In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Somali Pirates Kill 4 Americans
RtWngExtrmst
Member Posts: 7,456
Somali pirates killed four Americans aboard a yacht the pirates hijacked off the coast of Somalia, U.S. military officials reported of an incident that started Friday and ended in gunfire today with the death of several pirates, too. It marked the first time that U.S. citizens had died in the wave of piracies in the region during the past several years.
A U.S. Navy warship had been shadowing the Quest since pirates hijacked it Friday.
CBS News national security correspondent David Martin reported this morning that gunshots aboard the yacht were heard, and the warship took action.
U.S. naval forces quickly boarded the captured yacht after hearing the gunfire and tried to provide lifesaving care to the Americans but they died of their wounds, the U.S. Central Command said.
Two pirates died during the confrontation, and 13 were captured and detained, the U.S. Central Command said from Tampa, Fla. The remains of two other pirates who were already dead for some time were also found. The U.S. military didn't state how those two might have died.
Negotiations had been under way to try to win the release of the two couples on the pirated vessel Quest when the gunfire was heard, the U.S. military said.
The Quest was the home of Jean and Scott Adam, a couple from California who had been sailing around the world since December 2004. The two other Americans on board were Phyllis Macay and Bob Riggle of Seattle, Wash.
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Americans-killed-pirate/2011/02/22/id/386925
If the US Navy can't protect Americans from pirates, Maybe we need to contract the job to Israel.
A U.S. Navy warship had been shadowing the Quest since pirates hijacked it Friday.
CBS News national security correspondent David Martin reported this morning that gunshots aboard the yacht were heard, and the warship took action.
U.S. naval forces quickly boarded the captured yacht after hearing the gunfire and tried to provide lifesaving care to the Americans but they died of their wounds, the U.S. Central Command said.
Two pirates died during the confrontation, and 13 were captured and detained, the U.S. Central Command said from Tampa, Fla. The remains of two other pirates who were already dead for some time were also found. The U.S. military didn't state how those two might have died.
Negotiations had been under way to try to win the release of the two couples on the pirated vessel Quest when the gunfire was heard, the U.S. military said.
The Quest was the home of Jean and Scott Adam, a couple from California who had been sailing around the world since December 2004. The two other Americans on board were Phyllis Macay and Bob Riggle of Seattle, Wash.
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Americans-killed-pirate/2011/02/22/id/386925
If the US Navy can't protect Americans from pirates, Maybe we need to contract the job to Israel.
Comments
It seems to be the only thing those people understand.
It would only take about one batallion of MARINES.
And I WILL VOLUNTER to go.
For GOD and COUNTRY
Not as Lean[:D][:D]Not as Mean[:(!][:(!]But STILL a MARINE[}:)][}:)]
Vet
I respect their desire to share Bibles with all who wish to accept them but these animals have no respect for anything but the opportunity to steal whatever they can.
What annoys me is the navy accepting the surrender of most of the pirates who will now spend years in US prisons going through various trials until at millions of dollars each, their eventual execution.
There should have been no prisoners.
We do not need a battleship; we need a president with a backbone.
Wulfmann
"Fools learn from their own mistakes. I learn from the mistakes of others"
Otto von Bismarck
We can not nor can Israel guarantee the safety of people willing to sail in dangerous waters.
I respect their desire to share Bibles with all who wish to accept them but these animals have no respect for anything but the opportunity to steal whatever they can.
What annoys me is the navy accepting the surrender of most of the pirates who will now spend years in US prisons going through various trials until at millions of dollars each, their eventual execution.
There should have been no prisoners.
We do not need a battleship; we need a president with a backbone.
Wulfmann
That would be a nice start!
We can not nor can Israel guarantee the safety of people willing to sail in dangerous waters.
I respect their desire to share Bibles with all who wish to accept them but these animals have no respect for anything but the opportunity to steal whatever they can.
What annoys me is the navy accepting the surrender of most of the pirates who will now spend years in US prisons going through various trials until at millions of dollars each, their eventual execution.
There should have been no prisoners.
