Screwball Rules of Engagement

[Bill Nichols]

I just read this story ( http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2011/feb/04/san-diego-warship-helps-stop-pirate-attack/ ) and it really got my dander up!

Here's the short version:

http://media.signonsandiego.com/img/photos/2011/02/04/Picture_3_1_t595.png?7d3016c2135abb32e11fd45cdffa1 189dee3761c

In a statement, the Navy says, "While transiting in international waters, the merchant vessel reported that pirates were attempting to board the vessel. Momsen and Bunker Hill, which were in the vicinity, immediately responded to the Duqm's distress signal and caused two pirates skiffs alongside the vessel with ladders against its hull to flee the area. Momsen and Bunker Hill tracked the skiffs movement and located the mothership that facilitated the attempted boarding of Duqm, towing the two empty skiffs. Consistent with the U.N. Security Council Resolutions on piracy and U.S. rules of engagement, Momsen destroyed the two skiffs to prevent their use for future attacks."

:damn::damn::damn:

These pirates are caught red-handed, and our ROE only allow us to put holes in their skiffs??? What about the mothership? Did the Navy simply let it go?

What the Navy needs is more warriors, and fewer lawyers. More focus on maritime security, less on political correctness.

God! If I could only be President for a day!!!

:arrgh!:

[UnderseaLcpl]

Don't even get me started on ROEs, Bill. Trust me, it gets even worse than this incident would lead one to believe.

[Tribesman]

These pirates are caught red-handed, and our ROE only allow us to put holes in their skiffs??? What about the mothership? Did the Navy simply let it go?

What the Navy needs is more warriors, and fewer lawyers. More focus on maritime security, less on political correctness.

God! If I could only be President for a day!!!


Its bugger all to do with political correctness, its to do with the possibility of managing to kill all the hostages that may be held on the mothership.
India showed how easy it is to screw up when tackling a pirates mothership.

God! If I could only be President for a day!!!


If you could find a way to determine at sea who on the ship is guilty of piracy and who is an innocent hostage and found a way to board the ship and sieze it from armed men without endangering the hostages then forget about being elected president for a day, stand for the office of god.

[Platapus]

it would be interesting to find a citation for these rules of engagement.

[tater]

If innocents aboard drove ROE (they do, now, clearly), then the US subs in the PTO would have had to let most every jap ship go on its merry way. As it was, US submarines killed many thousands of POWs over the course of the war.

If we send boarding parties to clear each ship, then people will get killed who shouldn't (our guys, and possibly hostages, too). Maybe the new normal needs to be the assumption that hostages are already dead and make being a pirate FAR more dangerous than it is now.

What would the mothership do if we pulled nearby, and told them to heave to and be boarded, or we sink the ship, then churn the water like it was the Battle of the Bismarck Sea?

[Rockstar]

The mother ship has an owner and that owner may not be aware of the ships extra curricular activities. Sink the mother ship you owe the owner a new ship.

Before firing to sink the mother ship they would also need to make sure there are not people on board being held against their will. Attempt to board a suspected mother ship with drugged out pirates and you invite harm to come to your boarding party before they even see the whites of their eyes.

Those skiffs were tracked and it was obvious to everyone nobody was on board so they were sunk without incident. Arbitrarily sinking the mother ship could get real messy.

[August]

The mother ship has an owner and that owner may not be aware of the ships extra curricular activities. Sink the mother ship you owe the owner a new ship.

That's an interesting concept. Can you show where such a thing is codified in any law anywhere?

[Freiwillige]

The mother ship has an owner and that owner may not be aware of the ships extra curricular activities. Sink the mother ship you owe the owner a new ship.

Before firing to sink the mother ship they would also need to make sure there are not people on board being held against their will. Attempt to board a suspected mother ship with drugged out pirates and you invite harm to come to your boarding party before they even see the whites of their eyes.

Those skiffs were tracked and it was obvious to everyone nobody was on board so they were sunk without incident. Arbitrarily sinking the mother ship could get real messy.


I look at it like this, If your kid get caught drinking and driving in your car the car gets impounded. It is your responsibility to trust and know who you loan your vehicle to. It is the ship owners responsibility to know who and what is going on with their vessel.

If their ship is being used for Piracy then they deserve the loss just for not being up on what their vessel is being used for.

I say Torpedo Los!

[Jimbuna]

Why shouldn't it be possible to 'disable' the mother ship if they refuse to be boarded?

[August]

Why shouldn't it be possible to 'disable' the mother ship if they refuse to be boarded?

