Screwball Rules of Engagement

Bill Nichols · 02-05-11, 07:50 AM

I just read this story ( http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2...pirate-attack/ ) and it really got my dander up!

Here's the short version:

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."

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!!!

UnderseaLcpl · 02-05-11, 08:07 AM

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

02-05-11, 08:08 AM

Quote:

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.

Quote:

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 · 02-05-11, 08:33 AM

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

tater · 02-05-11, 09:58 AM

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 · 02-05-11, 01:47 PM

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 · 02-05-11, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 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.

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

Freiwillige · 02-05-11, 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 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.

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!

TLAM Strike · 02-06-11, 12:14 AM

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.

02-05-11, 07:50 AM	#1
Bill Nichols Master of Defense Join Date: Mar 2000 Posts: 1,502 Downloads: 125 Uploads: 0	Screwball Rules of Engagement I just read this story ( http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2...pirate-attack/ ) and it really got my dander up! Here's the short version: 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." 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!!! __________________ My Dangerous Waters website:

02-05-11, 08:07 AM	#2
UnderseaLcpl Silent Hunter Join Date: May 2008 Location: Storming the beaches! Posts: 4,254 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	Don't even get me started on ROEs, Bill. Trust me, it gets even worse than this incident would lead one to believe. __________________ I stole this sig from Task Force

02-05-11, 08:33 AM	#4
Platapus Fleet Admiral Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 19,361 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 0	it would be interesting to find a citation for these rules of engagement. __________________ abusus non tollit usum - A right should NOT be withheld from people on the basis that some tend to abuse that right.

02-06-11, 12:14 AM	#9
TLAM Strike Navy Seal Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Rochester, New York Posts: 8,633 Downloads: 29 Uploads: 6	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. __________________

02-05-11, 09:58 AM	#5
tater Navy Seal Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: New Mexico, USA Posts: 9,023 Downloads: 8 Uploads: 2	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?

02-05-11, 01:47 PM	#6
Rockstar In the Brig Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Zendia Bar & Grill Posts: 12,614 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	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.