piracy ransoms fuels militant activities in the largely lawless country. > > Navy officials have urged patience, saying the key will be to watch for progress over the next year to see if the increased patrols and agreements for piracy prosecutions begin to work. ---
**Author:** ![enipla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/54ee81/32.png) [@enipla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/enipla)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 1:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397/119 "2009-04-09T01:14:51Z")
What type of ‘Mother’ ship is used to launch the smaller boats? Do we know that? We must have SOME idea. They smaller boats aren’t zodiacs from what I have seen. I would guess that the pirates have access to what ships are coming though its area, direct a mother ship that is already close to intercept and then launch the smaller boats from less than 20 miles away. Pure speculation on my part. The total area Is roughly 200 x 2000 miles? IF a carrier was parked in the middle of that, couldn’t they launch a strike against the mother ship? Or at least locate it based on the location of the ship that was taken? I’m guessing that the mother ship loiters? At 200 miles out to sea it would have to to pick up the smaller boats, no? If the Mother ship is within small boat distance of the hijacked ship, doesn’t that make things a bit easier? THEN follow it back to port and disable it. (lots of problems here too I know). I’m not necessarily suggesting this. Just an exercise in thought. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Scrivener](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/eada6e/32.png) [@The\_Scrivener](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Scrivener)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 1:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397/120 "2009-04-09T01:16:33Z")
Two questions on high-tech and low-tech measures: How complicated would it be for the US (or NATO, or the U.N., or even a consortium of shipping companies) to set up a large sonarbuoy array far off the Somali coast, along with a dedicated supercomputer and maybe a geological or mapping satellite? Are there any legal barriers to prevent a party from setting up such a dragnet in international waters? And how effective might it be for a supertanker crew to keep a few ballast objects (like some concrete construction blocks) to drop from their great height onto the small dinghys and such, once they’ve pulled up alongside? I’m imagining some serious damage done to these craft… to engines and gas tanks, if not the bottom of the hull… and to a few craniums of pirates climbing ladders, too. What if you followed up the concrete with a few Molotov cocktails? Would either of these count as “weaponry”? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397.md?page=7)