Pirates

R

retired

Suspended / Banned
Messages
889
Name
Bri
Edit My Images
No
US navy snipers have shot dead three pirates holding a US captain in a boat off Somalia, in a dramatic rescue authorised by President Barack Obama.

Just heard the news, fantastic that he is freed without harm.
Do you think this is the best way to go or do we keep paying the millions to the pirates who carry out these attacks?
 
Killing them is good but they should have thrown the bodies overboard and broadcast the footage for the world to see. Paying ransomes only encourages more piracy.
 
ooooh aaah!!

I thinking owning them in the face with a .50 cal is probably the best thing for them, its instant justice, they wont do it again and the hostage goes free. Opening negotiations with them means there is a potentiol reward and makes it worth doing for a lot of people.

These Samali pirates started off as fisherman and would chase people away who where fishing in Samali water, people didnt listen and kept going back so they got more and more agressive with it until they eventually made more money protecting their own water from people muscling in on their fish than they did actually fishing and it spiralled out of control, so all this is part self inflicted to a lot of fishing companies. Just a shame some innocent shipping companies are getting involved.
 
Merovingian said:
Don't think we want to stoop to their standards; they're still human nevertheless.
Click to expand...

I believe the moment someone stops behaving like a decent, civilised human being they start to relinquish any rights to be treated as one.
 
Merovingian said:
Well thank God the Geneva Convention thinks differently I guess.
Click to expand...

The Geneva Convention only applies to standing armies and legally-authorised irregular forces, in time of war though the point is a little vague as to what actually constitutes 'irregular', as we saw in the recent conflict in Bosnia-Hertzegovina.

Piracy on the High Seas is still a capital crime under International Law.

Next time please think before you comment.
Piracy is a Crime, they are Criminals.

Trying to be reasonable only works with people who are reasonable to begin with.
The only thing that is going to make the Somali pirates stop and think is if the practice of Piracy becomes too risky for them to continue.

A few more high-profile pirate slayings would do that.

In the past no quarter was given to Pirates and with good reason - those who have stepped beyond the bounds of civilised behaviour deserved nothing less...
Nothing has changed in that respect IMO.
 
Arkady said:
The Geneva Convention only applies to standing armies and legally-authorised irregular forces, in time of war though the point is a little vague as to what actually constitutes 'irregular', as we saw in the recent conflict in Bosnia-Hertzegovina.

Piracy on the High Seas is still a capital crime under International Law.

Next time please think before you comment.
Piracy is a Crime, they are Criminals.

Trying to be reasonable only works with people who are reasonable to begin with.
The only thing that is going to make the Somali pirates stop and think is if the practice of Piracy becomes too risky for them to continue.

A few more high-profile pirate slayings would do that.

QUOTE]

Yes and sink their mother ships too.
Click to expand...
 
Just to clear - the US Navy did have both the authority and the legal right to kill Pirates in it's recent rescue mission.


Law of nations
Piracy is of note in international law as it is commonly held to represent the earliest invocation of the concept of universal jurisdiction. The crime of piracy is considered a breach of jus cogens, a conventional peremptory international norm that states must uphold. Those committing thefts on the high seas, inhibiting trade, and endangering maritime communication are considered by sovereign states to be hostis humani generis (enemies of humanity).

In the United States, criminal prosecution of piracy is authorized in the U.S. Constitution, Art. I Sec. 8 cl. 10:

The Congress shall have Power ... To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;

In English admiralty law, piracy was defined as petit treason during the medieval period, and offenders were accordingly liable to be drawn and quartered on conviction. Piracy was redefined as a felony during the reign of Henry VIII. In either case, piracy cases were cognizable in the courts of the Lord High Admiral. English admiralty vice-admiralty judges emphasized that "neither Faith nor Oath is to be kept" with pirates; i.e. contracts with pirates and oaths sworn to them were not legally binding. Pirates were legally subject to summary execution by their captors if captured in battle. In practice, instances of summary justice and annulment of oaths and contracts involving pirates do not appear to have been common.

Since piracy often takes place outside the territorial waters of any state, the prosecution of pirates by sovereign states represents a complex legal situation. The prosecution of pirates on the high seas contravenes the conventional freedom of the high seas. However, because of universal jurisdiction, action can be taken against pirates without objection from the flag state of the pirate vessel. This represents an exception to the principle extra territorium jus dicenti impune non paretur (the judgment of one who is exceeding his territorial jurisdiction may be disobeyed with impunity).

