. - HotUKDeals
We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HUKD, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Get the HUKD app free at Google Play

Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

Login / Sign UpSubmit

.

bykergrove Avatar
banned6y, 4w agoPosted 6 years, 4 weeks ago
.
bykergrove Avatar
banned6y, 4w agoPosted 6 years, 4 weeks ago
Options

All Comments

(24) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
#1
I think the same about all the terrorists living in the UK. Why don't they just take them out? Think there's more to it than meets the eye...
banned#2
Hmmmm. They are on an oil tanker.... and you want the military to bomb them! Not very smart.

I'm guessing the oil tanker owners regard the loss of $9M to be small fry rather than the cost of a new tanker and all the cargo. Just a thought.
#3
i dont think its as simple as blowing them up! lol esp considering the innocent hostages they are holding and the very expensive ships full of cargo they are in control of. I suspect the ships worth (including cargo or not) is worth far in excess of the payments they have made to release them. I cant believe they currently hold about 25 ships!! Is there not any way to avoid sailing in their waters?

Edited By: dh058977 on Nov 07, 2010 01:30: great minds n all that eh guv?
#4
bykergrove
guv
Hmmmm. They are on an oil tanker.... and you want the military to bomb them! Not very smart.I'm guessing the oil tanker owners regard the loss of $9M to be small fry rather than the cost of a new tanker and all the cargo. Just a thought.
dh058977
i dont think its as simple as blowing them up! lol esp considering the innocent hostages they are holding and the very expensive ships full of cargo they are in control of. I suspect the ships worth (including cargo or not) is worth far in excess of the payments they have made to release them. I cant believe they currently hold about 25 ships!! Is there not any way to avoid sailing in their waters?
sorry should have been more clear. I don't mean to blow the container ships up but to take out the pirate ships.dh- the reason they keep using this route is that it is by far the most direct trade route. even though it is dangerous

But would the less direct routes not offset the amounts paid out to the pirates? i.e. other routes cost more to travel but they no longer have to pay out millions. Plus surely it cant be that quick if the ships have to sit there for ages while the crew are held hostage! lol
Obviously you didnt mean blow up the containers but if they really do hold about 25 ships surely its not as easy as blowing them up? How many pirate ships actually are there?
banned 1 Like #5
bykergrove
sorry should have been more clear. I don't mean to blow the container ships up but to take out the pirate ships.


They do try to do this, though its a bit late if they've already boarded and seized the vessel. I agree they should actively patrol, but it really is a needle in a haystack.
#6
bykergrove
dh058977
But would the less direct routes not offset the amounts paid out to the pirates? i.e. other routes cost more to travel but they no longer have to pay out millions. Plus surely it cant be that quick if the ships have to sit there for ages while the crew are held hostage! lolObviously you didnt mean blow up the containers but if they really do hold about 25 ships surely its not as easy as blowing them up? How many pirate ships actually are there?
I think the alternative routes really are super long.. like REALLY long.bit in bold: that's why i made the thread.does anyone know why? I doubt these guys have heavy artillery? if there is some solid security on these ships it should act as a deterrent no? I really wonder why they don't do this.is it because if they use force in somali waters it's seen as an act of war?

I would think that targeting the pirates could be quite difficult although i do agree that perhaps the ships themselves could be better prepared, armed perhaps? even a dedicated ship security. After all some of these ships are like little citys anyway, some have catering employees, maintenance teams etc . . . surely a few more people isnt going to make a vast difference? Saying all this im not sure how the somalis would react to it, as you say perhaps it could be seen as an act of war.