We do not need a battleship; we need a president with a backbone.
Wulfmann
It's up to the Navy to insure there are no dangerous waters. Why can't the wipe out these scum? I know they have the means, but aparently they don't have the will.
Somali pirates hold dozens of ships and hundreds of prisoners at any one time. As many as 600 people at times are held hostage. This is a clear strategy on their part. They never allow their stock of hostages to fall too low, they know the value of Human Shields.
There is no one leadership organization, no one physical location to attack. Various criminal gangs and tribal factions run pirate operations.
The pirates operate over a massive area. They have been encountered over 1500 miles from Somalia. Look at the map, the coast of Somalia is huge and they operate from many ports. The waters of the Gulf of Aden, the Arabian sea and the Indian Ocean down to Madagascar in the south and the Maldives in the east have all seen Somali pirate activity.
The waters we are talking about are a critical route for sea travel. Avoiding the pirates is all but impossible without abandoning the Suez Canal and going completely around Africa.
Folks can blow steam about this all they want, but it ain't simple or easily solved.
Unless you don't mind shutting down a major sea route and letting hundreds of hostages be killed.
In which case, yeah, sure, blast away.
Personally I think it is going to take changes in international law to allow and require defense teams on all ships. Far larger naval deployments. Eventually invasion of Somalia by an international force to rescue what hostages can be saved, which will be few.
That's the price of all this.
And fiery auto crashes
Some will die in hot pursuit
While sifting through my ashes
Some will fall in love with life
And drink it from a fountain
That is pouring like an avalanche
Coming down the mountain
Yeah, horrible news requiring a deadly response. We have done many such responses already, as have other countries. The trouble is not one of inadequate backbone, it is one of finding a way to solve a complex threat without killing a whole lot of innocent people.
Somali pirates hold dozens of ships and hundreds of prisoners at any one time. As many as 600 people at times are held hostage. This is a clear strategy on their part. They never allow their stock of hostages to fall too low, they know the value of Human Shields.
There is no one leadership organization, no one physical location to attack. Various criminal gangs and tribal factions run pirate operations.
The pirates operate over a massive area. They have been encountered over 1500 miles from Somalia. Look at the map, the coast of Somalia is huge and they operate from many ports. The waters of the Gulf of Aden, the Arabian sea and the Indian Ocean down to Madagascar in the south and the Maldives in the east have all seen Somali pirate activity.
The waters we are talking about are a critical route for sea travel. Avoiding the pirates is all but impossible without abandoning the Suez Canal and going completely around Africa.
Folks can blow steam about this all they want, but it ain't simple or easily solved.
Unless you don't mind shutting down a major sea route and letting hundreds of hostages be killed.
In which case, yeah, sure, blast away.
Personally I think it is going to take changes in international law to allow and require defense teams on all ships. Far larger naval deployments. Eventually invasion of Somalia by an international force to rescue what hostages can be saved, which will be few.
That's the price of all this.
It's the bleeding hearts like you that get all misty eyed about 'innocent civilians' that keeps us from winning wars.
It's up to the Navy to insure there are no dangerous waters.
can you point me to the law, treaty, provision, or document of any kind that gives the us navy the authority to police that waters of the whole world? i cant seem to locate that reference.
between the navy and the coast guard, the territorial waters of the us and its territories are as same as we can reasonably make them. if you choose to venture out past that, then you have no right to expect protection from the us government.
the bottom line is that these people knowingly ventured into a dangerous place. this sort of thing has been going on for years now. its not a secret anymore. if you go to that area, you make the conscious decision to put yourself in harms way.
Long past time to get serious with these savages.
Too old to live...too young to die...
quote:Originally posted by RtWngExtrmst
It's up to the Navy to insure there are no dangerous waters.
can you point me to the law, treaty, provision, or document of any kind that gives the us navy the authority to police that waters of the whole world? i cant seem to locate that reference.
between the navy and the coast guard, the territorial waters of the us and its territories are as same as we can reasonably make them. if you choose to venture out past that, then you have no right to expect protection from the us government.
the bottom line is that these people knowingly ventured into a dangerous place. this sort of thing has been going on for years now. its not a secret anymore. if you go to that area, you make the conscious decision to put yourself in harms way.