In 2008 the British Foreign Office advised the Royal Navy not to detain pirates of certain nationalities as they might be able to claim asylum in Britain under British human rights legislation, if their national laws included execution, or mutilation as a judicial punishment for crimes committed as pirates.


International conventions

UNCLOS Article 101: Definition
In the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) of 1982, "maritime piracy" consists of:

(a) any illegal acts of violence or detention, or any act of depredation, committed for private ends by the crew or the passengers of a private ship or a private aircraft, and directed:
(i) on the high seas, against another ship or aircraft, or against persons or property on board such ship or aircraft;
(ii) against a ship, aircraft, persons or property in a place outside the jurisdiction of any State;
(b) any act of voluntary participation in the operation of a ship or of an aircraft with knowledge of facts making it a pirate ship or aircraft;
(c) any act of inciting or of intentionally facilitating an act described in subparagraph (a) or (b).

IMB Definition
The International Maritime Bureau (IMB) defines piracy as:

the act of boarding any vessel with an intent to commit theft or any other crime, and with an intent or capacity to use force in furtherance of that act
 
Arkady said:
The Geneva Convention only applies to standing armies and legally-authorised irregular forces, in time of war though the point is a little vague as to what actually constitutes 'irregular', as we saw in the recent conflict in Bosnia-Hertzegovina.

Piracy on the High Seas is still a capital crime under International Law.

Next time please think before you comment.
Piracy is a Crime, they are Criminals.

Trying to be reasonable only works with people who are reasonable to begin with.
The only thing that is going to make the Somali pirates stop and think is if the practice of Piracy becomes too risky for them to continue.

A few more high-profile pirate slayings would do that.

In the past no quarter was given to Pirates and with good reason - those who have stepped beyond the bounds of civilised behaviour deserved nothing less...
Nothing has changed in that respect IMO.
Click to expand...

I used Genova Convention as a generalisation for prisoner/people HR; I thought members would identify with more easily. Your point is mostly irrelevant as it's not key to my comment. The treatment of other humans is. The principle is key here, not the organisation.

You talk about piracy being a crime. And? Again, it's largely irrelevant to my point about post death humane treatment.
No body here is disputing a US right to shot on sight. It's what happens next is the issue. Next time think before you reply, or have unclear points clarified.
 
Eh?
You specifically mentioned the Geneva Convention which is a Legal Framework for the international community's prosecution of Land, Sea and Air Warfare...only a small section of that concerns treatment of prisoners and has nothing to do with Human rights...for that you need to refer to the Hague Convention.

If anything is irrelevant it's your previous post. If you're trying to make a point, make it, don't just post fatuous remarks when responding to others.

The poster remarked that throwing the bodies overboard would send a message - it would have.
The surviving pirate may now be tried by the US Military Authorities and hanged - again, that sends a message.

What message are you trying to send? People on here are quite rightly saying that people who use inhumane methods have lost the right to be treated humanely themselves and there's a kernel of truth in that.
 
Next time International Talk Like a Pirate day comes around should we speak Somali?

With no law to speak of in their own country to hold them in check the only answer is the 50cal in the face. Mistreating the bodies afterwards would not help anyones' case though.
 
Arkady said:
Eh?
You specifically mentioned the Geneva Convention which is a Legal Framework for the international community's prosecution of Land, Sea and Air Warfare...only a small section of that concerns treatment of prisoners and has nothing to do with Human rights...for that you need to refer to the Hague Convention.

If anything is irrelevant it's your previous post. If you're trying to make a point, make it, don't just post fatuous remarks when responding to others.

The poster remarked that throwing the bodies overboard would send a message - it would have.
The surviving pirate may now be tried by the US Military Authorities and hanged - again, that sends a message.

What message are you trying to send? People on here are quite rightly saying that people who use inhumane methods have lost the right to be treated humanely themselves and there's a kernel of truth in that.
Click to expand...
Geneva, Hague...it's academic for most on here. The point being made is about the humane rights of these prisoners - which I'd hoped they pick up from mentioning the GC. There's nothing really fatuous about it if members have picked up on the point. Perhaps try understanding, rather than replying truculently.

So my message? Yes, broadcasting dumping bodies sends a message - the wrong one. It just isn't going to happen, a view shared it seems...
Steep said:
Mistreating the bodies afterwards would not help anyones' case though.
Click to expand...
And as to whether people who treat others inhumanely should also be treated inhumanely is a matter of opinion here subject to as many kernels of doubt as kernels of truth.
 
From the BBC

Quote

Admiral Gortney said the military end to the hostage incident might raise the stakes for pirates in the region.

"This could escalate violence in this part of the world, no question about it," he told reporters.

