Thread: US drones hunting for Somali pirates

Originally Posted by Panda

Are you on medication for your problem?

Can you discuss an issue without making lame personal attacks?

Originally Posted by friscofrankie

Originally Posted by Panda

Are you on medication for your problem?

Can you discuss an issue without making lame personal attacks?

The voice of reason, and coming from someone who never makes personal attacks himself of course.

I will try to be better behaved in future for you Frankie.

I wouldn't gloat over the UN resolutions too much there Frankie. The resolutions have no real teeth and all they do is authorize international military to enter Somali territorial waters and/or land in an attempt to contain the piracy. The navies still cant round up the pirates on the high seas or in Somali waters. All they can do is intervene when they see an act of piracy in progress.

Here's an example of what I am saying, --

"On Wednesday morning pirates were reportedly foiled after attempting to attack a Chinese-owned ship in the Gulf of Aden - a day after three other vessels were seized.
The Chinese crew held off the pirates long enough for back-up to arrive, AFP news agency reported.
"Military helicopters came and they managed to chase the pirates away," Noel Choong, of the International Maritime Bureau, told AFP.
'Calculated jab' The BBC's Peter Greste in Nairobi says the latest attacks appear to be a calculated jab at UN attempts to clamp down on piracy."
BBC NEWS | Africa | UN approves piracy land pursuit

Here's a link to the toothless UN resolution you are referring to,--
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2008/sc9344.doc.htm

BTW, I take on board your comments quoted below and understand that it is simply a form of paternal advice from a mod rather than any attempt to provoke an argument here in order to get me jailed.

" You've done nothgn in this so-called discussion but rabble rouse, repeat anti-American rhetoric (OK, I guess, and to be expected) and make personal attacks."

Your opinion, as always, is valued appropriately. Thanks Frankie.

Originally Posted by Panda

I wouldn't gloat over the UN resolutions too much there Frankie. The resolutions have no real teeth and all they do is authorize international military to enter Somali territorial waters and/or land in an attempt to contain the piracy.

Actually part the point I was making. (please note the sarcastic comment abot the WP reported forgetting to mention the "at sea" bit) The UN has done fuck all. But I think we can agree there is a real need for some kind of action to protect not only international commerce but private citizens as well. My gloatig was merely gloatig over the uselessness of the UNSC in this matter and for my moeny it is EXACTLY the kind of thing the UN Security Council should be sticking it's nose. in.

The Piracy off the Somalia coast is of a higher concern to most nations other than the U.S. on the planet. It is not profitable to have a ship registered under the U.S. flag and the bulk of merchant seaman are not U.S. citizens anymore. SO. If not the UN; WHO?

Originally Posted by Panda

BTW, I take on board your comments quoted below and understand that it is simply a form of paternal advice from a mod rather than any attempt to provoke an argument here in order to get me jailed.
" You've done nothgn in this so-called discussion but rabble rouse, repeat anti-American rhetoric (OK, I guess, and to be expected) and make personal attacks."
Your opinion, as always, is valued appropriately. Thanks Frankie.

Gotta love that "value appropriately" bit
although you could consider it that it is not. Fuck all that modly shit.I'm just a guy that has been posting on the forum since it started . I've always enjoyed the banter and freedom with which we can discuss most current events without some censor/schoolmarm peeking in and giving reprimands. One of the things about TD has always been a bit of self moderation or moderation by consensus of the pack (not always, but nothng's perfect). Of late the place has become a fucking zoo, perhaps I am over-sensitized to it.

Originally Posted by withnallstoke

Originally Posted by zubber

The developments come as the White House seeks grounds to establish a major military presence in Africa.

There's the rub.

Ah....but the secret is that the U.S. has always had a military presence in Africa. Just another surface extension of the worldwide military empire.

Originally Posted by Dug

Originally Posted by BobR

Cowardly way to fight a war, but what can you expect from America anymore. At least they won't waste time taking prisoners.

Um, it's not a war.

Doesn't matter the label. Most buy into it. Drones....part of the broader metaphore of this story.

Two Worlds of a Drone Pilot

was also a good wired article , but I cannot find it with a quick search

Pirates? Privateers? Swashbuckling Buccaneers? As are the reflective courses of history, one has to ask: Who are the good guys and who are the bad guys?

^No one doesn't.

Originally Posted by Rural Surin

Doesn't matter the label. Most buy into it. Drones....part of the broader metaphore of this story.

