A Battle To Warm Up On
November 19th, 2008 by 
Kevin
While Somali pirates have existed for a long time now, they certainly have made quite a number of high profile hijackings lately. Most notable recently was the hijacking of the Faina, and it’s cargo of battle tanks. Now word that they’ve also captured a Saudi supertanker, which represents about a quarter of Saudi Arabia’s daily output of oil. Clearly, the status quo cannot continue.
That said, this seems like a perfect situation for Obama to warm up that smile and motivating speaking and any other skills he may have….if any. But it’s a chance to show what He can do on a global scale. All the more since it’s a relatively easy one, as global crises go.
Ships of many nations are being hijacked. Countries and companies are losing money. Lives are being lost. The criminals are of no importance to….well anyone. It’s not likely to be difficult to generate widescale support for action given those conditions. If The Messiah can’t grow enough of a backbone to stand up to pirates, what chance does He have against Iran or Russia?? After all that talk, pirates can’t have a place in the Age of Obama can they?? There has to be someone in the town of Hopenchange that can come up with a solution.
Toward that end, I’m wondering if we necessarily need to reinvent the wheel on this one. Seems to me that there is a solution that has worked before in a situation, which not identical, at least distantly similiar. There are at least two methods, both created in the First Battle of the Atlantic (WWI), and later “perfected” in the Second Battle of the Atlantic (WWII).
The first method being a convoy situation. The lack of a sufficient number of military ships to cover all areas off the coast of Somalia is frequently cited as one of the reasons world navies haven’t been able to counter the pirates. Ok, that same problem was part of the problem of battling U-boats. As a result a convoy system was used. Sure it’s a big target, but you can better utilize finite resources. And since the pirate’s range is relatively limited (even with motherships), the convoy wouldn’t even have to be maintained for long.
The second method is what’s known as a “Q-Ship”. Essentially it has the outward appearance of a common merchant ship, but in reality is an armed warship. In both WWI and WWII, these Q-ships had a rather paltry success rate…partially due to the fact that the first sign of their enemy was a torpedo in the side. In the case of a pirate attack, it seems it would be much more effective. Especially since it’s wouldn’t involve camoflauging a 5-inch gun, which was frequently the case in WWII. Here a platoon of Marines armed with a few long range weapons stationed aboard a common merchant vessel would do the trick. End result is the pirates would be a lot less confident in their trade.
In the end, we’ll have to await what The Almighty Obama has in store for us mortals. For He is the giver of both Hope and Change. Neither of which seems particularely useful against a pirate….especially since these aren’t even the cool pirates of grog, busty wenches and cool sword fights.
Email This Post
| 
Print This Post
Posted in Military, The Messiah | 
November 19th, 2008 at 10:11 am
There’s a better example: Thomas Jefferson and the Barbary pirates. He went in and wiped ‘em out. And he was a Democrat.
Obama, of course, has placed all his marbles on being able to talk these bad guys out of whatever they’re doing, by the sheer sunshine of his smile. I’m not sure that has quite the effectiveness he thinks it does, and I’m certain it’s not nearly as effective as a little hot lead.
http://dsc.discovery.com/fansites/future-weapons/weapons/zone1/metal-storm.html
November 19th, 2008 at 4:08 pm
Given that we’re talking about defending vs. small craft instead of U-boats, I’d kinda like to see large cargo ships start sporting a new fashion accessory; a few pairs of deck-mounted, belt-fed .50 Brownings to make the little terrorist kittens dance on their way to Hell.
And of course, it’ll be snowing there when Mr. Grab-your-guns Obama approves the right of merchant ships to do this.
November 20th, 2008 at 4:28 pm
First off, I don’t think Obama has to authorize merchant ships to arm themselves (unless they were to buy the weapons from us). The shipping line could do this.
The reading I’ve done on modern day piracy, however, indicates that to this point the shipping companies don’t want to actively resist pirates because most of the raids are smash and grab types and the crews typically aren’t brutalized or held hostage. Shooting at the pirates, the theory goes, will only piss them off and make things worse when they board. Along with this thinking is the assumption that merchant ship crews aren’t trained fighters and can be a rather motley collection (and some may even be in cahoots with the pirates). Many ships will try to keep them away with high-pressure hoses and noticeable security watches (in the hopes of inducing the pirates to go after easier targets).
Putting trained fighters on a tanker, however, or on a following ship (ala “Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid”), though might be an idea. I wonder how you say “Who are those guys?” in Somali.
November 20th, 2008 at 5:53 pm
NW, the trick is that most countries bizaarely don’t allow merchant ship crews to have guns. Arm your crew, you don’t get to go into the port. That part would have to be negotiated with trading partners.
I’d also think that it would be good to have something more than a deer rifle or such for defense, and for a .50 Browning or M60, you do need some interaction with government to use it.