Professional Soldiers ® - British Couple Hijacked by Somali Pirates

Professional Soldiers ® (http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/index.php)

- The Early Bird (http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=45)

- - British Couple Hijacked by Somali Pirates (http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=25720)

Quote:

Originally Posted by cszakolczai (Post 377893)

quoting the NY times article found here...

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/23/wo...s.html?_r=1&hp

"Navy Seals rushed to the yacht in assault craft, shooting one of the pirates and stabbing another."

1) At least someone got it right
2) Incredible restraint is an understatement demonstrated by the SEALs
3) I wonder why they did?

Exactly,why save those SOB's as prisoners..........:mad:

Big Teddy :munchin

Quote:

Originally Posted by greenberetTFS (Post 377896)

Exactly,why save those SOB's as prisoners...

Information...and a 5 day pass. ;)

Richard :munchin

How To Beat The Pirates?

What about breaking out Q-ships, Predator Drone escorts, or just pro-actively taking out anything that could be a mother ship?

Quote:

How to Beat the Pirates
February 10, 2011By Gabe Collins

It's time for a rethink on tackling Somali pirates in the Indian Ocean. We can start by targeting mother ships.

The South Korean and Malaysian Navies’ recent use of commandos to retake ships held by Somali pirates in the Indian Ocean suggests an increasing openness to more aggressive anti-piracy tactics.

Piracy’s human and economic costs—$7 billion to $12 billion annually, according to Oceans Beyond Piracy—are clearly unacceptable. It’s time for global navies to bottle the Somali pirates up by denying them the use of the large ‘mother ships’ that allow them to threaten shipping hundreds of miles at sea. Such moves, combined with rules of engagement that permit operations against pirates’ safe havens on shore, would help slash the pirates’ operational range and restore the freedom of navigation in key shipping lanes near the Horn of Africa.

Neutralizing the ‘mother ships’ Somali pirates use to support their operations far out into the Indian Ocean can shrink the threat zone to a more manageable belt within 150 miles or so of the Somali coast. Coalition forces can bottle mother ships up in port by stationing warships within visual range of major Somali ports like Mogadishu, Kismayo, and Berbera, as well as known pirate bases such as Eyl and Garacad and prohibiting vessels longer than 35 feet from leaving port without being boarded and searched.

Somalia's coastline is long, but features only a handful of ports and fishing anchorages large and busy enough for pirates to easily conceal their activities among legitimate commercial and fishing operations. The worsening pirate threat to international shipping justifies maritime checkpoints that permit registered food aid and other legitimate traffic to pass through but curtail passage of potential mother ships. Such a strategy would also make much more effective use of naval assets in the area. Forty-odd warships are hard pressed to effectively patrol a piracy danger zone that’s now approaching 1.5 million square miles in area—roughly three times larger than the Gulf of Mexico.

Restricting large vessel traffic around suspected pirate ports could flush pirates out and force them into new areas where they are less likely to enjoy reliable protective networks and intimate knowledge of the terrain. This would make them more vulnerable to air strikes and special forces raids. Naval forces in the region should also be given looser rules of engagement, particularly with respect to hot pursuit of suspected pirates. As things currently stand, pirates are safe once they reach Somali territorial waters. This is a highly artificial limitation, given that Somalia lacks a functioning national government.

Allowing coalition forces to pursue pirates up to the beach and engage them on land will help eliminate safe havens. US warships and AC-130 gunships have already struck suspected al-Qaeda targets in Somalia, so precedents do exist for taking kinetic action against non-state threats on land in the area. In addition, French commandos went ashore in April 2008 to capture pirates that had attacked the French yacht MY Le Ponant earlier that month.

With fewer pirate ships able to reach distant shipping lanes, the coalition can use high-endurance UAVs like the RQ-4 GlobalHawk and long-range patrol aircraft to locate and pinpoint suspected pirate vessels, warn shippers, and vector boarding teams to those vessels. Aircraft can identify suspicious vessels far out at sea and patrol large swathes of ocean much more quickly and cost-effectively than surface vessels can. If necessary, many of these aircraft can carry a range of weapons capable of destroying or disabling a sizeable ship. Djibouti or Kenya could likely accommodate UAVs and additional long-range patrol aircraft involved in anti-piracy missions.

Restoring maritime order off the Horn of Africa is a vital global strategic interest and should commence as quickly as possible. All trading nations benefit from the ability to move goods between markets as safely and efficiently as possible. American naval leadership and credibility are also at stake, with key implications for maritime security in the Asia Pacific region. Since the end of the Second World War, the US Navy has provided the public good of ensuring safe transit along key global shipping lanes. A system of maritime checkpoints would require close operational coordination and offers key Asian naval forces including the Chinese, Indian, Japanese, South Korean, and US Navies an excellent opportunity for cooperation and trust building working against a common threat.

