Fouled Anchor Forums

[krnl]

Land Attacks on Pirates Questioned
December 12, 2008
Associated Press

MANAMA, Bahrain - The commander of the U.S. Navy's 5th Fleet expressed doubt Friday about the wisdom of launching attacks against Somali pirates on land - a proposal the U.S. is circulating to the U.N. Security Council.

U.S. Vice Adm. Bill Gortney told reporters that striking pirate camps presents problems because it is difficult to identify them and the potential for killing innocent civilians "cannot be overestimated."

In a wide-ranging interview at his 5th Fleet headquarters in Manama, Bahrain, Gortney said that such strikes are an effort to go for an easy military solution to a problem.

He said the better solutions are to improve the security, stability and government in Somalia, and to clear up legal hurdles so that militaries that capture pirates can detain them and bring them to trial.

Currently, most foreign navies patrolling the Somali coast have been reluctant to detain suspects because of uncertainties over where they would face trial, since Somalia has no effective central government or legal system.

The draft U.N. Security Council resolution proposes that all nations and regional groups cooperating with Somalia's U.N.-backed government in the fight against piracy and armed robbery "may take all necessary measures ashore in Somalia."

Bush administration officials in Washington say that while the proposal would give the U.S. military more options in confronting the pirates, it does not mean the U.S. is planning a ground assault.

Gortney said that progress is being made in the broad international effort to stem the recent spike in pirate attacks on commercial vessels off the coast of Somalia.

He said he is seeing progress in efforts to change the legal requirements so that navies can detain and send captured pirates to trial. And, he said more shipping companies are adding security personnel.

Since the end of August, Gortney said, there have been 50 instances where coalition ships have disrupted potential pirate attacks, throwing guns overboard and sinking small skiffs. But in many instances they had to release the people on the ships because of the legal hurdles.

[ChiefinGuam (Alex)]

I think there should be a few more choices in this vote. The two choices are basically, shoot to kill or leave it be. I more apt to say we do nothing unless we come across something that is happening, but we should not be looking for the pirates.

If any ship that is transiting needs escort or security, maybe Blackwater can assist. They are having trouble in Iraq, just seems like a good step for them.

Thoughts?

[krnl]

The two choice poll was a feeble attempt at humor. I still think it's kinda funny

Really though - I think the best thing to do would be to mount a couple of .50 Cal's on port and starboard of each merchant ship and make sure they steam through the area in "Condition I" - manned and ready. I mean, really...these merchant ships...what would it cost them to mount a couple of .50's? I'm guessing they could do it for 15-20k per ship. It's a small price to pay for a little bit of security. If there's a small boat approaching, put your binoculars on them...if they look armed and dangerous, start lobbing .50 cal tracer rounds.

In short - I think the whole situation would be better handled by security forces on the ships than to send the Navy or Blackwater or foreign navies in to try to round them up, because that will never work.