0
22

[–] 13070535? 0 points 22 points (+22|-0) ago 

The thing is everyone is thinking about Somali pirates in dinghies stealing because they claim to have no other choice, when they should realize that without the safety of the high seas, there would be proper organized gangs seizing ships, ransoming survivors, and reflagging ships and selling cargo in alternative markets. Too many poor foreign graduates of the JFK Special Warfare School for this not to happen.

Not to mention the extortion that would be ongoing. They wouldn't even have to resell the cargo, sinking a ship or two and broadcasting the footage will get companies paying for a protection racket if there is no USN protecting the seas.

The reason the Mafia was able to run protection rackets was because their customers couldn't use the regular deterrent force, the police, because they had their fingers in some sort of criminal pie, whether it was moonshine, drugs, or fencing stolen goods or something that fell off the back of a truck. Since they couldn't rely on the police for security, they got mob protection which was a swifter form of justice than the police could offer.

Either ships will pay for legitimate onboard security, will pay for criminal protection for their ships, or will start shipping in a convoy style with destroyer or cruiser escorts and some fast attack/zodiac style boats that they can drop in to pursue pirates or an armed helicopter. Drones will be deployed off of ships for early detection, but knowing the attack is coming will only do so much if the pirates have RPGs and PKMs.

Basically it comes down to this: without the threat of force, there is no deterrent. With no deterrent, crime escalates. As it always has been, as it always will be.

0
6

[–] Scablifter 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

There are convoys in place off the coast already, and its an international operation. The Chinese, the Russians, the Brit Navy, the cheese eating surrender matelots, the Canadians and probably the Klingon Space Navy as well. Its not just the USN.

0
0

[–] CobraStallone 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

The straits of Malacca, and Hormuz, and the port of Rotterdam are chokepoints for a large percentage of global shipping, I don't see them under US jurisdiction. I'm sure they do more than their share, kind of obvious with the largest economy and navy, but yeah, preposterous that the US navy would be the only one fighting pirates globally.

0
1

[–] Whitemail 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

When you're prepared, Somali pirates make good target practice.

0
6

[–] Caesarkid1 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

Man, it's too bad we aren't using the same trade routes.

0
3

[–] Locked_Account 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago  (edited ago)

What? Have military control of the trade routes AND utilize them for ourselves... seems crazy... so burdensome.... what value could those possibly have?
/S

0
0

[–] Damnpasswords [S] 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

So we should pay for it all

0
3

[–] Caesarkid1 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago  (edited ago)

The other options are private security for the vessels or paying a toll for whatever nation is nearest to the trade route and giving up naval superiority.

One of the contributors to the fall of the Roman Empire was its loss of control of the seas.

1
5

[–] Ulfghar 1 points 5 points (+6|-1) ago 

It's not really trade when it's mainly one way

0
3

[–] Gunk 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

They could quit today, but that wouldn't be good for the military industrial complex.

1
1

[–] AdolfGutenbergstein 1 points 1 points (+2|-1) ago 

When we lose a carrier or two in the South China Sea; then America becomes more isolationist

0
0

[–] dooob 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Thank you Mr. President and thank you everyone who voted for you. By MAGAing, he will fix the world.

1
-1

[–] YugeDick 1 points -1 points (+0|-1) ago 

Sorry bud, the US Navy isn't the majority of the sea's protection. It's not even the largest single fleet.

https://www.globalfirepower.com/navy-ships.asp

North Korea is, and followed by China.

0
2

[–] Damnpasswords [S] 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Sounds legit

0
1

[–] winfieldscott 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago  (edited ago)

That is almost certainly wrong North Korea has a large amount of "patrol craft" which they don't specify models or hull designs at all it seems like they would basically count a basic coast patrol boat that the coast guard has hundreds of as a "patrol craft" as long as a few torpedo tubes latched onto them. But they seem to be ignoring that a large chunk more modern Coat Guard patrol craft hull designs can also accommodate launch tubes should they need to be converted to that use.

Not to mention that sheer numbers don't magically turn a bunch of patrol boats with torpedo tubes into air craft carriers and don't let them magically launch cruise missiles.

1
0

[–] YugeDick 1 points 0 points (+1|-1) ago  (edited ago)

It's a measure of the size of the fleet, not firepower. By that measure it's not wrong.

The question isn't who can nuke a pirate with the most long range missiles, it's who has the most ships, thereby able to patrol the most area. Last I checked patrol boats are still good for that.

10
-5
load more comments ▼ (1 remaining)