Hostages Taken off Somalia

[Stillraining]

Originally Posted by jdoe71

Why would you think that? Political expediency trumps common sense regularly. Governments bury the truth daily. I worked for one for 28 years and personally saw the spin doctoring of the information being given out and got into some significant sh!t for trying to give out real facts.

In the story referenced there is no denial from the gov't spokesman, only the comment that they thought they did the best they could under the circumstances. Just another failure of a government to actually protect their citizens.

But I have to say I think it was a mistake to be anywhere near that area.

WOW...it is hard to conceive isn't it...I cant fathom it myself...but I bet I would not want to believe half of what our governments world wide actually do.

Very sad state of affairs all around...

I will fault the media as much as politicians calling the shots for not giving the news to us straight most of the time but slanting it pandering to one side or the other...we need the light of truth shined on all shenanigan's and missed deeds no mater where it comes from.

[TOM]

Originally Posted by Rhoel_Asia

You have cruised from Panama across the Pacific and you've now "done" Australia: Time to leave Darwin and head for South Africa. Are you seriously suggesting a direct 6,000nm of headwinds rather than the safer Sri Lanka, Maldives, Seychelles route?

Its very easy to say folks shouldn't go there but come on, a 1,000nm offshore no-go zone is jut plain ridiculous. It's like saying you can't sail anywhere in the Caribbean. With the rate of expanding activity, even Mauritius and La reunion will be out of bounds ... since I've been to Reunion and love the place, I'd find it a destination hard to give up. And I have friends in Mauritius extending the kind of open door "if you are passing this way ..." type invitation which really can't be passed on.

Jimmy Cornell would suggest a June/October departure from Darwin to arrive South Africa October via Christmas Island/Indonesia, Cocos Keeling, Mauritius and on to South Africa. Chagos could also be another stop. The SE trades would be on your back quarter.

To me it makes little sense why you would use a Sri Lanka, Maldives route to get to South Africa, this would be the itinerary I would use on the route to the Red Sea.

Somali pirates are operating further afield, the caution are being north of 10 degrees south and west of 60 degrees east. Mauritius and Reunion are approx. another 700 nm south of that region.

Please let’s not get carried away. Although a big problem, the Somali pirates have not shut down the Indian Ocean.

www.byamee.com

[Fishman_Tx]

Soldiers don't run, politicians do. I know you were just trying to bring home a point, but it hits a nerve. Dissing the people who are following orders is not productive, diss the yahoo who gave that order. With a little research I bet you could come up with a name.

True that, just follow the chain of command upwards. The litle bugger's up there somewhere.

[Rhoel_Asia]

Originally Posted by Ocean Girl

Soldiers don't run, politicians do. I know you were just trying to bring home a point, but it hits a nerve. .... you could come up with a name.E

Possibly and I am not denigrating the guys on board - through my work in Southampton, I had an honorary officers rank and spent many hours out at sea with the Senior Service: The most scar incident was landing in a Sea King on the stern of a warship during a force 7 ... instruction was to bail out and hit the deck flat ... the pilot was using negative pitch to hold the helicopter on deck. Fast hair cut if you ignored the instruction.

The information I was given indicates there are plenty of Naval guys who are just as disappointed by the inaction. One would have thought that sustained burs of machine gun fire over their bows would be enough to convince the guys the kidnap was over - they were after all many miles away from the safety of their own ship and had they been run down, their position of power would have been over. As for the MOD statement, if the vessel had done so commendable well, why was there the need to silence the encounter?

As for the misinformation or spin: This is neither Misinformation would have been "RFA responded to the distress call and located the Chandler's yacht. When a boarding party checked the yacht, it was found to be empty." Both statements are true. It merely omits the "we saw them kidnapped." The lie is we don't know what happened. that appears to have wasted time and resources of other vessels and officials elsewhere.

Interestingly, many have proposed a Q ship solution. RFA's are not warships per say, they are supply vessels: That said, they are in effect Q ships, more than adequately armed and able to defend themselves. Yet despite their superior weaponry, they were unable to offer covering fire or otherwise protect the yacht.

