US Navy Now Actively Attacking Somali Pirates - But What When Something Goes Wrong ?

B

B1ackwater

Guest
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A U.S. Navy destroyer is searching waters off
Somalia hunting for pirates who hijacked a Japanese-owned ship,
military officials said.

The destroyer USS Porter, shown in 2006, sank pirate skiffs tied to
the stern of a hijacked vessel.

Over the weekend, gunmen aboard two skiffs hijacked the
Panamanian-flagged Golden Nori off the Socotra archipelago near the
Horn of Africa, said Andrew Mwangura, a spokesman for the Kenyan-based
Seafarers' Assistance Program.

The Associated Press reported a second incident Tuesday involving
another hijacked ship, whose crew had overpowered pirates and regained
control of the vessel, according to officials.

The guided-missile destroyer USS Arleigh Burke has been pursuing the
pirates after entering Somali waters with the permission of the
troubled transitional government in Mogadishu, U.S. officials said
Monday. In recent years, warships have stayed outside the 12-mile
limit when chasing pirates.

Two military officials familiar with the details confirmed the ongoing
operation.

The Navy's pursuit of the pirates began Sunday night when the Golden
Nori radioed for help. The Burke's sister ship, the USS Porter, opened
fire and sank the pirate skiffs tied to the Golden Nori's stern before
the Burke took over shadowing the hijacked vessel.

When the shots were fired, it was not known the ship was filled with
highly flammable benzene. U.S. military officials indicate there is a
great deal of concern about the cargo because it is so sensitive.

- - - - -

Pirates Of The ... er ... Gulf of Aden ???

Yep. Piracy never died. While there are still pirates
in the Caribbean, mostly stealing yachts from filthy
rich people, a more conventional brand has been an
ongoing problem near anarchic Somalia for years. Looks
as if what passes for a government there (for now) is
sick of it - or isn't getting its cut.

However - going after pirates will eventually generate
unfortunate incidents. Shoot at a ship full of flammables
and you can kill hostages as well as pirates plus spill
nasties into the water. Hostages WILL get killed in these
operations too. The Somali pirates will surely trend towards
keeping more hostages as "human shields" now. Not to say
the "shields" wouldn't be killed anyway though ...

Is the USA prepared to take the flak when things go wrong ?
You KNOW that doing 1000 rights will be ignored and media
and governments will fixate on that ONE unfortunate incident
that happens once in a while ...
 

> Is the USA prepared to take the flak when things go wrong ?
> You KNOW that doing 1000 rights will be ignored and media
> and governments will fixate on that ONE unfortunate incident
> that happens once in a while ...


100% correct.

Under a Republican administration, the USA will do the right thing,
continue to hunt and kill the muslim pirates, and ignore the
hysterical shrieking of the anti-American elements.

Under a liberal Democrat administration, the USA will apologize for
the incident, fire the navy captain in charge, pay reperations to the
UN, and change US policy to avoid any confrontation with the pirates
in the future.
 
On Oct 30, 5:53 pm, SwampMidget <webmas...@101click.com> wrote:
> > Is the USA prepared to take the flak when things go wrong ?
> > You KNOW that doing 1000 rights will be ignored and media
> > and governments will fixate on that ONE unfortunate incident
> > that happens once in a while ...

>
> 100% correct.
>
> Under a Republican administration, the USA will do the right thing,
> continue to hunt and kill the muslim pirates, and ignore the
> hysterical shrieking of the anti-American elements.
>
> Under a liberal Democrat administration, the USA will apologize for
> the incident, fire the navy captain in charge, pay reperations to the
> UN, and change US policy to avoid any confrontation with the pirates
> in the future.


Just out of curiosity, exactly what jusrisdiction does the U.S. Navy
hold in Somali waters? There is no problem with stopping an on-going
crime, but who designated the US as patrol cop for the world?
 
On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 22:59:27 -0000, Wes Penn <wespenn56@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Oct 30, 5:53 pm, SwampMidget <webmas...@101click.com> wrote:
>> > Is the USA prepared to take the flak when things go wrong ?
>> > You KNOW that doing 1000 rights will be ignored and media
>> > and governments will fixate on that ONE unfortunate incident
>> > that happens once in a while ...

>>
>> 100% correct.
>>
>> Under a Republican administration, the USA will do the right thing,
>> continue to hunt and kill the muslim pirates, and ignore the
>> hysterical shrieking of the anti-American elements.
>>
>> Under a liberal Democrat administration, the USA will apologize for
>> the incident, fire the navy captain in charge, pay reperations to the
>> UN, and change US policy to avoid any confrontation with the pirates
>> in the future.

>
>Just out of curiosity, exactly what jusrisdiction does the U.S. Navy
>hold in Somali waters?


