# 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:** 7
**Author:** ![Bender44](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/b487fb/32.png) [@Bender44](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bender44)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 1:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397/121 "2009-04-09T01:36:07Z")
> [@sailor](#): > > There already are several UN resolutions and a multinational force. Dammit Sailor, you beat me to it. I was about to drop that little fact. Here’s an article on resolution. [http://opiniojuris.org/2008/12/17/un-authorizes-attacks-on-pirates-on-land-or-sea/](http://opiniojuris.org/2008/12/17/un-authorizes-attacks-on-pirates-on-land-or-sea/) As far as jurisdiction to try pirates is concerned, piracy falls under universal jurisdiction under customary international law, so theoretically any country that captured the pirates could try them. In fact, universal jurisdiction developed as a response to piracy. However, I couldn’t tell you the last time it was used though. Not really my area of expertise. ETA: Of course, as the article details, this is all easier said than done. Legally and politically. ---
**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, 3:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397/122 "2009-04-09T03:11:08Z")
> [@Enginerd](#): > > 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? I don’t know where the million square miles of ocean comes from. The attacks occur in the [Gulf of Aden](http://www.eaglespeak.us/2008/11/somali-pirate-maps.html)which is 500 miles of coastline times 150 miles or 75,000 square miles. It would be many times cheaper to fly a handfull of these than operating 1 frigate and they travel 400 mph versus maybe 30 knots for a ship. The Global Hawk is a multi-platform aircraft and was deployed for [maritime testing](http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/Xplore/login.jsp?url=http%3A%2F%2Fieeexplore.ieee.org%2Fiel5%2F7969%2F22037%2F01025623.pdf&authDecision=-203) to countries such as Australia back in 2001. The Air Force is getting ready to pitch the idea of using it for [maritime surveillance](http://www.c4isrjournal.com/story.php?F=3127498)although I don’t think this is the same system the Navy will deploy over the next decade. As I stated previously, going after the ocean going “mother ships” would eliminate or severely limit deep-sea piracy. Tracking a pirate boat back to these ships cannot be done with other ships. It requires aerial surveillance and UAV’s are the most economic way to go. It’s not a function of stopping a small boat, it’s a function of tracing it back to a larger ship. ---
**Author:** ![Princhester](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 3:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397/123 "2009-04-09T03:34:37Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > I don’t know where the million square miles of ocean comes from. The attacks occur in the [Gulf of Aden](http://www.eaglespeak.us/2008/11/somali-pirate-maps.html)which is 500 miles of coastline times 150 miles or 75,000 square miles. It would be many times cheaper to fly a handfull of these than operating 1 frigate and they travel 400 mph versus maybe 30 knots for a ship. Your own cite, if you scroll down, shows that they occur well out to to the east and south of the Gulf of Aden, albeit that the Gulf of Aden is where most of the attacks are. ---
**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, 4:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397/124 "2009-04-09T04:06:08Z")
> [@Princhester](#): > > Your own cite, if you scroll down, shows that they occur well out to to the east and south of the Gulf of Aden, albeit that the Gulf of Aden is where most of the attacks are. Aside from the fact that the majority of them occur in the Gulf of Aden, how does that change the logic that it is many times cheaper to operate a Global Hawk than it is to operate a naval ship? ---
**Author:** ![Rick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9f8e36/32.png) [@Rick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 4:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397/125 "2009-04-09T04:10:01Z")
You go after the ocean going mother ships. Here is how. You take a US Navy cargo / oilier and paint it so it does not look like a US Navy ship. You load it with a SEAL Team. You sail it a 150-200 miles off the coast. You shadow it with either a 688 class attack sub or a frigate just over the horizon. You wait for the mother ship to show up and launch the small boats to capture their prize. When the pirates are boarding you let the SEALS do what SEALS do. At the same time you have the sub torpedo the mother ship, or have the frigate launch a anti ship missile. Either way there is one less mother ship available for the next attack, and the bad guys have no idea why. Wait about a week lather rinse and repeat. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 4:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397/126 "2009-04-09T04:18:44Z")
Heck, all the more reason to have a carrier in the area and equip cargo ships with radios that can send out distress signals with GPS information at the beginning of the pirate attack. Some F-16s show up and sink the pirate’s vessel (or use other means to track it) and at first opportunity, obliterate them. There will be hostages lost, and that’s unfortunate, but this isn’t a situation likely to respond to diplomacy. One could also try to encourage stabilization and economic development in Somalia to make piracy less attractive. That’s, I expect, considerably more challenging. ---
