SO there’s this huge piracy problem in a couple parts of the world, the German navy manages to capture some of the pirates flagrate delicto, and what do they do? Release the pirates. Why? Oh, they weren’t threatening German interests. WTF? :loco:
That is so seriously screwed up.
That’s because they won’t enforce a very simple rule on non-uniformed enemy combatants, summary battlefield execution.
They were following their orders which are very specific as to their ROE.
Rules of Engagement.
Not saying I agree with their course of action, but these are professional Military Officers. They are bound by their laws and orders for their mission.
[quote=“Dragonbones”]SO there’s this huge piracy problem in a couple parts of the world, the German navy manages to capture some of the pirates flagrate delicto, and what do they do? Release the pirates. Why? Oh, they weren’t threatening German interests. WTF? :loco:
That is so seriously screwed up.[/quote]
On a side note, pretty sick avatar.
Now on topic. This isn’t the first case, as the Dutch vessel caught some pirates a few months back but not in the act of piracy. As such they couldn’t hold them so they dropped them off on a beach in Somalia. I can’t find the link now, but I’ll search for it later.
Unless there is an overall authority about what to do with the captured pirates, it will be up to the individual nation states participating. None of them want the bad press of executing an innocent fisherman who was caught up with the “wrong sorts”. I’d be willing to bet that the families of any and all of the pirates executed will claim that it was mistaken identity.
The laws of the sea haven’t really been updated in a couple hundred years, when it was acceptable for the captain of the ship to act as the judge in the trial of pirates. Then they would be executed. Now, there are political considerations (along with the advent of Youtube) to worry about. Do you give them a trial in a civil court in Somalia, an admiralty court (military tribunal) or perhaps a court of the UN’s creation. What kind of evidence is allowed? What set laws do you use? Do you have to provide the pirates with civilian legal representatives or military lawyers?
The nation states who sent naval vessels there in order to patrol hoped that seeing big guns on a ship would scare the Somalis. It hasn’t and now they need to figure out what do quickly before the Somali pirates get any bolder.
Thanks, made it myself! 
The UN ought to authorize – no, REQUIRE – the world’s navies to treat pirates like the enemies of the civilized world that they are. Those big guns should be used, not just shown. Sounds like the UN needs to establish some kind of appropriate international law if one doesn’t already exist. Maybe an international court is needed, who knows? Maybe the captured pirates need to be turned over to whatever country’s interests WERE threatened. I don’t know, I don’t pretend to have a sophisticated understanding of the situation, but I just consider the current mess rather ridiculous.
No worries, this is probably the same mistaken impression that the Chinese fleet is currently under. The UN hasn’t actually translated the rules of engagement into Mandarin yet. They will do so in a few weeks time when the Somalia pirates file a human rights complaint in the Hague.
Chinese history has plenty of pirates as well, of course there was this the lad who beat the Dutch to pulp and their little colony of Taiwan.
But this lady sounds straight out of the Pirates of the Caribbean movie:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ching_Shih
A former prostitute, married to Pirate captain, and when widowed “robbed towns, markets, and villages, from Macau to Canton.”. She retired and ran a casino.
Sigh. Where’s Dirty Harry when you need him?
Hmmm…as mention by some other posters… I was always lead to believe that admiralty law was quite specific that pirates and pirate ships can be seized. I think the execute bits been phased out. See article 106.
http://www.admiraltylawguide.com/conven/unclospart7.html
Of course, possibly people are a bit gunshy after the Indians blew one pirate ship away only to find that the poor Thai fisherman were still on board.
[quote=“Dragonbones”]
The UN ought to authorize – no, REQUIRE – the world’s navies to treat pirates like the enemies of the civilized world that they are. Those big guns should be used, not just shown. Sounds like the UN needs to establish some kind of appropriate international law if one doesn’t already exist. Maybe an international court is needed, who knows? Maybe the captured pirates need to be turned over to whatever country’s interests WERE threatened. I don’t know, I don’t pretend to have a sophisticated understanding of the situation, but I just consider the current mess rather ridiculous.[/quote]
[quote=“Elegua”]Hmmm…as mention by some other posters… I was always lead to believe that admiralty law was quite specific that pirates and pirate ships can be seized. I think the execute bits been phased out. See article 106.
http://www.admiraltylawguide.com/conven/unclospart7.html
Of course, possibly people are a bit gunshy after the Indians blew one pirate ship away only to find that the poor Thai fisherman were still on board.[/quote]
Yep everyone is gun shy after the Indian incident. It gets dicey when trying to decide when does a Somali in those waters go from being a fisherman to a pirate. The UNCLOS deals with how to define piracy after the action has occurred. So if the Coalition forces storms the Saudi oil tanker, then they can gather up anyone left alive and try them for piracy.