Territorial waters only extend 12 nautical miles out. Any further
than that, and the pirates are engaged in piracy on the high seas and
are subject to attack by any nation's navy.
 
B1ackwater wrote:
>
> WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A U.S. Navy destroyer is searching waters off
> Somalia hunting for pirates who hijacked a Japanese-owned ship,
> military officials said.



>
> - - - - -
>
> Pirates Of The ... er ... Gulf of Aden ???
>
> Yep. Piracy never died. While there are still pirates
> in the Caribbean, mostly stealing yachts from filthy
> rich people, a more conventional brand has been an
> ongoing problem near anarchic Somalia for years. Looks
> as if what passes for a government there (for now) is
> sick of it - or isn't getting its cut.
>
> However - going after pirates will eventually generate
> unfortunate incidents. Shoot at a ship full of flammables
> and you can kill hostages as well as pirates plus spill
> nasties into the water. Hostages WILL get killed in these
> operations too. The Somali pirates will surely trend towards
> keeping more hostages as "human shields" now. Not to say
> the "shields" wouldn't be killed anyway though ...
>
> Is the USA prepared to take the flak when things go wrong ?
> You KNOW that doing 1000 rights will be ignored and media
> and governments will fixate on that ONE unfortunate incident
> that happens once in a while ...
>

Bush has been quietly dealing with the problems off the coast for
Somalia now for years. You never know when something is going to flare
up, of course, but I think generally the US Navy can do this sort of
thing and should. If the world's free navies can't deal with pirates,
who can, who will? Capt. Nemo?


--
"Throw me that lipstick, darling, I wanna redo my stigmata."

+-Jennifer Saunders, "Absolutely Fabulous"
 
>>>>> B1ackwater writes:


B1ackwater> Pirates Of The ... er ... Gulf of Aden ???

B1ackwater> Yep. Piracy never died. While there are still pirates
B1ackwater> in the Caribbean, mostly stealing yachts from filthy
B1ackwater> rich people, a more conventional brand has been an
B1ackwater> ongoing problem near anarchic Somalia for years. Looks
B1ackwater> as if what passes for a government there (for now) is
B1ackwater> sick of it - or isn't getting its cut.

IT is not just Somalia, it is pretty much global. Usually they do not
steal the whole ship, just get all cash on board...

I read an interesting book about modern piracy a couple of years ago.
The title escapes me right now, but I can get it if you care...


--
Andrew Hall
(Now reading Usenet in talk.politics.misc...)
 
wes penn sez:

"Just out of curiosity, exactly what jusrisdiction does the U.S. Navy
hold in Somali waters? There is no problem with stopping an on-going
crime, but who designated the US as patrol cop for the world?..."
_____________________________
Where the hell have you been since about 1890 or so? I guess you want to
wait until Somali pirates are taking ships off the California coast.

I know the USN should stay at home and just do floats and stuff for liberal
Democrat parades and stuff, but the US Navy has been showing the flag around
the world for over a hundred years, just like the Brits did before they were
taken over by their liberals and they had to get out of the business.

Pirates, of any stripe, are fair game wherever they show their faces. I bet
even the Japs will have one of their ships helping the Yankee infidel dogs
kill moslem pirates, if they are not there already.
 
On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 22:59:27 -0000, Wes Penn <wespenn56@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Oct 30, 5:53 pm, SwampMidget <webmas...@101click.com> wrote:
>> > Is the USA prepared to take the flak when things go wrong ?
>> > You KNOW that doing 1000 rights will be ignored and media
>> > and governments will fixate on that ONE unfortunate incident
>> > that happens once in a while ...

>>
>> 100% correct.
>>
>> Under a Republican administration, the USA will do the right thing,
>> continue to hunt and kill the muslim pirates, and ignore the
>> hysterical shrieking of the anti-American elements.
>>
>> Under a liberal Democrat administration, the USA will apologize for
>> the incident, fire the navy captain in charge, pay reperations to the
>> UN, and change US policy to avoid any confrontation with the pirates
>> in the future.

>
>Just out of curiosity, exactly what jusrisdiction does the U.S. Navy
>hold in Somali waters? There is no problem with stopping an on-going
>crime, but who designated the US as patrol cop for the world?


For the record, the Somali "government" (such as it is)
extended an invitation last week to the US navy to persue
pirates into its territorial waters. Before that, our
ships ceased persuit at the 12-mile limit.

As for policing the world ... yea, it gets out of hand
sometimes. On the other hand, nobody else seems to
wanna do it, so we get stuck with the job. Protecting
commerce on the high seas IS in our interests, the
interests of our allies too. Alas, persuits into
territorial waters could evolve into persuits into
Somali territory proper - putting us in a similar
position to the LAST time we were there ... and
likely with similarly BAD results. Somali rad-
islamics would just LOVE to have American targets
to shoot at ....
 