**Author:** ![ChrisBooth12](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e95f7d/32.png) [@ChrisBooth12](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ChrisBooth12)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 4:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397/127 "2009-04-09T04:33:48Z")
Why not just move a carrier group and have it sit off the coast of the major pirate port? I mean woudlnt the sheer presence of that deter pirates? Send up a jet every now and than and make sure its noticed? Is this solution to simple to work? ---
**Author:** ![mecaenas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/91b2a8/32.png) [@mecaenas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mecaenas)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 4:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397/128 "2009-04-09T04:37:23Z")
> [@The\_Scrivener](#): > > 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? Sonarbuoys and satellites won’t tell you if a ship/boat is a pirate or not. > [@The\_Scrivener](#): > > Two questions on high-tech and low-tech measures: > 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”? The pirates have RPGs, so when you toss a block of concrete or molotov over the side at them, one of the pirates fires his RPG and kills you all or fatally damages your ship which sinks. Or, as you lean over the side with the concrete a pirate with an AK74 takes your head clean off. There’s a reason that Internet Tough Guy strategies don’t work in the real world. ---
**Author:** ![mecaenas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/91b2a8/32.png) [@mecaenas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mecaenas)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 4:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397/129 "2009-04-09T04:38:36Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Heck, all the more reason to have a carrier in the area and equip cargo ships with radios that can send out distress signals with GPS information at the beginning of the pirate attack. Some F-16s show up and sink the pirate’s vessel (or use other means to track it) and at first opportunity, obliterate them. There will be hostages lost, and that’s unfortunate, but this isn’t a situation likely to respond to diplomacy. > > One could also try to encourage stabilization and economic development in Somalia to make piracy less attractive. That’s, I expect, considerably more challenging. So if you were a crew member would you volunteer to commit suicide and kill all your shipmates by activating the airstrike on yourselves? ---
**Author:** ![mecaenas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/91b2a8/32.png) [@mecaenas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mecaenas)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 4:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397/130 "2009-04-09T04:45:41Z")
> [@Lemur866](#): > > But we don’t need a UN resolution for the US navy to hunt down pirates, it is a well establish part of maritime law that navies are allowed to act against pirates. The problem is that you can’t just shoot up every boat you see around the horn of Africa. Yes, the speedboats are launched from motherships, but the motherships are just fishing boats. You can board and inspect every fishing boat but how do you tell which crew of fishermen plan on turning pirate after you leave? > > As for the notion that the crews should be fighting back, it’s a prisoner’s dilemma problem. Sure, if every crew always fought back, piracy would be too risky. But it’s a lot less risky for an individual crew to surrender, because the pirates currently have a very good track record of not harming crew members. And they have very good reason for not harming crew members because the pirates want the crews to surrender. If they kill the crews then future crews will fight, and that’s the last thing the pirates want. > > 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. And so paying ransom suits everybody, except the next guy who gets attacked by pirates. Bears repeating. Besides, I highly doubt that anyone on this message board would have half the guts it would take to do what they’re proposing about fighting back. ---
**Author:** ![Snnipe\_70E](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5a626/32.png) [@Snnipe\_70E](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snnipe_70E)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 4:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397/131 "2009-04-09T04:49:12Z")
> [@Mr.Excellent](#): > > I like the sentiment - but that’s a bit of overkill. Try “deploy a frigate, wipe them out.” That is not over kill. A jet can get there in minutes. A frigate takes hours or day to cover large distances. I have been thinking the US Navy first act was to end the pirates in that same area. Seens like it is time to repeat the act. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 4:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397/132 "2009-04-09T04:56:00Z")
> [@mecaenas](#): > > So if you were a crew member would you volunteer to commit suicide and kill all your shipmates by activating the airstrike on yourselves? In case you missed it, I said the _pirate’s_ vessel. Hopefully with all the pirates aboard, and ideally before they can board the target vessel. ---
