Grumpybear
Well-Known Member
because in our God-forsaken country that is what they know they can get away with. I spent 20 years in the RN, and until I read this story I was proud of that. Not any more
The NAvy WERE THERE at kidnap of Lynn Rival
- Thread starter FullCircle
- Start date
Kukri
Well-Known Member
The Navy goes in for particularly expensive toys. HMS ASTUTE (interesting name...) has just been delivered - £1.2Bn for a hunter killer submarine. No doubt she is a very good one but the Navy need seven of them and only three have been ordered. Only six type 45 destroyers when twelve were what was needed. And the two carriers can still be cancelled.
Meanwhile the Army has people actually fighting and dying and complaining about inadequate equipment.
If there is going to BE a Navy for my dead-keen-on-the Navy son to join, in a very few years time, someone, in the words of His Royal Highness Commander Philip Mountbatten, needs to pull his finger out.
Meanwhile the Army has people actually fighting and dying and complaining about inadequate equipment.
If there is going to BE a Navy for my dead-keen-on-the Navy son to join, in a very few years time, someone, in the words of His Royal Highness Commander Philip Mountbatten, needs to pull his finger out.
Last edited:
fergie_mac66
Well-Known Member
A few year time? I think we are a few years past that time. The people
who could train new recruits have mostly long since retired or been pushed out.
ccscott49
Well-Known Member
Whilst I am also tempted to say bomb the barstewards, the reason they are doing this, is because its easy and they have nowt else. The reason they can get away with it at home is there is no credible rule of law, bit different in the UK.
Cornishman
Well-Known Member
Is Al Qaeda involved?
During a recent discussion on a Radio 4 programme it came to light that UK and US intelligence sources believe that because things are getting hot for them in the tribal areas of Pakistan and in Afghanistan Al Qaeda is already seeking new places to arm and train locals to do their business for them and has set up cells in Somalia and up the road a bit in Yemen.
If this is true the piracy is part of a whole new ball game. Are the Somali pirates becoming the new Taliban?
During a recent discussion on a Radio 4 programme it came to light that UK and US intelligence sources believe that because things are getting hot for them in the tribal areas of Pakistan and in Afghanistan Al Qaeda is already seeking new places to arm and train locals to do their business for them and has set up cells in Somalia and up the road a bit in Yemen.
If this is true the piracy is part of a whole new ball game. Are the Somali pirates becoming the new Taliban?
Kukri
Well-Known Member
For reasons unconnected with sailing, I have had to learn a lot about Somali pirates in the last month.
First, I am told, by people who certainly ought to know, that there's no Al Qaeda, etc. involvement in Somali piracy; this is strictly a criminal activity.
Ironically, during the short rule of the "fundamentalist" Islamic Courts in Somalia, piracy actually stopped. But this may have been because of the weather. The pirates are, understandably, less active during the strong monsoon.
Next, in defence of the RN, I think that there probably was an operational reason not to release details of the involvement of the RFA "Wave Knight" at the time.
From the pattern of attacks, EUNAVFOR had plotted the probable location of a "mothership" (i.e. a captured fishing boat) near the Seychelles and my guess is that the "Wave Knight" was looking for her.
First, I am told, by people who certainly ought to know, that there's no Al Qaeda, etc. involvement in Somali piracy; this is strictly a criminal activity.
Ironically, during the short rule of the "fundamentalist" Islamic Courts in Somalia, piracy actually stopped. But this may have been because of the weather. The pirates are, understandably, less active during the strong monsoon.
Next, in defence of the RN, I think that there probably was an operational reason not to release details of the involvement of the RFA "Wave Knight" at the time.
From the pattern of attacks, EUNAVFOR had plotted the probable location of a "mothership" (i.e. a captured fishing boat) near the Seychelles and my guess is that the "Wave Knight" was looking for her.
Last edited:
Clarky
Well-Known Member
Dear Slowboat,
The sooner you retire from the police the better ! Your posts are well out of touch !Thank goodness you arent in the police where I live,I can imagine you wouldnt chase any burglars in case they fell over and hurt their leg.
Kelpie
Well-Known Member
Ummm, as I read it Slowboat is simply telling how it is, not giving you a personal opinion.
Police officers aren't allowed to choose what sort of ROE they follow.
Slow_boat
Well-Known Member
No need to get personal
I'm merely pointing out the constraints, both practical and legal, that influence the use of force. I do not ignore them and I wouldn't expect anyone else to.
As yet there has been a lot of opinion but no practical suggestions as to what could have been done, given that the safety of the Chandlers was paramount.
Or maybe there are those who hold the opinion that sinking/killing the 'pirates' takes precedence over all other considerations, which would really simplify matters.
I'm merely pointing out the constraints, both practical and legal, that influence the use of force. I do not ignore them and I wouldn't expect anyone else to.
As yet there has been a lot of opinion but no practical suggestions as to what could have been done, given that the safety of the Chandlers was paramount.
Or maybe there are those who hold the opinion that sinking/killing the 'pirates' takes precedence over all other considerations, which would really simplify matters.
Clarky
Well-Known Member
I think you are confused about the law and rules of engagement,since when in either are you not allowed to shoot either armed terrorists or armed pirates carrying out an armed kidnap ?
In this case the normal law covering police doesnt apply,as it occurred in international water,so I dont know why you are postulating in any case.
Quite obviously there has been a huge cock up here and massive lack of leadership.
In this case the normal law covering police doesnt apply,as it occurred in international water,so I dont know why you are postulating in any case.
