wrote in message
...
On Apr 10, 9:42 am, HK wrote:
Richard Casady wrote:
On Thu, 9 Apr 2009 08:25:08 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

On Apr 9, 12:23 am, wrote:
Simply train and arm the crew with 50 cal. and 20 m.m. automatic
weapons to
defend themselves. A 20 m.m. Vulcan gatlin gun mounted amidships with
quad
50's fore and aft would stop all the nonsense. As a former destroyer
shipmate, I assure you the firepower in the aforementioned is
sufficient to
strike terror in the hearts of any so called Pirates."Eisboch"
wrote in message

news:Cb6dnZsqAv2bQEHUnZ2dnUVZ_rSdnZ2d@giganews. com...

Betcha there are a few in Wash DC breathing a sigh of relief.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/piracy-Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Agreed.

At least a couple Ma-deuces, and even mini-guns would help

Arm that 13 man crew. The ones who have a half mile of railings to
watch for ladders and grappling irons.[Emma Maersk]

It is true that there are many smaller ships, with bigger crews.

It cost about 2 to 3 million bucks for a stabilized 20mm mount.

That leaves spray and pray, and the Gatling doesn't need to be bigger
than 5,56mm. No armor on those outboard motors. Shoot if you see guns
and ladders.

Casady

Alternately, we could give our mighty military forces and the mighty
military forces of other interested countries something useful to do for
a change. A few carriers and protective ships in the area, helped by
satellites and flyovers from carrier jets and prop planes, would do it.
We can easily keep track of the merchant vessels, and we can in real
time keep track of suspicious activities by the dinky boats and ships
the pirates operate.

--
Palin & Bachmann in 2012 -
Bring Integerity back to Washington.


Pffftt. Hopefully, nobody here is litening to you as your assumption
is way off. According to Navy officials it would take 60 ships to
handle that area. Do you know how many ships we currently have in our
Navy? C'mon Harry, get some facts then come back and talk snerk
Here's a hint, think 300...
--------
The navy are smoking crack then. 4 ships it all it would take. 3 escorts
and a flat top and fly to the target. I could only see 60 ships if you
planned an wholescale invasion of Somalia. Somalia is smaller than Texas.

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"HK" wrote in message
...


Alternately, we could give our mighty military forces and the mighty
military forces of other interested countries something useful to do for
a change. A few carriers and protective ships in the area, helped by
satellites and flyovers from carrier jets and prop planes, would do it.
We can easily keep track of the merchant vessels, and we can in real time
keep track of suspicious activities by the dinky boats and ships the
pirates operate.


Not enough ships for too big of an ocean. Fast as they may be, they
couldn't respond to a boarding 200 miles away in time to prevent it, even
at 30-35 kts. Maybe they all need to be retrofitted with a bank of Etecs
on their transoms to get there faster.

Lets see, an F18 and Apache have a range of what?

A 28' boat and F18.....hm.... Even if the F18 is out of ammunition a
supersonic full speed flyby at 75 feet.... they wouldn't even see it coming.
BOOM..... Now that would hurt the ears big time.

And since Somalia is just under the size of Texas, worst case delivery time
isn't going to be too long. And with 20mm forward guns, why waste missiles.
It would be like a kids turkey shoot practice for the boys.

On Apr 11, 4:05*pm, "Canuck57" wrote:
wrote in message

...
On Apr 10, 9:42 am, HK wrote:





Richard Casady wrote:
On Thu, 9 Apr 2009 08:25:08 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

On Apr 9, 12:23 am, wrote:
Simply train and arm the crew with 50 cal. and 20 m.m. automatic
weapons to
defend themselves. A 20 m.m. Vulcan gatlin gun mounted amidships with
quad
50's fore and aft would stop all the nonsense. As a former destroyer
shipmate, I assure you the firepower in the aforementioned is
sufficient to
strike terror in the hearts of any so called Pirates."Eisboch"
wrote in message

news:Cb6dnZsqAv2bQEHUnZ2dnUVZ_rSdnZ2d@giganews. com...

Betcha there are a few in Wash DC breathing a sigh of relief.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/piracy-Hidequoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Agreed.

At least a couple Ma-deuces, and even mini-guns would help

Arm that 13 man crew. The ones who have a half mile of railings to
watch for ladders and grappling irons.[Emma Maersk]

It is true that there are many smaller ships, with bigger crews.

It cost about 2 to 3 million bucks for a stabilized 20mm mount.

That leaves spray and pray, and the Gatling doesn't need to be bigger
than 5,56mm. No armor on those outboard motors. Shoot if you see guns
and ladders.

Casady

Alternately, we could give our mighty military forces and the mighty
military forces of other interested countries something useful to do for
a change. A few carriers and protective ships in the area, helped by
satellites and flyovers from carrier jets and prop planes, would do it.
We can easily keep track of the merchant vessels, and we can in real
time keep track of suspicious activities by the dinky boats and ships
the pirates operate.