My question is, how exactly do they board these huge ships in the first place? surely their boats arent big enough to just pull alongside and jump over? lol
If a farmer is allowed to shoot a dog thats annoying their sheep then why cant these sailors shoot a somalian scaling the side of their ship?! lol

*** you already answered all this in post 10 lol ***

Edited By: dh058977 on Nov 07, 2010 01:52: ***
1 Like #7
bykergrove
For the shipping industry, the alternative to the Gulf of Aden is rounding the Cape of Good Hope at the bottom of South Africa, a route that is thousands of miles longer. For that reason and because operating costs for giant vessels can run $20,000 to $30,000 a day, according to Noel Choong, head of the International Maritime Bureau's Piracy Reporting Center, the world's ships continue to run the Gulf of Aden, and the hijackings continue.
Overtaken by hijackers armed with automatic weapons and rocket-propelled grenades, targeted crews seldom try to fight off the pirates."Between the time you see them and the time they control the ship, it takes 15 minutes, maximum," said Patrick Marchesseau, captain of the French luxury yacht Le Ponant, hijacked in April with its 30 crew members as it headed to the port of Aden, in Yemen.
http://www.mareeg.com/fidsan.php?sid=8138&tirsan=3

So surely with the 5.8 and 1.9 million they paid out this time (not to mention other payments they have made including possible payements for the other 25 ships currently being held!) they could afford to send quite a few ships round the bottom of South Africa instead?

Edited By: dh058977 on Nov 07, 2010 01:55: ***
#8
bykergrove
dh058977
So surely with the 5.8 and 1.9 million they paid out this time they could afford to send quite a few ships round the bottom of South Africa instead?
sorry was supposed to like post 11it's because there were about 260 high jacksbut:
At least 22,000 ships pass each year through the Gulf of Aden, including tankers carrying 4 percent of the world's daily oil supplies. Nearly one-third of the world's containerized cargo, as well as almost half of the world's bulk cargo, goes through the Indian Ocean and on to the Gulf of Aden and the Suez Canal, ferrying goods from India, China and elsewhere to the West.
lots and lots of ships haha! only 1.2% are affected so i guess each company thinks/hopes it doesn't happen to them (there is specific insurance for this too lol)

Ah ok 260 out of 22000 isnt really that much! lol and those numbers also make what i said in post 11 pretty pointless, why would the companies bother with their own security etc when its such a small percentage and they have insurance.
Any idea of the times where pirates have harmed crew? I dont mean where someone tries to be a hero and they kill them but do they ever kill / cause harm to people? Because I guess if they kinda just take the money and do no harm then it would be pointless for the companies to set up security on ships! Little bit of crew distress to deal with sure but nothing else.
#9
Il have to have a read tomorrow when im less tired! thanks for that!
suspended#10
There are quite a lot of warships from various countries that patrol the area.
But like someone said, the area is so huge and the number of vessels so numerous, that these warships cannot escort every ship.
So there is always going to be incidents.

But there are reasons for the piracy, such as illegal fishing and a lot of nuclear and toxic waste dumping which destroyed the livelihoods of most Somali fisherman. Hence those fisherman now trying to claw money back.
banned#11
To avoid the route they have to go all the way round Africa....quite a big D tour :{
1 Like #12
midjet666
I think the same about all the terrorists living in the UK. Why don't they just take them out? Think there's more to it than meets the eye...

on this point(not the pirate one),often the security forces prefer to leave known terrorist leaders "in play" and observe them to catch others. They work on the principle that it is better to know who the leaders are,whereas if they arrest/kill them,then they may not discover the next in command.

during the troubles in Ireland,the security forces knew who most of the leaders were,and didnt "take them out" because it was a futile exercise-someone would take their place and their use as intelligence would be wasted.

Im no expert,but willing to bet there are quite a few cell leaders in britain who think they are under the radar,but are being watched 24/7.
#13
I wonder what the going rate for small teams of ex special forces guys would be?, say teams of 4 heavily armed mercs, that could be dropped on the tankers as they approach the area and picked up again to be dropped on the next tanker.
#14
DKLS
I wonder what the going rate for small teams of ex special forces guys would be?, say teams of 4 heavily armed mercs, that could be dropped on the tankers as they approach the area and picked up again to be dropped on the next tanker.


too risky on a ship. remember what happened when US forces tried to save the british woman in afghanistan?

i can see why the company paid them the $11m. the ship was carrying $170m of oil to the US from Iraq.
banned#15
Ahmedou Ould-Abdallah, the UN envoy for Somalia confirmed the world body has "reliable information" that European and Asian companies are dumping toxic waste, including nuclear waste, off the Somali coastli

European companies found it to be very cheap to get rid of the waste, costing as little as $2.50 a tonne, where waste disposal costs in Europe are something like $1000 a tonne.