Quite obviously there has been a huge cock up here and massive lack of leadership.
Slow_boat
Well-Known Member
Okay, lets forget about legal constraints for now. What, in practical terms, could have been done that would not have a good chance of rescuing the Chandlers unharmed?
1. The 'mother ship' was a recently taken container ship with the crew hostage on board.
2. The Chandlers were held close by numerous armed men who I assume would use them as a sheild or kill one to show they were serious.
1. The 'mother ship' was a recently taken container ship with the crew hostage on board.
2. The Chandlers were held close by numerous armed men who I assume would use them as a sheild or kill one to show they were serious.
Last edited:
David_Jersey
Well-Known Member
Paramount? No!
The answer(s) involve risk (including for the Chandlers), and sometimes the "best" answer is still a sh#tty one...........especially when the situation is nearer "Zulus coming over the hill - tharsands of 'em" than "unarmed man getting on tube train"...........
1 - RFA ship passes the yacht close at speed while pirates are attempting to disembark with intent to swamp the proceedings and then heads for the mother ship.
2 - Marines loose off a few m/g rounds into water nearby to cause skiff to veer off.
3 - Helo takes off and starts dropping grenades ahead of path of the skiff.
4 - Helo continues over to mother ship and rakes bridge with m/g fire.
4.5 - Drop RFA tender in water with armed marines to harass the skiff as it attempts to offload at mothership.
5 - RFA arrives near mother ship and peppers stern with 30mm cannon hoping to disable the rudder. We got the Bizmark after disabling its rudder.
6 - After delaying progress of the mother ship for 2 hours the RN Frigate arrives on scene.
The only justified impediment to action I can think of, and not mentioned here, is concern over environmental pollution if the captured tanker received serious damage. But hey we let these incompetent Royal Navy gits retire on a full pension after 22 or so years because we expect them to make tough decisions and be inconvenienced at times.
Kelpie
Well-Known Member
There is the rather unfortunate fact that with two hostages, the pirates had (and, indeed, have) the option of killing one person as a deterrant and still having one bargaining chip remaining. This would, I presume, make it less advisable to be gung-ho with any intervention.
Slow_boat
Well-Known Member
Ah.
I was thinking the objective was a rescue.................
Still, ignoring the hostages lives makes it all much easier. Round 'em up, put 'em in a field and BOMB THE BARSTWERDS (with apologies to Kenny Everett)
Jonjo3, I like your thinking. Were there marines on board? Is the helicopter armed?
Last edited:
David_Jersey
Well-Known Member
No!
that's my answer for Afghanistan 
, as I have mentioned on these very forums a number of times 
. (my plan for Iraq involved mass crucifixtions - or was that Ireland?, I forget 
).Rescue is the objective. but success should not be defined solely by the hostage's survival. It sounds a bit harsh, because it is - but it's a harsh part of the world.
Clarky
Well-Known Member
The Navy ship could have prevented the pirates fleeing with the hostages,which would be better than the outcome we have now.It sends the wrong message if Navy ships stand by and watch as piracy and kidnapping occurs ,in fact it obviously encourages more to occur,and if you are in the police I find it hard to believe you have this point of view.I understand this Navy ship had far more firepower than the pirates,not to mention a helicopter which obviously could carry marines with automatic weapons.
Do you do a desk job in the cops ?
Kukri
Well-Known Member
There a a few things amiss with this scanario.
"1 - RFA ship passes the yacht close at speed while pirates are attempting to disembark with intent to swamp the proceedings and then heads for the mother ship."
Do we know if the RFA was that close when the Chandlers were embarked into the skiff?
"2 - Marines loose off a few m/g rounds into water nearby to cause skiff to veer off."
Well, fine, if they are near enough; see (1)
"3 - Helo takes off and starts dropping grenades ahead of path of the skiff."
Well, fine, if they are near enough; see (1)
"4 - Helo continues over to mother ship and rakes bridge with m/g fire".
The "mother ship" in this case was a large Singapore owned containership; the pirates M.O. is to assemble the entire crew on the bridge; this is well known to those who actually have to deal withy these situations, which certainly includes the commanding officer of the RFA "Wave Ruler" - just how many innocent seamen are you proposing to kill?
"4.5 - Drop RFA tender in water with armed marines to harass the skiff as it attempts to offload at mothership."
Yes, do-able if near enough
"5 - RFA arrives near mother ship and peppers stern with 30mm cannon hoping to disable the rudder. We got the Bizmark after disabling its rudder."
Interesting thought; just how much taxpayers money are you willing to spend paying Mr SS Teo who owns PIL for repairs to his ship and have you actually seen a modern vane steering gear - it would be a pretty small target. If you do get the steering gear, are you going to detach Wave Ruler from her station to tow the containership to Singapore for dry docking?
"6 - After delaying progress of the mother ship for 2 hours the RN Frigate arrives on scene."
Unnecessary because a frigate has a much higher top speed than either an RFA or a containership.
Having thought about it, I have to admit that I have done something no poster to a bulletin board can ever admit to - I have changed my mind, and I reckon the Navy were probably right to act as they did.
Slow_boat
Well-Known Member
I agree something should have been done but the point I'm trying to make is what could have been done in practical terms, assuming the goal is the release of the hostages un-harmed. Some are quick to criticise but can't offer alternatives.
And yes, I started a desk job earlier this year after 23 years on the street. I figure that at the age of 51, having broken my back in a fight in 1987, I'm getting a bit to slow to be outnumbered fighting drunken twenty somethings with no chance of backup.
I still get out sometimes, though.