Originally Posted by TOM

Jimmy Cornell would suggest a June/October departure from Darwin to arrive South Africa October via Christmas Island/Indonesia, Cocos Keeling, Mauritius and on to South Africa. Chagos could also be another stop. The SE trades would be on your back quarter.

I don't have his books here at present and my Admiralty Sailing directions are safety tucked up in a UK lockup. The Sri Lanka route was suggested for December departure. The Darwin route is interesting - I had looked at the Sunda Straits/Krakatoa option as the Straits of Malacca as still problematical. I also have relative living in Jakarta which adds weight to that crossing the equator early route. is the Jim Cornell information available online? A link would be appreciated.

But it will be two years before I need to worry, I'm still in build mode. Hopefully this current wave of Somali activity will have beem resolved by then.

[Boracay]

It may be a little unfair to infer that the Royal Fleet Auxiliary Wave Knight had the ability to intervene. The boat in the photo above is not exactly bristling with firepower, and it is very unlikely that the 75 merchant seamen and 25 Royal Navy Sailors had the training or experience to do anything except watch.

I'd also guess that they were most likely following the pirate boats and only saw the initial contact from a considerable distance, arriving after the S/V Lynn Rival had been taken.

The VHF on S/V Lynn Rival may not have been turned on so it would not have been possible to warn them.

[Rhoel_Asia]

Originally Posted by Boracay

The boat in the photo above is not exactly bristling with firepower, and it is very unlikely that the 75 merchant seamen and 25 Royal Navy Sailors had the training or experience to do anything except watch.

I'd also guess that they were most likely following the pirate boats and only saw the initial contact from a considerable distance, arriving after the S/V Lynn Rival had been taken.

The VHF on S/V Lynn Rival may not have been turned on so it would not have been possible to warn them.

Granted: So why the deceit? Why the complete blackout on the RFA involvement and the failure to report for 5 days they were in the hands of the Somalis? The FCO were stating they were doing everything possible 2-3 days after the incident to discover if they had been taken - the navy knew, is the Foreign & Commonwealth Office saying it wasn't told?

This just isn't lying straight in bed at present.

Rhoel

[fishwife]

Is it too far fetched to think that our (British) government are happy to have examples of 'Islamic' piracy conflated with terrorism. It's also worth noting that there was a diplomatic mission to Somalia planned for a couple or so weeks after the couple were kidnapped. Perhaps they didn't want anything to 'disrupt' the negotiations, like half a dozen dead pirates.

Paige

[fishwife]

I have to post on this again, sorry. Like Rhoel, I have some understanding of the way things are done in the Navy. When a Royal Fleet Auxiliary Vessel goes into harms way, they are given a covering vessel or a complement of Marines. The 25 Royal Navy 'Sailors' were likely to be Marines and armed to the teeth. They also had a helicopter which probably (likely) had a door mounted machine gun. I despair, I really do.

Paige

[c-kow]

Originally Posted by Boracay

It may be a little unfair to infer that the Royal Fleet Auxiliary Wave Knight had the ability to intervene. The boat in the photo above is not exactly bristling with firepower, and it is very unlikely that the 75 merchant seamen and 25 Royal Navy Sailors had the training or experience to do anything except watch.

I'd also guess that they were most likely following the pirate boats and only saw the initial contact from a considerable distance, arriving after the S/V Lynn Rival had been taken.

The VHF on S/V Lynn Rival may not have been turned on so it would not have been possible to warn them.

I'm pretty sure they could have handled a glorified innertube and called in help to take down the mothership

[svHyLyte]

It would seem Wave Kinght's inability to respond to pirate attacks is very selective: News : RFA Wave Knight : Fast Fleet Tankers : RFA Flotilla : Royal Fleet Auxiliary : Operations and Support : Royal Navy .

From the above...

...Via radio, Wave Knight ordered the dhow to stop and used a Royal Navy armed force protection team as well as the ship's own weapons team to provide cover. The pirate vessel complied.

