rowyn: (thoughtful)
rowyn ([personal profile] rowyn) wrote2009-11-18 04:22 pm
Entry tags:

Maersk Alabama vs Pirates: 2-0

Armed security really earned their pay in this case. The Maersk Alabama -- the same ship that was attacked by pirates in April, whose captain was taken hostage and rescued by the US Navy -- was attacked by pirates again. Eeep! But this time they had a security detail for protection, and the pirates were scared off. Which makes me happy.

But this bit in particular caught my eye:

"Armed security is not the preferred route," Mr. Speers said, but added that the company had decided to hire the guards because the Alabama regularly sails in the high-risk waters to deliver food aid [emphasis added]. He said that the move had been approved by the U.S. Coast Guard. "It's something they encourage," he said.


So that's what these sailors are risking their lives to deliver, and pirates working so hard to steal: not gold or oil, but food aid. I wonder if the pirates even know what the cargo is, when they attack. I wonder if they're so desperate, or food so scarce, that it wouldn't make any difference if they did know. Makes me doubly proud of the crew, though. I'm glad they're okay.

[identity profile] postrodent.livejournal.com 2009-11-18 11:48 pm (UTC)(link)
I believe the pirates originally got their start scaring off European waste dumpers, who were exploiting the absence of a navy or coast guard by ditching toxic and radioactive waste off the Somali coast, sickening and destroying the livelihood of the local fishing villages. Obviously the pirates have moved a little beyond that, but you know, there just isn't a lot of pure black or white in this world.

[identity profile] terrycloth.livejournal.com 2009-11-19 12:01 am (UTC)(link)
Looking it up, the waste dumpers were land-based, and it was done by the somali warlords in return for cash payouts. Aren't those the same guys that are into piracy now?

[identity profile] terrycloth.livejournal.com 2009-11-19 01:08 am (UTC)(link)
I think that article has some of its facts wrong. Or more likely, glossed over to make it sound better. Timesonline and wikipedia say that, basically, European firms shipped toxic waste to Somalia because the warlords there agreed to take it off their hands for $2.50 a ton.

...then the warlords dumped it off the coast, or dumped it in huge piles inland, and it started killing everyone.

Later on, the same warlords subverted the vigilante coast guard trying to scare away illegal fishermen and convinced them to turn to full-time piracy.

[identity profile] postrodent.livejournal.com 2009-11-19 12:56 am (UTC)(link)
Apologies, short memory on my part, and I suppose I was a bit pedantic.

[identity profile] verminiusrex.livejournal.com 2009-11-18 11:51 pm (UTC)(link)
The pirates are stealing the ship and the crew for randsom, cargo is secondary. I doubt they know what is on the ship before they attach.

I'm waiting for the pirates to attack a ship full of ninjas, the battle would be epic.

[identity profile] octantis.livejournal.com 2009-11-19 01:16 am (UTC)(link)
Yeah, I think this is the case. Bunch of somali pirates can't do anything with umpteen tons of crude oil, for instance, but they'll go for those tankers.

"So what're they shipping in that crate you pried open?"
"Shuriken."
"...Oh crap."

[identity profile] verminiusrex.livejournal.com 2009-11-19 01:38 am (UTC)(link)
"What does the manifest say the cargo is?"
"Self-sealing stembolts and widgets. What the hell are those?"
"No idea. Wonder what we can get for the boat and crew."

[identity profile] narile.livejournal.com 2009-11-19 03:33 pm (UTC)(link)
I don't know, food aid allows the warlords to kill more farmers to cement their control over the locals.

[identity profile] terrycloth.livejournal.com 2009-11-19 09:18 pm (UTC)(link)
Schlock Mercenary had a whole plotline on that.