Maersk Alabama Hijacked by Pirates

KP just announced that no KP Mids are aboard this ship.
 
Not too many details out yet but I sure hope the pirates are pretty much peeing their pants when they got their hands on the crew manifest & saw they were all Americans. :unhappy:

Pirates hijack ship with 20 US crew aboard

1 hour ago

DUBAI (AFP) — Pirates seized a Danish-owned and US-flagged ship off Somalia on Wednesday with 20 American crew on board, the US Navy and the shipowner said.

"A US-flagged Danish-owned ship was attacked at around 7:30 local time this morning, 240 nautical miles southeast of the Somali town of Eyl," Lieutenant Nathan Schaeffer, a spokesman for the navy's Bahrain-based Fifth Fleet told AFP."

Maersk shipping line said the container vessel Maersk Alabama, belonging to the US subsidiary of Maersk, "was attacked by pirates and presumed hijacked" at around 0500 GMT.

"The US-flagged vessel has a crew of 20 US nationals and is owned and operated by Maersk Line, Limited in the US," a statement added.

The vessel was en route to the Kenyan port of Mombasa when it was attacked some 500 kilometres (310 miles) off the Somali coast, Maersk said.

The United States underscored its concerns after the latest seizure.

"We've seen the reports," said Megan Mattson, a State Department spokeswoman in Washington. "Recent acts of piracy off the Somali coast are a continuing concern."

Only on Tuesday, the multinational naval task force working to protect shipping in the region warned merchant ships plying the waters off Somalia to increase their vigilance in the light of an increase in pirate attacks.

The warning, issued by the Fifth Fleet, highlighted attacks hundreds of miles (kilometres) from Somalia and said "merchant mariners should be increasingly vigilant when operating in those waters."

"We continue to highlight the importance of preparation by the merchant mariners and the maritime industry," US Vice Admiral Bill Gortney, commander of the Combined Maritime Forces, said in a statement.

"We synchronise the efforts of the naval forces deployed to the region. However, as we have often stated, international naval forces alone will not be able to solve the problem of piracy at sea. Piracy is a problem that starts ashore."

Among attacks over the past few days, Somali pirates hijacked a British-owned cargo ship, a German container carrier, a Taiwanese fishing boat, a Yemeni tugboat and a small French yacht with a three-year-old boy on board.

"Despite increased naval presence in the region, ships and aircraft are unlikely to be close enough to provide support to vessels under attack. The scope and magnitude of problem can not be understated," the statement said.

It said the area involved covers an area roughly four times the size of Texas, or the size of the Mediterranean and Red Seas combined.

But despite successful recent attacks, it says "merchant mariners have proven successes as first line defenders against pirates" with some having used "evasive manoeuvring and other defensive measures to protect their ships and their cargoes."

Among those measures were turning fire hoses on attackers or firing flares at them, or rigging barbed wire along the sides of the ship to prevent pirates from boarding.

More than 130 attacks, including close to 50 successful hijackings, were reported in 2008. Most of them were in the Gulf of Aden, where 16,000 ships bottle-neck into the Red Sea each year on one of the world's busiest maritime trade routes.

At least 18 ships and more than 250 hostages are now in pirate hands.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jhPhA6alDE3Mc4V6T6VWQEtEQv_A
 
"We have very strict policies on the vessel. ... Crews are trained to handle these types of situations," Storgaard said from Maersk's headquarters in Copenhagen, Denmark.

Yeah. SURRENDER. :rolleyes:

Among those measures were turning fire hoses on attackers or firing flares at them, or rigging barbed wire along the sides of the ship to prevent pirates from boarding.

Fire hoses against AK-47's and RPG's. Brilliant tactic. :thumb:

310 miles offshore. That is significant in itself because that is WAY out at sea. These bad guys are getting good.

Looks like a job for the Navy SEALs.............. or Jimmy Carter. :rolleyes:
 
I was thinking the exact same thing Zaph. I keep think Biden saying Obama would be tested in his 1st 6 months, and this looks like the test.
Will Obama talk with them or just send in the Seals, afterall he believes you can talk to the terrorists.

If I recall correctly didn't France use their equivalent to Seals to rescue one of their ships?

My prayers go out to the family members of this crew.
 
Seems like either a CG MSRT or an FBI team would be well suited for this.
 
I don't so much blame the POTUS (President of the United States) or the VP for this. I blame the shipping companies that, for either internal cowardice reasons, financial reasons, or a refusal to engage applicable government bureacrats, refuse to properly arm or otherwise defend their crews.

"But Zaphod! Are you actually suggesting that...... horror of horrors......these crews be ARMED? Isn't that DANGEROUS?"

Well, DUH! That crew sure is SAFE right now, aren't they? :rolleyes:

And if the usual linguini-spined peaceniks can't stomach the idea of individuals defending themselves, then how about hiring a professional security detachment to sail with the ship?

Nah. I suppose it's better to save the money and pay it out as ransom. Never mind. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Unfortunately, this was only a matter of time.
As long as Maersk complies and parachutes a couple of million bucks the crew will be well kept, hopefully.

I am not sure what the solution is - do we provide a Navy escort for every American shipping vessel? Or do we go into Somalia and smack the crap out of them?
 
