Somali pirates seize supertanker loaded with crude

[seemslikeadream]

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gZeyeAHtrDVQhPXkHEQd_aeCPCWQD94GP5SG0

By BARBARA SURK – 48 minutes ago

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — Somali pirates hijacked a supertanker hundreds of miles off the Horn of Africa, seizing the Saudi-owned ship loaded with crude and its 25-member crew, the U.S. Navy said Monday.

It appeared to be the largest ship ever seized by pirates.

After the brazen hijacking, the pirates on Monday sailed the Sirius Star to a Somali port that has become a haven for bandits and the ships they have seized, a Navy spokesman said.

The hijacking was among the most brazen in a surge in attacks this year by ransom-hungry Somali pirates. Attacks off the Somali coast have increased more than 75 percent this year, and even the world's largest vessels are vulnerable.

The Sirius Star, commissioned in March and owned by the Saudi oil company Aramco, is 1,080 feet long — about the length of an aircraft carrier — making it one of the largest ships to sail the seas. It can carry about 2 million barrels of oil.

Lt. Nathan Christensen, a spokesman for the U.S. Navy's 5th Fleet, said the pirates hijacked the ship on Saturday about 450 nautical miles off the coast of Kenya — the farthest out to sea Somali pirates have struck.

By expanding their range, Somali pirates are "certainly a threat to many more vessels," Christensen said. He said the pirates on the Sirius Star were "nearing an anchorage point" at the Somali port town of Eylon Monday.

Somali pirates have seized at least six several ships off the Horn of Africa in the past week, but the hijacking of a supertanker marked a dramatic escalation.

[dysfunctional press]

1. how do they board a supertanker?

:shrug:

[Lasher]

5. They board some ships at the stern by climbing up big long bamboo poles.

I don't know about this one. Maybe they fired on the tanker or threatened to. The old 'shot across the bow' has been used before to get vessils to submit.

Sooner or later this thing with Somali pirates is going to get old.

[sufrommich]

23. I was wondering the same thing, those ships are huge.

I mean multi story building huge,it would be hard to believe they're swinging Errol Flynn style from ropes onto these monsters.

[no_hypocrisy]

2. You can't exactly shoot at an oil tanker and not expect a little boom.

[YOY]

3. Which is either genius of a Die Hard villain level or incredibly mind-numbingly stupid.

n.t.

[Skink]

4. They just pissed off the wrong Bush.

[lutefisk]

6. I'm for a joint mission of naval forces from around the world to address this whole pirate thing

South Korea, for one, is considering sending naval vessels. How about diverting some of our Navy resources to the area? Sure, the pirates have gps and satellite phones, but I think military technology can deal with that . . .

What would be the downside to addressing the overall pirate situation with military force?

[NeedleCast]

9. Already Have Several Navies in the Area

doing joint operations to prevent this sort of thing, but the ocean is big, even small peices of it like the areas off the Somalia coast.

Most of these pirates aren't armed very well. A few PRGs and assault rifles. I'd think the crews of ships sailing these wanters would be advised to mount a few .50 cals on their ships. Pirates would probably respond quite a bit differently when one of their little motor boats gets sawed in half with a hail of 50 cal shells.

[Blue_Tires]

42. +1

[Romulox]

16. I'm not. Where is it written that the US is the policeman to the world?

Saudi Arabia is one of the richest nations on the planet. Let them pay for their own defense.

"What would be the downside to addressing the overall pirate situation with military force?"

Crippling inter-generational debt, for one.

[KansDem]

7. Here's some of the crude it was loaded with...

[StreetKnowledge]

8. Can we get some naval vessels dispatched there, please?

And how about we send an AWACS plane or two to Kenya, and have them fly patrols to find these dumb pirates?

[NeedleCast]

10. dumb?

These dumb pirates have hijacked about 20 large ships in the last 18 months including a super-tanker and several large cargo ships, one of which was apparently packed to the gills with small arms and T-72 main battle tanks.

Uneducated maybe. Not dumb.

[JHB]

12. Also find out how they target a ship...

By that I mean, are they just grabbing what comes by, or are they lying in wait to nab specific ships.

[Romulox]

17. Nope. Not our business. We are not the world's policemen. nt

[Renew Deal]

29. Although I agree that we're not the worlds policeman

Those that can help should help. There are a few nations with functional Navy's and many more with interests in the region. If the US, Britain, Russia, and Japan got together on this, they could put a dent in this.

[Romulox]

47. Russia, Canada, Saudi Arabia, France, Germany, China--all of these "can help".

So let them.

[backscatter712]

50. And they do help.

You think it's only the U.S. that sends destroyers to the area to deal with the pirates?

