Piracy Somalia

the concerned said:
As has been mentioned most private companies employ proffesional soldiers. In the carribean when the royal navy is on narcotics patrols isn't it usually easier to take the engine out and less messy in courts and papers. No engine no pirate's. surely governments can oversee the training that these companies provide and inspect the weapons they employ because i think 2 guys with decent sniper rifles and something like an mp-7or p-90 for backup is all thats needed
Click to expand...
  1. Are you saying that all members of the Royal Navy Marines were qualified snipers? Or are the Royal Marines not professional soldiers because they cannot meet this standard?
  2. At what range are the narcotics patrols taking out the engine?
  3. Do the narcotics trafficers regularly shoot at the Royal Navy?
    For pirates it generally is the case unless being openly pursued by a warship when they have enough time to get rid of incriminating evidence.
  4. Commercial vessels are not naval ships, the rules of engagement are different. They are not going to let potential pirates get within effective RPG and AK-47 range. You can bet that the protective detail did not drop those 2 guys with one shot each, more like a couple hits and a dozen or so complete misses each.
 
ok i'll ask at what range could an engine be disabled. I'm no military expert all i'm saying is wouldn't it be responsible for the governments of the vessels to oversee what type of training is required.like i said a dead engine is alot easier to explain than a dead pirate or some cases a dead fisherman who was in the wrong place at the wrong time.Once you have taken the engine out then you let the nearest official naval asset deal with them appropiately.
 
the concerned said:
ok i'll ask at what range could an engine be disabled. I'm no military expert all i'm saying is wouldn't it be responsible for the governments of the vessels to oversee what type of training is required.like i said a dead engine is alot easier to explain than a dead pirate or some cases a dead fisherman who was in the wrong place at the wrong time.Once you have taken the engine out then you let the nearest official naval asset deal with them appropiately.
Click to expand...
I am not an expert either, so let’s just examine the parameters of the problem.
  1. What kind of an engine – inboard or outboard? An inboard engine is buried low in the hull and usually obscured, i.e. a lousy target. An outboard engine generally gives you a target between ½ and the size of a human torso.
  2. What is the angle of approach? From head on either location can easily be obscured and protected by crew and cargo. Shots from the side or rear are generally necessary to hit the engine.
  3. What kind of weapon? Entertainment to the contrary, an engine is a fairly thick chunk of metal, requiring something substantial to reliably knock it out. .30 AP can do it IF it hits the block square on (i.e. a right angle) at close range, but for a one shot ‘kill’ you will probably need a .50 cal anti-material rifle.
  4. At what range? The defenders (who are trying to take out the engine) want to keep the ‘pirate’ vessel out of range of the (pirate) guns, so let’s say 200+ yards. One of you experts out there, about 1 foot of bullet drop, right?
  5. Motion. At sea everything is in motion, even things that are not going anywhere, due to waves, wind, and currents, and when a vessel is in motion the effects are multiplied. At 8 to 12 knots on a calm sea the cargo vessel would still have been a relatively stable shooting platform, but a smaller fishing boat would have been moving around a fair bit. Take the sea state up a notch or 2 and the cargo vessels is rolling a little bit, but the fishing vessel is bouncing and weaving along, so potentially a foot of horizontal position error. You are not going to put the round past some fisherman/pirate’s ear.
Basically you are asking them to do the equivalent of shooting a gun out of the fisherman/pirate’s hand.
:duel
 
When and how was "Pirates are to be exterminated on sight" abolished?

It had been SOP since before Julius Caesar and lasted at least until the early 19th century in western navies - particularly the RN.
 
Dodger67 said:
When and how was "Pirates are to be exterminated on sight" abolished?

It had been SOP since before Julius Caesar and lasted at least until the early 19th century in western navies - particularly the RN.
Click to expand...
In 1982 the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) redefined piracy so that it occurred on the ‘high sea’, but did not include territorial waters, thereby ending the universal juristdiction. Any piracy in territorial waters, or which is pursued into territorial waters, becomes strictly a matter for local jurisdiction, laws, and courts, so no ‘hot pursuit’. The purpose of these provision was undoubtedly to remove any excuse that could be used for a navy to in the territorial waters of another nation.

