What on earth are you talking about? Piracy off the Somali coast has dropped significantly since the formation of the task force.:rolleyes:
We’ve already discussed the Somali task force. What do you want? I suspect you want to create some impossible to find criteria for determining how much the US spends on anti-piracy efforts. But, maybe you actually are asking this question in good faith.
What are the countries around Somalia? Please, tell me about their navies and how they are able to project power into Somali sea space.
Jesus, wait a minute; you’re saying the existence of the US Navy forces China to trade with Japan?
If China wants to stop trading with Japan, what does anyone’s navy have to do with it?
You mean the multinational task force? I realize the US Navy contributes mightily to it but surely the other 28 nations could send a few more destroyers if the U.S. decided not to?
And I’ll again ask where the big problem with deep ocean piracy is. The U.S. Navy is not designed to be a globe-spanning anti-piracy force.
Oh, this ought to be good. Please tell me which of the other nations have destroyers, which of those nations can afford to supply destroyers off the Somail coast, and please enlighten me as to how they supply those destroyers while they are there?
It’s just a feature.
Some of these:
or these
And who are the vast majority of destroyers listed in your own cites? And who provided the logistical train? Because the only destroyer I can see that could have provided its own logistical train is possibly one Russian ship (and I’m going to need evidence that it did).
All right. Bleah. Holidays are over, and this place consume too much of my time when I’m supposed to be working, so I have a rule that I can’t be on here when I’m supposed to be working. Anyway, have fun, and Happy New Year!
I’m not sure why you’re fixated on"destroyers", perhaps it’s your decades of experience in matters navel? I think you’re a little overexcited about the intentions and capabilities of these pirates.
Navies tend to send along ships appropriate to the action e.g. discouraging/blowing up the odd skiff - see the earlier photo.
So it’s a cross between “capture the flag” and leaving your calling card in the mailbox at the top of the mountain?
We’ve pulled out of Iraq and it has become more peaceful. Right?
If you thought the US pulled out of Iraq because the various Sunni and Shiite factions were reconciled, I’ve got some bad news …
Er, most of them? (If you’re going to quibble that some of the ships are technically called “Frigates,” have at it; everyone knows there’s not a clear line between the two. A Type 23 frigate, or a Halifax-class frigate, are powerful blue water warships.)
I would imagine the multinational force could scrounge up a few more bucks and some of those countries do have supply ships. We’re talking about some of the richest countries in the world. They’ll spend the money necessary for their own security and interests.
I don’t deny the U.S. Navy is the finest in the world and it would cost more for the rest of the world to make up for its absence, but it’s quite doable. The pirates are not going to rise up and control the high seas.
No, not at all. Go read my post again.
Nothing. That’s your misreading of my post. It’s not my mistake. As I said, go read my post again.
I was merely responding to the suggestion (yours, I believe) that China would never under any circumstances try to cut off Japan’s trade, because it would hurt them, too. Per my scenario, they might. But with the US Navy around, all they can do is stop their own trading with Japan. If the US goes away, per the OP, they can also stop Japan from trading with anyone else, either. Two entirely different scenarios. The second of which is not possible with the US Navy around to prevent them from blockading Japan.
"Protecting "or extracting fees from?
Life would go on, the slaves take the US holds internationally (under economic pressure) would be free and perhaps better themselves in time, but the people of the US on the lower end of the class system would have much less without the international slave labor.
Additionally it is questionable if the US would be allowed to have orbiting satellites over other countries and that could (soon) be enforced. So good -by GPS or at least surrendering GPS to nations that play well together.
If the US became isolationist, militarily-speaking, it would create a huge power vacuum. I have not noticed that such vacuums lead to greater stability.
Eventually, a new balance of power will be struck, but things will be messy until then.
Cite that the US government gets any fees from anybody else in the world to do anything on the water? :dubious: