Skip navigation

Seized supertanker anchored off Somalia

Associated Press

U.S. and other naval forces decide against intervention for now ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. Ontario Man from Canada writes: I am sure 'the crew' is the owners first concern.
  2. Nick Beerman from Calgary, Canada writes: This may be just the begining?
  3. Deck Dog from Chester Basin, Canada writes: Unless extreme force is used against these pirates they will continue to attack ships. Something has to be done. Nothing short of n invasion of Somalia by an international force (not peace keepers) will solve the problem. I was against invading Iraq but I would support the invasion of Somalia. The pacifists continue to say that arming merchant ships is not the answer but then they can safely stay thousands of miles away from the problem and continue to say 'this is terrible we must reson with these people'. Well they cannot be reasoned with.
    Arm the ships. Just the sight of the ship's crew carrying weapons would be deterent enough to stop the attacks as pirates are cowards. At present the risks are non existent and the profit is high. Use Q ships, put well trained security guards on board (mercenaries). If any pirates are caught while attacking a ship then just execute them forget about a trial they don't deserve one.
  4. Jim Q from Halifax, Canada writes: Invading Somalia would make Iraq look like a cakewalk. Cheap and lightly armed Q ships would also work.


    Instead, get these big, rich corporations to pony up for a couple dozen or so military types on each of the larger ships with missles and machine guns. That would make the bad-guys think twice.


    There's also a sonic device that emits powerful bursts of painful noise that they're using on cruise ships.
  5. Robert Mermelstein from Vancouver B.C., Canada writes: The current military forces an their tactics in the area are apparently not an adequate deterrent. So why are they not using a convoy or decoy system to deter the pirates ??
  6. D McAnn from Canada writes: Whether or not you agree with the politics of Liberia or Saudi Arabia has nothing to do with this. It is appalling these pirates continue to get away with this from 'known' pirate strongholds and ports. Today it's an oil tanker...tomorrow it could be the cruise ship on which you or a relative is travelling. This is no different than being mugged or carjacked by your local thug...as a matter of fact it is probabaly more dangerous because there is more at stake ($$$) and more lives are threatened. This is obviously a very visible activity, again from 'known' origins. I think a few well placed bombs from an international coalition would fix this problem.
  7. Canuck with Questions from Canada writes: UK: What about the oil drilling business in Somalia? How is that going?
  8. George Nikitin from Hamilton, Canada writes: I wanna move to Somalia and be a pirate when I grow up!!!
  9. Crimson The-Red from Canada writes: Awesome.... there will be additional seizures in the future since tankers move slow, are big so they provide good cover against defensive ships on the other side of the tanker, and armed defensive ships would not fire on a tanker (or near a tanker) for fear of hurting the crew and the environment.

    The prize is also big bucks and useful if the original owner does not want to pay a ransom.

    This will really define the term - oil security - to the Americans.

    As Hollywood taught us, Take what you can, give nothing back. Arrrrrr.
  10. Crimson The-Red from Canada writes: Of course someone will say,
    What is that? Pirates causing problems you say? Send in the ninjas.
  11. Is there anybody out there from Saltspring Island, Canada writes: people that live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
  12. Matthew Rockall from Mission, Canada writes: Gaarrrrrr!
  13. Chris M from Ch'town, Canada writes: Oh brother. The idea of 'vaporizing' Somalia...are you nuts?

    Even with sophisticated radar, the pirates are using wooden skiffs. Read the article, people. Wood can't be picked up on radar. And an outboard engine isn't enough metal to be picked up.

    Arming the ships may be a good idea, but I believe the pirates will only increase their numbers and armament.