Unfortunately, in local jurisdiction (nations) that are too poor, highly corrupt, or lacking in the Rule-Of-Law, this gives piracy free reign.
 
Thanks but your answer only explains the situation within 12nm of the beach.

But most of the Somali piracy is in fact happening well outside the territorial limits of the countries in the area so what is actually preventing the naval forces involved from simply :ar15 "wasting the mutha####ers" :ar15 and providing the local sharks with free dinners.

"Pirate skiff two points off the port bow Captain!"
"Confirm they are pirates?"
"Aye aye, Captain, Kalashnikovs and RPGs clearly visible."
"Weapons, engage with a burst of 25 mil if you please."
"Taget in range."
Brrrrrt!
"Target engaged Captain."
"Target sinking Captain."
"Very well, secure weapons. I believe we're having steak for dinner today."

When did high seas pirates acquire the right to life, a fair trial, and all that namby-pamby crap?

I believe when enough pirates simply disappear without trace (and without comment from the facilitators of the the disappearances) the remaining ones might seriously reconsider their career options.
 
A little bit late after all these years....but better late than never....

I wonder in what scale they have perform this attack. Just a car or truck blown up, or really causing heavy damage to the infrastructure, buildings, ships and weapons of these pirates?
 
Dodger67 said:
Thanks but your answer only explains the situation within 12nm of the beach.

But most of the Somali piracy is in fact happening well outside the territorial limits of the countries in the area so what is actually preventing the naval forces involved from simply :ar15 "wasting the mutha####ers" :ar15 and providing the local sharks with free dinners.

"Pirate skiff two points off the port bow Captain!"
"Confirm they are pirates?"
"Aye aye, Captain, Kalashnikovs and RPGs clearly visible."
"Weapons, engage with a burst of 25 mil if you please."
"Taget in range."
Brrrrrt!
"Target engaged Captain."
"Target sinking Captain."
"Very well, secure weapons. I believe we're having steak for dinner today."

When did high seas pirates acquire the right to life, a fair trial, and all that namby-pamby crap?

I believe when enough pirates simply disappear without trace (and without comment from the facilitators of the the disappearances) the remaining ones might seriously reconsider their career options.
Click to expand...
It is not just where the piracy takes place, but where you catch them. The piracy may be on the high seas, but once they are within ‘12 miles of the beach’ international forces are not supposed to touch them.

It is rumored that the Russians and the Chinese practice your favorite scenario.

For the rest, the law used to be trial at sea followed by execution. But with modern communications the captain of a vessel longer has the power of a feudal lord and the civil rights people have written laws requiring a civilian court trial. Which means either the closest nation, the nation in which the pirated vessel is registered, or the nation of the warship that apprehended the pirates. Unfortunately the closest nation is in Africa, and cannot afford the number of trials and incarcerations. Also, the EU refuses to send any pirates to nations where they might be subject to the death penalty. Most of the nations to which the ships are registered don’t want the expenses either. So that leaves the nation to which the warship belongs.

Other problems include the cost of incarceration after conviction, and what to do with them after they have served it. Especially in the EU the various human rights treaties and the EU constitution are being interpreted in such a way that they may become economic refugees even before the trial starts. This is why catch-and-release is the norm for EU vessels.
 
My2Cents said:
It is not just where the piracy takes place, but where you catch them. The piracy may be on the high seas, but once they are within ‘12 miles of the beach’ international forces are not supposed to touch them.

It is rumored that the Russians and the Chinese practice your favorite scenario.

For the rest, the law used to be trial at sea followed by execution. But with modern communications the captain of a vessel longer has the power of a feudal lord and the civil rights people have written laws requiring a civilian court trial. Which means either the closest nation, the nation in which the pirated vessel is registered, or the nation of the warship that apprehended the pirates. Unfortunately the closest nation is in Africa, and cannot afford the number of trials and incarcerations. Also, the EU refuses to send any pirates to nations where they might be subject to the death penalty. Most of the nations to which the ships are registered don’t want the expenses either. So that leaves the nation to which the warship belongs.