In Eyl, a pirate stronghold on the Somali coast, one self-proclaimed pirate said the US navy had become the "number one enemy".

"From now on, if we capture foreign ships and their respective countries try to attack us, we will kill them [the hostages]," he told the Associated Press by telephone.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/7996087.stm

News Africa
Somali pirates vow revenge on US



A Somali pirate chief has vowed to target Americans in revenge for the death of three pirates killed during a US raid to free an American hostage held by the pirates.

Abdi Garad said on Monday that the US forces had shot and killed the men, even after they had agreed to free the hostage.

"The American liars have killed our friends after they agreed to free the hostage without ransom," Garad was reported by the AFP news agency as saying.

"But I tell you that this matter will lead to retaliation and we will hunt down particularly American citizens travelling our waters."

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/africa/2009/04/200941373925842364.html
 
Last edited:
Great - a bunch of dhows armed with RPGs and 12.7's against the greatest combined Naval Powers on Earth...wonder how that'll end...

By making threats like these, they simply play into the hands of those who are wishing for an increased Military response to an issue that has been a thorn in the side of maritime commerce in the area for more than a decade.

For once we actually have an international consensus on an issue...

If the Somali Pirates wish their Human Rights to be respected they can always stay at home and engage in peaceful and productive activities instead...
 
Last edited:
Arkady said:
Great - a bunch of dhows armed with RPGs and 12.7's against the greatest combined Naval Powers on Earth...wonder how that'll end...

By making threats like these, they simply play into the hands of those who are wishing for an increased Military response to an issue that has been a thorn in the side of maritime commerce in the area for more than a decade.

For once we actually have an international consensus on an issue...

If the Somali Pirates wish their Human Rights to be respected they can always stay at home and engage in peaceful and productive activities instead...
Click to expand...

I think it would be foolish to underestimate the capabilities of these people. They want money, they've proven they'll attack any ship regardless of the cargo. I can't think of anything worse than a group of people that would put their lives on the line to do something like this. They might not be able to put up a good fight on the sea, but I'm pretty certain that no government would want to become embroiled in some sort of extraction mission should their hostages be taken to land.
 
Arkady said:
<snip>Just to clear - the US Navy did have both the authority and the legal right to kill Pirates in it's recent rescue mission.<snip>
Click to expand...

Interesting post Rob Thanks :thumbs:
IF Piracy still commands the death penalty then so be it!
Hung drawn and quartered may be a tad excessive, as would heads on "pikes"



but if thats what it takes ;)

Arkady said:
Great - a bunch of dhows armed with RPGs and 12.7's against the greatest combined Naval Powers on Earth...wonder how that'll end...

...
Click to expand...

The only "problem" I can see here is if they ( The (USA) now back off and go softly softly
after making "one quick and effective statement"
instead of continuing the hard line
 
RichardtheSane said:
IMO most of the events recorded there are not piracy - robbers stealing stores from a ship anchored in port.
Still makes for interesting reading, thanks for posting.
Click to expand...

Robber stealing from the stores while the boat is in port is not piracy, and have you checked the scale of the map before making the assumption that most are anchored in port :D
 
These are very interesting points of view chaps, being an old sea dog myself I hope this will somehow bring an end to all the piracy in this area :( some how I don't think it will.
I myself think that a hard line response is the only way to deal with pirates who operate outside/inside territorial waters.
 
Arkady said:
If the Somali Pirates wish their Human Rights to be respected they can always stay at home and engage in peaceful and productive activities instead...
Click to expand...

War has been rightly declared against this notorious new shipping piracy. But the older and mother of all piracies in Somalia - illegal foreign fishing piracy - in the Somali seas is ignored,


The piracy war between local fishermen and IUUs started here. Local fishermen documented cases of trawlers pouring boiling water on the fishermen in canoes, their nets cut or destroyed, smaller boats crushed, killing all the occupants, and other abuses suffered as they tried to protect their national fishing turf. Later, the fishermen armed themselves. In response, many of the foreign fishing vessels armed themselves with more sophisticated weapons and began to overpower the fishermen. It was only a matter of time before the local fishermen reviewed their tactics and modernized their hardware. This cycle of warfare has been going on from 1991 to the present. It is now developing into fully fledged, two-pronged illegal fishing and shipping piracy conflicts.

