Pirates take another Brit Yacht......
- Thread starter Edwin
- Start date
puddock
Well-Known Member
With all due respect Alcyone (I usually agree with your views on most things) but I disagree.
We are tax payers and we pay for defence of OUR liberties - not the rights of some criminal.
We are part of the European Union - if other notable countries in the EU are not pulling their weight in assisting with the duty of keeping free and honest global trade open, either cut the subsidies (substantially) or get them the hell out of the EU.
You say "This really is a huge and very costly issue, and I don't think it's as simple as just sending the Navy out to sort it every time. We are the ones that go to these places, it's our risk. "
Wrong - Do the job properly and a clear message is sent, negating the need to "send the navy out every time". An added bonus of this, if we could work on reducing the endemic corruption in these countries, is that trade would increase in these countries along with employment etc.
EVERY country that has a piracy problem, in and around their waters, has a MASSIVE problem with corruption.
Last edited:
RichardTaylor
Well-Known Member
I dont think there is any suggestion of deploying the navy in that fashion, however it is reported that the RN/RM stood by as the Chandlers were hijacked. The Somalis must be peeing themselves with laughter at such inaction.
If the Chandlers loose their lives to these Pirates, I hope the bureaucratic Whitehall idiot is identified and is made to explain the human rights of the Somali Pirates to the next of kin.
Algol
Active Member
Don't be stupid. There's no oil in Somalia, so noone in the West is interested. And no state is so bothered about the hassle to shipping to do much about it. Fevered dreams of huge task forces going out there just because two retirees on a yacht got taken on a holiday to Somalia are just that - dreams.
A
Alcyone
Guest
No disrespect, Puddock, but where does it stop? How long must we have the navy deployed over there? How much does it cost, and what ghappens if there is a yacht taken in Central America or the South China seas next week?
If it is our policy to act as enforcers in this region, do we do it elsewhere?
I'd rather see us contribute to an international anti-piracy organisation, funded, partly perhaps by commercial shipping using the region.
Algol
Active Member
I'd rather see some money put into developing fishing, ports and a navy in Somalia. They've had their waters fished out by foreign factory-scale fishing operations, toxic waste from Europe dumped in their waters. Foreign companies benefitted, foreign countries should pay. As a country Somalia did well while the cold war was on but now they're no use to anyone so have been left to hang out in the sun. And as long as that's the case they'll pirate if they can.
puddock
Well-Known Member
Listen you sh... (only joking
)I am not talking a few yachties going wandering off the beaten track. I am talking piracy on a global scale, which has been allowed to escalate to unacceptable levels due to the "SOFTLY SOFTLY" approach.
Do you ever wonder WHY it has increased almost inline with the reduction of our Naval Forces?
We, apparently, have an obligation as part of the "developed world", to be protectors of freedom, civil liberties and free trade. This is, I assume, why we are so welcoming to those from parts of the World that arrive daily to seek refuge from their own countries injustices.
Is it therefore, unjustified, to expect our own government to use some of OUR resources (which we have actually paid for) to enforce International Law?
Remember also, these countries are, nowadays, in a downward spiral. They were granted independance when "most" of them had very good infrastructure in place, yet due to corruption and short sightedness of their leaders, this infrastructure was never used to the advantage of their people (but to the GREAT advantage of those in power).
There are great opportunities to be had in these countries, if Governments would be interested in "the long game" rather than making do until the next election. Maybe protection of trade routes might actually be an investment...........
What is going to happen if we do nothing about this problem? Will it go away?
Will the refuges from "screwed up countries" stop coming to Europe because their goverments have sorted themselves out, decided to become "financially transparent" and their country is getting back on its feet? Remember, enormous amounts of ligitimate trade and industry has been wiped out in those countries due to corruption and governments led by someone who, 5 years previously, was probably the nastiest Pimp on the block .........
Algol
Active Member
Absolute twaddle. Most African countries are ruled by those who are most friendly (ie, corrupt) to the multinationals who extract metals, agricultural produce etc. Then only reason Somalia's going down the pan is there's nothing any Western co can make huge profits out of
Spyro
Well-Known Member
Fishermen or pirates will soon learn, DO NOT approach other vessels. It's not difficult.
Got to agree with Puddock.
puddock
Well-Known Member
No homework or Youth Club tonight?
Please do endeavour to enlighten us with your experiences of growing up, working and living in these malaligned places.
Algol
Active Member
Malaligned? WTF does that mean? Sounds like you're the one who needs to do some homework. The English language would be a good place to start. Enriching the abuse with some facts would be next on the list.
toad_oftoadhall
Well-Known Member
Think about it. It's unworkable, and ineffective for (at least) the following reasons:
a) Pirates don't wear uniforms or carry ID badges. So what you're really saying is you want to kill any black person in a motorboat. Which is almost everyone in the area I would think!
b) The local fishermen carry weapons to protect themselves from kidnappers. So even if you find a scruffy boat with weaponry you still don't know they are kidnappers.
c) The Pirate bosses don't give a **** if their minions come back or not.
d) I doubt the risk of death will put people of kidnapping for a good earner somewhere as poor and dangerous as Somalia.
e) Pirates that don't have hostages will always surrender. Even the SS didn't like killing prisoners - they used to get 60pc signing off sick to avoid the day's killing. That's why they had to switch to gas chambers to make it all less personal. I can't imagine a decent British bloke agreeing to shoot a guy with his hands up. The ones that will are going to end up mentally ill. (Or already are.)
f) Pirates that do have hostages... Well we've already seen how difficult it is to rescue hostages. (All you need is a hostage taker clutching a grenade with the pin out and you simply can't fire on him even with snipers - and that assumes you have a snipers and they don't miss and hit a hostage.)
e) Would you advocate shooting criminals in the UK without trial?