And the waste is many different kinds. There is uranium radioactive waste. There is lead, and heavy metals like cadmium and mercury. There is also industrial waste, and there are hospital wastes, chemical wastes – you name it.
#16
but everyone loves a pirate
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_XOw-uGXItVA/SwyVVQPJWxI/AAAAAAAAAEc/90GtazyZbRw/s1600/Gabrielle-Dreams-69220.jpg
1 Like #17
DKLS
I wonder what the going rate for small teams of ex special forces guys would be?, say teams of 4 heavily armed mercs, that could be dropped on the tankers as they approach the area and picked up again to be dropped on the next tanker.

http://www.toyshopuk.co.uk/assets/gfx/a-team-van.jpg
banned#18
While the pirates story has dominated the corporate media, there has been little to no discussion of the root causes driving piracy. We speak with consultant and analyst Mohamed Abshir Waldo. In January, he wrote a paper titled "The Two Piracies in Somalia: Why the World Ignores the Other?"
Guest:
Mohamed Abshir Waldo, a consultant and analyst. He joins us on the line from Mombasa. He is Kenyan of Somali origin. He wrote a piece in January titled "The Two Piracies in Somalia: Why the World Ignores the Other?"

AMY GOODMAN: President Obama vowed an international crackdown to halt piracy off the coast of Somalia Monday soon after the freeing of US cargo ship captain Richard Phillips, who had been held hostage by Somali pirates since last Wednesday. Three Somali pirates were killed in the US operation.
While some military analysts are considering attacks on pirate bases inside Somalia in addition to expanding US Navy gunships along the Somali coastline, others are strongly opposed to a land invasion. US Congress member Donald Payne of New Jersey made a brief visit to the Somali capital of Mogadishu Monday and said piracy was, quote, a "symptom of the decades of instability." His plane was targeted by mortar fire as he was leaving Somalia, soon after a pirate vowed revenge against the United States for killing his men.
Former US ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton told Fox News over the weekend that the US should assemble a, quote, "coalition of the willing" to invade Somalia.
Meanwhile, local fishing and business communities along the Somali coast are suffering as a result of the increased American and international naval presence in their waters.
SOMALI FISHERMAN: [translated] American Marine forces always arrest us as we continue fishing. We meet their warships, and at times they send helicopters to take photos of us, as they suspect we are pirates. And we are not.

SOMALI BUSINESSMAN: [translated] People are worried about the troops, as it is becoming more and more difficult to do business. There's a lot of warships patrolling the sea, and merchant ships are getting more and more checked, thinking they are operated by pirates.


