Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 3/9/2011 9:49:37 AM EST
[Last Edit: 3/9/2011 9:54:40 AM EST by M4-AK]
Just developing...

Mobile-based International Shipholding Corp. handles the crew and provisions for the vessel. In the latest attack, 4 suspected pirates in a skiff approached the Maersk Alabama with a hook ladder but were rebuffed Tuesday by warning shots.

http://blog.al.com/live/2011/03/maersk_alabama_targeted_again.html

Link Posted: 3/9/2011 9:55:07 AM EST
fool me once...
Link Posted: 3/9/2011 9:55:58 AM EST
Link Posted: 3/9/2011 9:56:20 AM EST
About f-ing time that the tankers plying those waters employed "private security" who use deadly force against pirates.

Use of any nation's navel forces on board is, however, a non-starter under the law of the seas.
Link Posted: 3/9/2011 9:58:28 AM EST
Originally Posted By CBR900:
About f-ing time that the tankers plying those waters employed "private security" who use deadly force against pirates.

Use of any nation's navel forces on board is, however, a non-starter under the law of the seas.


Hell...setting off a few firecrackers on deck would probably scare off most pirates.
Link Posted: 3/9/2011 9:58:29 AM EST
Originally Posted By CBR900:
About f-ing time that the tankers plying those waters employed "private security" who use deadly force against pirates.

Use of any nation's navel forces on board is, however, a non-starter under the law of the seas.


so is piracy.

Link Posted: 3/9/2011 10:00:46 AM EST
Originally Posted By Dog1:
warning shots.




Depends on how far out they were, if by 600 yards they're 'dialing' in I think that's a reasonable approach. At least they had something to use for 'warning shots.' Why every port in Somalia isn't a burning heap is beyond me, hell part of me secretly hopes the next ship the pirates hijack and kill the crew turns out to be a Chinese or Russian flagged. At least we'd get to see some pirate shark-food made then.
Link Posted: 3/9/2011 10:02:29 AM EST
time to arm todays merchant vessels like 200 years ago.

so what would be the equivalent to 8-12lb'er guns?
Link Posted: 3/9/2011 10:03:09 AM EST
Originally Posted By Dog1:
warning shots.




no shit
Link Posted: 3/9/2011 10:06:22 AM EST
You would think that any ship going to that area would have a half dozen semi auto AK's available. Or even pump shotguns with slugs and buckshot.
Link Posted: 3/9/2011 10:08:13 AM EST
Sure as fuck isn't the first time, sure as fuck won't be the last!
Link Posted: 3/9/2011 10:10:04 AM EST
Could we just use Q-boats?
Link Posted: 3/9/2011 10:11:31 AM EST

Originally Posted By Cypher15:
time to arm todays merchant vessels like 200 years ago.

so what would be the equivalent to 8-12lb'er guns?

Mk. 38 mod 0 or mod 2 25mm guns
Link Posted: 3/9/2011 10:17:47 AM EST
Warning shots have been SOP for maritime operations for a LONG time.

The pirates typically like to attack during calm seas, which is a plus for those security crew in terms of a shooting stability.

Link Posted: 3/9/2011 10:20:55 AM EST
Originally Posted By SilentType:
Warning shots have been SOP for maritime operations for a LONG time.




That's what I was thinking.
Link Posted: 3/9/2011 10:22:04 AM EST
Link Posted: 3/9/2011 10:22:40 AM EST
It's amazing what firearms in hte hands of the good guys can accomplish for peace and safety.
Link Posted: 3/9/2011 10:23:30 AM EST
Originally Posted By NYPrivateer:

Originally Posted By Cypher15:
time to arm todays merchant vessels like 200 years ago.

so what would be the equivalent to 8-12lb'er guns?

Mk. 38 mod 0 or mod 2 25mm guns


Blackpowder cannons would be more fun.
Link Posted: 3/9/2011 10:26:33 AM EST

Originally Posted By Strykewolf:
Originally Posted By NYPrivateer:

Originally Posted By Cypher15:
time to arm todays merchant vessels like 200 years ago.

so what would be the equivalent to 8-12lb'er guns?

Mk. 38 mod 0 or mod 2 25mm guns


Blackpowder cannons would be more fun.

