Escalating the pirate situation into a war would be stupid.

[JVS]

If this continues to be a problem simply have countries that are interested in protecting their shipping donate a few small warships each to the purpose of sending through a couple convoys a day through their area. We have no need for another invasion and occupation.

[stray cat]

1. No one want to invade or occupy Somalia

[stillcool]

6. Maybe not 'invade' but intervening...

is always popular.

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/North_Africa/North_Africa_page.html

[Poiuyt]

19. US military mulls attacking Somali pirates' land bases

While some Somali pirates are threatening to take revenge for two deadly international assaults which disrupted their kidnapping plots the last week, the US military is mulling taking the fight to their bases.

Also, a US congressman's plane was reportedly fired upon by insurgents as he was taking off from Mogadishu.

"The U.S. military is considering attacks on pirate bases on land and aid for the Somali people to help stem ship hijackings off Africa’s east coast, defense officials said," Bloomberg News reports.

The report continues, "The military also is drawing up proposals to aid the fledgling Somalia government to train security forces and develop its own coast guard, said the officials, who requested anonymity. The plans will be presented to the Obama administration as it considers a coordinated U.S. government and international response to piracy, the officials said."

more -

http://rawstory.com/news/2008/US_military_mulls_attacking_Somali_pirates_0413.html

[cali]

2. agreed. there must be qutie a few ways to

deal with the piracy problem.

[arcadian]

37. It's only a problem for multinational corporations.

How is it a problem for you cali?

[Taverner]

3. It's a simple problem to solve

Move in a bunch of gunboats right off the coast of Somalia, ask for ID from every boat going in and out

[Renew Deal]

5. I don't know if it's simple, but it would work.

But how long can we blockade Somalia? And at what point do the pirates give up the business? I think the nations interested in this would have to participate in some targeted bombings and raids with ground troops. I don't think we can just sit outside of Somalia as a "bouncer" indefinitely.

[Taverner]

14. No you are right - this is only a short term solution

But a good beginning

[orleans]

42. how the fuck are we going to police Somalia when we can't even police ourselves?

(ie: torture, wiretapping, war crimes)

what a joke.

[Towlie]

8. The Somalia coastline is 1,880 miles long. That's roughly the same as Northern Maine to Key West FL.

[Taverner]

13. Hell, we kept the Pacific ocean more or less secure in WWII

We can do Somalia

Granted, I don't think it should be just us doing it

[Mike Daniels]

41. There have to be certain points where these ships are harbored upon capture

I'd like to think our satellite tech is good enough that we can pinpoint a bunch of tankers. It's not like the Somalians have anything themselves that could be mistaken for a tanker size-wise.

Once you know where the ships are being quartered it couldn't be that difficult to blockade the access/departure points. The UN has basically said Somalia has no territorial waters when it comes to pursuing the pirates so I'd think you could get a little closer in on that respect.

[Posteritatis]

9. LOL

"Papers, please" idiocy notwithstanding, just what ID do you expect people from a country that hasn't had a functioning government for longer than half of its citizens have been alive to be able to provide?

Do you plan on sinking anything that doesn't have ID that matches your expectations? Do you know how many thousands of boats and ships there are in that region, or how many ships you'd need since Somalia has the longest coastline in Africa? Do you not think that even if there was ID worth providing in the hands of most of these guys that it wouldn't be simplicity itself to fake?

Seriously, anyone who uses the phrase "it's a simple problem to solve" when talking about anything other than arithmetic is kidding themselves.

[Taverner]

12. No ID, no passage

[Renew Deal]

20. I don't think it's that hard.

If you are on a small boat full of machine guns and RPG's, you don't go through. It's not rocket science. The coast guard does the same sort of thing in a different way.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

4. No doubt the grateful Somalis would shower us with flowers like in Iraq and Afghanistan.

[Arctic Dave]

7. Donate? Did I see this correctly.

Who trains them? Who pays them? Who services the ships? Who is responsible if they kill someone or if they are killed? Why doesn't the countries in that region take care of it. Why do we have to?

[Posteritatis]

11. Because more than the local countries have an interest in shipping lanes there?

The world doesn't magically stop and transform smoothly into Everyone Else's Problem just because you get two hundred miles and one foot off the US shoreline. There's this little canal, you see, that you have to get past the Somali and Yemeni coastlines to access, and causing problems there raises all sorts of merry hell for things getting to the US.

Do you think that Kenya, Ethiopia, Djibouti and Yemem, which aren't exactly towering pillars of strength, stability and properly-functioning government themselves, have the slightest ability to enforce any kind of order there? Why haven't they if that's supposedly their problem that they can fix? At least one of those countries just got thrown out of Somalia, in case you don't ermember.

[Arctic Dave]

32. So once again why the US. Are we the world police?

There are other countries in that region that are more the able to do the job.

[JVS]

17. Many countries have standing navies involving ships with trained sailors.

The African countries generally don't though. Ask everyone in the G-8 to dispatch a couple ships.

[Arctic Dave]

33. So 16 ships to patrol the entire area?

An entire battle group couldn't do it effectively.

[JVS]

35. A battle group would be ill suited to the task. I'm not talking about patrols, I'm talking about...

convoys. Ships go through the Suez canal headed East, you have them sail with each other and then as they approach Aden, you send out a gunboat to escort them toward India. On the way back you have them escort ships from India headed west. Add another route for ships heading north and south on the African coast. Number of ships needed would depend on how frequently convoys of ships go through.

