Thread: Best response to Somali piracy?

Originally Posted by Dreadnought

I would suggest looking at your host countries Federal Laws. They make that call and that is what they are elected to do by you/us the people. They vote on it and either it does or does not become law. A federal crime brings much more trouble to a person then a common crime such as theft and since all of this takes place in International waters it becomes an International crime as well. The circumstances of the crime determine exactly how they classify the crime, how they will address the crime and how they will punish the crime.

Now what exactly makes what these people do terrorism?

Besides, are we talking law, definitions of words, or philosophy now?

That, and I've never elected anybody. Don't believe in people's rule, sorry.

Besides, if we start to use law and such, we can make the US wars in the Middle East look like terrorism. It will certainly make me banished so I will not go deeper into the subject.

Originally Posted by entropy

Burning villages...

Glad you're honest you're an armchair warrior.

Killing the thieves at sea, very well. Using the cheap mantra of "we'll kill their friends until they realize that piracy is wrong and one should be super duper liberal" is what got the States in trouble in Iraq and elsewhere.

And then there are those using the T-word.

Armchair worrier actually.
It isn't a cheap mantra. I dont care what they think, i want my ships intact.
As long as only they are at risk and they get to enjoy themselves they wont quit. So burn the villages destroy their mansions and harry them and theirs.
Make the cost outweigh the benefits.

Originally Posted by entropy

Besides, if we start to use law and such, we can make the US wars in the Middle East look like terrorism. It will certainly make me banished so I will not go deeper into the subject.

*All nations agree to the Freedom of the Seas Act. Its been around alot longer then any of us. It governs and protects all nations shipping in the worlds oceans no matter if the nation is on the outs with the UN or not. Its there to protect them.

Originally Posted by entropy

Now what exactly makes what these people do terrorism?

Besides, are we talking law, definitions of words, or philosophy now?

That, and I've never elected anybody. Don't believe in people's rule, sorry.

*Only way to govern my friend, by the people and for the people since it is from their pocket you recieve the funds to do your job as President, Prime Minister or other.

Originally Posted by bolo121

Armchair worrier actually.
It isn't a cheap mantra. I dont care what they think, i want my ships intact.
As long as only they are at risk and they get to enjoy themselves they wont quit. So burn the villages destroy their mansions and harry them and theirs.
Make the cost outweigh the benefits.

[pirate]

I don't care what they think, I want a nice life in this crappy by all gods forgotten country. I will kill crew members the same way neighbouring clans killed my friends and family. The strong survive, that's how we do in Somalia and in the rest of the world. [/pirate]

Terrorism, its the street thugs who deal drugs in my area, the gangs who assault old ladies at night and make city trains unsecure. And worse than that, they happen to be MUSLIMS.

Originally Posted by entropy

[pirate]

I don't care what they think, I want a nice life in this crappy by all gods forgotten country. I will kill crew members the same way neighbouring clans killed my friends and family. The strong survive, that's how we do in Somalia and in the rest of the world. [/pirate]

*Obvioulsy he has never seen the outside of Somalia.

Originally Posted by Dreadnought

*All nations agree to the Freedom of the Seas Act. Its been around alot longer then any of us. It governs and protects all nations shipping in the worlds oceans no matter if the nation is on the outs with the UN or not. Its there to protect them.

I agree, and I approve.

But still, terrorism?

Originally Posted by Oscar

Terrorism, its the street thugs who deal drugs in my area, the gangs who assault old ladies at night and make city trains unsecure. And worse than that, they happen to be MUSLIMS.

Bigot,

They use terror, but do not further ideologies. They are crooks.

Originally Posted by entropy

I agree, and I approve.

But still, terrorism?

Yep.

A little-known congressional power could help the federal government keep the Somali pirates in check — and possibly do it for a discount price.

Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) and a growing number of national security experts are calling on Congress to consider using letters of marque and reprisal, a power written into the Constitution that allows the United States to hire private citizens to keep international waters safe.

Used heavily during the Revolution and the War of 1812, letters of marque serve as official warrants from the government, allowing privateers to seize or destroy enemies, their loot and their vessels in exchange for bounty money.

The letters also require would-be thrill seekers to post a bond promising to abide by international rules of war.

In a YouTube video earlier this week, Paul suggested lawmakers consider issuing letters, which could relieve American naval ships from being the nation’s primary pirate responders — a free-market solution to make the high seas safer for cargo ships.

“I think if every potential pirate knew this would be the case, they would have second thoughts because they could probably be blown out of the water rather easily if those were the conditions,” Paul said.

Theoretically, hiring bounty hunters would also be a cheaper option.

National security experts estimate that this week’s ship captain rescue by Navy SEALs cost tens of millions, although a Navy spokesman says the military cannot confirm the exact cost of the mission.