If the pirate threat isn’t curbed, leaders in China and other emerging powers may conclude that they need independent, globally-capable naval forces to protect their growing maritime interests. This could usher in an era of destructive naval competition and instability. Denying pirates access to mother ships and pursuing them on land offers a better way to utilize the existing international naval assets in the region and reduce the pirate threat to international shipping.

Gabe Collins is the co-founder of China SignPost and a former commodity investment analyst and research fellow in the US Naval War College's China Maritime Studies Institute. He can be reached at gabe@chinasignpost.com.

http://the-diplomat.com/flashpoints-...t-the-pirates/

Until the rise of the UN, International Maritime Law was very explicit WRT piracy for at least 300 years. It used to be one of the few opportunities left to practice summary execution of individuals caught "in flagrante delecti". A friend recently sent me a great video of a Russian crew "solving" a piracy problem. At least they still have what it takes to act.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peregrino (Post 377913)

. A friend recently sent me a great video of a Russian crew "solving" a piracy problem. At least they still have what it takes to act.

Please do share the link if you still have it :munchin

US deaths show growing pirate violence in hijackings

US deaths show growing pirate violence in hijackings

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-12548045

"............Some feel that it would be better to try to intervene quickly especially after the British Navy chose not to use force when Paul and Rachel Chandler were taken hostage in 2009.

They were held for more than a year and were only released last November after a multi-million dollar ransom was paid.

The EU task force and other navies have felt that it is too dangerous to intervene as hostages' lives would be put in danger................"

The EU task force and other navies have felt that it is too dangerous to intervene as hostages' lives would be put in danger.

Bottom line up front - If there are no pirates there are no hostages. 750 pirates held around the world? WTF. For a start - don't take prisoners. Caught in the act enjoy the swim. Going out to sea? Better have nets in your boat - not AKs and RPGs.

As long as it pays with limited downside there will be pirates. No pay and big down side? No pirates.

I'd bait'em.....

Stay safe.

A good article that adds more detail, without trying to answer unknowables (and, I suspect some of you SF guys will appreciate the fact that they call the Navy's special operators SEALs instead of "Special Forces.")

Quote:

WASHINGTON — When the two pirates boarded the U.S.S. Sterett off the coast of Somalia on Monday, American officials thought they were headed for a breakthrough in the four-day standoff with a gang that had seized four Americans vacationing on their 58-foot yacht.

What happened next is sharply contested and raises questions about the crucial decision to detain the pirate leaders.

American officials said the pirates on the yacht, called the Quest, seemed relieved — even “exceptionally calm” — when told their senior commander was cooling his heels in a Navy brig.

But hours later, panic ensued among young pirates. Some Americans theorized that a fight had broken out among the gang members, suddenly leaderless, and fearing they were about to be overtaken by the four Navy warships that surrounded them. One person who has talked to associates of the pirates said their leader had told them that if he did not return, they should kill the hostages, though American officials say they do not know that to be the case.

The death of the four Americans — the yacht’s owners, Jean and Scott Adam of Marina del Rey, Calif., and two crew members, Phyllis Macay and Robert A. Riggle of Seattle — is certain to add momentum to a wide-ranging review the Obama administration is conducting on how to combat the growing threat from bands of Somali pirates. The episode began last Friday, when the Quest sent out a distress signal 275 miles from the coast of Oman, in open waters between Mumbai and Djibouti. A Yemeni fishing vessel that served as a mother ship for the pirates was seen near the yacht when it was hijacked by pirates in a smaller craft, maritime officials said, but it disappeared once the American warships drew near.

As the military converged on the yacht, officials learned that there might be a way to negotiate with the pirates’ financiers and village elders, who could have acted as shore-based intermediaries if communication permitted. But for unknown reasons these contacts did not pan out.

On Monday, the two pirates boarded the Sterett, which had pulled within 600 yards of the Quest, to conduct face-to-face negotiations, apparently knowing that it was unlikely they could get away with the yacht or its passengers. One of the pirate negotiators was a seasoned commander, who had several successful hijackings under his belt, according to one person who has regular contacts with pirate cells.

The F.B.I. agent involved was a hostage negotiator from a special team based at Quantico, Va., who was experienced in both domestic and international hostage crises, a law enforcement official said Wednesday. It was unclear whether the agent had ever negotiated with Somali pirates.

The two pirates were brought on board “in a good-faith attempt to negotiate the safe release of the hostages” a military official said. Once the Americans came to believe they were not serious, the official said, the pirate commander and his ally were detained and their fellow pirates were notified.

“The pirates who were brought aboard the ship never communicated back to their pirate allies on the Quest,” said the official, who agreed to speak on the condition of anonymity because of the F.B.I. investigation.

“The pirates on the Quest seemed relieved and were exceptionally calm in discussions with the negotiator,” said the military official. He said the Americans placed an offer on the table. The pirates could take the Quest, or another small Navy boat. But they had to release the hostages and could not take them to join the hundreds of travelers who are believed being held for ransom in pirate strongholds.

