Do you believe the United States should increase its naval presence to fight piracy?

[Occam Bandage]

With the recent capture of the multi-hundred-billion-dollar ship Sirius Star, piracy has become a high-profile issue. Do you believe that the United States should redirect Navy resources towards clamping down on piracy in the international waters off the Somali and Indonesian coasts?

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

1. Aarrghhh.

[underpants]

2. The US Navy ....on Wall Street?

Oh the SOMALI pirates sorry I misunderstood

[lutherj]

3. Everyone knows how you fight piracy. You deck out a Man O' War to look like a merchant

ship, and then when the pirates get close you raise your colors and open the gun turrets and give 'em good broadside.

[gravity]

4. There should be international support

but I don't think that will be hard to get.

[Crazy Dave]

5. First the war on terror...

Anything to scare the public into diverting more tax dollars into the defense budget instead of education, social security, roads, bridges, etc.

[Greyhound]

6. No, Want to stop the Somali pirates? Remove the cause, the destruction of their

livelihood by corporations. They've turned to piracy in an effort to survive, so we have two choices, rebuild or replace their means of sustenance, or kill them.

I think option #1 is far preferable.

[Occam Bandage]

10. ...corporations? What?

Are you remotely familiar with Somali history?

On edit: Are you talking about foreign fishermen outcompeting Somali fishers? I don't think that shutting down the world fish trade is going to be an effective or realistic means of stopping piracy.

[Greyhound]

25. A combination of commercial trawlers fishing out the waters and ships dumping

waste and killing what was left.

Yeah, "out competing" is such a great euphemism. Of course, there is nothing between total plunder and "shutting down the world fish trade".

When will you pro-corporate asshats figure out that most people will not simply crawl into a corner and die for your convenience? More death, more destruction, more pollution, always more.

Yes Somalia is completely fucked up, like so many other African nations, and it is our (the "western world") fault and responsibility, one we have no intention of living up to.

[wuushew]

7. What we should do is rightfully blame Bush

very little news of these Somali pirates were in the headlines before Bush declared yet another crusade against Islam in the form of waging war against the Islamic Courts in Somalia.

Why would the United States choose to make a failed state even worse and damage our own economic interests as well? :shrug:

[Motown_Johnny]

8. Yes. as part of a package to help the people who have turned to piracy as well

as a deterrent.


We have naval vessels deployed around the world anyways, why not have a visible presence where it is most needed?

[RC]

18. Sure, expand the War on Terror to the High Seas.

Got a fishing boat? Ya need to pass it through DHS every time you put it into the water. Do it again when you want to retrieve it. That works so well when flying.

[kristopher]

9. No. Let the ships hire their own security.

After encountering a few well prepared merchant vessels the problem would stop.

I also agree with other poster that suggested attacking the root of the problem - the loss of livelihood of the fishermen who are turning to piracy. I don't think that would solve the immediate problem, however.

[gravity]

11. Most ships can't afford security

[Occam Bandage]

12. And frankly, aren't exactly going to be gung-ho

about taking on pirates armed with rocket-propelled grenades. Most people don't feel like turning their daily jobs into a James Bond opening scene.

[kristopher]

15. Then let them be taken by the pirates.

I don't want either the bill for policing the world's oceans nor more unnecessary missions for our military.

[kristopher]

19. Bullshit. Most owners are too cheap to provide it.

It is much cost effective to place a couple of properly armed guys on these ships than to deploy a fleet to patrol a million square miles of ocean. It is also much more probable that they will actually be able to engage the bad guys before they occupy a vessel and take the crew hostage.

[amandabeech]

13. I think that we should contribute to an international effort, but not lead it.

We may be the recipients of oil tankers coming through that area from the Saudi terminal at Yanbu (sp) on the Red Sea, so we may very well have an interest in the shipping lane in question.

Perhaps the Saudis will give us a nice tip for taking care of their shipping lane out of Yanbu.

I also agree that we should contribute to an international effort to help the Somalis go into a different line of business, and to generally get their country moving again.

[TheCowsCameHome]

14. Once a few pirate vessels get blown out of the water,

word will get back to the villages that it's not such a hot idea.

[Posteritatis]

17. One gets blown out of the water about once a month; hasn't changed much. (nt)

[Greyhound]

26. Oh yeah, nobody's ever tried military overkill on Africans before,

and it always works so well.

Is there any problem you don't think can be solved with an ordinance delivery?

[TheCowsCameHome]

27. Yeah, just let them keep the silly old tanker.

You're right.

[Greyhound]

29. I don't believe I ever suggested that. n/t

[Posteritatis]

16. Multi-hundred-billion? Yeahno

Supertankers are cheap, even if their cargo isn't. This is an oversimplification in the extreme, but for the most part they really are just a lot of empty space with some engines and tubing attached. The Sirius Star is an extraordinarily expensive tanker and came in at under $150 million, which is a bit more than the market cost of the oil on it right now, assuming it's full. Most cost a third of that or less. You could buy six of them for the cost of a single Canadian Navy frigate. Please; if you don't have the information, look it up, don't make it up. That doesn't help anyone.

Now, that said, I certainly think a chunk of US navy presence - and most other navies' presence, for that matter - could be better spent dealing with the piracy problems off Somalia and Southeast Asia than saber-rattling at Iran, Venezuela, Mars or whoever else is the enemy this week.

[Occam Bandage]

20. Now add up the cost of the Sirius Star and the cost of its cargo.

Is that greater than $200B? Yes? Oh, hey, looks like I was entirely correct in saying multi-hundred-billion. Hey, whaddya know. Looks like I did do the research after all, and you're a jackass.

[Posteritatis]

22. Nope, it's not

Unless, of course, oil went up to a few thousand bucks a barrel and I wasn't notified. If it's the price I see in the paper these days, the total comes to roughly one thousand times less than the figure you're quoting.

So no, you didn't, at least not research of the same quality I could do with a few seconds' Googling and a pocket calculator.

(I note with interest, BTW, how quickly your civility vanishes when you're corrected. Par for the site, I guess?)

[gravity]

23. Replace that B with a M and you will be right

$200 billion is about the GDP of Venezuela

[FarCenter]

21. No, we don't have suitable ships

It would be unaffordably expensive to use state-of-the-art US Navy ships to fight piracy.

It would be better to let the Indians, Saudi Arabians, Iranians, etc. fight the pirates.

[zorahopkins]

24. The US Is NOT The World's Cop

How long will it be before we realize that the US is NOT the world's cop.

The US should not behave as the world's cop.

[hendo]

28. We need ninjas not the navy

Everyone knows a pirate's true arch nemesis is a ninja.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirates_versus_Ninjas