On Oct 30, 11:37 pm, "Docky Wocky" <mrch...@lst.net> wrote:
> wes penn sez:
>
> "Just out of curiosity, exactly what jusrisdiction does the U.S. Navy
> hold in Somali waters? There is no problem with stopping an on-going
> crime, but who designated the US as patrol cop for the world?..."
> _____________________________
> Where the hell have you been since about 1890 or so? I guess you want to
> wait until Somali pirates are taking ships off the California coast.
>
> I know the USN should stay at home and just do floats and stuff for liberal
> Democrat parades and stuff, but the US Navy has been showing the flag around
> the world for over a hundred years, just like the Brits did before they were
> taken over by their liberals and they had to get out of the business.
>
> Pirates, of any stripe, are fair game wherever they show their faces. I bet
> even the Japs will have one of their ships helping the Yankee infidel dogs
> kill moslem pirates, if they are not there already.


The point, again, is who designated the us US as patrol cop for the
world? And why, if you are so comfortable with that, don't the
nations that use/benefit the "international waters" foot the expensive
and danger of patrolling their own ships which are carrying out their
own interests, not those of the American taxpayer?
 
In article <1193849394.116948.193880@v3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
wespenn56@gmail.com says...
>
>
>On Oct 30, 11:37 pm, "Docky Wocky" <mrch...@lst.net> wrote:
>> wes penn sez:
>>
>> "Just out of curiosity, exactly what jusrisdiction does the U.S. Navy
>> hold in Somali waters? There is no problem with stopping an on-going
>> crime, but who designated the US as patrol cop for the world?..."
>> _____________________________
>> Where the hell have you been since about 1890 or so? I guess you want to
>> wait until Somali pirates are taking ships off the California coast.
>>
>> I know the USN should stay at home and just do floats and stuff for liberal
>> Democrat parades and stuff, but the US Navy has been showing the flag

around
>> the world for over a hundred years, just like the Brits did before they

were
>> taken over by their liberals and they had to get out of the business.
>>
>> Pirates, of any stripe, are fair game wherever they show their faces. I bet
>> even the Japs will have one of their ships helping the Yankee infidel dogs
>> kill moslem pirates, if they are not there already.

>
>The point, again, is who designated the us US as patrol cop for the
>world? And why, if you are so comfortable with that, don't the
>nations that use/benefit the "international waters" foot the expensive
>and danger of patrolling their own ships which are carrying out their
>own interests, not those of the American taxpayer?
>

Because the US has taken it upon itself. Busybody to the world.
 
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 16:49:54 -0000, SteelersFanInTx
<wespenn56@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Oct 30, 11:37 pm, "Docky Wocky" <mrch...@lst.net> wrote:
>> wes penn sez:
>>
>> "Just out of curiosity, exactly what jusrisdiction does the U.S. Navy
>> hold in Somali waters? There is no problem with stopping an on-going
>> crime, but who designated the US as patrol cop for the world?..."
>> _____________________________
>> Where the hell have you been since about 1890 or so? I guess you want to
>> wait until Somali pirates are taking ships off the California coast.
>>
>> I know the USN should stay at home and just do floats and stuff for liberal
>> Democrat parades and stuff, but the US Navy has been showing the flag around
>> the world for over a hundred years, just like the Brits did before they were
>> taken over by their liberals and they had to get out of the business.
>>
>> Pirates, of any stripe, are fair game wherever they show their faces. I bet
>> even the Japs will have one of their ships helping the Yankee infidel dogs
>> kill moslem pirates, if they are not there already.

>
>The point, again, is who designated the us US as patrol cop for the
>world?


That would be the British when they gave up the job.

And why, if you are so comfortable with that, don't the
>nations that use/benefit the "international waters" foot the expensive
>and danger of patrolling their own ships which are carrying out their
>own interests, not those of the American taxpayer?


The United States has more oceanic commerce going on than any other
nation on Earth.
 
On Oct 31, 12:45 pm, David Johnston <da...@block.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 16:49:54 -0000, SteelersFanInTx
>
>
>
> <wespen...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Oct 30, 11:37 pm, "Docky Wocky" <mrch...@lst.net> wrote:
> >> wes penn sez:

>
> >> "Just out of curiosity, exactly what jusrisdiction does the U.S. Navy
> >> hold in Somali waters? There is no problem with stopping an on-going
> >> crime, but who designated the US as patrol cop for the world?..."
> >> _____________________________
> >> Where the hell have you been since about 1890 or so? I guess you want to
> >> wait until Somali pirates are taking ships off the California coast.