    And if armed ships start killing pirates, why would pirates leave captured crews unharmed?
  14. Chairman Meow from Catalina Catamaran Catastrophe, Canada writes: I still say take away their parrots, peg legs, hook hands, bandanas and they will collapse in confusion. Pirate haute Couture is very exacting.
  15. Crimson The-Red from Canada writes: Arrr! Arrr! Arrr!
    A pirate, a pirate, a pirate says Arrr!
    It might seem strange, just a bit bizarre,
    But they know you're a pirate,
    When they hear you say Arrr!
  16. B.C. Expat from Ottawa-Hull, NCR, Canada writes: Every time there's one of these stories, people come on and make the same, tired 'cute' comments. We get it. You year pirate, you think of Disney. That's great, unfortunately there are a lot of hostages with their lives at risk and an entire region of the globe that is becoming a no-go zone. It really isn't very funny.
  17. K Ordos from Canada writes: 'Wood can't be picked up on radar. And an outboard engine isn't enough metal to be picked up.' Well, not exactly... Whether or not a vehicle can be picked up on radar is due to it's RCS or Radar Cross Section. The reason a small skiff is difficult (not impossible) to detect on radar is because it is low to the water and gets hidden in the clutter of bad radar echoes returned by surface waves. Only Radar Absorbent Materials (usually very complex polymers) are capable of attenuating Radar waves. Radar can be scattered if the vehicle is made up of surfaces which are sloped at specific angles (google Stealth Fighter or Sea Shadow). Radar can also be blocked by various electronic countermeasures (ECM). In reality, wood reflects radar almost as well as any metal. If a boat or ship can reflect a radar wave back to the transciever, the ship can be 'seen'. The only major factor that decides whether or not something can be seen by radar is the size of the target. A large wooden sailing ship returns a very nice blip. A 12 foot dinghy, not so much.
  18. Okanagan Man from Vernon, Canada writes: They (and I am not sure who they are) better do something as the message I would read as a Somalian would be that, 'wow, if we can steal a ship this big and get away with it then it must be easy to swipe the small ones.' 'To hell with fishing, lets go jack some boats...'
  19. Sen Siv from Canada writes: Some more employment for security perhaps . All ships navigating these waters may have to carry additional security personell armed with enough fire power to deal with these guys and we need to ask the Somali Government and the neighbouring governments to patrol their seas. An international Naval Force to patrol the Horn of Africa is also another possibiliy.
  20. Wassup Widat from Canada writes: BC Ex - Truer words were never spoken.
    Crimson - your last post was well thought out and well spoken. Its the nursery rhymes that we skim over.
  21. sam johnson from Canada writes: silent majority(?) - tell all those bleeding hearts how you would get these hijackers off a freighter with a million barrels of oil without destroying an immense amount of oil. i really don't mind if you impail these scum, but the cargo is the main interest here.
    bleeding hearts await your great solution.
    not silent and a definite minority.
  22. B A from Ottawa, Canada writes: Ah, this is an easy one. Simply create a militarized corridor for shipping and make sure it's advertised. Any ships travelling on it must purchase an IFF transponder through proper channels to broadcast their identity to the picket vessels. Anything on the water within that cooridor not broadcasting is seized and if they resist or flee, sunk. This isn't rocket science people, (though I susopect they may fall into the solution somewhere along the line) All that is required is the political will. Otherwise, there is a very real risk of September 19th (TLAP Day) becoming a national holiday in Somalia.
  23. Ron Joseph, P.Eng from Canada writes: Sheesh, just read Julius Ceaser's memoirs. Young ceaser was captured by pirates who at the time were more powerful than the existing Roman navy. Ceaser told them thier time was up as soon as he was released and guess what. No more pirates! I guess if there is no will, there is no way.
  24. Teddy G from Canada writes: Captain Jack Sparrow I presume... They should hold on to it for as long as possible..

    Their 100 million could be worth 200 million in the next few weeks.
    Plus the boat.

    Who would guess... where the act of piracy in itself increases

    the value of the booty!!!!!

    Nice job.
  25. Fake Name from Canada writes: ' John McMortimer-Boyles from An Undisclosed Underground Location Safe From Nuclear Attack, Canada writes: Short of going into Somalia and killing everyone in the country, you aren't going to stop the Somali pirate problem.'

    Now that the pirates are threatening the global oil supply, that may not be entirely out of the question...
  26. JOSH Back from PHILLY from T dot., Canada writes: Am i the only one that finds it funny that a bunch of untrained, poorly armed 'bandits' can take over a cargo worth 120 million dollars?

    this is hilarious!... good on the pirates LOL..

    also interesting that the u.s. has done nothing.

    Great opportunity to offer 'security' contracts for only 500k...

    lol.
  27. sam johnson from Canada writes: b a from ottawa - great idea. who's going to pay for it? whose vessels are going to be used? all it requires is the political will? i don't see any and haven't heard any yet.
    i'm not belittling your idea, it's a good one, it's just so obvious no government seems to want to do anything about it.
  28. Rudy H from Canada writes: While I support the arming of the ships it may just be a temporary solution.

    All a pirate has to do is threaten the ship with a rocket launcher. If you fire on them then they shoot rockets at you. Sure you can prevent them from boarding but think of the damage they could do to the ship.

    I'm sure if the pirates retaliate and does enough damage then the ship owner's policy will be not to repel the pirates. It depends on what is the cheaper solution.

    What may have to be done is to have convoys of ships with armed escorts. In the end someone will have to put down the pirates.
  29. j boland from United States writes: The fact that it is a Saudi ship is immaterial. Either there is free passage of the seas for all or there is not. This is a slow fast ball right down the middle of the plate just waiting for the UN to hit a home run. All the UN has to do is take some action and actually look as if it is accomplishing something of use. I expect, however, the UN will come through, as usual, and do nothing of substance.
  30. Jack Squat from Canada writes: Some of the posters here are unintentionally funny with their great words of wisdom on how the solve the problem. Do you really think that the ship's owners and other directly affected haven't thought of this, and a lot more? If you really want to understand the problem, discover how piracy developed in the area to begin with. By understanding the problem, you're half-way to solving it.... give it a try sometime.
  31. Cadillac Rancher from FORMER Conservative, writes: LOL! these pirates are making monkeys out of the whole international community!
  32. L.B. MURRAY from !! from Canada writes: R. Carriere, our very wise poster, made the following comment on another thread....