And what the fuck is that crap supposed to mean? People are being kidnapped, shipping lanes are not safe for commerce, cruising or transportation and you come up with this comment? I've attacked others in this very thread for personal attacks, how can I then tell you you shouljd not comment? DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA HOW TO CURTAIL THE PIRACY? have anything of value to adde otehr than some lame-brained rhetoric? I mean seriously, calling your somment s rhetoric is a braod leap in trying to attach any legitimacy I'm tryin' REAl fucking hard to be nice here.

people are being held against their will, fortunes are being held for ransome. THE COST OF DOING BUSINESS has gone up = the end consumer is getting fucked. People even die. and all you can say is... ".part of the broader metaphore of this story" what the fuck are you talking about? What the Fuck does that mean? seriously, Needs an explanation.

Originally Posted by Rural Surin

one has to ask: Who are the good guys and who are the bad guys?

The bad gys are the ones taking what doesn't belong to them and holding it for ransom. The bad guys are teh ones stealing the bad guys are teh ones holding innocnt civilian yachtsmen for ransom. Ny god man just dont even post you are an idiot. (excuse me Pnady, But it's true!)

Ther is never a more clear cut case of right and wrong in all of history. Ther is never a more clear cut need for the UNSC to step up ad take an iniative thanexists today withe the 18year old anarchy tha is Somalia. For one I'd liek to see France, the UK or some other country to tell teh UN to go fuck themselves walk in and take over teh fucking country., God forbid the US takes on anoteh POS "war" the "international community" (i.e. teh UN) has been sitting on its collective hands while this shit goes on. and on. and on. Fuck the at sea pirates. Cut their support options to none. These pirates need fuel, supplies a palce to stow their booty Tae that away and they wither and die. Cover them from the air so they cannot move (drones are good for that! hey!) These are not some fairy tale swashbuckling heros. These fucking scum bags are simply road agents f the seas taking advantage ofa weak fuking international community situtation.

IF the UNSC cannot rally a force to deal with these international criminals then they should be disbanded, the UN accepted as a failure dismantled and an individual nation should step up and starting from the interior, proceed to cut some fucking pirate throat (figuratively speaking).

Aft several years of this shit the UN has proved themselves to be a Lame fucking joke nd unnecessary. waste of time. The Un headquaters in NYC would be best used to house the homeless and the seat of "Power" for the un best moved to some obscure African shithlole nation and given a fuckng hut to ork out of.

My country tis of thee, willeventually act unilaterally and kill off this problem and Rghtfully so. One has to wonder what this worthless waste of time could have done to prevent the Iraqi conflict. Just think, If teh UNSC had been a tad bit stronger the weakness ofthe UNSC is amazing I cannot see how it still survives.

Originally Posted by Panda

As it stands a countries navy can not arrest or kill pirates attacking merchant ships from another country.

I don't believe that is accurate, Panda. Recent examples would show otherwise, I think.
Added to that the Straits of Melaka are patrolled by local navies that protect all nations' ships.

Originally Posted by mordred

Let the rest of the international community take care of their own ships or get them involved in patrolling those waters. Why should the we put up all the resources and have the rest of the world benefit from more secure shipping lanes?

Did you take your red, white and blue blindfold off to write this tripe?

As usual some uninformed half-wits would lead us to think that the US is the only country to undertake, or be involved in, international peace-keeping or patrolling efforts . . .

So . . .

The US goes it alone: The US is the world's policemen. Ra-ra-ra

Other nations do so: The US is the world's policeman. Ra-ra-ra


Get stuffed, mate

Originally Posted by Panda

Surveillance is about all these drones will do.

International laws re piracy actually protect the pirates at the expense of their victims. As it stands a countries navy can not arrest or kill pirates attacking merchant ships from another country. So the whole exercise of having all these various countries navys out there patrolling the area is pretty well useless unles they just happen to be lucky and intervene in a hijacking of one of their own countries ships. Otherwise they have just got to let the hijackers go and ensure they have safe passage home or back to the mother ship.

Drones are certainly no protection except for surveillance purposes. All this talk about how they are "capable" of carrying missiles is really nothing more than some muscle flexing with no real teeth unless exceptional circumstances arise.

Wait and see

Originally Posted by panama hat

Originally Posted by Panda

As it stands a countries navy can not arrest or kill pirates attacking merchant ships from another country.

I don't believe that is accurate, Panda. Recent examples would show otherwise, I think.
Added to that the Straits of Melaka are patrolled by local navies that protect all nations' ships.

I cant recall any instances where navies have arrested or killed pirates attacking a ship on the high seas that was not of their own nationality. Things may have changed however.

Territorial waters are a different matter to international laws that govern the high seas. As you point out in the Melakan Straight local navies have the right to arrest who they like in their own territorial waters if they deem they are committing a crime under their countries jurisdiction.