Or do we go into Somalia and smack the crap out of them?

:yllol:

Oh, come on! What are the chances of THAT happening? :rolleyes:



As you said, get another helo, a few million bucks, and a parachute, and hope that nature takes out the garbage for us the way it did last time.
 
Okay Zaph...I have to ask abou your tag line, where did Obama say that...I am not saying he didn't, but WOW oh WOW and now I just want to know why he would!
 
To continue Off Topic:

Of course Obama didn't say those words - it is just Zaphods way to continue to disrespect the Office of the President, as usual.
As this is a forum mostly visited by Young Adults who are willing to serve their country, perhaps with their lives, who are or will be in an environment where they are being taught to respect their Commander in Chief and the office - it's inappropriate - especially by a supermoderator, regardless of your political views. IMHO.

The quote was originally by Churchill and distorted by Zaphod.
The Original:
You ask, what is our aim? I can answer in one word. It is victory. Victory at all costs. Victory in spite of all terror. Victory, however long and hard the road may be. For without victory, there is no survival.” In a speech in the House of Commons, May 13, 1940.

back to our continuing program......
 
Of course Obama didn't say those words - it is just Zaphods way to continue to disrespect the Office of the President, as usual.

No. It's called satire. It is a direct flip of my old signature line (the incredible and historic quote delivered by the great Winston Churchill) applied to Obama. The fact that he's doing such a bang-up job of making the satirical into fact without any help from me is just gravy.

Besides, I didn't hear any whining when the shoe was on the other foot for eight years, so you'll have to forgive me if I ignore it now. Dissent is the highest form of patriotism, remember? So deal with it.

No, Pima, Obama didn't say that. He's just LIVING that. If he DID say it, would anyone really be surprised?
 
I thought he said it over on his meet the world tour and I just missed it. Afterall didn't we just hear that he knew AMericans were thought of as crass people?
 
No idea.

I just hope that he responds correctly for the sake of these hostages. It's bad enough they were forced to sail defenseless into hostile waters. I hope they won't be left out to dry in the aftermath.
 
I think that is where the quandry the administration is facing. I would think the shipping company would need to request assistance from the govt. If they do than Obama will need to address why he used military force. Currently he is facing the issue that Geithner wants to take over companies that are failing, so where and when will the govt get involved. 5 Americans or 20 Americans? What if there is another ship that flies under a different country's flag, but the entire crew is American do we use force there, or only if it is an American flag ship, and what about an American flag ship that might have foreign crew do we allow them to decide if they want to bring their elite forces in to rescue their citizens?
 
Another option, the shipping companies invest in security teams to secure their vessels. There is little hope in escorting merchant vessels through the many dangerous check points around the world.

Unlike the other nations who have had flagged vessels hijacked, the U.S. does not negotiate with terrorists.
 
I just don’t see our nation having the intestinal fortitude to do what is necessary to solve the problem in Somalia, especially the current administration. I mean look who the Sec. of State is! Do you think for one moment she will do what is necessary after her husband experience there? They will just use the excuse that they have learned their lesson from history and move on. They will point to our experience in nation building in Iraq and Afghanistan and say it cannot be done.

The problem with Somalia also is who is in charge? Who do you negotiate with? There is no Government to speak of there! Anyways, I do feel for the merchantmen who are on that ship. I do feel for their families. I also feel that they should be armed if they are going to sail the seas. There are more pirates out on the oceans than just off the coast of Somalia.

True, the problem of dealing with failed states.
 
If they do than Obama will need to address why he used military force.

Well, in all fairness to the guy, I don't think he'd have a very hard time doing that. For crying out loud, even Carter tried to rescue the hostages in Iran back in 1980.

What if there is another ship that flies under a different country's flag, but the entire crew is American do we use force there, or only if it is an American flag ship, and what about an American flag ship that might have foreign crew do we allow them to decide if they want to bring their elite forces in to rescue their citizens?

That IS a quandry, but only because of the politics involved, and I'm not talking domestic politics. America has been the policeman of the world for years simply because most of the rest of the civilized world has decided to outsource their defense to us. We are more than able to send our forces to rescue anyone anywhere, but where do we stop?

The other problem is that the terrorists have been paid off in the past, so now they are encouraged, so much so that they are striking hundreds of miles out to sea (one has to wonder how good their intel is to hit a ship that far out and nail one with a valuable cargo or owned by a big-wig company with deep pockets).

Going into Somalia is a non-starter. I for one would have resolved this issue years ago by levelling Mogadishu and a few other places after the Blackhawk Down incident, but we didn't, so there they are. And now we can't go into another nation and simply smac them around. After all, isn't that part of the "change" we voted for?

So we can't go into SOmalia and strike them where they live, we shouldn't pay them off, and we really can't task all of our SEALs to maritime defense duties because the companies or the other countries won't take care of security themselves.

Great situation. I hope the pay those sailors get is worth it all....
 
It's also important to remember SEALS aren't our only teams, nor are they always the best pick for this kind of operation. I like SEALs but there are teams better suited for this kind of stuff.

The U.S. has an obligation to any American in trouble overseas in some way. It changes sometimes based on the situation, but that still remains.
 
Back
Top