AMY GOODMAN: While the pirates story has dominated the corporate media, there has been little to no discussion of the root causes driving piracy.
Mohamed Abshir Waldo is a consultant and analyst in Kenya. He is Kenyan of Somali origin. In January, he wrote a paper called "The Two Piracies in Somalia: Why the World Ignores the Other?" He joins us on the phone right now from Mombasa.
Welcome to Democracy Now!
MOHAMED ABSHIR WALDO: Hello. Thank you.
AMY GOODMAN: Good to have you with us. Can you talk about what you think the two piracies are?
MOHAMED ABSHIR WALDO: Well, the two piracies are the original one, which was foreign fishing piracy by foreign trawlers and vessels, who at the same time were dumping industrial waste, toxic waste and, it also has been reported, nuclear waste. Most of the time, we feel it's the same fishing vessels, foreign fishing vessels, that are doing both. That was the piracy that started all these problems.
And the other piracy is the shipping piracy. When the marine resources of Somalia was pillaged, when the waters were poisoned, when the fish was stolen, and in a poverty situation in the whole country, the fishermen felt that they had no other possibilities or other recourse but to fight with, you know, the properties and the shipping of the same countries that have been doing and carrying on the fishing piracy and toxic dumping.
AMY GOODMAN: Can you explain what IUUs are?
MOHAMED ABSHIR WALDO: IUUs are-I don't remember now, but it's uninterrupted an unreported fishing, unlicensed, unreported, uncontrolled, practically, fishing. Without [inaudible]-
AMY GOODMAN: In your article, you say-in your article, you say it stands for illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing fleets from Europe-
MOHAMED ABSHIR WALDO: Correct.
AMY GOODMAN: -and Arabia and the Far East.
MOHAMED ABSHIR WALDO: Correct, correct. And this has been known to both the countries in the West that had these fishing fleets, which included Spain, Italy, Greece, and eventually UK and others who joined later, as well as Russian. And, of course, there were many more from the East. And this problem has been going on since 1991. And the fishing communities and fishermen reported and complained and appealed to the international community through the United Nations, through the European Union, with no, actually, response in any form at all. They were totally ignored.
AMY GOODMAN: Mohamed Abshir Waldo, explain how what you call "fishing piracy" began.
MOHAMED ABSHIR WALDO: Fishing piracy means fishing without license, fishing by force, even though the community complains, even though whatever authorities are there complain, even though they ask these foreign fishing fleets and trawlers and vessels that have no license, that have no permit whatsoever, when they tell them, "Stop fishing and get out of the area," they refuse, and instead, in fact, they fight. They fought with the fishermen and coastal communities, pouring boiling water on them and even shooting at them, running over their canoes and fishing boats. These were the problems that had been going on for so long, until the community organized themselves and empowered, actually, what they call the National Volunteer Coast Guard, what you would call and what others call today as "pirates."
AMY GOODMAN: So you're saying illegal fishing is happening off the coast of Somalia. What countries are engaged in it?
MOHAMED ABSHIR WALDO: The countries engaged include practically all of southern Europe, France, Spain, Greece, UK. Nowadays I hear even Norway. There were not many Scandinavians before, but Norwegian fishing now is involved in this, you know, very profitable fishing business. So, there are others, of course. There are Russian. There are Taiwanese. There are Philippines. There are Koreans. There are Chinese. You know, it's a free-for-all coast.
And to make things worse, we learned that now that the navies and the warships are there; every country is protecting their own illegal fishing piracies-vessels. They have come back. They ran away from the Somali volunteer guards, coast guards, but now they are back. And they are being protected by their navies. In fact, they are coming close to the territorial waters to harass again the fishermen, who no longer have opportunity or possibility to fish on the coast because of the fear of being called pirates and apprehended by the navy, who are at the same time protecting the other side.
So the issue is really a matter of tremendous injustice, international community only attending and talking and coming to the rescue of the-of their interests and not at all considering or looking from the Somalis' side. This does not mean I am condoning or anyone is condoning piracy or endangering the life of innocent sailors and crews or damaging the property of others, but these people, these fishermen-turned-pirates, had no alternative but to protect themselves, to protect their turf, to-you know, an act of desperation, you might call it.
AMY GOODMAN: What do people in Somalia feel about the pirates, the issue of pirates off the coast?
MOHAMED ABSHIR WALDO: A mixed reaction, I think, in Somalia. The people do not want the innocent sailors to be harmed. They don't want any major environmental disasters to happen by blowing up chemical- or oil-carrying vessels. And they urge the pirates, or fishermen pirates, they urge them not to do any such things.