--
Palin & Bachmann in 2012 -
Bring Integerity back to Washington.

Pffftt. Hopefully, nobody here is litening to you as your assumption
is way off. According to Navy officials it would take 60 ships to
handle that area. Do you know how many ships we currently have in our
Navy? C'mon Harry, get some facts then come back and talk * snerk
Here's a hint, think 300...
--------
The navy are smoking crack then. *4 ships it all it would take. *3 escorts
and a flat top and fly to the target. *I could only see 60 ships if you
planned an wholescale invasion of Somalia. *Somalia is smaller than Texas.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

That's what they said it would take to protect and monitor all of the
traffic in that area... Don't ask me, it was a Navy guy who explained
it. You just can't monitor all the traffic in that area and pick out
the bad from the innocent unless the Pirates flew the Jolly Roger.
Remember, we would have apologist groups like the UN claiming that
every boat was an innocent and fighting for pirates rights.. It could
get real messy.. I still think private security is the answer...

"Canuck57" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
...
On Apr 10, 9:42 am, HK wrote:
Richard Casady wrote:
On Thu, 9 Apr 2009 08:25:08 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

On Apr 9, 12:23 am, wrote:
Simply train and arm the crew with 50 cal. and 20 m.m. automatic
weapons to
defend themselves. A 20 m.m. Vulcan gatlin gun mounted amidships with
quad
50's fore and aft would stop all the nonsense. As a former destroyer
shipmate, I assure you the firepower in the aforementioned is
sufficient to
strike terror in the hearts of any so called Pirates."Eisboch"
wrote in message

news:Cb6dnZsqAv2bQEHUnZ2dnUVZ_rSdnZ2d@giganews. com...

Betcha there are a few in Wash DC breathing a sigh of relief.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/piracy-Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Agreed.

At least a couple Ma-deuces, and even mini-guns would help

Arm that 13 man crew. The ones who have a half mile of railings to
watch for ladders and grappling irons.[Emma Maersk]

It is true that there are many smaller ships, with bigger crews.

It cost about 2 to 3 million bucks for a stabilized 20mm mount.

That leaves spray and pray, and the Gatling doesn't need to be bigger
than 5,56mm. No armor on those outboard motors. Shoot if you see guns
and ladders.

Casady

Alternately, we could give our mighty military forces and the mighty
military forces of other interested countries something useful to do for
a change. A few carriers and protective ships in the area, helped by
satellites and flyovers from carrier jets and prop planes, would do it.
We can easily keep track of the merchant vessels, and we can in real
time keep track of suspicious activities by the dinky boats and ships
the pirates operate.

--
Palin & Bachmann in 2012 -
Bring Integerity back to Washington.


Pffftt. Hopefully, nobody here is litening to you as your assumption
is way off. According to Navy officials it would take 60 ships to
handle that area. Do you know how many ships we currently have in our
Navy? C'mon Harry, get some facts then come back and talk snerk
Here's a hint, think 300...
--------
The navy are smoking crack then. 4 ships it all it would take. 3 escorts
and a flat top and fly to the target. I could only see 60 ships if you
planned an wholescale invasion of Somalia. Somalia is smaller than Texas.



It's not land mass that needs to be patrolled. It's hundreds of thousands,
if not millions of square miles of ocean.

Think about Coast Guard search and rescue missions that know within a
hundred square miles of where a small boat is in trouble. Without a beacon
or GPS coordinates, they often search for days unsuccessfully. Pirate
boats aren't exactly broadcasting their positions.

Eisboch

Eisboch

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"HK" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...


Alternately, we could give our mighty military forces and the mighty
military forces of other interested countries something useful to do
for a change. A few carriers and protective ships in the area, helped
by satellites and flyovers from carrier jets and prop planes, would do
it. We can easily keep track of the merchant vessels, and we can in
real time keep track of suspicious activities by the dinky boats and
ships the pirates operate.


Not enough ships for too big of an ocean. Fast as they may be, they
couldn't respond to a boarding 200 miles away in time to prevent it,
even at 30-35 kts. Maybe they all need to be retrofitted with a bank
of Etecs on their transoms to get there faster.

Eisboch

Eisboch


Or eTec launchers, to toss all the dead eTechs at the pirate boats.

A U.S. and other nation carrier, stationed strategically, could easily be
the mainstay of a force designed to keep the waters clear of pirates.
Remember, satellite technology makes it possible to track these pirate
craft from the moment they leave port.

Lots of small patrol craft are the real answer, all hooked up in a
communications network, with fighter jet backup. Do it the right way, and
no bitty pirate boats are going to be able to get close to the
freighters.





Catching these guys at sea is like trying to capture a bunch of bees that
have left their nest.
Better to destroy the nest.