**Author:** ![Notassmartasithought](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/c0e974/32.png) [@Notassmartasithought](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Notassmartasithought)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 5:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397/133 "2009-04-09T05:15:06Z")
Does anyone know more about this? [Cruise ship used high-tech noise gun on attacking pirates](http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1518441/posts) If it really worked this way, wouldn’t about every marine insurance company be buying it? Is it included in the notion of an “armed” vessel? ---
**Author:** ![Princhester](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 6:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397/134 "2009-04-09T06:10:00Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Aside from the fact that the majority of them occur in the Gulf of Aden, how does that change the logic that it is many times cheaper to operate a Global Hawk than it is to operate a naval ship? I don’t know. All I know is you’re wasted just hanging about on this message board when you know so much more about tactics and cost than the military, and I think you should ensist and immediately tell your superiors how much more you know about this stuff than the existing hierarchy and that you should be put in charge immediately. Let me know how it goes. ---
**Author:** ![Enginerd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/bcef8e/32.png) [@Enginerd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enginerd)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 6:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397/135 "2009-04-09T06:34:02Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > I don’t know where the million square miles of ocean comes from. The attacks occur in the [Gulf of Aden](http://www.eaglespeak.us/2008/11/somali-pirate-maps.html)which is 500 miles of coastline times 150 miles or 75,000 square miles. It would be many times cheaper to fly a handfull of these than operating 1 frigate and they travel 400 mph versus maybe 30 knots for a ship. A million square miles came from the US Navy via the [Washington Post](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/08/AR2009040800940.html?hpid=topnews): \*“It’s an incredibly vast area, and basically we’re seeing pirates in more than a million-square-mile operating area,” said Cmdr. Jane Campbell, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Navy’s 5th Fleet, based in Bahrain. “So while the presence of naval vessels has had an effect, we continue to say that naval presence alone will never be a total solution. It starts ashore.” \* It’s my understanding that once a ship is hijacked, it’s usually too late to do any tracking. In the Alabama, for instance, the pirates scuttled their fishing boat once they had the ship - they escaped in one of the Alabama’s lifeboat when the crew regained control. That same Washington Post article states that typically “pirates ferry their hostages to the coast and employ semiprofessional negotiators to deal with ransoms. Speer, the spokesman for Maersk, said the pirates had not contacted the company.” There’s a boat going to Eyl (which we already know about) and there are pirates on the hijacked vessel, but there’s nobody to track back to the mother ship. ---
**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, 6:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397/136 "2009-04-09T06:45:41Z")
> [@Rick](#): > > You go after the ocean going mother ships. > Here is how. You take a US Navy cargo / oilier and paint it so it does not look like a US Navy ship. You load it with a SEAL Team. > You sail it a 150-200 miles off the coast. You shadow it with either a 688 class attack sub or a frigate just over the horizon. > You wait for the mother ship to show up and launch the small boats to capture their prize. > When the pirates are boarding you let the SEALS do what SEALS do. At the same time you have the sub torpedo the mother ship, or have the frigate launch a anti ship missile. > Either way there is one less mother ship available for the next attack, and the bad guys have no idea why. > Wait about a week lather rinse and repeat. This has been discussed in previous threads and the conclusion is that it will not work. It seems we go over the same arguments in every thread about anything. Simplistic solutions to very complex problems. I have to wonder at people who know nothing about a complex topic but think they have the solution to the problem when all the experts who are actually working on the problem say it is difficult and complex. In such a case I would tend to think I was maybe just missing something but no, our armchair experts have the answers which elude the pentagon, the white house, the UN, NATO, Europe, Russia, etc. They are all incompetent fools when compared to the board of experts we have right here. As **Bender44** ’s [link](http://opiniojuris.org/2008/12/17/un-authorizes-attacks-on-pirates-on-land-or-sea/) also explains, the problem is not only on the sea. You would have to intervene on land too and that is full of dangers. Trying to control Somalia would be another Afghanistan. It did not work out so well the last time it was tried. And countries like Russia or China who are in general supportive of anti-piracy operations might probably turn around and oppose an expansion of America’s area of influence which they see as too big already. Europe would probably not support it either. And right now The US has to consult with other countries because they have ships there. If America starts arragantly telling everyone what they should do, like happened in Iraq, most other countries would just withdraw and let America deal with the problem on their own terms. But hey, don’t let reality get in the way of our Internet experts. Let them carry on with their silliness. ---