...The intervention resulted in the release of 13 fishermen who had been held hostage by pirates since 12 April. The seven suspected pirates aboard the dhow were not captured in the act of piracy so they were released, but they were disarmed and their weapons destroyed.

As, when and if the Political Class defines the mission, the military including the RN, USN, USA, USMC et al wiill respond. Until then they are hamstrung by indecisiveness.

FWIW...

[Blue Stocking]

ANOTHER attempt to hi-jack the Maersk Alabama leaves me-----well, almost speechless!!
How does a right thinking person logic this out?
Are the pirates so individualistic in operations that no 2 know what ship is being attacked. I know its a large area of ocean --but--What the H*LL!!.
Do they think that the ship would not now be armed to the teeth?
Do they think that the Maersk Line is weak, and will continue to pay ransom?
The pirates are NOW complaining that the Warships outgun them
Surely we have reached some sort of an international law situation where an authorized vessel has the right to challenge what appears to be an imminent threat.
If they claim to be "fishing vessels" and are found to be carrying offensive weapons (RPGs, heavy machine guns, etc) this must account for something sinister. Where are the nets, the bait boxes, the longlines and floats? COME ON, NOW!!
I have done electrical work in the past on Korean fishing vessels working around Bermuda, and am yet to find any suggestion that these types of weapons are carried for "vessel protection " from outside threat.

[David_Old_Jersey]

I think the Pirates still have around a dozen ships held for ransom.

Although they no doubt still have the crew onboard as hostages I would still sink them at anchor Not with a 500lb bomb but in a reasonably controlled manner, if not from 30mm cannon into the waterline then by scuba diver planted explosives. Even if not actually sunk, a partly flooded vessel will soon not be worth anything, apart from scrap value. I would do this under a UN flag, with the action being taken by whoever has the capacity and willpower.

Maybe a UN compensation fund for the vessel & cargo owners / the insurance company (so the pirates know that no one has any financial interest left in the ships)..........the idea being to remove the big incentive for piracy if they know the prize asset will simply be sunk. Of course they can still go for crews, but the Somalis ain't stupid - most of the crews are 3rd world citizens with no "commercial value" to their employers.

[Rhoel_Asia]

news broke a few hours ago to say the captain of the MV Theresa VIII, which was seized a few days ago, has died of gunshot injuries he sustained in the attack.

Source: BBC http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8366097.stm

In a separate report, BBC report the US has deployed unmanned REAPER drones to monitor the pirates, to gather court-grade evidence on 'fishermen' preparing for attacks, ditching weapons overboard etc.
Source BBC: Drones scour the sea for pirates

[jdoe71]

Originally Posted by Blue Stocking

ANOTHER attempt to hi-jack the Maersk Alabama leaves me-----well, almost speechless!!
How does a right thinking person logic this out?
Are the pirates so individualistic in operations that no 2 know what ship is being attacked. I know its a large area of ocean --but--What the H*LL!!.
Do they think that the ship would not now be armed to the teeth?
Do they think that the Maersk Line is weak, and will continue to pay ransom?
The pirates are NOW complaining that the Warships outgun them
Surely we have reached some sort of an international law situation where an authorized vessel has the right to challenge what appears to be an imminent threat.
If they claim to be "fishing vessels" and are found to be carrying offensive weapons (RPGs, heavy machine guns, etc) this must account for something sinister. Where are the nets, the bait boxes, the longlines and floats? COME ON, NOW!!
I have done electrical work in the past on Korean fishing vessels working around Bermuda, and am yet to find any suggestion that these types of weapons are carried for "vessel protection " from outside threat.

Well they won't think Maersk line is weak because that ship was armed and returned fire. Which convinced the pirates to buggar off. Perhaps that says something?

[Blue Stocking]

Originally Posted by jdoe71

Well they won't think Maersk line is weak because that ship was armed and returned fire. Which convinced the pirates to buggar off. Perhaps that says something?

EXACTLY!!