Pirates Strike Back!

[blue]

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water

Source.

[Lady's Human]

Just a couple quick notes....

Merchant ships being unarmed is a recent anomaly, historically. Until the 20th century merchantmen were routinely armed to deal with (drum roll, please) Pirates. Piracy had largely though not completely) been eradicated by the Royal Navy and the US Navy, removing the need to arm merchant ships. Even into the early 20th century merchantmen normally had a small arms locker to deal with issues.

If Letters of Marque have been granted by Congress anytime in the last 200 years, I'm unaware of it. Handy way to deal with unspoken wars (basically a letter of marque is legalized piracy), but I don't believe we have used them in the post revolutionary period.

[blue]

Letters of Marque are at least Constitutional. LOMs where also used during the War of 1812 against the BNT.

The bounties on Bin Laden and other terrorists currently in place today seem similar to LOMs.

Allocating Naval vessels to combat piracy would likely be far more expensive then issuing LOMs to private contractors.

[Lady's Human]

I could argue semantics, but I won't. (The US wasn't really treated by the Great Powers as a serious player until after the war of 1812, and even after that it was a very, very grudging respect. Hence the post-revolutionary qualifier.....it's like arguing when WW2 started......it all depends on whose perspective you're looking at the question from)

After doing a little looking we used 1 letter of marque in WW2, for an airship used in searching for submarines on the coast.

As to using naval vessels to combat piracy, that's pretty much what got the original 6 frigates constructed. It would be very, very difficult to argue that using the US Navy to combat piracy is unconstitutional. Keeping the sea lanes open for merchant traffic has been priority number one for ANY navy for centuries.

[blue]

I could argue semantics, but I won't. (The US wasn't really treated by the Great Powers as a serious player until after the war of 1812, and even after that it was a very, very grudging respect. Hence the post-revolutionary qualifier

I dont really care who treated the US as a serious player, but I would like to see your arguement, I only did a quick search.

.....it's like arguing when WW2 started......it all depends on whose perspective you're looking at the question from)

How can one argue about the spark that started a global inferno?

After doing a little looking we used 1 letter of marque in WW2, for an airship used in searching for submarines on the coast.

Pacific or Atlantic? Link if you saved it. Check out the book Shadow Divers if that sort of war history interests you.

As to using naval vessels to combat piracy, that's pretty much what got the original 6 frigates constructed. It would be very, very difficult to argue that using the US Navy to combat piracy is unconstitutional. Keeping the sea lanes open for merchant traffic has been priority number one for ANY navy for centuries.

Never said using the USN was unconstitutional, only that it would be cheaper to use contractors and LOMs.

[Cinder & Smoke]

Letters of Marque are at least Constitutional.

Allocating Naval vessels to combat piracy would likely be
far more expensive then issuing LOMs to private contractors.

Letting the Navies of the World combat high seas piracy rather than farm out the
anit-piracy operations would no doubt result in better control and coordination
of the efforts ... and less bad press when incidents like the Blackwater / Iraq
civilian shootings happen during a Letter of Marque operation.

PS: NICE to see ya, Fred!

[Lady's Human]

OT, but which spark?

Japanese invasions on the Asian mainland?

Anschluss?

Sudetenland?

German entry into the Ruhr?

The Sitzkrieg?

The Panay?

The war was on long before 1939.

or 1941 (The US Navy was fighting the Germans in the North Atlantic well before any declaration of war)

[blue]

OT, but which spark?

Japanese invasions on the Asian mainland?

Anschluss?

Sudetenland?

German entry into the Ruhr?

The Sitzkrieg?

The Panay?

The war was on long before 1939.

or 1941 (The US Navy was fighting the Germans in the North Atlantic well before any declaration of war)

Touche, WWII started on many different fronts but they all led to the same conclusion. It wouldnt have been a World War otherwise.

[RICHARD]

I wonder what the recent capture/release of the pirates will do for the problem.

Does it buy the countries invovled a 'free pass', Now I don't advocate killing all the pirates, unless they need it- but wouldn't little Muhammad going off to sea and not coming back have more of an effect on the rest?

[blue]

I agree the good press of the SEAL sniper teams was good.

Using a private contractor, shipping companies could spend less in ransoms and loss of their cargos , using private contractors would also be cheaper for USA tax payers then using the USN.

If the combined Navies of the world were to combat piracy, who would be in charge of the coordination?