>
> >> I know the USN should stay at home and just do floats and stuff for liberal
> >> Democrat parades and stuff, but the US Navy has been showing the flag around
> >> the world for over a hundred years, just like the Brits did before they were
> >> taken over by their liberals and they had to get out of the business.

>
> >> Pirates, of any stripe, are fair game wherever they show their faces. I bet
> >> even the Japs will have one of their ships helping the Yankee infidel dogs
> >> kill moslem pirates, if they are not there already.

>
> >The point, again, is who designated the us US as patrol cop for the
> >world?

>
> That would be the British when they gave up the job.
>
> And why, if you are so comfortable with that, don't the
>
> >nations that use/benefit the "international waters" foot the expensive
> >and danger of patrolling their own ships which are carrying out their
> >own interests, not those of the American taxpayer?

>
> The United States has more oceanic commerce going on than any other
> nation on Earth.


Fine, then let the United States escort it's OWN vessels and leave the
the rest of the world to it's own. If the other nations of the world
want protection, charge them as any other security firm or insurance
company would do.

And if the Brits gave up the job, maybe it's saying they learned
something.
 
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 18:57:50 -0000, SteelersFanInTx
<wespenn56@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Oct 31, 12:45 pm, David Johnston <da...@block.net> wrote:
>> On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 16:49:54 -0000, SteelersFanInTx
>>
>>
>>
>> <wespen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >On Oct 30, 11:37 pm, "Docky Wocky" <mrch...@lst.net> wrote:
>> >> wes penn sez:

>>
>> >> "Just out of curiosity, exactly what jusrisdiction does the U.S. Navy
>> >> hold in Somali waters? There is no problem with stopping an on-going
>> >> crime, but who designated the US as patrol cop for the world?..."
>> >> _____________________________
>> >> Where the hell have you been since about 1890 or so? I guess you want to
>> >> wait until Somali pirates are taking ships off the California coast.

>>
>> >> I know the USN should stay at home and just do floats and stuff for liberal
>> >> Democrat parades and stuff, but the US Navy has been showing the flag around
>> >> the world for over a hundred years, just like the Brits did before they were
>> >> taken over by their liberals and they had to get out of the business.

>>
>> >> Pirates, of any stripe, are fair game wherever they show their faces. I bet
>> >> even the Japs will have one of their ships helping the Yankee infidel dogs
>> >> kill moslem pirates, if they are not there already.

>>
>> >The point, again, is who designated the us US as patrol cop for the
>> >world?

>>
>> That would be the British when they gave up the job.
>>
>> And why, if you are so comfortable with that, don't the
>>
>> >nations that use/benefit the "international waters" foot the expensive
>> >and danger of patrolling their own ships which are carrying out their
>> >own interests, not those of the American taxpayer?

>>
>> The United States has more oceanic commerce going on than any other
>> nation on Earth.

>
>Fine, then let the United States escort it's OWN vessels and leave the
>the rest of the world to it's own.


A great of American commerce is carried on other nation's vessels.

If the other nations of the world
>want protection, charge them as any other security firm or insurance
>company would do.


The United States is not doing this because it was asked to by other
nations, but because the pirates pose a problem for the United States.
Nor does the United State particular want to encourage other nations
to develop their force projection capabilities in order to deal the
problem themselves.
 
"B1ackwater" <bw@barrk.net> wrote in message
news:47277070.11837000@news.east.earthlink.net...
> WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A U.S. Navy destroyer is searching waters off
> Somalia hunting for pirates who hijacked a Japanese-owned ship,
> military officials said.
> - - - - -
> Pirates Of The ... er ... Gulf of Aden ???
> Yep. Piracy never died. While there are still pirates
> in the Caribbean, mostly stealing yachts from filthy
> rich people


Yep. I've met some before.

> Is the USA prepared to take the flak when things go wrong ?
> You KNOW that doing 1000 rights will be ignored and media
> and governments will fixate on that ONE unfortunate incident
> that happens once in a while ...


What happens at sea stays at sea......
 
"Wes Penn" <wespenn56@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1193785167.860157.228090@o80g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> Just out of curiosity, exactly what jusrisdiction does the U.S. Navy
> hold in Somali waters? There is no problem with stopping an on-going
> crime, but who designated the US as patrol cop for the world?


We've been helping Somalia with various problems for a couple of years.
 
"SteelersFanInTx" <wespenn56@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1193849394.116948.193880@v3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> The point, again, is who designated the us US as patrol cop for the
> world?


We designated ourselves.

In case you didn't the top 18 or so Nacies in the world COMBINED are still
less than half of ours....

Actually Somalia has been asking for our help for a couple of years now.
 
Back
Top