Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Defending against the Somali pirates.

  • 11-04-2009 09:21PM
    #1
    jayteecork
    Site Banned Posts: 5,676 ✭✭✭


    So I'm sick of hearing about Merchant Ships being captured by at most 10 Africans weilding Ak47s and driving inflatabale dingies.

    How on earth are they getting away with for so long?

    Why don't you arm the crew with some automatic firearms, and shoot the bastards as they climb up the rope or however they do it.

    The height advantage and ability to fire down completely sheltered should do away with these nasty c***s.


«1

Comments

  • #2
    Dudess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37,214 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    Well it must not be as straightforward as that, otherwise the US would have intervened. There's bound to be a good explanation for the inaction.


  • #3
    Snowie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,048 ✭✭✭✭Snowie


    but in fairness black people really are crap at shooting :D

    so what 30 rounds in an ak47 what are the chances of 2 of you hitting you id say the odds are in your favour fire axe ftw


  • #4
    Thomas_S_Hunterson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,151 ✭✭✭Thomas_S_Hunterson


    Dudess wrote: »
    There's bound to be a good explanation for the inaction.

    Somalia has no oil.


  • #5
    luckylucky
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,437 ✭✭✭luckylucky


    been there, done that.
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055535623


  • #6
    Jimbo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,379 ✭✭✭Jimbo


    Apparently the pirates are usually heavily armed (RPGs, etc) so shooting at them might'nt be the best idea.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    Terry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,073 ✭✭✭✭Terry


    Dudess wrote: »
    Well it must not be as straightforward as that, otherwise the US would have intervened. There's bound to be a good explanation for the inaction.

    They may be overstretched.
    I was gonna use that pic to start a thread in US politics, but then remember that I don't really care that much.


  • #8
    Hogzy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,545 ✭✭✭Hogzy


    Ships tend not to carry firearms as it increases the risk of a serious injury at sea, its completely understandable!

    There has to be some solution out there to be able to prevent people climbing on board anyways, Like extra high walls or something like that...i dunno im not a ship design person but a problem of people climbing on board should be easily solvable!


  • #9
    TheZohanS
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,581 ✭✭✭✭TheZohanS


    Jimbo wrote: »
    Apparently the pirates are usually heavily armed (RPGs, etc) so shooting at them might'nt be the best idea.

    Never underestimate heavily armed Really P1ssed-off Grannys.


  • #10
    Hagar
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,786 ✭✭✭✭Hagar


    RPGs have only one use, to inflict damage on armoured targets using the hollow charge principle They are not high explosive and don't have much of a kill radius. If they miss you, they miss you. There is little chance of being injured by a near miss. Take into account the poor training in its use that the attackers would have you would be pretty safe going up against it with an automatic pistol and a pointy stick. I'd be more afraid of the AK47s as they are far easier to aim properly. IMHO fear is the enemy of the crews, they need to defend themselves with everything at their disposal from the first hint of trouble. A small boat coming under fire from trained men on a height and from behind steel plate decking etc shouldn't stand a chance.


  • #11
    Terry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,073 ✭✭✭✭Terry


    Hagar wrote: »
    RPGs have only one use, to inflict damage on armoured targets using the hollow charge principle They are not high explosive and don't have much of a kill radius. If they miss you, they miss you. There is little chance of being injured by a near miss. Take into account the poor training in its use that the attackers would have you would be pretty safe going up against it with an automatic pistol and a pointy stick. I'd be more afraid of the AK47s as they are far easier to aim properly. IMHO fear is the enemy of the crews, they need to defend themselves with everything at their disposal from the first hint of trouble. A small boat coming under fire from trained men on a height and from behind steel plate decking etc shouldn't stand a chance.
    A couple of hand grenades would sort that.
    Seriously.
    Just lob the ****ers at the small boat. One of them has to hit the target.
    It none do, they would at least scare the pirates off.

    Just hire someone trained in throwing grenades as a deck hand or something.
    Cheaper than losing your cargo and paying more in insurance.


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    TheZohanS
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,581 ✭✭✭✭TheZohanS


    Hagar wrote: »
    RPGs have only one use, to inflict damage on armoured targets using the hollow charge principle They are not high explosive and don't have much of a kill radius. If they miss you, they miss you. There is little chance of being injured by a near miss. Take into account the poor training in its use that the attackers would have you would be pretty safe going up against it with an automatic pistol and a pointy stick. I'd be more afraid of the AK47s as they are far easier to aim properly. IMHO fear is the enemy of the crews, they need to defend themselves with everything at their disposal from the first hint of trouble. A small boat coming under fire from trained men on a height and from behind steel plate decking etc shouldn't stand a chance.

