Hostages Taken off Somalia

[ViribusUnitis]

What about allow the insurance companies or ship owners to hire protection?

So the USN and RN arn't doing a decent enough job. If the ships owners were allowed to hire protection, the Navies of the world wouldn't have to do much of anything.

I'd say what would be perfectly doable is set up a protection company with a number of smallish boats with decent naval cannons on them, and as set of larger ships with the ability to operate helos. Register the boats in Somlia, or some other nation that doesn't care what they register. Hire Somolia natives to be the sailors and most of the crewmen. Then sell escort services to convoys of yachts, and/or security details to merchant ships transetting through the area. For merchant ships, a sercurity detail could be provided for each ship transitting the region, delivered by helo or high speed boat, and then picked back up when through the Red Sea. The goal of the security details would be to slow the pirates down to allow a fact reaction gun boat to arive and overpower the pirates.

Also provide for a number of "former" special services teams to recover stolen ships or hostages, at the insurance companies expence.

To an insurance company or a shipping owner, if there is a service avalible like that, $10 million in ransom, or $1 million in "recovery fees", or $100,000 per transit in "security", is a no brainer. No goverments. No legal questions. No news. And no pirates.

Similar for yachts, organize the yachts into convoys based on minimum speed with peroidic dates. Provide an armed escort for each convoy through the region, with helo back up support. Charge a fee for each transit.

[Eleven]

The UK press has recently confirmed that the UK Navy did in fact watch the kidnap 'from 50ft'. Disgracefull, the navy is shamed by the no-offence politics that dominate current politics governed by weak monetary based individuals.
Also the couple have again been on TV, looking apprehensive at the point of assault rifles and conveying threats of no more food or water until their demands are met.
I'm not sure whether these pirates are a single group, or just various bunches of lazy, hungry, individuals. Their techniques do seem very similar. Perhaps individual groups sell their captives on?
Either way the Navies of the free world must ensure that in international waters their citizens are allowed free passage, except where governmental claims are made. I'm pretty sure, even then, that a fugitive taken in international waters would not be prosecuted in UK or USA courts (out of a war zone of course).

[Rhoel_Asia]

Originally Posted by Eleven

The UK press has recently confirmed that the UK Navy did in fact watch the kidnap 'from 50ft'. Disgracefull, the navy is shamed by the no-offence politics that dominate current politics governed by weak monetary based individuals.

With an election in the offing, I would not be surprised to see calls for the First Sea Lord (the head of teh UK Navy) to fall on his sword. Ultimately it is his responibility for policy and in this case, inaction. His position is untenable.

As far as the safety of the Chandlers are concerned, The hostage takers might like to consider there is a sizable Somalis community in the UK and it would not take much to motivate the far right radicals such as the BNP into taking the law into their own hands.

Maybe that is the solution, to take Somali pirates hostage and demand million dollar randoms ... the cash flow isn't a problem, the Somali pirates have been given enough by the Spanish Government.

Unfortunately in this politically correct modern times, such common 16th century tit-for-tat actions are now ruled out-of-bounds. Anyone in favour of regime change? To the barricades, lads ..

Rhoel

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by Eleven

The UK press has recently confirmed that the UK Navy did in fact watch the kidnap 'from 50ft'. Disgracefull, the navy is shamed by the no-offence politics that dominate current politics governed by weak monetary based individuals.

As I understand the story, when the Navy Auxiliary ship arrived on scene, the armed pirates were already on board the Lynn Rival and they watched "from 50ft" as the Chandlers were moved, at gunpoint, to the 'mothership' via motor launch. So what should the 'Navy' have done at that point?

[Stillraining]

Sunk the skiff..put them all in the water and then rescue them.

[Therapy]

Originally Posted by Stillraining

Sunk the skiff..put them all in the water and then rescue them.

Put a big hole in the mother ship.

Call for help to "rescue" the lot.

[Stillraining]

That was the second option I thought of as well I agree..didn't know if they had the fire power......Idiots!

[jkleins]

Man, I don't want you guys handling my hostage situation. Putting a missile into the ship or sinking it some other way would be awful dangerous to the hostages. There are very few injuries or deaths from these pirates. I think I would rather let it play out then risk a hurried rescue/attack with me in their custody. I would personally prefer to play the odds.
Now when they get a situation like the Mersk "Alabama" (version 1) and the Navy can plan and get the proper players in place and circumstances are right to kill the pirates with long range sniper weapons, sure, go ahead but trying to disable or sink a ship in this circumstance would not be my choice if I were a hostage. I applaud the British Navy for their actions if not there handling of the publicity surrounding it.