On the other hand, since there's no sympathy, there's no understanding, there is no readiness for dialogue with the coastal community, with the community in general, with the Somali authorities or the regional government or the national government on a joint action for solving these problems, then it's each for his own way of doing. But the people are very concerned. On the one hand, they would like this to be resolved peacefully; on the other, they feel very sad for injustice being done by the international community.
AMY GOODMAN: A little more on the issue of toxic dumping, if you would, Mohamed Abshir Waldo. I don't think people in the United States understand exactly what it is you're referring to and how it affects people.
MOHAMED ABSHIR WALDO: Well, toxic dumping, industrial waste dumping, nuclear dumping, as you are probably aware and have heard and many people know, for quite some time, in the '70s mainly, in the '80s, in the '90s, there was a lot of waste of all these kinds that companies wanted to get rid of, following very strict environmental rules in their countries. So where else to take but in countries in conflict or weak countries who could not prevent them or who could be bought? So these wastes have been carried to Somalia. It's been in the papers. It has been reported by media organizations like Al Jazeera, I think, like CNN. Many had reported about the Mafia, Italian Mafia, who admitted it, dumping it in Somalia for quite some time, for quite a long time.
And as we speak now, I heard yesterday, in fact, another vessel was captured in the Gulf of Aden by community-this time not pirates, by the community, when the suspected it, and it was carrying two huge containers, which it dumped into the sea when they saw these people coming to them. They have been apprehended. The vessel had been apprehended. Fortunately, the containers did not sink into the sea, but they are being towed to the coast. And this community has invited the international community to come and investigate this matter. So far, we don't have action. So this dumping, waste dumping, toxic dumping, nuclear waste dumping has been ongoing in Somalia since 1992.
AMY GOODMAN: When I read your article, Mohamed Abshir Waldo, [snipped by DBA for length]
2 Likes #19
the real theft, is the 160 million pounds of crude oil that the tanker contains, with none of the benefit going to the iraqi people.
#20
They need Johnny Depp on each ship !!
[mod]#21
Was gutted to see this wasn't in relation to X Factor :(:D
#22
The issue of piracy is a threat that exists all over the world, pirate attacks have long been a problem in the South China Sea and areas around Singapore. There has even been a recorded pirate attack in Liverpool Bay in 2007!
The Somali pirates have just taken it to the next level, usual piracy involves a small group boarding a vessel to steal crew effects and money from the Captains safe. The Somali's realised that ransom money for the vessel is much more profitable.
The area they operate in is huge and impossible to patrol, plans to sail through the area in convoy have fallen flat as the authorities and shipping companies argue over who is to pay for it!
Several issues already discussed are the alternative routes and arming of civilian merchant navy crews. First the alternative route; the shipping lanes through the affected area lead to the Suez canal which saves thousands of miles and many days of sailing times. Ships are not cheap to run, a Suezmax vessel will probably consume around 50 tonnes (11,250 gallons) of fuel a day, fuel is around £400 a tonne. So a 15 deviation around the Cape could cost £300,000 and the delay would be critical for the customer. Shipping companies are very conscious of costs to say the least! The second issue is arming of crews; currently the pirates treat the crews very well, they are of no real value to the pirates. However if a group of pirates, in a shoot out, lose a colleague to the armed crew then they won't be as keen to treat them well!
Piracy is a very scary threat, as a junior officer I was robbed whilst in port in Indonesia when armed men boarded the ship and held us at gunpoint. For all of your bravado, when a drug-fuelled pirate points an AK-47 at you with trembling hands you soon cooperate. Without doubt the scariest moment of my life, I have no shame in admitting shedding tears when they had left.
Whilst the authorities and shipping companies continue to argue over plans and costs, the seafarers are still facing the risks in this area. Each time a ransom is paid it creates a bigger incentive for the pirates.
#23
slamdunkin
Ahmedou Ould-Abdallah, the UN envoy for Somalia confirmed the world body has "reliable information" that European and Asian companies are dumping toxic waste, including nuclear waste, off the Somali coastliEuropean companies found it to be very cheap to get rid of the waste, costing as little as $2.50 a tonne, where waste disposal costs in Europe are something like $1000 a tonne.And the waste is many different kinds. There is uranium radioactive waste. There is lead, and heavy metals like cadmium and mercury. There is also industrial waste, and there are hospital wastes, chemical wastes – you name it.


Then why don't the pirates attack the ships dumping waste?
#24
by paying the ransom, they might aswell hold up a sign on each tanker, "free money, come aboard - big guns required".
They've inadvertently bought better equipment,guns and supplies for the pirates to use on more hijacks, and advertised to local non pirates to change profession.

Post a Comment

You don't need an account to leave a comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

...OR log in with your social account

...OR comment using your social account

Thanks for your comment! Keep it up!
We just need to have a quick look and it will be live soon.
The community is happy to hear your opinion! Keep contributing!