    What about babysitting?


  • #13
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 5,079 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Sean_K wrote: »
    Somalia has no oil.

    Neither did Vietnam and how long were they there?:confused:
    They do have some sort of interest in Somalia that I cant explain not an interest like Iraq though. But enough of an interest to side with the gangs they previously fought against to oppose the Islamic forces that almost took over the entire country. The Islamic forces spread law and order while they advanced and installed government (yes it was Sharia law though).

    The pirates are fairly well organised so it seems with whole communities behind them and are better armed than just a bunch of AK47s. . . !

    http://uk.reuters.com/article/UKNews1/idUKTRE53A0ZJ20090411
    a Portuguese warship protecting shipping lanes from piracy, said an unexploded rocket-propelled grenade landed in the commanding officer's cabin during the attack and bullets were fired at the ship.

    If the boyos are gettin away with shooting rockets and bullets at Naval ships then this has got to have something more to it??

    RE them not having oil - it still affects countries economically -wasnt a huge oil tranporter caught before? The UN even passed a resolution on this allowing nations do "whatever is necessary" to stop the pirates!
    UN resolution 1816, which was approved on June 2, 2008, allows foreign navies to enter Somalian territorial waters to pursue pirates while resolution 1838, which was passed on October 20, 2008, authorises the use of “necessary means” to combat piracy in international waters
    http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/msid-3738889,flstry-1.cms


  • #14
    Hogzy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,545 ✭✭✭Hogzy


    I think the use of grenades on an oil tanker might be a little bit overkill!


  • #15
    dlofnep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,759 ✭✭✭✭dlofnep


    Nukes, tbh.


  • #16
    ScumLord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,787 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    These men may not be trained but they have experience in firing weapons and attacking ships. That does count for allot.


  • #17
    blogga
    Closed Accounts Posts: 344 ✭✭blogga


    One of the great advantages of living in the dismal backwater of the Repuberlic is that it is extremely unlikely that we will have to defend against the Somali pirates. You may rest easy now. Easy now.


  • #18
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Dudess wrote: »
    Well it must not be as straightforward as that, otherwise the US would have intervened.

    No oil?


  • #19
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    jayteecork wrote: »
    So I'm sick of hearing about Merchant Ships being captured by at most 10 Africans weilding Ak47s and driving inflatabale dingies.

    How on earth are they getting away with for so long?

    Why don't you arm the crew with some automatic firearms, and shoot the bastards as they climb up the rope or however they do it.

    The height advantage and ability to fire down completely sheltered should do away with these nasty c***s.

    Africas fairly conservative. A few men dancing around shirtless and some strapping fellow with a big mustache and nice leather cap winking suggestively should see them off.


  • #20
    ShooterSF
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,822 ✭✭✭ShooterSF


    We've been over this before the damage they do is more than negated by the reduction in global warming we see from their existence.


  • #21
    Armin_Tamzarian
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,833 ✭✭✭✭Armin_Tamzarian


    This would never have happened if they had hired a better cook...

    http://www.iwatchstuff.com/2008/10/02/under-siege-seagal.jpg


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    tony1kenobi
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,755 ✭✭✭tony1kenobi


    jayteecork wrote: »
    So I'm sick of hearing about Merchant Ships being captured by at most 10 Africans weilding Ak47s and driving inflatabale dingies.
    How on earth are they getting away with for so long?
    Why don't you arm the crew with some automatic firearms, and shoot the bastards as they climb up the rope or however they do it.
    The height advantage and ability to fire down completely sheltered should do away with these nasty c***s.

    Morality and civility would be two immediate assumptions.


  • #23
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 145 ✭✭ [Deleted User]


    If you really want to beat an enemy at sea what you need to do is employ Russel Crowe to be a hard 19th century captain. Add a poofish Irish doctor to be level headed and what you have is alot of dead pirates, funny costumes and rum.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzG4K2m_j5U

    The natives wouldnt stand a chance!


  • #24
    partyatmygaff
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,992 ✭✭✭✭partyatmygaff


    I think way too many people play Call of Duty 4 and the like to actually see why the US dont just send in 50 men armed with M4A1s and combat gear to get rid of the pirates.
    The pirates see one enemy soldier and they'll kill a hostage, 1 hostage dies and they'll threaten to kill them all if attacked.