Instead, privateers would be incentivized to patrol the ocean looking for key targets — and money would be paid only to the contractor who completed the job.

“If we have 100 American wanna-be Rambos patrolling the seas, it’s probably a good way of getting the job done,” said Competitive Enterprise Institute senior fellow and security expert Eli Lehrer. “Right now we have a Navy designed mostly to fight other navies. The weapons we have are all excellent, but they may not be the best ones to fight these kinds of pirates. The only cost under letters of marque would be some sort of bounty for the pirates.”

According to Senate historians, Congress hasn’t issued a letter of marquee since the War of 1812, but the Confederate States of America issued them during the Civil War to deliver supplies behind enemy lines. There are also some indications that a letter was granted to a flying band of armed civilians during World War II to operate the Resolute, a Goodyear Blimp used to patrol the ocean for enemy submarines, but the issuance isn’t apparent in the Congressional Record.

If Congress were to revisit the antiquated process, a serious makeover would be required.

In the past, privateers were allowed to keep the ship and treasure they captured in an enemy encounter.

“That isn’t a viable way of funding in today’s world,” said Lehrer. “These pirates don’t really have treasure chests, and their money is tied up in Swiss Bank accounts. Congress would probably have to attach sizable bounties to people.”

Bounties are not a new idea — there is still a $25 million bounty on Osama bin Laden, and millions have been awarded by the government for other enemy captures.



The U.S. State Department earlier this month put a $5 million bounty on the head of the top Pakistani Taliban leader, and even local police departments use rewards to solve cold cases.

University of Oregon economics professor Bill Harbaugh argues the setup could potentially work better than some of the United States’ relationships with modern-day security contractors.

“Obviously, this is somewhat like the contract the government had with Blackwater, except we forgot the bond part of the contract, he said. “If Congress had used this contract from 1776, it would have been more sophisticated than the one they issued with Blackwater.”

Harbaugh’s fifth great-grandfather, Silas Talbot, worked as an early privateer for the United States in 1780 after serving in the Revolutionary War. His letter of marque shows he set out with 12 carriage guns and a crew of 50 men to attack and seize cargo ships coming from Great Britain on the high seas.

Could it really work again?

“It may work in the sense that if you give people incentives to fight piracy, you’ll see more action taken against it,” said Andrew Grotto, a senior national security analyst with the Center for American Progress. “The ocean is huge and, practically speaking, there’s no way the Navy can prevent piracy; it’s too big. But just given the experience in Iraq with private contractors, that effort showcases the difficulties dealing with folks who aren’t answerable to anyone but shareholders.”

But Paul has already thought through a number of these updates.

Days after Sept. 11, Paul introduced legislation allowing President Bush to allow private citizens to go after Osama bin Laden and other identified terrorists and put a bounty price on the heads of targets responsible for the New York attacks. Contractors would also be required to post a play-by-the-rules bond and turn over any terrorists — and their seized property —to U.S. authorities.

“The Constitution gives Congress the power to issue letters of marque and reprisal when a precise declaration of war is impossible due to the vagueness of the enemy,” Paul wrote in a press release. “Once letters of marque and reprisal are issued, every terrorist is essentially a marked man.”

But national security experts and legal analysts warn that applying a colonial-era policy to a modern-day problem could be wrought with legal pitfalls that the Founding Fathers never encountered.

If bounty hunters chase pirates into territorial coastal waters or on to the shore of another country, the problem would fall under the jurisdiction of that country. And any plundering activity that takes place in coastal waters is no longer considered piracy, according to College of William and Mary national security law professor Linda Malone.

Not to mention that there’s also no clear indication where and how the captured pirates should be prosecuted.

“You have to find a stable court system nearby to have them tried for these offenses, but that can be quite complicated,” Malone said. “The fact that the pirates are from Somalia doesn’t make them state actors. They are doing this for private gain.”

And how to determine exactly who is a pirate — and what constitutes pirate activity — could get fuzzy.

“What happens when a ship flying under Congress accidentally takes out an aid ship bound for Somalia?” Grotto said. “At what time does an act seem pirate-like enough to cross the line? Do we really want these snap judgments being made on the fly in waters thousands of miles away from Washington? This is not Johnny Depp we’re dealing with.”

from yahoo news

Originally Posted by Dreadnought

*Only way to govern my friend, by the people and for the people since it is from their pocket you recieve the funds to do your job as President, Prime Minister or other.

Thing is: the people isn't a monolith of free and conscious individuals. It's a conglomerate of power groups. Everything from the local group of gossip girls to the Presbyterian Church to the MS-13 is one.

Originally Posted by Dreadnought

Yep.

Why? Do they further ideologies?