Illegal foreign fishing trawlers which have being fishing in Somalia since 1991 are mostly owned by EU and Asian fishing companies &#8211; Italy, France, Spain, Greece, Russia, Britain, Ukraine, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, India, Yemen, Egypt and many others. Illegal vessels captured on the Somali coast by Somali fishermen during 1991 and 1999 included Taiwanese trawlers Yue Fa No. 3 and Chian Yuein No.232, FV Shuen Kuo No.11; MV Airone, MV De Giosa Giuseppe and MV Antonietta, all 3 Italian vessels registered in Italy; MV Bahari Hindi, Kenyan registered but owned and managed by Marship Co. of Mombasa. A number of Italian registered SHIFCO vessels, Korean and Ukrainian trawlers, Indian, Egyptian and Yemeni boats were also captured by fishermen and ransoms of different sizes paid for their release. Many Spanish seiners, frequent violators of the Somali fishing grounds, managed to evade capture at various times.



According to a report in the Daily Nation of October 14, 2004, even Kenyan registered fishing vessels are known to have participated in the rape of the Somali fishing grounds. In October 2004, Mr Andrew Mwangura, Kenya Coordinator of the Seafarers Assistance Program (SAP) asked the Kenya Government to help stop illegal fishing in Somalia. &#8220;Since Somalia has been without government for more than 11 years, Kenya trawlers have been illegally fishing along the country&#8217;s territorial waters contrary to the UNCLOS and the FAO instruments, he said. SAP further reported that 19 Kenyan registered fishing vessels also operated illegally in the Somalia waters.

Not to be outdone, in October 1999 Puntland Administration, gave carte blanche to another Mafia group known as PIDC, registered in Oman to fish, issue licenses and to police the Puntland coast. PIDC in turn contracted Hart Group of the UK and together they pillaged the Somali fishing grounds with vengeance, making over $20 million profit within two years. The deal was to split the profits but PIDC failed to share the spoils with Puntland administration, resulting in revocation of their licenses. Having reneged on their part of the deal, PIDC/Hart quit the country with their handsomely won chips.

http://www.africanexecutive.com/modules/magazine/articles.php?article=4060
....................................................................
CASE NUMBER: 64
CASE MNEMONIC: SOMALIA
CASE NAME: Somalia Waste Imports from Italy

A. IDENTIFICATION

1. The Issue

During the Somali civil war hazardous waste was dumped in this
African nation by industrialized countries. The alleged
perpetrators were Italian and Swiss firms who supposedly entered
into a contract with the Somali government to dump waste in the war
ravaged African nation. The issue of dumping in Somalia is two
fold in that it is both a legal question and a moral question.
First, is there a violation of international treaties in the
export of hazardous waste to Somalia. Second, is it ethically
questionable to negotiate a hazardous waste disposal contract with
a country in the midst of a protracted civil war and with a
government that can best be described as tenuous and factionalized?

http://www1.american.edu/TED/somalia.htm
 
Last edited:
Awesome post...

Just goes to prove that nothing happens in a vacuum - there are always contributory factors...

Unfortunately it's a lot easier to 'deal' with a bunch of lightly-armed thugs on small boats than it is sovereign nations circumventing international treaties on waste disposal and fishing rights...
 
Here we go again&#8230;..from BBC News.
Pirates have hijacked a tanker off the coast of Somalia, maritime officials say, days after several pirates were killed by US and French forces.

America is convinced that Somalia, having been without a government since 1991, was an ideal conduit through which al-Qaeda could advance into the region from the Arabian peninsular.

The senior US envoy to Africa, Jendayi Frazer, said publicly that the Islamic Courts were controlled by members of al-Qaeda.
"The top layer of the Courts are extremists. They are terrorists," she said.

I always thought that there was outside funding from somewhere plus of course the millions they have obtained through the ransom route.
These are not fishermen with a grudge against other fishing nations, these are ruthless thugs backed by notorious nations.
 
To be honest, I think it's a bit out of order that the US Navy used snipers and such-and-such.

I think they should have gone the traditional route and tried boarding them with all cutlesses in their mouths while laughing maniacally and saying "AVAST!"
 
Apparently they only opened fire after the Pirates drew aim on the escaping captain as he swam away...

If so, an unusual amount of restraint for US Marines...I worked with them in Fallujah in December '04 and they weren't so forgiving back then...
 
Arkady said:
Apparently they only opened fire after the Pirates drew aim on the escaping captain as he swam away...

If so, an unusual amount of restraint for US Marines...I worked with them in Fallujah in December '04 and they weren't so forgiving back then...
Click to expand...

Please tell me that the pirates at least made the captain walk the plank.
 
Arkady said:
Apparently they only opened fire after the Pirates drew aim on the escaping captain as he swam away...

If so, an unusual amount of restraint for US Marines...I worked with them in Fallujah in December '04 and they weren't so forgiving back then...
Click to expand...