    More than likely they've already planned to infiltrate the boat with a small group of 2-3 expert soldiers to sneak in and kill as many pirates as possible and save the hostages, solid snake style ;)


  • #25
    nogoodnamesleft
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,028 ✭✭✭nogoodnamesleft


    Probably a way too serious answer for After Hours but here goes....My occupation brings me on board merchant vessels from time to time and I have sailed though the Suez on more than one occasion. Anyways trying to police weapons on that have been issued on board would be a huge task, never mind on a fleet of vessels. Ammunition etc would be a fire hazzard and what would happen on the occassion that crew men have a disagreement? Some ship management companies have a big enough problem trying to limit the alcohol comsumed on board and some have prohibited it! as it led to deaths, falling down flights of stairs and punchups. Plus by entering different waters they would be goverened by that countries legislation regarding firearms.

    The vessels used sail around 100 nautical miles off the coast but have pushed it out to about to 300 - 400 nautical miles as they origionally thought the pirates speed boats would not venture out that far. Since the Sirrus Star incident some ships have stopped using the Suez are are instead sailing around the Cape of Good Hope.


  • #26
    Biggins
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 34,567 ✭✭✭✭Biggins


    Take into account that having registered firearms on a ship also means that there is a heap of paperwork to be filled in with every dock entry and exit.
    Also because of onboard arms, most dockland security (at the instance of a government) also do more intensive additional full searches of entire ships as well.
    What it all adds up to is a series of further delays for each ship for each port.

    This is on top of men having been confined on what is closed space for sometimes long periods, sometimes snap in the heat of moments.
    So the idea that firearms might be used at those moments don't make a captain or two happy sometimes lol.
    Add to that the possibility that accidents happen with these weapons also on board what sometimes carries volatile items such as gas, etc...

    The primary reason however given for not carrying weapons on board as far as the shipping companies are concerned is the first one.


  • #27
    A-Trak
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,315 ✭✭✭A-Trak


    Hagar wrote: »
    RPGs have only one use, to inflict damage on armoured targets using the hollow charge principle......

    *Scratches HMS Hagar off his pirate target list*


  • #28
    Jonty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,830 ✭✭✭Jonty


    ScumLord wrote: »
    These men may not be trained but they have experience in firing weapons and attacking ships. That does count for allot.

    Does anybody know if they are hiring??


  • #29
    KerranJast
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,828 ✭✭✭KerranJast


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Neither did Vietnam and how long were they there?:confused:
    They do have some sort of interest in Somalia that I cant explain not an interest like Iraq though. But enough of an interest to side with the gangs they previously fought against to oppose the Islamic forces that almost took over the entire country. The Islamic forces spread law and order while they advanced and installed government (yes it was Sharia law though).
    The US sided with the anti-Islamist gangs as they were the only thing stopping Al Quaeda from setting up shop there a la Afghanistan in the 90s. Lesser of two evils IMO. If the International community organised a proper convoy system these incidents would fall off rapidly. The pirates may be cocky but only a insane man would go up against a Battleship in a dinghy. Alternatively the UN could hire the Indian Navy, who have been asking for ages, to act as a regional naval patrol in the area. They'd have to allow the Indians to use deadly force though which could prove problematic to get approved.


  • #30
    mikemac
    Closed Accounts Posts: 19,967 ✭✭✭✭mikemac


    nogoodnamesleft wrote: »
    Probably a way too serious answer for After Hours but here goes....My occupation brings me on board merchant vessels from time to time and I have sailed though the Suez on more than one occasion. Anyways trying to police weapons on that have been issued on board would be a huge task, never mind on a fleet of vessels. Ammunition etc would be a fire hazzard and what would happen on the occassion that crew men have a disagreement? Some ship management companies have a big enough problem trying to limit the alcohol comsumed on board and some have prohibited it! as it led to deaths, falling down flights of stairs and punchups. Plus by entering different waters they would be goverened by that countries legislation regarding firearms.

    Interesting post.

    Fair enough if they won't give the crew access to weapons. But much like navy ships carry marines, could the merchant ships not carry a team of military personnel on loan from some country?
    They hold the weapons, not the crew

    But then maybe the captain needs to control everything. It's seems an obvious solution but it's never quite that simple.


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    nomorebadtown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 634 ✭✭✭nomorebadtown


    Small highly trained private security teams, well armed, that are put on vessels due to sail through dangerous waters. They stay seperate from the crew and only become active when there is an attack.

    Somewhere, somehow, someone's going to pay.


Advertisement
Advertisement