Ok, then we should go with 12 pounders loaded with double canister!
Link Posted: 3/9/2011 10:30:12 AM EST
How many armed Predators would it take to sink every Somali pirate "mothership"
Link Posted: 3/9/2011 10:33:31 AM EST
[Last Edit: 3/9/2011 10:33:46 AM EST by red_on_black]
Originally Posted By NYPrivateer:


Ok, then we should go with 12 pounders loaded with double canister frozen hams and lard-dipped canister shot!


FIFY
Link Posted: 3/9/2011 10:36:12 AM EST
A directed microwave weapon would be the ticket. Let the ocean boil them alive.
Link Posted: 3/9/2011 10:36:42 AM EST
Pass The Ammunition!




Link Posted: 3/9/2011 10:37:47 AM EST
Originally Posted By danpass:
Originally Posted By CBR900:
About f-ing time that the tankers plying those waters employed "private security" who use deadly force against pirates.

Use of any nation's navel forces on board is, however, a non-starter under the law of the seas.


so is piracy.



Well then you could complain about the pirates' disregard for international law to the Somali government . . . - er, wait, what government?

Link Posted: 3/9/2011 10:38:31 AM EST
Originally Posted By xylo:
It's amazing what firearms in hte hands of the good guys can accomplish for peace and safety.


It's just too bad they were warning shots and not head shots.
Link Posted: 3/9/2011 10:44:34 AM EST

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
Roll Tide!


I wonder what kind of security they are running.

Wonder how much the pay is?


Link Posted: 3/9/2011 10:45:39 AM EST
A large ship has to provide a MUCH more stable shooting platform than those little dhows... particularly in rougher seas.

Hitting them before they can hit you should be a piece of cake.
Link Posted: 3/9/2011 10:46:46 AM EST

Originally Posted By CBR900:
About f-ing time that the tankers plying those waters employed "private security" who use deadly force against pirates.

Use of any nation's navel forces on board is, however, a non-starter under the law of the seas.

My navel has a fleet of 20 ships, including an aircraft carrier and 4 nuclear attack submarines
Link Posted: 3/9/2011 10:47:08 AM EST

Originally Posted By Cypher15:
time to arm todays merchant vessels like 200 years ago.

so what would be the equivalent to 8-12lb'er guns?
Miniguns????

Or mortars/rpgs?
Link Posted: 3/9/2011 10:50:12 AM EST
Originally Posted By CBR900:
Originally Posted By danpass:
Originally Posted By CBR900:
About f-ing time that the tankers plying those waters employed "private security" who use deadly force against pirates.

Use of any nation's navel forces on board is, however, a non-starter under the law of the seas.


so is piracy.



Well then you could complain about the pirates' disregard for international law to the Somali government . . . - er, wait, what government?



I'm pretty sure that a "kill 'em all" approach is still considered a-ok when it comes to piracy.

Nobody has the stones to actually do it, though (okay, except the Russians.)
Link Posted: 3/9/2011 10:50:18 AM EST
Link Posted: 3/9/2011 10:57:37 AM EST
Originally Posted By TheCanuck:

Originally Posted By CBR900:
About f-ing time that the tankers plying those waters employed "private security" who use deadly force against pirates.

Use of any nation's navel forces on board is, however, a non-starter under the law of the seas.

My navel has a fleet of 20 ships, including an aircraft carrier and 4 nuclear attack submarines


Yes. But your navel forces are NOT on board commercial vessels.

We also have navel forces on ships in that area. When they can, they intervene against pirates. Our navel vessels are ships of war. The distinction between commercial vessels and ships of war is crucial.

Link Posted: 3/9/2011 10:59:55 AM EST
Originally Posted By Cypher15:
time to arm todays merchant vessels like 200 years ago.

so what would be the equivalent to 8-12lb'er guns?


40mm Pom=Pom Twin Mounts maybe????
Link Posted: 3/9/2011 11:02:38 AM EST
Warning shots eh?

Oh but guns won't solve anything, right?

Link Posted: 3/9/2011 11:02:52 AM EST

Originally Posted By CBR900:
Originally Posted By TheCanuck:

Originally Posted By CBR900:
About f-ing time that the tankers plying those waters employed "private security" who use deadly force against pirates.

Use of any nation's navel forces on board is, however, a non-starter under the law of the seas.

My navel has a fleet of 20 ships, including an aircraft carrier and 4 nuclear attack submarines


Yes. But your navel forces are NOT on board commercial vessels.

