Pirates hijack ship with 21 Americans aboard off Somalia

So I read that the pirates attacked the Maersk Alabama again and I wonder if it was targeted or just luck they hit this ship again. This time it seems they where armed and faught them off.

The Associated Press: Pirates again attack US-flagged Maersk Alabama (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gB7YMEDuCwwY9ncDOtPAkEI4-H2wD9C1SR2O0)

So I read that the pirates attacked the Maersk Alabama again and I wonder if it was targeted or just luck they hit this ship again. This time it seems they where armed and faught them off.

My question is - Which is more cost effective and ultimately safer: Hiring a highly qualified, well armed detachment for each of your ships sailing in the troubled area or paying ransom, paying for lost time, exposing the company to the loss of valuable personnel & property and putting lives at risk.

It would seem to me the former is ultimately cheaper even just as a deterrence force - I'd rather pay my mercenaries than pirates even if the risk of attack is slim. It always seemed pretty straightforward to me, maybe I am missing something.

My question is - Which is more cost effective and ultimately safer: Hiring a highly qualified, well armed detachment for each of your ships sailing in the troubled area or paying ransom, paying for lost time, exposing the company to the loss of valuable personnel & property and putting lives at risk.

It would seem to me the former is ultimately cheaper even just as a deterrence force - I'd rather pay my mercenaries than pirates even if the risk of attack is slim. It always seemed pretty straightforward to me, maybe I am missing something.

Perhaps, but I am the best protector of my own life.

My question is - Which is more cost effective and ultimately safer: Hiring a highly qualified, well armed detachment for each of your ships sailing in the troubled area or paying ransom, paying for lost time, exposing the company to the loss of valuable personnel & property and putting lives at risk.

It would seem to me the former is ultimately cheaper even just as a deterrence force - I'd rather pay my mercenaries than pirates even if the risk of attack is slim. It always seemed pretty straightforward to me, maybe I am missing something.

i think and heard the decision of whether to arm the crew, hire your own security detail or just pay the ransom is the decision of the insurance companies of the shipping companies. the shipping co saves money on insurance by not arming their own crew b/c, i imagine, a forseeable gunfight between trained militia pirates vs. a non-trained shipping crew could end up with alot of wrongful death suits.

looks like shipping co and their insurance carriers might be deciding that hired security detail is the way to go compared to their thought process a few years ago.

If you're a oil/cargo tanker you absolutely need to hire security if you're traveling in pirate seas. If you're a small fishing ship stay the hell out of those waters...either that or get military support from your government. To be honest though you can't defend against an RPG heading your way from 300 feet.

If you're a oil/cargo tanker you absolutely need to hire security if you're traveling in pirate seas. If you're a small fishing ship stay the hell out of those waters...either that or get military support from your government. To be honest though you can't defend against an RPG heading your way from 300 feet.

They know well in advance when another boat is approaching their ship. I have just a basic Radar on my boat and I can reach 15 miles out. I can also program it to sound an alarm when anything is within so many feet or miles. Its easy to track a vessel heading toward you from any direction. The problem has been there is nothing they can do about it if they are not armed.

The day the it becomes a US Federal priority is the day this nonsense stops.

A few 50 caliber machine guns should do the trick http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/systems/dvic552.jpg ... YouTube - .50 Cal Machine Gun Waterfun (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2sFKBgYbI4&feature=related)

I'm guessing it was dark and they attacked a US Navy ship in error or they are really, really, dumb. It was great target practice and we wiped a few of them off the earth.
Navy: Photo shows warship destroying pirate mother skiff – This Just In - CNN.com Blogs (http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/04/02/photos-show-navy-warship-destroying-pirate-mother-ship/?hpt=T2)

I'm guessing it was dark and they attacked a US Navy ship in error or they are really, really, dumb. It was great target practice and we wiped a few of them off the earth.
Navy: Photo shows warship destroying pirate mother skiff – This Just In - CNN.com Blogs (http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/04/02/photos-show-navy-warship-destroying-pirate-mother-ship/?hpt=T2)

What do you think the squids were saying? I'll bet, "here's your sign".