The UN Security Council resolution was at the request of the Somali government and allows international navies to act on behalf of the Somali government ONLY in Somali territorial waters. I believe the laws governing the high seas still remain as such is the reason the pirates have moved thier opperations further out to sea and outside of Somali territorial waters where they are protected.

Below is an extract of discussion prior to the vote on the UN resolution 1816/2008

"
Speaking prior to action on the draft, Indonesia’s representative emphasized the need for the draft to be consistent with international law, particularly the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, and to avoid creating a basis for customary international law for the repression of piracy and armed robbery at sea. Actions envisaged in the resolution should only apply to the territorial waters of Somalia, based upon that country’s prior consent. The resolution addressed solely the specific situation off the coast of Somalia, as requested by the Government.

Speaking after the vote, Viet Nam’s representative said the resolution should not be interpreted as allowing any actions in the maritime areas other than Somalia’s or under conditions contrary to international law and the Law of the Sea Convention.

The representative of Libya said he had voted in favour of the draft on the understanding that the resolution related only to acts of piracy in the maritime areas under jurisdiction of Somalia.

South Africa’s representative said that it was necessary to be clear that it was the situation in Somalia that constituted a threat to international peace and security and not sea piracy in itself. Furthermore, the resolution must respect the Law of the Sea Convention, which remained the basis for cooperation among States on the issue of piracy. The Council should not lose focus on the larger situation in the country, most importantly the need to address the political, security and humanitarian situation on the ground.

China’s representative said that the Council’s actions should facilitate international assistance in combating piracy and avoid negative consequences. Such assistance should be based on the wishes of the Government and be applied only to the territorial waters of Somalia. It must comply with the Law of the Sea Convention and must not constitute conflict with existing international legislation. The resolution adopted today responded to those requirements to the greatest extent possible"

Originally Posted by RPETER65

Originally Posted by Panda

Surveillance is about all these drones will do.

International laws re piracy actually protect the pirates at the expense of their victims. As it stands a countries navy can not arrest or kill pirates attacking merchant ships from another country. So the whole exercise of having all these various countries navys out there patrolling the area is pretty well useless unles they just happen to be lucky and intervene in a hijacking of one of their own countries ships. Otherwise they have just got to let the hijackers go and ensure they have safe passage home or back to the mother ship.

Drones are certainly no protection except for surveillance purposes. All this talk about how they are "capable" of carrying missiles is really nothing more than some muscle flexing with no real teeth unless exceptional circumstances arise.

Wait and see

Would you care to expand on that rather cryptic comment there RPETER65?

Originally Posted by friscofrankie

Of late the place has become a fucking zoo, perhaps I am over-sensitized to it.

Its just that you are such a sensitive and caring guy Frankie.

the other article I was looking for was esquire , and not wired

Unmanned Aircraft - Future of Drone Aircraft and UAVs - Esquire

and the aircraft are not just for surveillance

In 2001, ninety years after an airplane first dropped a bomb, a Predator launched a Hellfire missile in Afghanistan for the first time. The next year, a Predator fired a Stinger missile at an Iraqi MiG-25. The missile's heat seeker was thrown off by the MiG's missile, which destroyed the Predator, but still: A drone had been in a dogfight. If the Air Force ever again has an ace, the pilot will likely be parked in a chair in a windowless room in the desert outside Las Vegas.

Originally Posted by Panda

As you point out in the Melakan Straight local navies have the right to arrest who they like in their own territorial waters if they deem they are committing a crime under their countries jurisdiction.

Good point, I was comparing apples to oranges. Thanks

Originally Posted by baldrick

the other article I was looking for was esquire , and not wired

Unmanned Aircraft - Future of Drone Aircraft and UAVs - Esquire

and the aircraft are not just for surveillance

We know.
From the OP.

The drones are capable of carrying a dozen guided bombs and missiles. They would not immediately be fitted with weaponry, but military officials did not rule out doing so in the future.

Somebody needs to sort these mothers out, either with warships or drones, just sink their motherships and job done.

Originally Posted by fish

Somebody needs to sort these mothers out, either with warships or drones, just sink their motherships and job done.

or maybe defend their fishing zones from immoral international companies that are taking advantage and let them go back to fishing to feed their families

Germany, Russia . . . and the list goes on.

Originally Posted by mordred

There is no other country that is willing to do the job

You are indeed an empty buffoon.

Originally Posted by panama hat

Germany, Russia . . . and the list goes on.

Originally Posted by mordred

There is no other country that is willing to do the job

You are indeed an empty buffoon.

An empty buffoon indeed.