We also have navel forces on ships in that area. When they can, they intervene against pirates. Our navel vessels are ships of war. The distinction between commercial vessels and ships of war is crucial.


A navel vessel wouldn't need to be very big
Link Posted: 3/9/2011 11:04:13 AM EST

Originally Posted By krpind:
Originally Posted By SilentType:
Warning shots have been SOP for maritime operations for a LONG time.




That's what I was thinking.

Yep.
Link Posted: 3/9/2011 11:06:35 AM EST
Originally Posted By TheCanuck:

Originally Posted By CBR900:
Originally Posted By TheCanuck:

Originally Posted By CBR900:
About f-ing time that the tankers plying those waters employed "private security" who use deadly force against pirates.

Use of any nation's navel forces on board is, however, a non-starter under the law of the seas.

My navel has a fleet of 20 ships, including an aircraft carrier and 4 nuclear attack submarines


Yes. But your navel forces are NOT on board commercial vessels.

We also have navel forces on ships in that area. When they can, they intervene against pirates. Our navel vessels are ships of war. The distinction between commercial vessels and ships of war is crucial.


A navel vessel wouldn't need to be very big

i hear it has to be the size of a bellybutton at the least...

but naval vessels... well... they are absolute behemoths

Link Posted: 3/9/2011 11:07:49 AM EST

Originally Posted By 7Six2Fifty4R:
Originally Posted By TheCanuck:

Originally Posted By CBR900:
Originally Posted By TheCanuck:

Originally Posted By CBR900:
About f-ing time that the tankers plying those waters employed "private security" who use deadly force against pirates.

Use of any nation's navel forces on board is, however, a non-starter under the law of the seas.

My navel has a fleet of 20 ships, including an aircraft carrier and 4 nuclear attack submarines


Yes. But your navel forces are NOT on board commercial vessels.

We also have navel forces on ships in that area. When they can, they intervene against pirates. Our navel vessels are ships of war. The distinction between commercial vessels and ships of war is crucial.


A navel vessel wouldn't need to be very big

i hear it has to be the size of a bellybutton at the least...

but naval vessels... well... they are absolute behemoths


Thanks, I was having so much fun
Link Posted: 3/9/2011 11:08:40 AM EST
Originally Posted By TheCanuck:

Originally Posted By 7Six2Fifty4R:
Originally Posted By TheCanuck:

Originally Posted By CBR900:
Originally Posted By TheCanuck:

Originally Posted By CBR900:
About f-ing time that the tankers plying those waters employed "private security" who use deadly force against pirates.

Use of any nation's navel forces on board is, however, a non-starter under the law of the seas.

My navel has a fleet of 20 ships, including an aircraft carrier and 4 nuclear attack submarines


Yes. But your navel forces are NOT on board commercial vessels.

We also have navel forces on ships in that area. When they can, they intervene against pirates. Our navel vessels are ships of war. The distinction between commercial vessels and ships of war is crucial.


A navel vessel wouldn't need to be very big

i hear it has to be the size of a bellybutton at the least...

but naval vessels... well... they are absolute behemoths


Thanks, I was having so much fun




Link Posted: 3/9/2011 11:09:09 AM EST
Originally Posted By DaveM4P99:
Originally Posted By CBR900:
About f-ing time that the tankers plying those waters employed "private security" who use deadly force against pirates.

Use of any nation's navel forces on board is, however, a non-starter under the law of the seas.


Hell...setting off a few firecrackers on deck would probably scare off most pirates.


I sucking chest wound would be better......
Link Posted: 3/9/2011 11:09:16 AM EST

Originally Posted By 7Six2Fifty4R:
Originally Posted By TheCanuck:

Originally Posted By 7Six2Fifty4R:
Originally Posted By TheCanuck:

Originally Posted By CBR900:
Originally Posted By TheCanuck:

Originally Posted By CBR900:
About f-ing time that the tankers plying those waters employed "private security" who use deadly force against pirates.

Use of any nation's navel forces on board is, however, a non-starter under the law of the seas.

My navel has a fleet of 20 ships, including an aircraft carrier and 4 nuclear attack submarines


Yes. But your navel forces are NOT on board commercial vessels.

We also have navel forces on ships in that area. When they can, they intervene against pirates. Our navel vessels are ships of war. The distinction between commercial vessels and ships of war is crucial.


