Preemptive Strike

[CapnBilll]

Originally Posted by tager

(If you have ever read John Rawls, think about the Original Position in the context of this debate...)

Here's an alternate standpoint.

Pirates, Warlords and Rogue Fishing Vessels in Somalia's Unruly Seas


The pirates are being painted by the press as morally bankrupt thieves. I am pretty sure that many of them are bankrupt fishermen.

Was the holocaust good?

There is just a wee problem with this scenario.
1. If these guys are the "Somalian coast guard", why are they attacking yachts? More than 500 miles from the Somalian coast?
2. If they were really enforcing Somalian fishing rights, they would be targeting fishing vessels, and or collecting fees. If they were merely robbing vessels that transit, especially if they were collecting a fixed amount like $1000.00 or we seize your ship, I could almost buy it.

The major problem is that Somalians, (formerly Ethiopians before an Islamic revolution). NEVER HAD A FISHING INDUSTRY, ...NEVER. The current "fishermen", were given their steel fishing boats with British outboards as part of a charity project among a group of European Nations as an attempt to reduce Somalian dependence on UN food aid. (The theory is give a man a fish you feed him for a day, teach a man to fish, ...), The problem with this theory is, Somalians DON'T EAT FISH! It is not in their culture. The original coastal inhabitants, that might have once upon a time eaten fish were genocided. The current inhabitants of Somalia's coastline not only have no "father to son" fishing tradition, they also have neither the raw materials, nor the know how to construct ocean going vessels of any size or type.

This does not even mimic the pirate situation in Thailand. In Thailand there IS a tradition of fishing, but the fishermen are the lowest and least educated of Thai society. They are paid pennies for the fish they catch, and have to make it up in volume, (hard to do with hand fishing). And as such are even poorer that the rice farmers. The Thai priate attack we have heard about are merely robbery attempts gone bad, as the Thai priates rarely try to hold someone for ransom. Most of the killings have been because of racial strife, and historical animosity between the different groups of Asians, (that westerners often group together).

Also the Thai build their own fishing vessels, (out of native materials like bamboo), and dont venture far from the coast.

We've focused on losses from the pirated ships, but to be in a small steel skiff 500 miles out with a single outboard you have no idea how to fix, and no spare parts, and no tools, hoping the mothership that dropped you off out here doesn't lose you or forget you. I'm betting that the pirates don't have either ocean experience, or the ability to navigate, and that 1-10% are simply lost each trip. You can buy a lot of skiffs for one of the million dollar ransoms.

[TheMadchef]

Seems to me that much of this discussion revolves around whether or not somali pirates should be killed. In my mind, the punishment should fit the crime;
if a pirate is witnessed killing innocent people, by all means, blow up the boat they are on, arrest and prosecute the survivors accordingly.
Any pirate arrested during the commission of a crime should be detained and prosecuted according to the same standards of anyone else in the free world.
Seems pretty simple. More authorities in pirate-laden waters to police criminal activity.

[Minnewaska]

Originally Posted by TheMadchef

....Seems pretty simple. More authorities in pirate-laden waters to police criminal activity.

I hate the bastards, but this isn't very practical. There is 2,000 miles of Somalian coastline and they wander hundreds of miles offshore. It would require all the authorities east of the Mississippi.

[CapnBilll]

Originally Posted by steel

Yeah that makes a lot of sense. Think of what would happen in the US if the economy collapsed and a lot of starving fishermen saw foreign fishing ships coming through fishing on and depleting what had always been their fishing waters. I think a lot of Americans would do the same thing. When someone is really hungry it doesn't take much or any logic to justify doing something like this.
So there are some "good" pirates who are doing exactly the same thing that most other nations would do if you came in their waters without permission and started fishing. Then there are the ones who have taken it to the next level.

.

Exactly you are wrong. What DID happen in the US in disasters, (except Katrina), was the people of the comunities gathered together, selected leaders, and worked together to fix the problem. What WOULD happen in the US if our economy collapsed and foreign ships were threatening our livelyhood, is what DID happen historically. We would organise a fleet of "deputized" armed merchant ships, and patrol our coast with the ships operating under a common command, and under strict rules of engagement.

This was the exact scenario under which the US NAVY was commisioned by congress. The patrols; like our society operated under the RULE OF LAW, and under the supervision and scrutiny of the original colonies. Even in the "wild west", people worked to form local and regional authorities, and enforce the rule of law. Lawlessness, thievery, and kidnapping is not part of our culture.

[smackdaddy]

As pirate attacks grow, shipowners take arms - Business - World business - msnbc.com

It's about time these ships started packing heat.

[Omatako]

Originally Posted by CapnBilll

Exactly you are wrong. What DID happen in the US in disasters, (except Katrina), was the people of the comunities gathered together, selected leaders, and worked together to fix the problem. What WOULD happen in the US if our economy collapsed and foreign ships were threatening our livelyhood, is what DID happen historically. We would organise a fleet of "deputized" armed merchant ships, and patrol our coast with the ships operating under a common command, and under strict rules of engagement.

This was the exact scenario under which the US NAVY was commisioned by congress. The patrols; like our society operated under the RULE OF LAW, and under the supervision and scrutiny of the original colonies. Even in the "wild west", people worked to form local and regional authorities, and enforce the rule of law. Lawlessness, thievery, and kidnapping is not part of our culture.

Well said

+1

[motion300]

So if a unemployed auto worker in detroit started hyjacking trucks and killing the drivers on the highway we should understand and let him be?

[MarkSF]

Surely if all the Somalian coastline can't be patrolled, the best approach is to protect individual ships? By that I mean put teams of marines or the coalition equivalent on random ships - once a few ships have fought back the pirates might start thinking about another profession.

[Omatako]

Originally Posted by MarkSF

Surely if all the Somalian coastline can't be patrolled, the best approach is to protect individual ships? By that I mean put teams of marines or the coalition equivalent on random ships - once a few ships have fought back the pirates might start thinking about another profession.

There is some complication, I believe it is to do with the Geneva Convention (not sure) that prohibits merchant ships from arming themselves.

[BentSailor]

Originally Posted by Omatako

There is some complication, I believe it is to do with the Geneva Convention (not sure) that prohibits merchant ships from arming themselves.

This is an interesting piece of info. Does anyone know if this is true? I'm not casting doubt, it's just I've never heard it clarified one way or the other (though a few people I've talked to believe it to be).