Thomas Jeffeson Barbary PiratesFollow

You are missing one of the realities of the situation up to now.

Most large commercial ships are owned and registered out of tiny tax havens, little island nations with no regulations. The shipping companies are making a fortune by not having to comply with the safety and condition standards of first world nations, nor pay their company tax. The conditions for most workers aboard international ships are little better than slave labour. It keeps our imports cheaper and shipping more profitable for owners.

So when ships get hijacked by pirates... the owners HAVE no army or navy to call on. Not without making big fat liars out of all their legal documents of ownership, and their piddly tiny taxes they've paid to a small island with some palm trees, some houses and shops, some fishing boats, and that's it.

So far, each company losing a few ships and cargo a year to pirates, and having staff sit out for 4 to 6 months while ransoms are negotioated, partially gets covered by insurance, and partially gets written off as a cost of business. The minute pirates are more expensive to shipping company businesses than first world taxes and employment conditions, all these ships are going to be registered to a first world nation with a navy to go crying to.

In theory right now, there are hardly any American, European or Australian owned ships. These pirates certainly picked a bad one this time around. They might even still be unaware of why this one was different, and why they got attacked over it, instead of a big crate of money choppered in. It's going to be interesting how all this plays out now.

Are you speaking ill of the military might of Liberia?

I thought we only cared about our own ships, right?

I wonder how many Navymen joined the Navy because they dreamed of fighting pirates when they were kids?

Out of my window looking in the night
I could see the barges' flickering lights
Suddenly went a lighthouse in the air
And the beck'ning beams went everwhere

Barges, I would like to go with you
I would like to sail the ocean blue
Barges, is their treasure in your hold?
Do you fight with pirates brave and bold?

Edited, Apr 14th 2009 12:35pm by catwho

Plus Johnny Depp fangirls would mob the White House.

Other than, say the Indian Government? It's not like the US is the first to fight the Pirates. This is the first time a US flagged ship has been attacked. The commitment of US naval vessels to help deal with piracy in that region was made last year, as well as many of the international agreements related to fighting said pirates.



Well. Yes and no. The resolutions (there's a whole list of them, so feel free to read at your leisure. 1851 is a good starting point btw) allow for interested parties to join together and share resources to fight the pirates, and allow (in theory) the ability of an "official" international force to chase pirates into territorial waters. But I'm not aware that any such agreement or coalition has been formed, so it technically prevents any single nation from doing so on their own. The combination of resolutions and other existing maritime laws effectively require that a naval vessel catch the pirates in the act. So. Had our ship arrived while the pirates were on the US flagged ship, they could indeed fight and kill the pirates as they wish.

The problem in this case is that the pirates were no longer on the US flagged ship when the US navel vessel arrived. Technically, we killed three men who were on their own ship and not actually engaged in piracy at the time. That they had a hostage and intended to ransom him for cash is beside the point. The resolution allowing for action only includes acts of piracy.

It's a silly distinction, but it's potentially relevant, doubly so since we didn't capture, but rather killed (one might say assassinated) the three men.

It was absolutely the correct call, and I applaud Obama for making it. But let's be honest, once in the situation that call was pretty much a no-brainer. The challenge comes down the line. Does he push for ROEs which allow US naval forces to do this sort of thing in the future? Does he wait for the international community to get off it's collective butts to decide to deal with the pirates more aggressively? Or does he press US interests?

Heck. Is it something we want to do anyway? As someone pointed out, the reason most ships are flagged to small nations is for tax purposes. The companies get to avoid taxes to large industrial nations by not flying their flags. Part of me tend to think that they should pay for that decision and if they want the protection of the worlds navies, perhaps they should decide to fly their flags for protection (and pay for it)?

That's a bit more complex of an issue though, but it's certainly relevant here.



Yeah. The French are about the only one's though. And the Indians. But, as I said, most of the world is perfectly willing to just let the companies pay the ransoms and not escalate the conflict. Heck. There are people in the US who think what we did was dangerous because it'll just make the pirates more violent in future attacks. And they're arguably correct...


I just happen to think that "avoiding escalation" isn't a good way to resolve a conflict. It's a great way to loose the conflict though.

That's a sexy RPD.

Fighting pirates with pirates.

Inaccurate, I think. It is a hairbit different, commissioning privateers to go capture/sink vessels/crews who take otherwise innocent vessels/crews hostage and demand ransom.

The two seem exclusive from one another to me; one committed an unprovoked act of belligerence, the other is hired after the fact to prevent it from happening again.

EDIT: That might just be me and the whole death penalty thing going again. eesh.

EDIT # 2: I am not a reptile.

Edited, Apr 15th 2009 3:59pm by KinleyArdal

Edited, Apr 15th 2009 4:00pm by KinleyArdal

It still could be, if you're into that kind of thing. Foreign legion, anyone?

But the whole mercenary army thing worked out so well in Iraq, I'm sure a mercenary navy would work out just as well.