News   Jan 07, 2025
Galleria III Approaches Topping off at Dufferin and Dupont
 1K     2 
News   Jan 07, 2025
67 Storeys Proposed Across from Eaton Centre at Yonge and Shuter
 4.2K     14 
News   Jan 07, 2025
News Roundup for January 7, 2025
 534     1 

Pirates seize oil supertanker

From what I've been told, such gassing is carefully regulated on a (well-operated) ship.

The Indian Navy just sunk a pirate boat, so it would seem that some action is being taken. While this might turn some off from pirating, the problem is that it might also generate a more desperate and dangerous class of pirates willing to engage in more violence.
 
Prometheus The Supremo said:
if the saudi's try to take the ship back by force, i wonder if the pirates will try something crazy like blowing the thing up? this could be the beginning of a disaster.

has there been any mention on how much the ransom is yet?
Click to expand...

I heard they had asked for 20m, which was rejected. Not sure how accurate that is. I would imagine that, if they wanted, they could just pump out all of the petroleum. Though, it would probably take a while and the surrounding troops would probably just storm it as soon as they figured out what was happening. If things didn't go the way they were hopping, I imagine the easiest way to scuttle the ship would be form them to just floor the engine and try to beach it. Not sure how far from shore the ship is though, and how much momentum it could build up.
 
Hydrogen said:
From what I've been told, such gassing is carefully regulated on a (well-operated) ship.

The Indian Navy just sunk a pirate boat, so it would seem that some action is being taken. While this might turn some off from pirating, the problem is that it might also generate a more desperate and dangerous class of pirates willing to engage in more violence.
Click to expand...

The Indians are starting to perk up. They just sent in a destroyer instead of a frigate. If the pirates do get more feisty, they will have to contend with a more determined foe as well. At the end of the day, the pirates' weapons are no match for the kit on any naval vessel plus the naval boarding parties that are available. That's why the pirates hang to the crews as hostages till they get paid. It's their only insurance.
 
For taking on a AK-armed dhow, does it really make a difference whether it's a frigate or a destroyer?

As for pumping the oil out, it's not so easy to store 2 and half million barrels of crude. And what would they do with it after? It's not like Somalia has any refineries. Pretty much the only conceivable hope of selling the oil would be to cut a deal with some nearby rogue state. Something like Zimbabwe, if it weren't landlocked. Even then, I can't see the naval ships surrounding the supertanker letting them get that far.

About the only country that's taken serious measures is France. When the pirates captured a yacht with two French citizens aboard, they sent a destroyer with 30 frogmen who were dropped from a helicopter just out of sight of the yacht, and then swam up and climbed aboard, taking the pirates completely by surprise. One pirate was killed, while the others realized the most sensible course was surrender. They were arrested and taken back to France.
 
Last edited:
unimaginative2 said:
For taking on a AK-armed dhow, does it really make a difference whether it's a frigate or a destroyer?
Click to expand...
Not for killing a slow, open decked, small dhow.

However, if you want to take on the pirate mother ship, likely at close range, stuffed with RPG-armed lads, it depends I suppose on whose frigate and whose destroyer, since these two classes of ship can overlap and vary greatly. Malaysia's British-built Lekiu class frigates are tiny 2,270 ton, 106m long ships, with credible anti-ship and anti-air missile armament, but only one 57mm gun and 2 x 30mm cannons to deal with a conventional gunfight. Whereas, Russia's Sovremenny class destroyers are 8,000 ton 156m heavies, armed with 4×130 mm guns, plus 4 x 30 mm AK-630 Gatling guns.
 
unimaginative2 said:
For taking on a AK-armed dhow, does it really make a difference whether it's a frigate or a destroyer?
Click to expand...

Show of force. The size difference is noticeable, as is the increased number of armaments.

unimaginative2 said:
As for pumping the oil out, it's not so easy to store 2 and half million barrels of crude. And what would they do with it after? It's not like Somalia has any refineries. Pretty much the only conceivable hope of selling the oil would be to cut a deal with some nearby rogue state. Something like Zimbabwe, if it weren't landlocked. Even then, I can't see the naval ships surrounding the supertanker letting them get that far.
Click to expand...

They have not proposed selling the oil or storing it. They are simply doing what they always do: holding the ship until ransom is paid. The cargo is worth more to the owner than it is to the pirates.

unimaginative2 said:
About the only country that's taken serious measures is France. When the pirates captured a yacht with two French citizens aboard, they sent a destroyer with 30 frogmen who were dropped from a helicopter just out of sight of the yacht, and then swam up and climbed aboard, taking the pirates completely by surprise. One pirate was killed, while the others realized the most sensible course was surrender. They were arrested and taken back to France.
Click to expand...

The French might try that once or twice, but they won't be able to pull it off all that often without serious in-theatre resources and presence. And all it will take are a few dead SOF guys and a couple of dead hostages to change the calculus of counter-piracy missions.