Sending it down to Davy Jones Locker would be a form of disabling it I suppose. :DL

[Growler]

Sending it down to Davy Jones Locker would be a form of disabling it I suppose. :DL

Yeah, but then Greenpeace, the EPA, whomever get all bunged up griping you out for it.

I tell you, ya can't win.

Though, I gotta say it: The Coast Guard's sharpshooters, using a .50, from a helo in flight, are pretty good at disabling go-fasts' engines for their seaborne brethren and sisters to round up... gotta love that.

[August]

Yeah, but then Greenpeace, the EPA, whomever get all bunged up griping you out for it.

I tell you, ya can't win.

Though, I gotta say it: The Coast Guard's sharpshooters, using a .50, from a helo in flight, are pretty good at disabling go-fasts' engines for their seaborne brethren and sisters to round up... gotta love that.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_lM6ADTK51GM/S0Pi7T9SivI/AAAAAAAACWE/HoC1Xi91GV0/s400/Patriot-Nation-Motivational-Poster-US-Navy-001.JPG

[Jimbuna]

Sending it down to Davy Jones Locker would be a form of disabling it I suppose. :DL

True but I was thinking more in terms of taking out the prop. :DL

[Tribesman]

It is your responsibility to trust and know who you loan your vehicle to. It is the ship owners responsibility to know who and what is going on with their vessel.


So if someone steals your car and kills someone by driving it dangerously you are responsible for the killing?
You think these "motherships" are out on loan to the pirates:doh:

Why shouldn't it be possible to 'disable' the mother ship if they refuse to be boarded?
That still leaves you with a hostage situation

[Gargamel]

That still leaves you with a hostage situation

On a disabled ship, that you are now forced to board in order to rescue both the pirates and the hostages.

Sure they can disable it, but then what?

If the navy's aren't goignt o do anything about it, I fully expect the companies that own these ships to start arming them (more than they already are). If they can't trust they're (or the worlds) governments to protect the shipping lanes that are vital to the world economy, and their profit margins, then they'll have to take matters into their own hands.

[TLAM Strike]

Most of these mother ships are captured merchant or fishing vessels. Now if the crew cannot escape on the lifeboats or lock them selves in the citadel (sort of a panic room with a radio, normally the ship's engine room) its highly likely that they will be captured and held by the pirates. Any attempt at seizing the mother ship puts them in grave danger and should only be attempted with the best possible planning in place.

IMHO detection, avoidance and deterrence of pirate action groups is the best bet right now. Starting a war with them would be very nasty.

[breadcatcher101]

Have them all board the skiffs as lifeboats and sink the big one.

[Growler]

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_lM6ADTK51GM/S0Pi7T9SivI/AAAAAAAACWE/HoC1Xi91GV0/s400/Patriot-Nation-Motivational-Poster-US-Navy-001.JPG

THIS. ^

Very good reminder, August, thank you - I hadn't meant to slight the SEAL guys who pulled MV MAERSK Alabama and her crew outta the piratical fire. there's no doubt those guys made beyond the best of a bad go; shooting a guy standing in a boat, from another ship, with a large bore rifle, with a third guy's life on the line, is what you call the SEALS for, and they showed that beyond question.

Rather, I was attempting to point out that there are ways of disabling smaller craft fairly simply, "simply" in this case meaning uncomplicated in theory - shooting a moving boat on the seas with a large-bore rifle from a helicopter moving in the air is, I imagine, not easy.

Anyone behind the sights/scope of a sniper rifle is already engaged in some complicated geometry. Add in pitching watercraft & aircraft on both ends of the equation, over a surface that is notorious for goofing with humidity levels and thermals, and the average person's head explodes in a fine mist of pluses, minuses, multiplicands, divisors, roots, cosines, tangents, chords, and numbers.

[August]

TI hadn't meant to slight

Actually I was agreeing with you although inaccurately. I'm a Paratrooper, the distinctions between puddle jumpers and squids is lost on me! :DL

[nikimcbee]

If they could confirm the mothership, they could send a sub in to take it out. Blast it in the middle of the night. Who would miss it?

[Jimbuna]

If they could confirm the mothership, they could send a sub in to take it out. Blast it in the middle of the night. Who would miss it?

The families and loved ones of the hostages aboard I should imagine.

[August]

The families and loved ones of the hostages aboard I should imagine.

So just the mere chance of the presence of hostages aboard makes the mother ship immune to attack? Tough to get anything accomplished under those rules.

[Jimbuna]

So just the mere chance of the presence of hostages aboard makes the mother ship immune to attack? Tough to get anything accomplished under those rules.