A navel vessel wouldn't need to be very big

i hear it has to be the size of a bellybutton at the least...

but naval vessels... well... they are absolute behemoths


Thanks, I was having so much fun




Fucking party pooper



Link Posted: 3/9/2011 11:09:33 AM EST
Originally Posted By CBR900:
Originally Posted By TheCanuck:

Originally Posted By CBR900:
About f-ing time that the tankers plying those waters employed "private security" who use deadly force against pirates.

Use of any nation's navel forces on board is, however, a non-starter under the law of the seas.

My navel has a fleet of 20 ships, including an aircraft carrier and 4 nuclear attack submarines


Yes. But your navel forces are NOT on board commercial vessels.

We also have navel forces on ships in that area. When they can, they intervene against pirates. Our navel vessels are ships of war. The distinction between commercial vessels and ships of war is crucial.


You guys have powerful belly buttons
Link Posted: 3/9/2011 11:10:00 AM EST
Originally Posted By TheCanuck:

Originally Posted By CBR900:
About f-ing time that the tankers plying those waters employed "private security" who use deadly force against pirates.

Use of any nation's navel forces on board is, however, a non-starter under the law of the seas.

My navel has a fleet of 20 ships, including an aircraft carrier and 4 nuclear attack submarines


Belly buttons FTW!!!
Link Posted: 3/9/2011 11:12:18 AM EST
Originally Posted By 583:
Originally Posted By Dog1:
warning shots.




no shit


Don't get too bent out of shape over it.

This may just be PR speak for missed shots. One can hope.
Link Posted: 3/9/2011 11:13:38 AM EST
My solution...



Pirate repellent - made in Arizona.
Link Posted: 3/9/2011 11:13:56 AM EST

Originally Posted By CBR900:

Use of any nation's navel forces on board is, however, a non-starter under the law of the seas.


Um, why?
Link Posted: 3/9/2011 11:14:41 AM EST
[Last Edit: 3/9/2011 11:15:09 AM EST by freerider04]
Originally Posted By CBR900:
About f-ing time that the tankers plying those waters employed "private security" who use deadly force against pirates.

Use of any nation's navel forces on board is, however, a non-starter under the law of the seas.


Which UNCLOS Article is that?

UNCLOS talks about warships being the only ones to arrest pirates. doesn't say anything about shipriders for self defense.

It's not a good idea though. Too many ships, not enough people to go around, or platforms to get them there and pick them back up, or food, or berthing, or any number of other things.

Link Posted: 3/9/2011 11:17:07 AM EST
Because LOST is as fucked up a document as any ever written by the hand of man.


My version of warning shots is fired at the Central T, a T-shaped region drawn between the eyes and
centrally running down the neck.

The first dead pirate is adequate warning for the rest of them to back off and go fishing.


CJ
Link Posted: 3/9/2011 11:22:47 AM EST
[Last Edit: 3/9/2011 11:24:13 AM EST by 7Six2Fifty4R]
Originally Posted By TheCanuck:

Originally Posted By 7Six2Fifty4R:
Originally Posted By TheCanuck:

Originally Posted By 7Six2Fifty4R:
Originally Posted By TheCanuck:

Originally Posted By CBR900:
Originally Posted By TheCanuck:

Originally Posted By CBR900:
About f-ing time that the tankers plying those waters employed "private security" who use deadly force against pirates.

Use of any nation's navel forces on board is, however, a non-starter under the law of the seas.

My navel has a fleet of 20 ships, including an aircraft carrier and 4 nuclear attack submarines


Yes. But your navel forces are NOT on board commercial vessels.

We also have navel forces on ships in that area. When they can, they intervene against pirates. Our navel vessels are ships of war. The distinction between commercial vessels and ships of war is crucial.


A navel vessel wouldn't need to be very big

i hear it has to be the size of a bellybutton at the least...

but naval vessels... well... they are absolute behemoths


Thanks, I was having so much fun




Fucking party pooper






nevermind i misquoted so uhh...

you could always move to a maritime province and have you own navel force?
Link Posted: 3/9/2011 11:24:27 AM EST

Originally Posted By 7Six2Fifty4R:


if it makes you feel any better i think cbr900s are gorgeous bikes :D

I'm a Ducati man myself
Link Posted: 3/9/2011 11:28:12 AM EST
Freighters need more Quad .50

Sure it isn't the fanciest gun, but damnit is it a sexy contraption.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top