India playing off with our waters, who they think they are!

[Libaax-Sankataabte]

No "pirate mothership" was blown up. The truth is finally coming out. "Those Indians" are not that good.

 

Sunken 'pirate ship' was actually Thai trawler

[Aaliyyah]

^^ lol so they were showing off eh...Makes me wonder how hard it is to catch those pirates? saw them on tv the other day...kuwa macawiis iska xidhan lol...

[N.O.R.F]

They fired on a ship being hijacked!

[nuune]

The playing off turned out to be playing off with civilian boats, some one must kick out those Indian so called Navy.

 

 

I expect Thailand to send its Navy to Indian shores hunting for that Indian Navy, and showing some aggressive power!

[me]

Originally posted by Norf 1:

They fired on a ship being hijacked!

Norf that’s what you get when the proper procedures are not followed.

 

13 civilians may have lost their lives now.

[nuune]

Me, that is true, and India has no direct communication links to the maritime bureau, in which they would be informed of who and what that boat was and for.

 

 

Ignorance of show off indeed.

[N.O.R.F]

Originally posted by me:

quote:Originally posted by Norf 1:

They fired on a ship being hijacked!

Norf that’s what you get when the proper procedures are not followed

They thought the trawler was the 'mother' ship. My position hasn't changed.

[me]

I see wali madaxaad dhulka kula jirtaa.

[N.O.R.F]

^Its called seeing things what they are saxib. Try it.

 

Do you still they're fishermen whilst they're busy hijacking a ship off the Yemeni coast?

 

ps you have failed to address my previous points.

[me]

We both know the difference between Fishermmen protecting their fishing waters and Pirates hijacking ships in the high seas and there is no need to further discuss that issue.

 

What I was saying was that the Indian Navy acted unlawfully when they attacked a ship that didn't pose a threat to it.

 

Do you know the story of that Brazilian guy that was shot at stockwell tube station? The police shot him because they thought he was argagaxiso. It turned out he was innocent.

 

There were argagaxiso in london then, that looked like him, the kinda tanned types and he was wearing a jacket on a hot day.

 

Do you see the parallels between the two stories?

 

- Lives could have been saved it the procedures were followed.

- The 'law emforcement agency' should not break the law and kill innocent people.

- There are procedures in place for situations like this and when those procedures are not followed innocent people get killed.

- It is the judges to decide who is innocent and not a trigger happy indian soldier.

 

The indians broke the law, pirates or no pirates. The only thing that seperates 'criminals' from the enforcement agency is the law. If the enforcement agency breaks the law, then they are criminals.

[Abwaan]

Originally posted by Norf 1:

They thought the trawler was the 'mother' ship. My position hasn't changed.

There is a claim that although it was a fishing boat, it has already been hijacked.

 

Or maybe it is a failed rescue mission.

[N.O.R.F]

Edit

 

Mr, erm, are we on the same page here? In the early part of this thread you were protesting about the Indian ship and the legality of their actions and what not. Now you're saying they can't shoot! Do you now accept they are right in what they're doing but have a problem with 'how' they're doing it? If they got the pirates (like we all thought they did) would you still be protesting?

 

See what I'm getting at? I hope I don't have to keep repeating myself again.

[me]

I don't even think were reading the same book.

 

The Indians had no right to do what they did.

 

This is a multi layered argument.

 

1. You have to recognize the difference between fishermen protecting their waters and pirates.

 

2. Somali Fishermen have the right to board foreign vessels in the Somali coast, tow those vessels and fine the ships that were engaged in illegal activities inside the Somali maritime zone.

 

3. In the case that there are pirates abusing the situation and attacking ships unlawfully. Whichever Navy vessel that is patrolling that area in international waters should follow international law.

 

In the case of the ship that was sunk, I believe they were in Omani waters. What was an Indian Navy ship doing in Omani waters, sinking a Thai ship?

 

4. Pirates or no pirates they the Indian navy had no right to sink that ship and even if they did sink that ship they should at least saved the survivors. In this case 13 sailors are possibly drowned, 1 of them was in the sea for 6 days and was luckily rescued by ships sailing by.

 

5. We are accusing the pirates of breaking the law, well here we have the Indian Navy breaking the same law yet you are saying you still believe they had the right to sink that ship.

 

I don’t know much about maritime law or any other law, but we all know the difference between right and wrong. The Indians where in the wrong.

[Gheelle.T]

Norf1, are you saying Indian navy or any navy in those waters, has the right to shoot and sink any ship that is under pirates possession? As in this case of the Thai trawler!! If your answer is yes, then all of the 17 or 18 ships anchored in Somali shores (including Saudi oil tanker)are fair game, don't you think?

[Geel_jire]

The sheer incompetence & stup!dity of the indian navy is surprising to me.

 

assuming the ship was hijacked and say you have a 1:10 ratio of 'pirates' to hostages ... sinking the ship makes sense how ? .... talk about throwing the baby out with the bath water