I don't think so, they found the captain tied up inside the lifeboat.
He did escape but was re-captured, that's why he was tied.
Anyway a good ending all round.
 
retired said:
Here we go again…..from BBC News.
Pirates have hijacked a tanker off the coast of Somalia, maritime officials say, days after several pirates were killed by US and French forces.

America is convinced that Somalia, having been without a government since 1991, was an ideal conduit through which al-Qaeda could advance into the region from the Arabian peninsular.

The senior US envoy to Africa, Jendayi Frazer, said publicly that the Islamic Courts were controlled by members of al-Qaeda.
"The top layer of the Courts are extremists. They are terrorists," she said.

I always thought that there was outside funding from somewhere plus of course the millions they have obtained through the ransom route.
These are not fishermen with a grudge against other fishing nations, these are ruthless thugs backed by notorious nations.
Click to expand...

1 It seems to me al-Queda is a generic name for anyone who dose`nt agree with U.S. politics.

2 This was originally started by somali fisherman, it has now been taken over by pirates/thugs. I feel sorry for the fishermen not the pirates/thugs


3The US has maintained a base in the former French colony of Djibouti since 2002. It also ran a CIA operation from Nairobi. The CIA recruited Somali warlords to act as US proxies. But such was the animosity to America in Mogadishu after the experience of “Operation Restore Hope”, when the US military last intervened in Somalia, that the CIA action only succeeded in uniting the warring clans behind the Islamic Courts movement. The US-backed warlords were driven out of Mogadishu and the Islamic Courts took over the capital. In the course of the summer they established control over most of the country.

http://www.cageprisoners.com/articles.php?id=18422
 
The ocean is large the pirate boats small.
I remember during my time as an aerial photographer that trying to locate ships in the English channel was far harder than you might think (and we were in radio contact)
I would have thought that today, with satellite cameras pirates and suspicious vessels could be tracked in real time and disposed of if they did not withdraw.
 
That's an interesting link poacher, there must be a drop of oil in them there parts :D
 
Arkady said:
Apparently they only opened fire after the Pirates drew aim on the escaping captain as he swam away...

If so, an unusual amount of restraint for US Marines...I worked with them in Fallujah in December '04 and they weren't so forgiving back then...
Click to expand...

He was in the boat, one of the pirates, after becoming angry with the course the negotiations were taking picked up his rifle and aimed it at the back of the hostages head.

3 snipers, 3 bullets, 3 dead pirates. Awesome. My close friend who served in Iraq and Afghanistan with USACAPOC always told me stories about some of the snipers. Tremendous skill.
 
Galaxy66 said:
Robber stealing from the stores while the boat is in port is not piracy, and have you checked the scale of the map before making the assumption that most are anchored in port :D
Click to expand...
Nope, I spend about half an hour reading the actual reports over the past three years. Majority I read from various global locations were as I described :)
 
KayJay said:
I think it would be foolish to underestimate the capabilities of these people. They want money, they've proven they'll attack any ship regardless of the cargo. I can't think of anything worse than a group of people that would put their lives on the line to do something like this. They might not be able to put up a good fight on the sea, but I'm pretty certain that no government would want to become embroiled in some sort of extraction mission should their hostages be taken to land.
Click to expand...

'Maritime Security Contractors'

Interesting phrase to have been used on Sky news yesterday.
These are I belive the folk who may have a nice corporate name but their activities in international waters are far from the corporate image they may portray.
Now is probably a lucritive time to be in that profession and I expect someone paid to keep a vessel safe would definitly not under estimate anything!

You are absolutely right about what could happen if hostages are taken... that scenario has just got a whole lot more sticky.
 
RichardtheSane said:
'Maritime Security Contractors'

Interesting phrase to have been used on Sky news yesterday.
These are I belive the folk who may have a nice corporate name but their activities in international waters are far from the corporate image they may portray.
Now is probably a lucritive time to be in that profession and I expect someone paid to keep a vessel safe would definitly not under estimate anything!
Click to expand...

New Maritime Security Contractors

BEIJING, April 14 (Xinhuanet) -- Thousands of dolphins blocked the suspected Somali pirate ships when they were trying to attack Chinese merchant ships passing the Gulf of Aden, the China Radio International reported on Monday.

The Chinese merchant ships escorted by a China's fleet sailed on the Gulf of Aden when they met some suspected pirate ships. Thousands of dolphins suddenly leaped out of water between pirates and merchants when the pirate ships headed for the China's.

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-04/14/content_11184581.htm
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top