Nope, not what I said or implied.....see #13....take the method of propulsion away and stop her in the water, that would be step one, then if the scum didn't recognise the plight they were in and resisted boarding or threatened/started killing hostages.....in you go.

I can't imagine a majority of pirate gangs not surrendering in this instance.

The alternative method of sinking the mothership at step one would always stack the odds against any potential hostages being saved on every occasion.

[August]

Nope, not what I said or implied.....see #13....take the method of propulsion away and stop her in the water

I suppose that would work although I don't know how you'd take out a prop on a ship that is underway. :salute:

[TLAM Strike]

I suppose that would work although I don't know how you'd take out a prop on a ship that is underway. :salute:

Not that I'm for such actions but rounds can go though water, aim for the stern below the waterline. Or there are guns that fire nets to entangle a ship's propeller.

I still believe that surveillance of pirate activity, along with defense and deterrence of vessels likely to be targeted is the right approach.

If the pirates know that captured ships will be trailed and be unable to attack target ships covertly the incentive to hold ships and crews for long periods of time partially diminishes, then would then just be holding ships and crews for ransom instead of holding them for ransom and using the ships as a base of operations- which puts the hostages in danger.

[Jimbuna]

No matter what ethic/method one subscribes to the common denominator is that some sort of physical action should be adopted....otherwise sit back and watch the situation deteriorate and develop in a negative way for the worlds maritime trade.

[Growler]

I suppose that would work although I don't know how you'd take out a prop on a ship that is underway. :salute:

Oh, I dunno - a few from a 3"/50 right below the waterline oughta do the trick.

And remember - most of the propulsion kills will work once, until the bad guys cop wise and start leaving hostages to drown in the machinery spaces after you pop the shaft seals with that prop kill. At least at that point, we'll have them reacting to what we're doing, but they still have the advantage as long as we're concerned about hostages.

They act, we react. We have to find a way to take the initiative away from these guys. As long as the world's nations are on the defensive, the bad guys are winning.

[Platapus]

One thing to consider is that these pirates don't go out and buy these "mother ships" they steal them. Which means they are still the property of the legitimate owners.

If we sail in, guns a blazin, cowboy style, and sink the ship, the owners of the ship probably would have a case to sue us for the destruction of their property to the tune of a few cubic mega bucks.

"but we waz fightn crime" may not be an acceptable defense.

Just one more complication in a complicated issue. :damn:

[Onkel Neal]

Sink 'em all, cowboy style :yeah:

Bill, when you're made President, remember me for your Secretary of Defence. :shucks:

[TLAM Strike]

Bill, when you're made President, remember me for your Secretary of Defence. :shucks:

and me for DNI. ;)

[ETR3(SS)]

One thing to consider is that these pirates don't go out and buy these "mother ships" they steal them. Which means they are still the property of the legitimate owners.

If we sail in, guns a blazin, cowboy style, and sink the ship, the owners of the ship probably would have a case to sue us for the destruction of their property to the tune of a few cubic mega bucks.

"but we waz fightn crime" may not be an acceptable defense.

Just one more complication in a complicated issue. :damn:This brings up an interesting question, how was this same issue addressed during the 17th century heyday of piracy?

[Tribesman]

This brings up an interesting question, how was this same issue addressed during the 17th century heyday of piracy?
Didn't some naval ships captains end up in debtors prison due to the financial liabilities incurred.

[Platapus]

This brings up an interesting question, how was this same issue addressed during the 17th century heyday of piracy?

Probably poorly

[Jimbuna]

This brings up an interesting question, how was this same issue addressed during the 17th century heyday of piracy?

http://i58.photobucket.com/albums/g243/kevbk/emoticons/s3j1hf.gif

[Bilge_Rat]

This brings up an interesting question, how was this same issue addressed during the 17th century heyday of piracy?

Pirates would steal/take their ships and upgrade if they found a better one. Edward "Blackbeard" Teach is one the best example of a classic pirate. He was always upgrading/expanding his fleet:

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

Any regular naval vessel who encountered a pirate ship could seize it as a "prize". In theory, it could then be returned to its rightful owner, although whoever had recovered it was entitled to a reward ("prize money"), which was based on the value of the vessel and cargo aboard.

[USNSPARKS]

Stephen Decatur is rolling in his grave.

[August]

Stephen Decatur is rolling in his grave.

True.

Welcome to the forum.

[Growler]

Stephen Decatur is rolling in his grave.

Good first post... let me echo August's welcome.