[Romulox]

52. So call on China to send ships. Ours are occupied atm. nt

[backscatter712]

45. Actually, it is. Jointly with other navies

The appropriate thing is for the U.S. Navy to operate jointly with other nation's navies to patrol those waters and deal with those pirates.

[Romulox]

48. Nope. Saudi Arabia needs to protect its own profits.

[backscatter712]

49. Has it occurred to you that...

Nations in the world find it in their self-interests to work together to keep piracy at bay, which is why the U.S. Navy actually does this thing called diplomacy, works with other country's navies, like those from European countries; while countries that didn't have significant navies provided financial assistance to those that did, in exchange for protection of their shipping.

If we didn't do that, I think we'd find the seas to be far more savage. It is not in our best interests, or anyone else's to say "Sorry, solve your own problems."

So, yes, it is our problem - not just for Saudi oil, but for other shipping - remember that ship full of Russian tanks? It would definitely be in the world's interests to make sure that didn't fall into the wrong hands. Cruise liners have also been hijacked, as have ships with medical supplies and humanitarian aid supplies.

[Romulox]

51. Does it occur to YOU that the Saudis contribute ZERO ships to this allegedly collective action?

:silly:

[alittlelark]

36. How about the SAUDIS send forces? It's THEIR ship.

:think:

[naaman fletcher]

11. This is what I don't get..

Here is an actual, legitimate use of our naval power. A use for which I would be proud of our navy, and for which the world would be grateful. Go patrol these waters and blast the pirates out of the sea. Yet, what is the Navy doing? Obviously not this.

[NeedleCast]

13. A little critical thinking

Think about this for a minute, yeah?

First, the US is part of a joint naval operation going on in this area to curtail piracy but these are pirates. They don't operate under a flag or by typical rules of engagement. They don't sail around in wooden sloops and cracks with a black skull and crossbones flag.

Somalia is an area where thousands of small water craft are operated from dhows down to small motor boats, canoes, etc. So, how do you go about rooting the pirates out from all the other personal boats operating in the area. You can't just blast joe-the-fisherman out of the water. You basically have to catch them in the act, which is hard to do, and even then, you're usually dealing with a hostage situation, as the pirates usually take the crew as prisoners.

So it's not so easy as just go patrol the waters and start blasting pirates.

[naaman fletcher]

14. heh..

fine point, I was using hyperbole. You can have ships on station, ready to respond to distress calls. Under international law any vessel can use deadly force to protect another from piracy.

[NeedleCast]

19. Shipping has changed, piracy hasn't

As somewhat of an expert on pirates, it's interesting to see just how successful an institution it is, and one that hasn't changed in thousands of years.

The Brits used to say the same thing during the golden age of piracy in the Caribean. They had the big 90-gun ships of the line and the pirates were mostly operating much smaller ships. Even big targets like Spanish galleons were often very heavily armed but fell pray to small bands of pirates. Dozens if not hundreds of stories of packs of anywhere from a dozen to twenty pirates taking ships with a crew of 300, mostly because the pirates used suprise and terror to capture ships. Pretty much how they still do it. That's why I said upthread that merchant vessles operating in these waters need to be heavily armed and be keeping a watch.

From the stories I've read, these pirates are using small 4-6 person motor-boats and are launching from larger ships (dhows in most cases) to find targets. The dhow sails around doing minor league fishing operations until they see a vulnerable target then they launch motorboats of crews packing AKs and RPGs which rapidly approach the target, threaten to riddle the target with bullets and RPG rockets, board it when the crew surrenders and sail away with it.

Our navy isn't designed for this sort of operation. Even our fast destroyers and frigates would have a hard time dealing with these small-boat tactics. Keep in mind that to a large extent, our armed forces are built to deal with other major powers. Russia, China, etc. They weren't made to hunt down motor boats in crowded shipping lanes.

[Sgent]

46. True

but our Coast Guard is designed to handle these types of operations. It maybe time to assign some USCG units to the Navy.

[Joiwind]

15. The Navy is busy protecting the UAE from Iran

What with all the US corporations that have pulled up stakes and repatriated to Dubai, and especially the capital flight, my guess is that the 3rd Fleet hasn't got the cycles to go chasing after Cap'n Jack Sparrow

[Romulox]

18. Look at a map. Look at where Somalia is. Look at where Saudia Arabia is. Now look at where the US

is.

Why is this our problem again???

[naaman fletcher]

20. not saying...

I don't necessarily think its our problem, just if we are going to have a massive navy that goes around the world doing stuff, this would be something that is actually useful.

[Romulox]

21. Nonsense. There is NO REASON for young Americans to risk their lives for Saudi Princes' profits.

And the fact that we have a large navy certainly isn't a good reason to go to war.

