Idea to Reduce Somali Piracy ?

[delmarrey]

Originally Posted by Cadence10m

I agree that just shooting the bad guys won't permenantly fix the problem, because if you have nothing to lose you'll take the risk regardless of the likelihood that you'll die. A whole failed nation is a lot of potential volunteers for even nearly suicide pirate ops.

And I suspect that's what happen in this case. They were cornered like a rat and had nothing to lose. We already know that muslims will self destruct just to be a martyr for the religion. And going to jail would be like a hotel for some of these guys.

There are only two ways to deal with this. Go in and wipe out there resources for pirating or isolate them so they can't get out to sea.

IAW do our own bit of pirating, anyone out side their limit, just take their power boats away and transfer them back to shore w/o their guns. They don't have a government, so how are they going to protest?

[perchance]

The UN? Don't make me laugh. That bunch of hand wringing, wishy washy idiots couldn't come to a decision on Rwanda when the evidence of genocide was staring them in the face. Do you honestly think they will come up with an enforceable solution in our lifetime? I say send in the B 52's and spray them all (the pirates) with pork fat.
Unclean! Unclean!

[boatman61]

I think your being a bit elitist with 40ft.... not trying to be funny but there's people doing this in under 40ft boats.... whats the fate for them... killed by friendly fire... Sorry guys but **** Happens...??

[atoll]

i hear col ghaddafi and a few of his buddies are looking for a new country.............. must have billions stashed.................

[delmarrey]

Originally Posted by perchance

I say send in the B 52's and spray them all (the pirates) with pork fat.

Unfortunately, bombs take out some of the wrong people. Possibly, even the ones that could do the country good.

[Aussiesuede]

Capitalism 101: If there is money to be made, people will figure out a way. Over a trillion dollars, and the manpower of more than 10 armies hasn't put a dent in the drug trade because there is too much money to be made, and we have our collective heads too far up our ideological arses to do the common sense necessary to put a real dent in the problem. Folks will get all "rah rah" in the short term, but I'd easily bet a years salary that nothing will effectively change over the next half decade.

[Cadence10m]

"...there's people doing this in under 40ft boats..."

I don't follow you? I'm referring to the size of pirate boats, not cruising boats. Also it would be hard for me to have a smug view of cruising boats under 40' long, since I have one. I spent most of last year cruising with my family of four on my 37' ketch.

My idea is to not allow boats over 40' within a zone from say 5 nm to 50 nm off the coast of Somalia (those numbers are just a W.A.G. for sake of arguement and may need to be modified in the tight spot near the base of the Red Sea). Cruisers in any size boat would presumably not be within that distance of Somalia for any reason. Pirates in small boats without floating support have limited range and therefore limited effectivenss.

Craig

[David_Old_Jersey]

Originally Posted by psneeld

The UN is a totally toothless organization...probably why we didn't or still haven't paid some huge dues thing to it in years...we host the building...the rest is a joke...nice idea...but when you have to deal with socialists...all negotiating is fruitless.

The UN works perfectly. and exactly as intended Was never intended to bring about universal peace and happiness to all mankind.

Every Country can (and does) act as if the UN simply did not exist.........but the UN provides options - mainly from being all talk and no action.that allows countries to talk without having to also start a war to get there point accross (but they retain that option. and sometimes use it). Also helps in circumstances where events have developed beyond the intentions and both / all sides actually want a face saving way of de-escalating, even if only until the next time. don't over assume there was ever actually any great thought / end plan in motion in the first place! - most Wars are the result of cumulative actions / inactions. Even Hitler did not decide to start another World War and then cleared his diary to do so just a side effect of invading a few too many countries -

Before the UN we had 2 world wars.

And you are correct...trying to deal with desparate, lawless people...yep...like trying to teach pigs to fly.

I am a great beleiver in the power of violence - which is why I avoid it Whilst violence is a part of the answer, it isn't all of it (if it was the human race would by now be the most peaceful creatures on the planet ) - For the West. Somalia could be more easily (and cheaply) "solved" with some paperwork, inside a week - albeit being a safe and prosperous place would take a generation or 2 .

The situation is puzzling - a bit like the Sherlock Holmes "the dog that didn't bark".......... for something so easy to solve (and the status quo being fairly expensive to maintain) there must be vested interests afoot in keeping the pot bubbling.