Thomas Jefferson set the precedent about 200 years ago when he declared war on the Barbary Coast Pirates. If the US Navy can't protect Americans, what are they good for? Who do you think will police International waters? The UN?
Former Member U.S. Navy Shooting Team
Former NSSA All American
Navy Distinguished Pistol Shot
MO, CT, VA.
150 years ago, captains of naval vessels were authorized to -- and expected to -- kill known pirates on sight. They were brought on board, tried, found guilty, and hung without delay. It was a good plan.
Today, we are wimps. Nothing short of aerial and naval bombardment of their bases will do. Nothing less than firing squad for convicted pirates will do. The one clown we tried in NY recently got 33 years. What a joke! His prison time will be easy, compared to life back home. Three hot meals, free koran and prayer rug, a law library and exercise equipment. He should have been shot. Not for murder, but for piracy -- the last capital crime.
I think a few warning shots from even a bolt action rifle would be enough to make the pirates pick another target.
#2) you don't need a major port to operate speedboats and the type of craft the pirate use, its not as if there is just 1 pirate port that you can shut down and get rid of the problem.
You could cause massive civilian casualties, but you wouldn't stop the piracy
#3) These pirates should have been executed on the spot.
Pirates who surrender with their captives alive should be spared (at least initially until a trial). If you are a pirate, and being trailed by a ship, you should know that your only way to get out of the situation alive, is to keep the crew of the captured ship alive.
If they kill a crew member, we should kill them - its simple enough for even the most uneducated person to understand.
#4) You don't need a battleship to deal with pirates. Such ships would be massive wastes of fuel and money, and would only prompt jokes that the Americans are "overcompensating" for something
Its not like any of our military vessels has came close to being overpowered by the pirates.
The pirates have mistakenly attacked even the most vulnerable of military ships- unescorted supply ships/tenders. They were driven off by the ship and captured by the task force in short order.
If you still insist on hitting a port, one attack helicopter should be sufficient, which can be carried on vessels much smaller than a battleship.
Smaller vessels with only 8" guns would also be fine, its not as if Somalia has coastal defense batteries that the ship needs to keep out of their range.
The battleship was obsolete by 1940.
Sure, they saw some use in WWII (the last BB vs BB battle ever), mostly as naval artillery.
On land, guns 105-150mm are used just fine.
You don't need ships with calibers of over 400mm just to serve as artillery to support marines.
Especially now with aircraft and guided missiles that can direct fire support much farther inland with much greater accuracy (accuracy is very important if you are calling for fire support near to your current position!)
I bet if you asked for volunteers for this you would have a waiting list a decade long ! ! ! ! !
If the 15 surviving bastaards aren't hanged within 24 hours it means that I am not in charge of the situation.
Long past time to get serious with these savages.
I disagree entirely. They should let those poor misguided souls go.
I would allow them to swim home & would even give them directions on which way to swim. Maybe even help speed them on their way by putting chum in the water.
I do not, however, understand why people choose to travel unarmed in a relatively small and slow vessel to a region where piracy runs rampant. Why people have the "oh it can't happen to me" mentality is beyond my comprehension.
Last video I saw was the Russians allowing a bunch of pirates to go down with their ship. Very liberal of them even though there may have been handcuffs involved.[;)]
What is unusual in this is the deaths were the result of in-fighting among the pirates. It is exactly what they never do, bad for business. They know that.
Two pirates were aboard the USS Sterett to negotiate. The Navy was in contact with the pirate's "financier" and with elders of their villiage or tribe. The pirates had an internal dispute going on over money. Suddenly an RPG was fired at the Sterett from the yacht and shooting broke out among the pirates.
As 15 SEALS raced to the yacht using two inflatable boats some pirates stood at the bow with their hands in the air.
Upon boarding the yacht the SEALS met some resistance. One pirate was shot dead. Another was killed by a SEAL using a knife. Two other priates were found already shot to death by their fellow pirates.
