Terrorist Navy
Posted: 2003-09-29 07:29pm
Al-Quaeda navy If this is true who sold them those ships.
Get your fill of sci-fi, science, and mockery of stupid ideas
http://stardestroyer.dyndns-home.com/
http://stardestroyer.dyndns-home.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=31059
The article credits a Greek agency as being behind it, in which case al-Qaida would be lucky if they even floated. The reality is that there is no way in hell the worlds shipping can be kept track of. You can register a ship with Liberia and fly that nations flag for about a hundred bucks, and they have offices in cities like New York and London, to spare you the need to actually travel to the country. Same story for Somalia, Panama and a few other flags of connivance, which account for many thousands of vessels. Though many significant sized ships in the Indian Ocean especially are unregistered. The reality is that there is no way in hell the worlds shipping can be kept track of.If this is true who sold them those ships.
Nah, it wouldnt only be more firing practice, really. It's Al Qaeda afterall, they don't just use ships, there would always be little bases and shit. The ships would just be terrorist wanking.Darth Wong wrote:It would actually be fantastic if Al-Quaeda had a navy, because then they'd be much easier targets.
I give them ten minutes against Chile's navy.HemlockGrey wrote:Suddenly I have visions of a fleet of privateer-yachts cruising the Cape of Good Hope and flying the Liberian flag.
The Coast Guard an USN are way ahead of you. I'm not particularly concerned.EmperorMing wrote:Just a thought; can imagine a suicide freighter in some port going off?
Actually, all they need to do is plant a small explosive chargeEmperorMing wrote:Just a thought; can imagine a suicide freighter in some port going off?
Thats awesome.Sea Skimmer wrote:Something like 70% of that is done at India's Alang ship breaking yard, which has the sophisticated method of running the vessels aground before unleashing 40,000 workers armed with hammers and cutting touches to tear them to pieces.
YesDalton wrote:Didn't the USS Cole get hit by a bomb-laden boat?
I see the great leader left out the part about the incredible fatality/maimHowedar wrote:Thats awesome.
Exactly what I was thinking. Not a pretty sight or thought.MKSheppard wrote:Actually, all they need to do is plant a small explosive chargeEmperorMing wrote:Just a thought; can imagine a suicide freighter in some port going off?
on a LNG tanker, and basically have it set to remote control...
wait for it to enter Baltimore, or some other port, and then BOOM,
it goes off..
a few tens of KILOtons of LNG going up at once isn't pretty
The hulls are rather thick, and the super cooled gas does not ignite as easily as you might think. You'd need something more on the lines of a torpedo or Mk83 to set one off, and even then your unlikely to get any sort of atomic level blast. However the US coast guard is well aware of the risk, which is why it almost completely shuts down waterways when major LGN tankers arrive and gives them a major escort. I'd actually be more concerned with something like an ammoniac gas carrier; a major tank breach could kill everyone downwind for fifteen miles. Though not many of those come into US ports, and they also get escorts as I recall.MKSheppard wrote: Actually, all they need to do is plant a small explosive charge
on a LNG tanker, and basically have it set to remote control...
wait for it to enter Baltimore, or some other port, and then BOOM,
it goes off..
Most pirates operate off of small islands or even within harbors from shore. operating them for a major freighter would attract too much attention. And anyway piracy isn't too profitable, especially if you've got to keep a freighter fueled as a base.The Duchess of Zeon wrote:I think the biggest danger from Al-Qaeda getting ahold of several freighters would be using them as motorboat tenders for piracy operations against merchant shipping in areas like the East African Coast or Indonesia to raise money for more serious attacks.
And thanks to that bill the USN now generally loses money with every ship that's broken up, which is one reason why so many are being sunk as targets. But indeed Alang does lose a minimal of one person a week killed outright and many more suffer and die later from cancers and lung conditions thanks to all the chemicals on old ships.Howedar wrote:No, don't get me wrong, its horrible. But there's a certain level of awesomeness to it. Kinda like having eight zillion people dig a giant fucking ditch through Panama, even though thousands of people died.MKSheppard wrote:I see the great leader left out the part about the incredible fatality/maimHowedar wrote:Thats awesome.
rate there. Congress passed a bill saying that former US warships cannot
be scapped in shitholes like that.
I hope that didn't sound as callous as it looks.
Yea I read a Baltimore Sun article on that once and I've seen footage of itSea Skimmer wrote: As for the awesomeness, it really is. The shear scale is incredible, especially considering that almost nothing bigger then a 5-ton truck or welding touch is used, outside of the tugs that shove the ships ashore at high tide. I remember one bit off footage which showed a worker slowly finish a cut on deck, suddenly the side walls away ad it cuts to a wide shot from shore, showing a section of the hull that must have been at least 100x200 feet fall away onto the beach and surf.
But Harpoons generally don't break ships into pieces, just burn them out. A swarm of migrant Indians however does both.MKSheppard wrote:
Yea I read a Baltimore Sun article on that once and I've seen footage of it
on TV once or twice. Still though, Harpoons are more awesome
Yeah, it would be a chance for the Coast Guard to get some payback when one of their High Endurance Cutters comes across the Al-Quaeda vessel.Darth Wong wrote:It would actually be fantastic if Al-Quaeda had a navy, because then they'd be much easier targets.