**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, 7:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397/137 "2009-04-09T07:02:50Z")
> [@Princhester](#): > > I don’t know. All I know is you’re wasted just hanging about on this message board when you know so much more about tactics and cost than the military, and I think you should ensist and immediately tell your superiors how much more you know about this stuff than the existing hierarchy and that you should be put in charge immediately. > > Let me know how it goes. It goes well considering I posted a cite that showed the Air Force is already pitching the idea to other countries. ---
**Author:** ![jimigorilla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/edb3f5/32.png) [@jimigorilla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jimigorilla)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 7:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397/138 "2009-04-09T07:15:35Z")
> [@ralph124c](#): > > Pay the $3 million-get these guys out, then send a cruise missile to the port the pirates use. Flatten it. > Anybody now how much marine insurance rates have increased becuase of these pirate’s activities? And all the people living there I suppose? To emphasize America’s goodwill towards all once and for all? There never used to be piracy in those waters before the whole region collapsed into total anarchy, with world politics largely to blame. This has caused serious economic distress, which has made people quite desperate. And desparate people often do desparate things. If these pirates were characters from your own frontier history, no doubt they’d be glorified in Hollywood movies by now. Get real, please. Eradicate poverty and most crime will disappear. But then, how would you tell a loser from a winner in your rather warped view of humankind? The whole idea of “America” would become pointless. But what would you expect from a country that prefers spending tax dollars on prisons rather than schools (I think I’m paraphrasing Mark Twain here, so once upon a time there was at least one sane American.) Apart from which, I understand that the crew have managed in the meantime to retake the ship by itself, which indicates that the pirates may have been somewhat less dangerous than portrayed. ---
**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, 7:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397/139 "2009-04-09T07:16:19Z")
> [@Enginerd](#): > > A million square miles came from the US Navy via the [Washington Post](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/08/AR2009040800940.html?hpid=topnews): > > \*“It’s an incredibly vast area, and basically we’re seeing pirates in more than a million-square-mile operating area,” said Cmdr. Jane Campbell, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Navy’s 5th Fleet, based in Bahrain. “So while the presence of naval vessels has had an effect, we continue to say that naval presence alone will never be a total solution. It starts ashore.” \* Just do the math. A million square miles is 1,000 times 1,000. The Somali pirates are operating in a much smaller arena. The Gulf of Aden piracy is 75,000 square miles and the eastern coast would be in the neighborhood of 180,000 sm. > [@Enginerd](#): > > It’s my understanding that once a ship is hijacked, it’s usually too late to do any tracking. In the Alabama, for instance, the pirates scuttled their fishing boat once they had the ship - they escaped in one of the Alabama’s lifeboat when the crew regained control. That same Washington Post article states that typically “pirates ferry their hostages to the coast and employ semiprofessional negotiators to deal with ransoms. Speer, the spokesman for Maersk, said the pirates had not contacted the company.” There’s a boat going to Eyl (which we already know about) and there are pirates on the hijacked vessel, but there’s nobody to track back to the mother ship. Unless a crew is completely taken by surprise they are able to transmit their position with exact coordinates. At this point it would be easy for a Global Hawk to transition to station and remain there. any ship close to the pirated vessel is tracked. It’s only a matter of time before the launch ship is identified. ---
**Author:** ![Enginerd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/bcef8e/32.png) [@Enginerd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enginerd)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 7:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397/140 "2009-04-09T07:42:49Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Unless a crew is completely taken by surprise they are able to transmit their position with exact coordinates. At this point it would be easy for a Global Hawk to transition to station and remain there. any ship close to the pirated vessel is tracked. It’s only a matter of time before the launch ship is identified. The Gulf of Aden is one of the world’s busiest waterways. You’re really planning on tracking every ship within, say, a hundred mile radius of a hijacked vessel? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/somalian-pirates-seize-us-crew-is-it-on/492397.md?page=8)