    .....While no condescension is intended, perhaps it would be very naive to believe that winning A-Stan would close down AQ and stifle the other cousins in various countries spanning not only the Middle East, but the planet...
    ______________________________________

    Well, here is a fine example of those ''COUSINS''.... Those of you who still think that some ''victory'' in Afghanistan would be the answer and the end-all to every concern, time to find out about the ''AQ COUSINS'' who are everywhere from here to Timbuctoo.

    -
  33. Layne Crawford from United States writes: 'also interesting that the u.s. has done nothing.'

    Why, exactly, should the US do something? We wouldn't want to be unilateral. Let the UN figure it out and handle. it.
  34. sam johnson from Canada writes: jack squat - your post should be printed on bill board sized letters!
    too bad most would ignore it and still jabber on with their comic book ideas.
  35. Paul Bunyan from Northern forest, Canada writes:

    Is no one worried about the potential for a huge oil spill here?

    This type of action could cause a big mess. Security has to be improved.
  36. Crimson The-Red from Canada writes: Wassup Widat from Canada writes: BC Ex - Truer words were never spoken.
    Crimson - your last post was well thought out and well spoken. Its the nursery rhymes that we skim over.

    Ya, I guess I should apologize for the lyrics, my 5 year old daughter loves the Backyardigans (we have some of their DVDs) and their pirate song (with a Caribbean beat) is easily the most catchy song I have ever heard, and it pops in my head at any mention of pirates.
  37. sam johnson from Canada writes: bill smith - you were born 70 years too late! the nazis tried this in many european countries. didn't seem to do much good.
    i was hoping you were joking.
    are you joking?
  38. Silent Majority from Canada writes: Sam,
    What I am trying to get at is that the crew is very much on the mind of the ship owners and to a lesser extent the cargo owners. There are people who plan by certain rules and there are those who do not. What happens to the crew is important as is the potential environmental damage; it all must be weighed. This ship is big but if the crew were of no importance then storming it would be a real possibility. Chances are, there will be a ransom paid and the ship will be released but these particular pirates will be hunted down. Changes will be made and situations like this will be less likely.
  39. Crimson The-Red from Canada writes: DON'T MIND THE BOLLOCKS from Canada writes: Damn it Jim I'M a Doctor not a Pirate!!!

    The Enterprise is the wrong type of ship to deal with this issue....

    I suggest the Flying Dutchman would be the right tool for the job.
  40. David Gehring from Kingston, Ontario, Canada writes: Why does everyone think 'bait boats' and armed guards on cargo ships will easily solve this problem? There must be thousands of well-armed pirates out there who have become well-practiced in their craft. You'd have to raise a large army of tens of thousands of mercenaries / security guards to sufficiently guard the hundreds (if not thousands?) of cargo ships that travel through that region. I'm not even sure how many security guards it would take to adequately patrol a large supertanker 24/7, but that's a perimeter of close to 700 meters on one boat alone. The idea of escorted convoys sounds a bit more practical.
  41. d g from Canada writes: Oh, and this is yet another good reason why other sources of energy are needed....this increase of piracy isn't going away.
  42. john 'trillium boy' smith from Centre of Universe, Canada writes: I've said it before and repeat it again:

    - oil companies rake in record profits year after year and transport huge amount of dangerous cargo without any security protection (just multinational crew of 25 people)

    - now they expect some military (read taxpayer) to protect the cargo, provide rescue etc.

    - and of course they never expected this to happen.

    I say go not only after pirates, go after oil companies too.

    ps. if you have a party at home and let your drunken friends drive, you can be found responsible in court.
  43. W M from Canada writes: It's hard to see an option other than starting to put heavilly armed commando teams on ships (without letting the pirates know which ships), then having them blow the pirates and their support ships out of the water. If piracy becomes like Russian roulette (especially Russian roulette with more than one live round in the chamber), it is likely to become a lot less attractive. This also highlights the need to slow down the flow of weapons like grenade launchers. Kalashnikovs are bad enough. We'll never stop it, but the fewer the better.
  44. Shannon White from Waterloo, Canada writes: From the new reports it seems these criminals are not related to Al Qaeda or any other international terrorist org. But, Al Qaeda et al are probably taking notes...
  45. Crimson The-Red from Canada writes:
    I'm gonna be a Pirate on the River Saskatchewan......

    Cause its a heave-ho, hi-ho, coming down the plains

    Stealing wheat and barley and all the other grains

Comments are closed

Thanks for your interest in commenting on this article, however we are no longer accepting submissions. If you would like, you may send a letter to the editor.

Report an abusive comment to our editorial staff

close

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.

Back to top