I'm ready for these pirates to get a can of whoop ass
1
2
3
-
April 12, 2009 1:20 a.m. ManofFewWords Reader
-
April 12, 2009 1:27 a.m. Apexcarver UltraDork
I really do hope we deliver a swift industrial sized can of whoopass, and soon
the general pussification of america has gone too far if we are negotiating with terrorists (they essentially are) under the guns of US warships.
-
April 12, 2009 5:54 a.m. DILYSI Dave UltimaDork
Apexcarver wrote:
I really do hope we deliver a swift industrial sized can of whoopass, and soon
the general pussification of america has gone too far if we are negotiating with terrorists (they essentially are) under the guns of US warships.
a-berkeleyin-men. I'm so tired of us so readily accepting the role of victim. Hell - if we hadn't tucked tail and run 15 years ago, there's a fair chance that Somalia would never have gotten to this point.
-
April 12, 2009 7:09 a.m. Snowdoggie Reader
What's your hurry? They are sitting in a rowboat with limited food and water. We have battleships with fully stocked refrigerators. As long as we can keep their buddies from re-stocking them, we control the situtation.
The longer we wait, the weaker they get when we finally do attack.
-
April 12, 2009 8:21 a.m. cwh Dork
We have some really good snipers. What are the chances they could get all 4 of the pirates in one try? A Barrett has a range of way out there, but firing from a floating ship obviously would be a challenge. I read that the ships are staying out of range of the Somali's. Let's analyze that a bit. AK47s vs. armor plated distroyer? Oh, come on. Let them put a few scratches on the big boat til they run out of ammo. This is so wrong.
-
April 12, 2009 8:23 a.m. mad_machine UltraDork
yup.. few more days and they will be about dead from a lack of fresh water...
what they should do is offer them supplies doped with something to knock them out.
of course, being in a lifeboat, a few well placed tear gas canisters will have them in the water in no time.. and I doubt they can swim with AKs
-
April 12, 2009 8:48 a.m. sachilles Reader
cwh wrote:
We have some really good snipers. What are the chances they could get all 4 of the pirates in one try? A Barrett has a range of way out there, but firing from a floating ship obviously would be a challenge. I read that the ships are staying out of range of the Somali's. Let's analyze that a bit. AK47s vs. armor plated distroyer? Oh, come on. Let them put a few scratches on the big boat til they run out of ammo. This is so wrong.
It's a covered lightboat. Tough to see through it. Suppose they could use flir or something, but that doesn't prevent the pirates from using the captain as a shield.
I think waiting them out is the smarter solution to get the captain out alive. Get the Captain out, then let the pirates drift out out sea. They want to play pirate, let them die like one.
-
April 12, 2009 9:34 a.m. joey48442 SuperDork
Apexcarver wrote:
I really do hope we deliver a swift industrial sized can of whoopass, and soon
the general pussification of america has gone too far if we are negotiating with terrorists (they essentially are) under the guns of US warships.
It's not terrorism. They are just plain criminals trying to make a buck, not further some silly movment. They rarely even kill anyone, until recently. They don't want to. The want there money, quick, and then they want to leave.
Plus, were not paying the ransom, we don't do that, but we will try to talk our way out. It's just a waiting game now.
Joey
-
April 12, 2009 10:04 a.m. YaNi Reader
I'm sure there's an attack sub in the region. Just have a SEAL team seize the life boat at night. They'll never know what hit them.
-
April 12, 2009 10:36 a.m. gamby UberDork
Why aren't the crews of these ships armed???
In this climate it's crazy that they aren't armed to the limit.
-
April 12, 2009 10:40 a.m. MrJoshua SuperDork
YaNi wrote:
I'm sure there's an attack sub in the region. Just have a SEAL team seize the life boat at night. They'll never know what hit them.
Or just poke some little holes in the bottom and swim away.
-
April 12, 2009 10:45 a.m. sachilles Reader
gamby wrote:
Many of the ships carry cargo that doesn't react well with gun fire, so the owners typically don't allow them to carry firearms on board.Why aren't the crews of these ships armed???
In this climate it's crazy that they aren't armed to the limit.
-
April 12, 2009 10:57 a.m. stuart in mn Dork
gamby wrote: Why aren't the crews of these ships armed??? In this climate it's crazy that they aren't armed to the limit.
There's a guy on another board I frequent who's a marine engineer, he spends most of his time at sea on ships like the one that was attacked. Apparently he's in port right now and responded to the same kind of questions (i.e. why did this happen.)