The problem with your idea is that as soon as you relax a bit, they will
be back. It would require constant, endless surveillance to control it.
(it's been going on for many, many years).

Better to fix the problem than the symptoms.

Eisboch

Agreed.

So why not have the satellite monitor where their bases are, send a couple
of F18 pilots need some live munitions practice to fix it good? Sounds like
a nice 2 hour ride. Wish I was 19 again....

What I seem to hear sounds like excuses. Maybe the politicians need to
learn to fight like terrorists and pirates, hit and run. Why even bother to
put people on the ground in there?

Maybe even tell the government to arrest them or else? Send a couple of
aging (cheap) Mavericks in for a close look and warning.

It is not as hard as one thinks. Bet the boys would love the air time.

"HK" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...


Alternately, we could give our mighty military forces and the mighty
military forces of other interested countries something useful to do
for a change. A few carriers and protective ships in the area, helped
by satellites and flyovers from carrier jets and prop planes, would do
it. We can easily keep track of the merchant vessels, and we can in
real time keep track of suspicious activities by the dinky boats and
ships the pirates operate.


Not enough ships for too big of an ocean. Fast as they may be, they
couldn't respond to a boarding 200 miles away in time to prevent it,
even at 30-35 kts. Maybe they all need to be retrofitted with a bank
of Etecs on their transoms to get there faster.

Eisboch

Eisboch


Or eTec launchers, to toss all the dead eTechs at the pirate boats.

A U.S. and other nation carrier, stationed strategically, could easily
be the mainstay of a force designed to keep the waters clear of pirates.
Remember, satellite technology makes it possible to track these pirate
craft from the moment they leave port.

Lots of small patrol craft are the real answer, all hooked up in a
communications network, with fighter jet backup. Do it the right way,
and no bitty pirate boats are going to be able to get close to the
freighters.





Catching these guys at sea is like trying to capture a bunch of bees that
have left their nest.
Better to destroy the nest.

The problem with your idea is that as soon as you relax a bit, they will
be back. It would require constant, endless surveillance to control it.
(it's been going on for many, many years).

Better to fix the problem than the symptoms.

Eisboch


A. They have several nests.

So, how many nmh can a F18 cover in 45 minutes?

B. Destroying the nests would mean destroying the ports in a starving
nation.

So what? Maybe they are starving because they are so lawless they need a
good kick into reality?

C. Interdicting the pirates for a considerable period of time would give
our Navy something useful to do.

Mavericks are cheaper than a seat at Gitmo when you consider trial,
transportation, political costs etc.

D. We supposedly are doing constant, endless surveillance in a number of
areas in the world, with huge flotillas. Most of what I envision could be
done with one U.S. carrier task force and a carrier or two from another
friendly nation, plus lots of small patrol boats and satellite
surveilliance.

Sounds like the navy has seen better days then. Or is it pure politics?

E. Really fixing the problem would require rebuilding Somalia.

Only they can do that, but being pirates isn't the way, let them know it.

We always have at least one carrier group in the Indian Ocean, by the way.

And they spend the fuel being there anyway. Might as well give the boys
some entertainment of live fire. Somalias don't even have the fire power of
a Jap Zero, this is a turkey shoot.

wrote in message
...

plus lots of small patrol boats and satellite
surveilliance.

Again, what are we looking for, are we going to attack every small
armed ship? What if they are only fishermen trying to protect
themselves?
------------

The only half baked excuse to not chase them down like dogs yet. But by the
same token, should we not jail any criminal because one might be innocent?

I would be creative, drop fliers from a plane outlining the forbidden areas
right over the fishing areas and if they are in the forbidden areas down
they go, fish food.

wrote in message
...
On Apr 10, 10:55 am, HK wrote:
Eisboch wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...

Alternately, we could give our mighty military forces and the mighty
military forces of other interested countries something useful to do
for a change. A few carriers and protective ships in the area, helped
by satellites and flyovers from carrier jets and prop planes, would do
it. We can easily keep track of the merchant vessels, and we can in
real time keep track of suspicious activities by the dinky boats and
ships the pirates operate.

Not enough ships for too big of an ocean. Fast as they may be, they
couldn't respond to a boarding 200 miles away in time to prevent it,
even at 30-35 kts. Maybe they all need to be retrofitted with a bank
of Etecs on their transoms to get there faster.

Eisboch

Eisboch

Or eTec launchers, to toss all the dead eTechs at the pirate boats.

A U.S. and other nation carrier, stationed strategically, could easily
be the mainstay of a force designed to keep the waters clear of pirates.
Remember, satellite technology makes it possible to track these pirate
craft from the moment they leave port.

Lots of small patrol craft are the real answer, all hooked up in a
communications network, with fighter jet backup. Do it the right way,
and no bitty pirate boats are going to be able to get close to the
freighters.

