Screwball Rules of Engagement

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by August

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]

Originally Posted by jimbuna

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.

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by August

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

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]

Originally Posted by August

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

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.

[Onkel Neal]

Sink 'em all, cowboy style

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

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by Neal Stevens

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

and me for DNI.

[ETR3(SS)]

Originally Posted by 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.

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

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]

Originally Posted by ETR3(SS)

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

Probably poorly

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by ETR3(SS)

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

[Bilge_Rat]

Originally Posted by ETR3(SS)

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.