4 poor, technologically challenged Somalians were able to board a ship this big?
-
Princess_Ashmi — 12 years ago(March 22, 2014 12:45 PM)
Goddamn you're stupid. Did you not watch the movie?
They had no weapons on board.
They DID try to shoot the flares at the boats but were shot at so that ruined their aim.
And if you can hold up an entire bank full of people with one gun, its not hard to believe that four guns were able to momentarily take over an entire ship!
Tired of people like you thinking you could probably have done a better job when in reality we all know you'd probably crap your pants and start crying like a baby if you ever found yourself in the same situation.
Don't try to deny it.
Ashmi
any
question -
CGSailor — 12 years ago(March 27, 2014 12:28 AM)
THIS ^^^^^^^^
I am so sick and tired of armchair wannabes thinking they know better, when their whole experience comes from some Call of Duty video game.
I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water! -
purpleprinc3 — 12 years ago(March 27, 2014 05:18 AM)
To be fair they were firing at him with AK47's from a range of 200-400 metres which is a very good range for that weapon. The crew don't carry guns because that would require extra security and gun training for each individual crew member and I'm pretty sure commercial ship liners won't find it particularly profitable to train every member of their staff with guns.
-
untoldwind — 12 years ago(March 28, 2014 07:07 AM)
This is quite ridiculous: This movie is based on a real life event!
In 2009 the Maersk Alabama was boarded by four Somali pirates. You can read it all here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MV_Maersk_Alabama
or
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maersk_Alabama_hijacking
or
http://articles.latimes.com/2009/apr/09/world/fg-somali-pirates9
or
Don't get me wrong here. I'm not claiming that everything happened just like in the movie, most likely not.
But: Four guys with guns were obviously able to board a cargo ship. That's a fact. -
SeeEmilyPlay — 12 years ago(March 29, 2014 08:07 PM)
Sometimes the crew of cargo ships are not allowed to have guns. Some international ports won't let you in if you are an armed ship. Sometimes it's against the law. I agree, it was aggravating to watch. When you're not allowed to protect yourself, jacka**es who don't care about right from wrong can terrorize and even kill you.
-
monique79-1 — 11 years ago(April 13, 2014 05:10 PM)
Did the original poster forget the fact that no one aboard the ship was armed?! Commercial ships may not be allowed to carry any weapons, depends on international laws as well as the company that owns the ships.How could 4 scrawny Somalis take over a whole ship? BECAUSE THEY HAD WEAPONS and the ships crew didn'tObviously the poster did not watch the movie and is clueless that this actually happened.
-
Rubixcube10 — 11 years ago(April 15, 2014 07:09 AM)
I was shaking my head when they were about to board this big ship. Yes, it happened in real life. But what the heck were the people on the ship thinking. 4 people had to climb a ladder just to get onto the ship. That means, they had to use at least one hand to climb up, not to mention it was s little difficult to climb with the wind and waves. You couldn't get 4-5 people at the top of the ladder and just hit them with a board when they reach the top? Or throw heavy objects (fire extingusher) down the ladder. I'm just amazed that 4 people were able to board the ship. What about shooting the flare down the ladder onto their boat, why try taking a long shot?
I know this is based off a true story but I'm just amazed that the 100 people on the ship couldn't stop the 4 people from boarding. Yes, they all were able to escape the situation and not be harmed with they way they did it. Procedural, I guess. -
Doodlebuger — 11 years ago(May 02, 2014 02:36 AM)
The crew never had a chance to get anywhere close to the ladder, and the pirates are not all on the ladder at the same time and can always shoot. Anyway, it happened and merchant ships are not gunships.
Business tries to avoid anything military looking until they are forced (reluctantly) to use armed protection. This goes for merchant ships in dangerous waters, oil rigs in Nigeria, etc.
And btw, these SOmali pirates are fierce fighters, not technologically challenged at all ! Certainly quite proficient with their Kalachnikovs. -
mwmtampa — 11 years ago(August 30, 2014 08:10 PM)
I will repeat my comments also despite all the protests to the contrary. They mentioned at the beginning of the movie that there were acts of piracy that had taken place already. For them to head into these waters knowing that, and not being armed and prepared, is really lame, foolish, and preposterous.
I also agree with the posters who stated they could have prevented the pirates from boarding the ship by dislodging their hooks, or conking them as they tried to board. Why did the crew just accept their boarding attempt? And not repel them? Quite preposterous. -
callumfaulkner — 11 years ago(April 16, 2014 02:08 AM)
Sorry can't see how to add a new comment so I'll just reply to mt OP.
But just so everyone knows, yes I'm aware this is based on a real event - I'm not mentally challenged like most of the people here.
What I am questioning is the audacity that in this day and age with all our technology, (supposed) intelligence, and weaponry; that four god damn poor and technologically inept Somalians can take over a ship that big.
This is undeniably just horrendous foresight/ planning and most likely some stupid political beep preventing weapons/ better defense systems for these ships.
Oh and the movie was still an over-dramatized piece of crap used to milk your sympathy and guilt you into liking it (see the piss poor opening conversation (dialogue) between the Captain and his wife). -
DorkoTheDorkLord — 11 years ago(April 16, 2014 10:35 AM)
Politics is part of it, as a lot of countries don't like the idea of armed foreign ships coming in and out their ports (can't imagine why). Cost is another part, since it would mean different insurance and permits and training. A final one isthere's just nothing on those ships (in general) worth dying for. Being able to get into a gunfight with the pirates, people who are dirt poor and looking at (potentially) multi-million paydays from a successful hijacking, won't make them
less
dangerous. -
cribera-1 — 11 years ago(May 04, 2014 10:16 PM)
I mean, they were US soldiers aboard, or did I understand wrong such part?
If the cargo+ship is worth millions of U$, how come INSURANCE COMPANIES won't demand such BASIC security (2 to 4 well armed men, even with at least a missile launcher, apart from machine guns, mercenaries on the payroll of the ship's company or the insurance company), to be able to have the ship insured? -
Wiccaman — 11 years ago(May 05, 2014 11:53 AM)
Until relatively recently insurance companies were quire reluctant to encourage armed guards. They believed that the consequences of a firefight would be more costly than the cost of a boarding (this was in the days that pirates just tended to nick money and easily transportable valuables than the ship itself).
Now though they do offer a bit of a discount on the premium if there is
trained
security on board. It's normally around 25% for non armed guards and 50% for armed guards.
This is just for bulk cargo carriers carrying inert goods though. They still don't like armed guards on petroleum and chemical carriers because of the fire/explosion risk. -
r_freeman — 11 years ago(April 20, 2014 04:46 AM)
I found it frustrating watching the crew do nothing until it was too late and they were aboard. The film bored me throughout, and I can't understand why it's rated so highly.
- Opinions are like a$$holes, everyone has them, and they normally stink.
-
Galactus03 — 11 years ago(May 03, 2014 07:49 PM)
with everything you said.plus the movie just plain stunk.based on true events or not it really wasnt that dramatic of a story for the big screen. TV film perhaps but not a major motion picture. Also did you notice how much more exciting the poster for the film made the boarding of the ship look. Lol