"Guns, guns
they all got guns
And now they
want to shoot someone."

[naaman fletcher]

25. So how would you suggest this work?

A country only protect its own ships from pirates? If that was the case, the seas would be full of pirates, and countries without large navies would not have commercial fleets. How would, say, Venezuela, be able to protect its shipping? It can't afford a large blue water navy. That is why it has generally been considered everyone's duty to come to the aid of a ship under attack by pirates. We have a massive blue water navy.. I'd rather it be used keeping the shipping lanes open than doing what we do with it now.

[Romulox]

26. I suggest countries protect their own ships.

Or else form a new multilateral organization that is tasked with protecting shipping lanes. The system of Pax Americana is over.

"That is why it has generally been considered everyone's duty to come to the aid of a ship under attack by pirates."

If it were everyone's "duty" to protect international shipping lanes, then you need to call on Saudi Arabia, UAE, France, et al. to send more ships.

We're already doing our share.

[misanthrope]

22. Here's how some Brits handled it...

...not too long ago.

British forces kill two pirates in foiled hijacking

[AntiLempa]

24. More Corporate Welfare

Let these corporations pay for their own defense! This is what should be called a standard operatic cost. In a freed market (see http://williamgillis.blogspot.com/2007/07/freed-market-one-of-tactics-ive-taken.html) business wouldn't be able to depend on government(s) to solve all of their problems.

Defending private companies amounts to a bail out similar to AIGs. Bailing them out amounts to fascism (liberal or conservative).

[Fireweed247]

27. Does anyone else wonder why they can't catch these guys?

We have an amazing satellite system capable of seeing everything that is going on...it would be pretty easy to follow them to wherever they are going. What about using aircraft? Does Somalia have a refinery? Something about this just doesn't make sense. Is there a new Pirates of the Caribbean movie coming out or something...

[NeedleCast]

30. Ransom

Ransom the crew and cargo. Its doubtful they could do anything with the oil, other than sell it back to who it used to belong to.

[slackmaster]

31. It would be hard to make a case that capturing them was in the scope of US national interests

My brother was the CO of a US Navy vessel that got into some engagements with pirates near the horn of Africa in the summer of 2007. One problem with any kind of action taken against them, once they have boarded a ship, is the likelihood of causing a fire or massive environmental incident (not to mention harming the innocent hostages).

We do have the firepower to pursue them and attack them wherever they are, but there are major issues with national sovreignty.

[Posteritatis]

41. Real life isn't the movies

There isn't a The Pirate Base that can be found and attacked. Satellites don't provide realtime 24/7 coverage of areas. There's thousands upon thousands of ships in that area; the waters are thick with them and it would be easy to get lost in the crowd. Once a pirate boat gets into the herd or docks, the crew's gone as far as tracking purposes go. The larger ships are easier to follow, but you can't just Rambo your way onto them without expecting the crew to be killed or worse.

Sure, it could be dealt with readily enough, but you'd have to be prepared to kill a lot of bystanders to do it.

[ladjf]

44. It seems to me that a Black Hawk helicopter , armed with air to

surface missiles and carried on the deck of the ship could dispatch any small time attackers to the ocean bottom.

[Bake]

28. Why don't these supertankers carry their own security forces?

That seems like the obvious solution.

Bake

[slackmaster]

32. International shipping and customs laws prohibit commercial vessels from carrying "real" weapons

Unfortunately the pirates don't care about the law.

[Bake]

37. Those laws can be changed, can they not?

Again, it seems obvious to me. Make it riskier for pirates, and piracy goes down. The risk is no longer worth the reward.

Bake

[Karenina]

33. Uh-oh! NOW they're in trouble!

:scared: ;-)

[bullwinkle428]

34. In related news, gas prices suddenly rise by $1 per gallon!

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

35. I didn't know downloading music made people so nasty. -nt

[Brooklyns_Finest]

38. Blackwater

The laws should be changed so the commercial frieght can have weapons and then they should hire some private security company to protect them. I can definately see companies like blackwater being all over this.

[seemslikeadream]

39. Britons held hostage as Somali pirates seize oil supertanker

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/kenya/3474013/Britons-held-hostage-as-Somali-pirates-seize-oil-supertanker.html


Two Britons are among the crew of an oil supertanker seized by pirates off the Kenyan coast.

[taught_me_patience]

40. Picture of the pirates found!

[ladjf]

43. A couple of heavily armed Black Hawk type helicopters carried

on the deck of freighters should be able to deal with the pirate's effectively.

[Liberal In Texas]

53. Where are Dirk Pitt and Al Giordino when you need them?