Other problems include the cost of incarceration after conviction, and what to do with them after they have served it. Especially in the EU the various human rights treaties and the EU constitution are being interpreted in such a way that they may become economic refugees even before the trial starts. This is why catch-and-release is the norm for EU vessels.
Click to expand...
All these EU the various human rights treaties and the so political correct EU constitution make the EU deployement almost totally useless....
What those Russians and Chinese doing is so much more effective and cost efficient...
Its better for the EU to sponsor the deploments of these two countries than sending their own ships...
 
Sandhi Yudha said:
A little bit late after all these years....but better late than never....

I wonder in what scale they have perform this attack. Just a car or truck blown up, or really causing heavy damage to the infrastructure, buildings, ships and weapons of these pirates?
Click to expand...
BBC News - Somali piracy: EU forces in first mainland raid
“The multinational forces used helicopters in conjunction with two warships to leave five of the pirates' fast attack craft "inoperable.”

Guess that means they shot up 5 fishing boats (that is all the pirate ‘fast attack craft’ are), but the boats are not on fire and might be repairable.

Or maybe I am just becoming unbelievably cynical where the EU is concerned.
:hitwall
 
Anixtu said:
Somalia has been the exception to this since 2008.
Click to expand...
No it has not, and that is a huge part of the problem.

The Transition Federal Government (and those before it) has insisted that control of Somali waters is their job (including piracy and fishing), and that they will fulfill the role if funds are supplied, and they are not going to allow any other navy to operate in their waters. To date 90%+ of the funds, vessels, and supplies provided have been stolen by the government or its members. At least 1 of the patrol vessels, that was not reported as missing, has even turned up being operated by the pirates.

The autonomous state of Puntland is the exception to the rule, which is probably what you are referring to. They do have a working maritime police force and actively cooperate in suppressing piracy, forcing nearly all the gangs that were in Puntland to move their operations to areas just outside Puntland’s borders.
 
My2Cents said:
No it has not, and that is a huge part of the problem.
Click to expand...

UNSCR 1846 (para 10) and 1851 (para 6) as renewed by 2020 (para 9).

There are fig leaves for TFG sovereignty, but yours is the first interpretation I have come across to say that counter-piracy action in Somali TTWs is forbidden.

Otherwise what authorisation did French forces have for the recent raid?
 
My2Cents said:
No it has not, and that is a huge part of the problem.

The Transition Federal Government (and those before it) has insisted that control of Somali waters is their job (including piracy and fishing), and that they will fulfill the role if funds are supplied, and they are not going to allow any other navy to operate in their waters. To date 90%+ of the funds, vessels, and supplies provided have been stolen by the government or its members. At least 1 of the patrol vessels, that was not reported as missing, has even turned up being operated by the pirates.
Click to expand...
You have to respect the souvereignity and their territorial waters of every nation, but reading such things above....maybe we can make an exception for this failed state...
 
Sandhi Yudha said:
You have to respect the souvereignity and their territorial waters of every nation, but reading such things above....maybe we can make an exception for this failed state...
Click to expand...
Then you might end up making that exception for an awful lot of countries. It is quite possible a couple countries out there that are worse than Somalia, and even if not a lot that are nearly as bad, like Afghanistan, Nigeria, Mali, Tunisia, etc. Revolutions in these countries are less about repression and civil rights than they are about changing which groups get the bribes/payoffs/looting.

Outside of the western world what we would term corruption is business-as-usual.
 
My2Cents said:
Then you might end up making that exception for an awful lot of countries. It is quite possible a couple countries out there that are worse than Somalia, and even if not a lot that are nearly as bad, like Afghanistan, Nigeria, Mali, Tunisia, etc. Revolutions in these countries are less about repression and civil rights than they are about changing which groups get the bribes/payoffs/looting.

Outside of the western world what we would term corruption is business-as-usual.
Click to expand...
Tunisia doesn't belong in that list (hint: it's still a popular destination for European tourists), & I suggest you look up how its revolution began.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top