--
Palin & Bachmann in 2012 -
All Stupidity All the Time- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You sure are dumb.. First off you talk about all these other countries
as if they are going to put their ships in harms way. As we have seen
all around the world is that we and a few other countries are the only
ones with the guts to stand up for ourselves, certainly not any of our
UN partners.. Second, you say we should buy ships from them, pffffttt,
how does that square with all of your other bull**** about more
intelligence and less armement? Forget it, I don't need to read your
dodge...

Another thing you seem to forget is "innocent until proven guilty".
What are you going to do, wipe out every small armed ship in the area.
The UN would immediately take us to the Haige (sp?) for killing
"innocent" fishermen, simply carrying arms to protect themselves from
Pirates.. The list goes on, but we know you rarely think these things
out, you just spew, what a waste of time you are...
---------
Lets see. They have the capitain hostage right now. When they do get
arrested, it will cost millions to prosecute, and all the UN BS and crap.

I like the old way, slit their wrists and walk the plank. You slit the
wrists so the sharks find them fast. Dead pirates never pirate again.

"Tim" wrote in message
...

The "Now" Somalian gov'twants the international community to help
support the Somalian CoastGguard????

Now it sounds like they want the wolves to be hand fed too! ....

http://www.voanews.com/english/Afric...04-10-voa3.cfm

The Somalia coast guard is probably are the pirates.

wrote in message
...
On Apr 11, 4:05 pm, "Canuck57" wrote:
wrote in message

...
On Apr 10, 9:42 am, HK wrote:





Richard Casady wrote:
On Thu, 9 Apr 2009 08:25:08 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

On Apr 9, 12:23 am, wrote:
Simply train and arm the crew with 50 cal. and 20 m.m. automatic
weapons to
defend themselves. A 20 m.m. Vulcan gatlin gun mounted amidships
with
quad
50's fore and aft would stop all the nonsense. As a former destroyer
shipmate, I assure you the firepower in the aforementioned is
sufficient to
strike terror in the hearts of any so called Pirates."Eisboch"
wrote in message

news:Cb6dnZsqAv2bQEHUnZ2dnUVZ_rSdnZ2d@giganews. com...

Betcha there are a few in Wash DC breathing a sigh of relief.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/piracy-Hidequoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Agreed.

At least a couple Ma-deuces, and even mini-guns would help

Arm that 13 man crew. The ones who have a half mile of railings to
watch for ladders and grappling irons.[Emma Maersk]

It is true that there are many smaller ships, with bigger crews.

It cost about 2 to 3 million bucks for a stabilized 20mm mount.

That leaves spray and pray, and the Gatling doesn't need to be bigger
than 5,56mm. No armor on those outboard motors. Shoot if you see guns
and ladders.

Casady

Alternately, we could give our mighty military forces and the mighty
military forces of other interested countries something useful to do for
a change. A few carriers and protective ships in the area, helped by
satellites and flyovers from carrier jets and prop planes, would do it.
We can easily keep track of the merchant vessels, and we can in real
time keep track of suspicious activities by the dinky boats and ships
the pirates operate.

--
Palin & Bachmann in 2012 -
Bring Integerity back to Washington.

Pffftt. Hopefully, nobody here is litening to you as your assumption
is way off. According to Navy officials it would take 60 ships to
handle that area. Do you know how many ships we currently have in our
Navy? C'mon Harry, get some facts then come back and talk snerk
Here's a hint, think 300...
--------
The navy are smoking crack then. 4 ships it all it would take. 3 escorts
and a flat top and fly to the target. I could only see 60 ships if you
planned an wholescale invasion of Somalia. Somalia is smaller than Texas.-
Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

That's what they said it would take to protect and monitor all of the
traffic in that area... Don't ask me, it was a Navy guy who explained
it. You just can't monitor all the traffic in that area and pick out
the bad from the innocent unless the Pirates flew the Jolly Roger.
Remember, we would have apologist groups like the UN claiming that
every boat was an innocent and fighting for pirates rights.. It could
get real messy.. I still think private security is the answer...
-----
Americans, and Canadians need to learn not to give a damn about what the UN
thinks. In fact, we should scale back what we spend to what other countries
like Kenya, SA, Liba, China, Vietnam, Pakistan spend. Heck, unless they tie
votes to contributions....

UN is useless liability. Good idealism that fails the test of reality. It
gives too many backward and barabaric countries too much vocal time and aid
to support their dictatorships and facist regimes.

The US needs only go to the UN, say 24 hours to give back our ships and
people or else. Then if they don't, go in, do damage they will rember for
20 years, and get out. Light the place up for 24 hours of flame. Fight
like they do, hit and run. Kadafi got the message when his palace was
bombed. Very effective. Hit fast, hard then get out.