What they aren’t sure about is the guys who are floating around waiting for a target. If you catch them on the way there, how do you proof they are pirates? Having lots of guns isn’t a rare thing in Somalia so that might not be a very good criterion. Perhaps they can use the boat they are in as a guide. If its a big slow fishing trawler, then it is probably not a pirate vessel. If it is a zodiac or some other speed boat that won’t work very well for fishing, they can detain them.
Article 106 is in reference to what happens when you screw up and detain someone who isn’t a pirate. You have to make amends to the state whose vessel you caused “damage” to. I guess the fate of the arrested persons depends on what country is trying them. I know some suspects have been handed over to Yemen for trial and others to Kenya.
What will be interesting in the near future is UN resolution to allow anti-piracy fight on land. We’ll see who has the political capital to allow them to destroy all those nice big homes that Somali pirates have built along the coast.
The US’s “dirty harry” mentality is how the Is brought 9/11 on itself.
The Germans didn’t take unilateral violent action without authority. There won’t be any blowback because of it.
Isn’t life funny, people getting on Germany’s back for not initiating unprovoked attacks on people from other countries. Of course, if they had shot up the pirates’ boat, people would be saying, “The Germans are acting like it’s 1939 again.”
The reason why they weren’t arrested is because you can’t get rid of them - if no country is willing to take and prosecute them what will you do with them instead?
Ask the Indians, they recently arrested 23 pirates and got stuck with them …
My opinion: drop a bomb on the pirate’s boat, avoids any such problem.
True. Just sink their boat, and then fail to detain the pirates, at least 100 nautical miles from shore.
That’s what I’m talkin’ about! 
'Cept its not their boat.
'Cept its not their boat.[/quote]
Yep, them leasing companies can be a bitch to deal with…
I’m wondering what it’s like to be the insurance adjuster guy that has to go negotiate to get the ship back…
It’s asinine leftist drivel like that which caused me to shift to the right after 9/11 (and land in the center).
There won’t be any results either.
How’s this going to play out? I see a few possibilities…
This is an interesting situation in that virtually every country is affected. Between the ship owners, renters, crews, and cargo, everybody has an economic interest in stopping piracy in the Sea of Aden. Whether or not they’re willing to commit to military action is a function of their level of interest and the political environment.
Most likely. The current Somali govt does pretty much nothing currently except see how much they can enrich themselves.
2nd most likely, but without real enforcement, i.e. summary execution of pirates caught in the act, the pirates will keep on doing what they do and just consider the occasional chance of getting caught a price for doing business since it means a shower, medical check up, and a trip back in a seaworthy ship to the coast.
:roflmao: We all know how that worked out the last time. If those boy lovers and pedophiles ever fine that can of nerve, well the children and daughters of Somalia had better be careful, hide or being welling to have sex for food and possibly be videotaped doing it. When has the UN ever completed a successful military action since the Korean War?
See above
Side of the ship, one in the back of the head, tossed in the sea and put on the news. OMFG, they stop grabbing ships, since it stops being free cash.
It’s asinine leftist drivel like that which caused me to shift to the right after 9/11 (and land in the center).[/quote]
You didn’t shift to the right, you shifted into la-la land. You probably still believe the “hate us for our freedoms” nonsense.
And no doubt you are completely ignorant of the fact that bin Laden was behind both attacks on the World Trade Centre - 1994, not just 2001 - and why they were launched.
There won’t be any results either.[/quote]
If by results you mean the Germans won’t be violating people’s human rights and exacerbating tensions with other nations, then yes. US foreign policy caused the islamic revolution in Iran, and it caused 9/11.