There are areas defined as High Risk Areas (HRA) where anti-piracy countermeasures are put in place. We have to go at full speed, have extra watches, have the fire pump running with hoses blasting on deck, all doors into the accommodation are locked, with the only access being from the bridge wing, stuff like that. It's expensive, and the likelihood is that you are not going to get hijacked. Let's say we were going 15 knots to make our ETA, and had to speed up to 19 knots for 36 hours to transit the HRA ... that's about $100,000 in fuel above what we would have spent. Extra watches means overtime, and also work that's not being done because you're watching not working. We don't carry firearms onboard due to liability issues and issues in various ports of call. And the pirates know that we are not armed, just like the thugs on a NYC subway train know that probably no one, other than another criminal, is going to have a gun. It's not that the company doesn't care about us ... it's expensive to get hijacked, and not only do you have to pay ransom, but your ship is off hire, and your reputation is shot, your customers are concerned that their cargo is at risk. It's just that countermeasures are expensive. These companies aren't making money hand over fist, the margins are very tight. And, the pirates aren't pirates until they attack, until then they're just fishermen. Imagine instead of "Maersk Alabama hijacked by pirates" the headline was instead "American Flag ship sinks fishing boat, 23 Somali children orphaned; Maersk claimed they were pirates"
Someone else on the board questioned the liability issue, and he replied:
The liability of using the weapon in the wrong situation. Not the liability of storing them. Companies are always trying to manage risk; you wouldn't believe the amount of paperwork it takes to do even routine jobs. And having firearms onboard is too much risk for them. Let's say they did carry firearms ... there would have to be training as well. And training costs money. These companies aren't the meanies that people make them out to be, they're just trying to survive in a competitive market, and minimize their exposure. Take my ship, for instance. When loaded, we carry 149,000 cubic meters of liquid natural gas. It's like a small floating bomb. Do you really want a 22 year old Filipino ordinary seaman manning a machine gun, trying to shoot pirates climbing up the side of a ship?
-
April 12, 2009 11:00 a.m. ignorant PowerDork
DILYSI Dave wrote:
I'm so tired of us so readily accepting the role of victim.
Does not compute!
-
April 12, 2009 11:14 a.m. ignorant PowerDork
gamby wrote:
Why aren't the crews of these ships armed???
as an adjunct to the liability of having guns. I think you would start an arms race with the pirates. It's big business for them, I'm sure you can get some good ex-russian stuff cheap. I also think you'd see less crew members as hostages and more crew members in body bags.
-
April 12, 2009 11:30 a.m. Flynlow None
No need for the crew to kill pirates....most of these guys operate off little runabouts with outboards, right? Why not have 1 or 2 crewmen trained to operate a firearm, and have a regular rifle on board (No M16s or AK47s, just a normal hunting rifle in a heavy caliber). If a runabout is approaching your supertanker 300 miles offshore, put a round through their engine and call in an SOS. If they're fishermen, they get picked up and rescued by the anti-pirate task force. If not, give them a paddle and point them in the direction of home.
-
April 12, 2009 12:42 p.m. Apexcarver UltraDork
YES!!
he is free, 3 pirates dead, 1 in custody
captive jumped overboard again, SEALS gave whoopass!
-
April 12, 2009 12:54 p.m. sachilles Reader
We should make the one in custody walk the plank.
-
April 12, 2009 2:08 p.m. MrJoshua SuperDork
Apexcarver wrote:
YES!!
he is free, 3 pirates dead, 1 in custody
captive jumped overboard again, SEALS gave whoopass!
The captive sounds like a bad ass!
-
April 12, 2009 2:17 p.m. jrw1621 HalfDork
I expect that The Captain will be played by Bruce Willis in the movie version
-
April 12, 2009 2:33 p.m. ignorant PowerDork
jrw1621 wrote:
I expect that The Captain will be played by Bruce Willis in the movie version
harrison ford
-
April 12, 2009 3:02 p.m. sachilles Reader
Clooney.
-
April 12, 2009 3:25 p.m. 4g63t Reader
I can't believe it took me to say.....Chuck Norris (fellow Tang Soo Do guy)
-
April 12, 2009 3:33 p.m. Apexcarver UltraDork
4g63t wrote:
I can't believe it took me to say.....Chuck Norris (fellow Tang Soo Do guy)
nah, then everyone would wonder why he didnt just kill them all with the fist hidden in his beard
-
April 12, 2009 6:20 p.m. chaparral New Reader
Maybe "wait for the USN to show up" was the right solution here