[Woodchuck]

I agree that the solution to this problem lies on land. There's just too much ocean to effectively police with the assets that foreign governments are willing to commit. I think the UN should recognize Somaliland, the region of the country that already has a relatively functional government, and provide them with the navy they would need to patrol their own coast and take the safe-havens away from the bad actors. If they didn't have a place to take the ships they couldn't very effectively hold them for ransom.
I don't think it is helpful to categorize Somalis as either savages or extremist Muslims who are ready to blow themselves up for the slightest reason. Somalis are YOU without all the opportunity.

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by Woodchuck

I agree that the solution to this problem lies on land. There's just too much ocean to effectively police with the assets that foreign governments are willing to commit. I think the UN should recognize Somaliland, the region of the country that already has a relatively functional government, and provide them with the navy they would need to patrol their own coast and take the safe-havens away from the bad actors. If they didn't have a place to take the ships they couldn't very effectively hold them for ransom.
I don't think it is helpful to categorize Somalis as either savages or extremist Muslims who are ready to blow themselves up for the slightest reason. Somalis are YOU without all the opportunity.

Nice post mate...

[psneeld]

Originally Posted by David_Old_Jersey

The UN works perfectly. and exactly as intended Was never intended to bring about universal peace and happiness to all mankind.

Every Country can (and does) act as if the UN simply did not exist.........but the UN provides options - mainly from being all talk and no action.that allows countries to talk without having to also start a war to get there point accross (but they retain that option. and sometimes use it). Also helps in circumstances where events have developed beyond the intentions and both / all sides actually want a face saving way of de-escalating, even if only until the next time. don't over assume there was ever actually any great thought / end plan in motion in the first place! - most Wars are the result of cumulative actions / inactions. Even Hitler did not decide to start another World War and then cleared his diary to do so just a side effect of invading a few too many countries -

Before the UN we had 2 world wars.




I am a great beleiver in the power of violence - which is why I avoid it Whilst violence is a part of the answer, it isn't all of it (if it was the human race would by now be the most peaceful creatures on the planet ) - For the West. Somalia could be more easily (and cheaply) "solved" with some paperwork, inside a week - albeit being a safe and prosperous place would take a generation or 2 .

The situation is puzzling - a bit like the Sherlock Holmes "the dog that didn't bark".......... for something so easy to solve (and the status quo being fairly expensive to maintain) there must be vested interests afoot in keeping the pot bubbling.

Here's but one criticism of the UN...I could post or write a dozen more...but people believe what they want.

Wiki...

"Role of elite nations
There has been criticism that the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council (Russia, the United States, China, the United Kingdom, France), who are all nuclear powers, have created an exclusive nuclear club whose powers are unchecked. Unlike the General Assembly, the United Nations Security Council does not have true international representation. This has led to accusations that the UNSC only addresses the strategic interests and political motives of the permanent members, especially in humanitarian interventions: for example, protecting the oil-rich Kuwaitis in 1991 but poorly protecting resource-poor Rwandans in 1994.[1]"

No one in the US government (which I served 23 years in) that I ever talked to had any belief that the UN was anything more than a good old boys club.

All permanent solutions have multiple layers...fixing the problem is different than preventing todays piracy. Basic law enforcement from the beginning of time has shown that cops on the beat and the inevitable probability of getting caught with punishment is what deters crime...not just the law or the "threat" of punishment. The "guaranteed" thought that a US SEAL team bullet will pass through your head is what will put the biggest and most immediate stop to piracy...everything else is just smoke and mirrors...of course giving every Somali about 5 million may work just as well and is probably cheaper in the long run than operating a carrier task force.

[delmarrey]

Originally Posted by Woodchuck

I don't think it is helpful to categorize Somalis as either savages or extremist Muslims who are ready to blow themselves up for the slightest reason. Somalis are YOU without all the opportunity.

What is your definition of "savage" or "extremist"?

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by delmarrey

What is your definition of "savage" or "extremist"?

I would respond... but I like it here...

[tager]

I have found a solution that is guaranteed to work: Don't go near the Somalian coast.

Blammo! Problem solved! No more pirates!

People have completely forgotten that these pirates were fishermen before false flag fishing vessels came across the water and depleted their fisheries beyond the point of ecological recovery.

So now they have boats, but no jobs, what do you expect them to do? Not eat?

[GordMay]

I would define a “savage” as an uncivilized barbarian, probably violent.

I would define an “ extremist” as one who advocates or resorts to measures beyond the civilized norm.

Accordingly, pirates, and those who advocate kill on sight countermeasures, both exhibit signs of savagery and extremism.