At which point all surrendered.
Two hostages were dead, two others dying on the deck from their wounds.
All surviving pirates, including those who went to the Sterett to negotiate, are now being held on the USS Enterprise.
its not like Star Wars where all the mercenary scum in the sector hang out in Jabba's Palace [;)]
I bet most of the close to shore piracy is out of small fishing villages, and you can bet the little buzzards would quickly disappear if Marines were to come around looking in those villages.
I suppose a more concentrated effort could be made to ferret out motherships that allow the pirates to extend their range. Of course just having a trial aboard ship and shooting/hanging promptly would go a long way too.
Do you remember the news coverage of Mogadishu---specifically the image of those animals who, incidentally, hate us--- dragging the body of one of our servicemen through the streets?
This won't stop until we eliminate the need for "aid"---.
My question is why in the hell did they sail into those waters where the pirates operate? Were they that supid?
pretty much. Really these folks in Somalia really don't want your bibles. just your money, no money?? no life
Time to break out the effective idea from WWI...the Q ships. Very effective weapon on the high seas against subs/pirates. Take an old, slow, low freeboard vulnerable-looking ship and load it to the gills with unseen weapons. Just cruise the coast, kinda like fishing for pirates. Once the kids jump the ship, let them get close, drop the sides and let the fun begin! Could be a good training ground for the worlds naval special forces....kinda like a capstone graduation requirement. Just an idea[^]
+1 . . . . exactly the concept I was thinking ! ! ! !
They sailed through there knowing the consequences. I thank them for there sacrafice to the cause. We should do the exact same thing next time.
+1..stray from the waters of the US and its territories...and your chance of surviving the journey grows dim...
I'd see how long they could swim if wrapped in about 30 pounds of chain.
#1) Why do people sail into lawless waters (international waters) unarmed?
I think a few warning shots from even a bolt action rifle would be enough to make the pirates pick another target.
#2) you don't need a major port to operate speedboats and the type of craft the pirate use, its not as if there is just 1 pirate port that you can shut down and get rid of the problem.
You could cause massive civilian casualties, but you wouldn't stop the piracy
#3) These pirates should have been executed on the spot.
Pirates who surrender with their captives alive should be spared (at least initially until a trial). If you are a pirate, and being trailed by a ship, you should know that your only way to get out of the situation alive, is to keep the crew of the captured ship alive.
If they kill a crew member, we should kill them - its simple enough for even the most uneducated person to understand.
#4) You don't need a battleship to deal with pirates. Such ships would be massive wastes of fuel and money, and would only prompt jokes that the Americans are "overcompensating" for something
Its not like any of our military vessels has came close to being overpowered by the pirates.
The pirates have mistakenly attacked even the most vulnerable of military ships- unescorted supply ships/tenders. They were driven off by the ship and captured by the task force in short order.
If you still insist on hitting a port, one attack helicopter should be sufficient, which can be carried on vessels much smaller than a battleship.
Smaller vessels with only 8" guns would also be fine, its not as if Somalia has coastal defense batteries that the ship needs to keep out of their range.
The battleship was obsolete by 1940.
Sure, they saw some use in WWII (the last BB vs BB battle ever), mostly as naval artillery.
On land, guns 105-150mm are used just fine.
You don't need ships with calibers of over 400mm just to serve as artillery to support marines.
Especially now with aircraft and guided missiles that can direct fire support much farther inland with much greater accuracy (accuracy is very important if you are calling for fire support near to your current position!)
and just how do you propose to determine who you're firing warning shots at?
And fiery auto crashes
Some will die in hot pursuit
While sifting through my ashes
Some will fall in love with life
And drink it from a fountain
That is pouring like an avalanche
Coming down the mountain
[img][/img]
+1[}:)][}:)][}:)]
and just how do you propose to determine who you're firing warning shots at?
Any boat loaded with native men on a course that intersects your course, that has not properly identified itself while in that region.
The ocean is a big place, there is no reason for random ships to approach yours.