The best solution is the 'all of the above' answer. The UN should authorize a standing piracy interdiction force in the Gulf of Aden. And merchants should station armed guards on these vessels to make it risky for the pirates to try.
And finally, given that most of these pirates are Somali fishermen who have lost their livelihood to commercial fisheries, action needs to be taken to restore their traditional means of making a living.
 
If there were wild dogs attacking innocent passersby, we'd destroy them. Why are these pirates treated differently? They certainly won't share the same sentimentality for human life when rescue is attempted.

First step, announce a total exclusion zone and blockade 5 miles off the Somalia coast. Any Somali-manned boat of any size or type found outside of those 5 miles should be considered a potential pirate and be boarded. If that hurts the fishermen, tough, the world didn't ask for Somalia's seafarers to attack them. Next, if any weapons are found on boarded vessels, the vessel is scuttled and the crew arrested for piracy and sent to a local Muslim country for trial, perhaps to nearby Saudi Arabia or Yemen. Third, introduce Q-Ships, or tasty decoy ships for the pirates to attack, that are heavily armed, and registered in countries that mean business, such as Russia or Indonesia. Forth, arm those ships using Suez and the Horn, and re-route unarmed ships via Capetown or Panama.

The world needs to convince the Somalis that piracy is suicidal. Until that happens, they'll always be those that are desperate enough to try it.
 
Does anyone else think it's the Telegraph and New York Times funding the Somali pirates to grab some commercial vessels so they can generate headlines so folks will buy their papers? Since, you know, place has been sh** for longer than anyone can remember but only recently did those scribbling folks get back there because whitey was back in trouble. Makes for good copy anyway.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
fieras said:
Does anyone else think it's the Telegraph and New York Times funding the Somali pirates to grab some commercial vessels so they can generate headlines so folks will buy their papers? Since, you know, place has been sh** for longer than anyone can remember but only recently did those scribbling folks get back there because whitey was back in trouble. Makes for good copy anyway.
Click to expand...

yes, that must be it. :confused: maybe toronto news companies are funding crime all around the city for the same purpose. :rolleyes:
 
I thought the New York Times was low on cash.


Anyway, when it comes to newspapers, who wants to write about smelly pirates in far off waters when there is so much celebrity news to report on?
 
Has the connection to (militant) muslims and these pirates been established yet? perhaps it may help to understand them if we can accept that the(Somalian) pirates are just imitating the fine example of Mohammad -who would raid caravans, ransom the wealthy, behead some, enslave the rest...He needed the plunder to finance his jihad.


It's all good.
 
qwerty said:
Has the connection to (militant) muslims and these pirates been established yet? perhaps it may help to understand them if we can accept that the(Somalian) pirates are just imitating the fine example of Mohammad -who would raid caravans, ransom the wealthy, behead some, enslave the rest...He needed the plunder to finance his jihad.


It's all good.
Click to expand...

i don't know if they are religiously motivated. the motivation is most likely money. that being said, if they are actual muslims doing this but they are not doing it out of religious motivation, other than "their religion didn't prevent them from being bad", religion is not an issue. there are crimes committed everyday here in the west by people who happen to be affiliated with a religion and we don't make an issue of the religious aspect unless it is the cause of the offending act.

example: guy (who happens to be christian) kills his wife because she cheated on him. unless his motivation came from religious issues such as biblical instruction of some sort, we wouldn't report in on TV as "christian man kills wife". but of course, someone being raised in a cultural way which is inspired by religion could have a indirect religious motivation but it wouldn't be clear. in fact, to use me as an example, just because i stopped believing in god, at the moment that happened, i didn't magically abandon my cultural ways which were inspired by my religion. for example, i have dietary beliefs which are inspired by the old testament. i still haven't shaken them because it doesn't really do any harm.
 
qwerty said:
Has the connection to (militant) muslims and these pirates been established yet? perhaps it may help to understand them if we can accept that the(Somalian) pirates are just imitating the fine example of Mohammad -who would raid caravans, ransom the wealthy, behead some, enslave the rest...He needed the plunder to finance his jihad.


It's all good.
Click to expand...

You raise a good point and it's an angle that's being studied by intelligence outfits everywhere. That theory certainly works for Al-Qaeda. They see Mohammad's exploit as a template for success. Just like Mohammad's need to capture Medina (for a base) before taking on Mecca, Al-Qaeda seems to believe that having a sanctuary in an Islamic country is vital if they are to successfully, defeat their enemies.

With the pirates, it's more complex. Some of the pirates have links to terror groups. Some have links to trans-national criminal organizations and drug traffickers. That's to be expected, however, given the dog's breakfast that Somalia is today. Failed states don't exactly attract the best and the brightest. However, the vast majority are Somali fishermen who see an opportunity for fast cash. And we've incentivized them by destroying their traditional livelihoods. To defeat this requires a two pronged approach. We have to give them their livelihoods back. And we have to make the price for piracy steep. You'll note that the attacks have already started dying down now that warships are showing up in the region. We still have some ways to go, however, on helping them restore their fishing grounds.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top