The pirates communicated back that they wanted to sleep on the offer, the military official said. The Americans agreed, giving them eight hours.

Whatever calm the pirates displayed on the surface masked a roiling split, according to one person who has been in contact with Somali pirate cells, including people who were in communication with others who know those aboard the Quest.

Somali pirate specialists say the pirates once had an informal code that required members to treat one another well and not harm hostages, valuable commodities who draw ransom payments on average of $4 million. But while Somali pirates might once have been a tight-knit group motivated by money, not murder, pirates and pirate experts say the lure of big money was attracting less-disciplined young Somalis hungry to share in the new riches.

Somali pirates interviewed Wednesday said something must have gone very wrong in the case of the Quest, since killing hostages is bad for business and is almost certain to draw a more aggressive response from countries like the United States. “We don’t kill hostages,” said a pirate in Hobyo who gave his middle name as Hassan. “We have many hostages here, and we treat them well. But the pirates might have been angered by the Americans.”

The person in contact with pirate cells said a gun fight had broken out below deck on the Quest, likely over money or the hostages’ fate. American officials theorize this may have been the case. Five minutes after the pirates fired a rocket-propelled grenade at the Sterett, and small arms fire erupted, 15 Navy SEAL commandos stormed the yacht. The hostages were dead or dying. American officials said it was unclear whether they had been executed or killed in the pirates’ cross-fire. Other pirate hostages have died in captivity or during rescue attempts, but there are few, if any, cases of pirates intentionally killing hostages.

The commandos shot and killed one pirate and stabbed another. Two other pirates were found dead, apparently killed by their comrades, and 13 surrendered to the Americans.

“While the pirates clearly knew, from the beginning of our negotiations, that we were not going to allow the Quest to make shore, they gave no warning, no visible signs whatsoever that the hostages’ lives were in danger,” said the military official. The senior law enforcement official added, “These incidents, by their very nature, often move at a rapid pace which requires difficult decisions in real time.”

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...sets-free.html

HMS Nursemaid: Shame as Navy seizes 17 armed Somalis, gives them halal meat and nicotine patches... then sets them free!

By Tom Kelly and Paul Revoir
Last updated at 8:13 AM on 12th April 2011
When a Royal Navy warship captured a crew of Somali pirates, it seemed like a rare chance to strike back at the ruthless sea gangsters.

The 17 outlaws were armed with an arsenal of AK 47s and rocket-propelled grenades, and had forced hostages on a hijacked fishing vessel to work as slaves for three months.

But instead of bringing them to justice, the British servicemen were ordered to provide the pirates halal meals, medical checks, cigarettes – and in one case even a nicotine patch – before releasing them in their own boats....

HMS Cornwall is one of two Royal Navy frigates patrolling two and a half million square miles of ocean to try to capture pirate ships.

The apparent breakthrough came in February when the captain of a merchant ship crossing the ocean radioed to say he had seen something suspicious.

A helicopter was scrambled and spotted a Yemeni fishing vessel which had been hijacked by pirates and was being used as their ‘mother ship’ to attack other vessels.

Armed Royal Marines launched boats and swooped on the pirates, who were found with nine AK 47s plus rocket-propelled grenade launchers and boarding ladders.

The five slave crew from the fishing vessel were released and the 17 pirates initially detained on board the warship.

Commander David Wilkinson, Cornwall’s captain, said: ‘This team admitted their intention was to commit piracy activities.’

But after compiling the evidence against them and submitting it to his superiors he was ordered to ‘set up arrangements for putting them ashore in Somalia’.

Before being freed, the pirates were given a medical check-up in accordance with UK law and food which included a halal option to take into account religious needs.

After showing they were compliant, some were given cigarettes, and one was given a nicotine patch on medical advice because his tobacco withdrawal had caused his heart rate to soar.

Close to shore, the British servicemen set them free in two skiffs which they had earlier seized from the gangsters – with no food and just enough fuel to get them to land.

As they stepped off the warship, Commander Wilkinson told the head of the pirate gang: ‘If you are a leader, go back and lead for good.

‘If you are going to carry on in this trade, expect to find me and my colleagues waiting for you. And if I see you again, it’s not going to go well.’

Commander Wilkinson added that he believed the order to free the pirates was the ‘right decision’ because he was not convinced bringing them back to the UK would have been a deterrent.

He also said he was unconvinced that they had enough evidence to convict the pirates – even though they were heavily armed, were carrying hostages and had confessed.

The decision to release the pirates was made by the UK’s Maritime Component Commander based in Bahrain after considering UK policy and law.

Foreign Office Minister Henry Bellingham said the Government is reviewing the ‘catch and release’ approach to piracy.

‘It is not going to happen in the future unless there isn’t any other alternative.’