Jim

[Stillraining]

Jim...either boat we were talking about firing on at one point did not have the hostages in or on....This was a command debockle plain and simple...the solders could have easily handled it with their training..but were handcuffed waiting for orders that never came.

At 50 ft I could have taken my choice of targets be-it water line of skiff or chest cavity of thug with my daw-gone compound bow and not ever missed...I know I was not there but I will never believe they didn't have an opportunity to intervene safely or as safely as it could have gotten from this point forward trying to rescue them now.

[Roy M]

Do we really want to be talking about the tactics and strategies of our guys versus the bad guys? Sure, it feels good to vent, but none of us probably sees the big picture in a particular situation. Do ANY of you seriously think our guys are not considering ALL of the options available? Do ANY of you seriously think that our guys are not considering everything short of nuking the bad guys? Give us all a break. Rambos are fantasy figures, not folks who understand consequence.

[Stillraining]

NO.... I do believe that for the combat soldiers most emphatically....but you know better then that when it comes to political correctness of command nowadays...and that's what I said.
FWIW...Every Coast Guard jumper or Seal or special ops is a Rambo...they have to be.

[David_Old_Jersey]

Originally Posted by jkleins

Man, I don't want you guys handling my hostage situation. Putting a missile into the ship or sinking it some other way would be awful dangerous to the hostages. There are very few injuries or deaths from these pirates. I think I would rather let it play out then risk a hurried rescue/attack with me in their custody. I would personally prefer to play the odds..............applaud the British Navy for their actions if not there handling of the publicity surrounding it.

Jim

Jim,

I am guessing you are an American - UK Govt has very different ways of looking after it's citizens. It will do anything it can..........to not get blamed for anything..........so I wouldn't go thinking the inaction by the RN was part of any great thinking, let alone a plan to minimise the risk to the Chandlers.

Anything that happens ashore in Somalia is not now the fault of HMG - "mission accomplished"

The days of Churchill / Nelson etc are long since gone..........


(FWIW in the same circumstances I would be happy to have a boat shot out from under me and take the risks their and then, rather than await my fate onshore in Somalia (with Pirates / Islamicists / Health) given that I don't have USD4M spare for ransom, and that HMG will neither be paying nor launching a rescue mission. Indeed I strongly suspect that HMG won't even be negotiating........God Save the Queen! )

[Ocean Girl]

I am sure the Brits wanted to blow them out of the water and were well capable of doing it. One well trained soldier is better than ten or even twenty somalian thugs when it comes to training, strength, and courage. It irks me that it is implied that this choice of not shooting up the sailboat and skiffs is somehow an act of cowardice. Cooler heads prevailed, it was the best move, lets hope it was the right one. If the thugs kill them then maybe a rambo move was in order. But so far most hostages are not killed by the pirates. Sorry if I sound a bit bent out of shape, everyone is allowed their own opinion ( even if it is wrong).
I was an Air Force brat, which means my Dad was a serviceman so I grew up on Air Force bases. I don't know about British servicemen, but Americans are mostly honorable and would (and do) give their lives for a fellow soldier or civilian. My dad was a photographer for the AF. He would go up with the Thunderbirds and even the Navy's Blue Angels to take photo shoots. I used to go out on the Tarmac and watch. The pilots would joke with me about how full they could get my dads barf bag or the fastest time it took to get him to lose his lunch. Every time he'd hop out of that jet the barf bag would be full and he'd be green, but his eyes would sparkle over the shot he got. I know I am way off topic! sorry, I'll try to bring it back to the point at hand. It is very easy for us to sit safely on the side lines, using hindsight to critic what should of been done. Critique all you want, but to imply cowardice on the side of the soldier simply shows how profoundly misinformed you are. I grew up around soldiers, some were jerks, some were nice, but none, let me repeat, none were cowards. Lord I am sorry for my rant, but I am still going to post this. So much crap the average soldier has to put up with, being called a coward shouldn't be one of them.

Erika

[Stillraining]

Who here is saying anything about the soldiers cowardice????? Please reread what has been said!
It was lack of command...has nothing to do with bravery..The command to do nothing was in some of our opinions the wrong one..that's all.. no different then your opinion...

[Ocean Girl]

Uh er.... you are right. I was reading an older post about the navy "watching them get taken" and "running away". OK, one problem with rants is you tend to regret them, I don't totally regret this rant, though it was a bit late in coming
Sorry,
Erika