[Arctic Dave]

45. Yes, I am completely familiar with "earnest goodwill" missions.

You are not thinking large enough when it comes to how many ships are on the ocean. Thats not even including smaller private ships.

[readmoreoften]

27. You really think we "do" anything if that we don't have a direct financial interest?

You think we "care" about the world or something?

[kestrel91316]

10. I like the idea of treating them as individual criminal acts - for now.

If need be, we work with other nations victimized by them to blockade their ports that they launch the pirate boats from, and maybe take out their communications systems (cell phone or radio towers). No actual war - just a police action.

[WeDidIt]

15. Tell that to the pirate apologists

They started the war here.

:evilgrin:

[EFerrari]

16. It's too late. GD:Pirates has already invaded.

[dem629]

18. That won't work.

I have a bee's nest in my garage. I can go out there every day, in perpetuity, with a can of Raid and/or a swatter, or I can go out there ONE day and remove the nest.

[JVS]

21. So how does your metaphor translate into real life? Should we kill everyone is Somalia?

[dem629]

22. There are pirate enclaves.

And they are run by various klans and warlords.

Multiple former Navy SEAL and Special Forces guys were interviewed over the weekend on CNN who talked about how to take these camps out.

I have not seen anyone on TV or here on DU talking about killing everyone in Somalia, so that's a stupid question. Next?

[JVS]

23. With a country that is run by clans and warlords, killing one group is likely to just result in...

its replacement by another. My suggestion is use escort vessels as bug repellant, and if necessary swat. There is no way for us to impose an efficient state apparatus on Somalia and we'd end up getting involved in another quagmire. Look how great the Afghanistan war has gone.

[dem629]

24. I never suggested trying to impose a functioning government.

I couldn't care less what goes on inside that country. And I don't agree that there'd be an endless resupply of pirates, especially if we made it clear, through example, that a career in piracy will last just a few days on land.

[Raineyb]

25. Apparently, he thinks all the Somali are insects

That would certainly explain the bloodlust.

I don't think you're going to get a reasoned answer out of this one.

Regards

[dem629]

26. Please come back

if you think of anything substantive to contribute.

But I do thank you for your content-free post.

[readmoreoften]

29. As opposed to your deep, insightful, content-rich "final solution" post? /nt

[dem629]

31. I've offered my opinion and answered questions about it.

If you disagree, fine. Apparently you're incapable of participating in the discussion.

You don't live up to your handle.

[LynnTheDem]

28. "Nobody ever went broke overestimating the stupidity of the American people"

Not a good sign, really.

[arcadian]

38. +1

:hi:

[ColbertWatcher]

30. Rarely is war ever NOT stupid. n/t

[gratuitous]

34. It would indeed be stupid for the United States

Unfortunately, it would appear that not every country on the planet is concerned about what might be best for the United States. In fact, there are some countries with a little time and money on their hands who might think making some mischief for the U.S. might be just the ticket for enhancing their own power and prestige.

The decision on escalation might have passed out of the hands of the United States.

[JVS]

36. Oh come on. I'm sure that India and Australia don't want their ships bothered

The Europeans probably don't like it either. And any claim that we are forced into escalation is grade a bullshit.

[gratuitous]

39. Well, that list covers every party on the face of the earth

So I obviously stand corrected. No government or non-governmental organization would dream of selling better weaponry to the Somali warlords who send these expendable teen-agers out on the open sea to plunder for them. And being nice, rational players, I'm sure you're absolutely correct that these desperately poor people would consider their own personal safety before tempting their own annihilation by ratcheting up the violence. And surely, if they do start shooting first and asking questions later, looting what they can from these ships instead of holding hostages for ransom, we won't be forced or sucked into any escalation. Everyone in the United States would immediately recognize it for what it was, and no one would call for massive retaliation against anybody who crossed our line of sight.

Whew! I feel so much better now.

[JVS]

40. zOMG you're right. We'd better nuke Somalia and stop this threat!

[gratuitous]

43. Nice non sequitur

But since it serves the true national religion of the United States, the High Church of Redemptive Violence, it would be the rankest heresy not to say it. Well done, good and faithful acolyte.

[JVS]

44. I think you misunderstand the premise of the thread

The idea here is not to get involved in a war on piracy, but simply to send groups of ships through with a small escort vessel. What's your beef with that?

[gratuitous]

46. And I think you misunderstand my response

And that is, that the decision on whether or not this incident escalates into something more may have passed out of our hands.

But back to your post: Would it be the sole responsibility of the United States to escort flotillas through the area? Should the corporations sending ships through this area pay for their own protection? Or will we enlist the assistance of other nations who have economic interests in shipping through the area? What if other countries don't have the ships to provide naval escorts or can't afford to take their turn escorting ships? Do we cover for them, and then bill them? Would everyone have equal shared responsiblity, or responsibility in proportion to their share of shipping through the area? Based on number of ships or total weight of the cargo? Is there a more cost effective method than having a naval presence on permanent stand-by in the region? (Right now, it appears that most merchants going through the area are willing to trust to their small odds of being attacked by the pirates, and figure in as a cost of shipping through the area the possibility of losing a cargo or paying a ransom.)

I also think it would require more than a small escort vessel, unless the rules of engagement boiled down to "Shoot first, ask questions later." And that would raise the distinct possibility, even probability of an accidental sinking of a ship that was no threat to a flotilla. Who would be responsible? What if the escort ship that did the sinking did everything by the book, but bad weather or a faulty radio prevented timely identification of an approaching ship? Or would that area simply be declared off limits, and who has the authority to do that?