Jim's right - when the money dries up the Piracy dries up. We need to stop the problem at root - with the ransoms.
Convoys would work but the problem is considered such a small scale that insurers don't insist on them. Even the yachts don't deem it worthwhile to go in convoy. (Maybe if things get worse there will be Convoys.)
Ultimately somehow we're going to have to build a working state in Somalia. Not sure how you do that.
Algol
Active Member
Nail > Head
A
Alcyone
Guest
Listen you sh... (only joking
I am not talking a few yachties going wandering off the beaten track. I am talking piracy on a global scale, which has been allowed to escalate to unacceptable levels due to the "SOFTLY SOFTLY" approach.
Do you ever wonder WHY it has increased almost inline with the reduction of our Naval Forces?
We, apparently, have an obligation as part of the "developed world", to be protectors of freedom, civil liberties and free trade. This is, I assume, why we are so welcoming to those from parts of the World that arrive daily to seek refuge from their own countries injustices.
Is it therefore, unjustified, to expect our own government to use some of OUR resources (which we have actually paid for) to enforce International Law?
Remember also, these countries are, nowadays, in a downward spiral. They were granted independance when "most" of them had very good infrastructure in place, yet due to corruption and short sightedness of their leaders, this infrastructure was never used to the advantage of their people (but to the GREAT advantage of those in power).
There are great opportunities to be had in these countries, if Governments would be interested in "the long game" rather than making do until the next election. Maybe protection of trade routes might actually be an investment...........
What is going to happen if we do nothing about this problem? Will it go away?
Will the refuges from "screwed up countries" stop coming to Europe because their goverments have sorted themselves out, decided to become "financially transparent" and their country is getting back on its feet? Remember, enormous amounts of ligitimate trade and industry has been wiped out in those countries due to corruption and governments led by someone who, 5 years previously, was probably the nastiest Pimp on the block .........
I'm not being flippant, but Nelson's dead.
The days when we could do this sort of thing, when we had a navy and could afford to send it out on patrol, they are in the past.
I'd love to see the Brits go out there and sort these pirates out. I'd love to see the SAS storm Somalia and bring the Chandlers home triumphantly. To me, sadly, it's a non starter. I just don't feel we could afford it, and if we could, I think the general population, who could not give a toss for us yachties, would be up in arms at the cost.
Not now, maybe, but in 5 years, when nobody else has been taken and it's not in the papers and the taxpayer gets a bil for £200million or whatever.
No, to me, international action, or convoys with larger vessels at intervals would be a better solution.
Marsupial
Well-Known Member
So you would agree that colonial exploitation (the west installing a puppet government) is the best thing that could happen to a third world economy, and that in the absence of such exploitation piracy on the high seas is entirely justifiable.
Not an opinion I would hold.
The Somalis are responsible for their own destiny and must therefore be accountable for their own actions, so they have no cohesive government no law and order, a few conglomerates have done the dirty on them ALLEGEDLY – so what? does that mean they are immune from international law?. They are a disparate tribal bunch that only wants an easy ride; if they cant steal from each other then they will steal from anyone else, they must be expunged.
puddock
Well-Known Member
So, why the F--K are we seen as a "safe haven"?
And if you follow my posts, you will read that it was intentioned as an EU obligation. The US being to busy to start wars with people that don't have Oil. (Look at Angola during the S.Africa bush wars troubles ......SA Troops, 35 Klms outside Angolan Capital, US pres calls and tells SA to send the troops back to SA. Major oil finds in Angola, US have most of the operator licenses. Angolan Pres = 2nd richest man in Brazil, daughters own Angolan mobile phone networks.......... but, God Bless, they still had Princess Diana on their stamps, honouring her work in helping the "landmine" victims. Incidentally, during a casual chat in a bar one evening (with what I assumed to be an ageing hippy) I got speaking to an American gent, himself disabled, who was working for a charity that supplied and repaired wheelchairs. This was at no cost to the Angolan or ANY government. They were getting ready to pull out as they had been hit with a massive tax bill for the wheelchairs, spares and crutches they were supplying????
Last edited:
Marsupial
Well-Known Member
Well convoys are already being used and that is the main reason why the pirates are now operating 1000 miles or more offshore. Shipping companies don’t like convoys because they are as fast as the slowest ship.
We do have quite a few RN units in the area on active service but the politicians have tied their hands and blindfolded them with silly rules of engagement, if they manage to catch a pirate they take away his gun and release him to try again another day.
This does pose the question -what is the gun for? Clearly it doesn’t intimidate the pirates.
Why do we have the grey funnel line at all? we are paying for them to be there!
Naval intelligence (there’s an oxymoron) should be able to identify these people and deal with them without the presence of captives.
toad_oftoadhall
Well-Known Member
How?
Tugw
Well-Known Member
Marsupial
Well-Known Member
For a start they know the ones they catch - follow them - tag them - hound them
They know some of the motherships they come from - follow them - find out where they go, who's on board - when its empty of hostages sink it.
Picket their ports of operation - if they cry foul you're in our waters say tough send your navy out for a fight or hand over the hostages.
we are paying for them to be there - lets see some results - so far its not clear if they have any impact on the problem at all.
Where's a mad Mitch when you need one.