JEFFERSON AND THE BARBARY PIRATES: The Deep State?

[DIRTYSECRET]

Jefferson built a Navy that all Americans paid for while it was the merchant class that got most of the benefits. Europe wouldn't fight to free their captured people and offered us no help. Washington(entangling alliances) wanted to pay a higher ransom and John Adams fought against the naval buildup. Is the issue settled after 200+ years? We've got our own oil. We can turn the whole muslim world into glass, something that just may be necessary at some date. The Crusades were too ragtag to engage in whack-a-mole. Tell me what Trump should do.

[Parmenio]

Jefferson did NOT build the U.S. naval ships you are referring to. In fact, he was strongly opposed to building them. The naval ships that fought in the Barbary War were built during the Federalist administrations of Washington and Adams - Jefferson’s political enemies.

[Parmenio]

John Adams was a strong supporter of the naval build up. You have stood history on its head!

[Psalm 73]

It's not just about oil. It's about keeping the sea-lanes open for commerce, mainly our commerce.
We still have the pre-eminent economy on the earth, and the US Navy enables that.
Do others benefit also? Sure, but the bottom line is America's economic integrity.

Screw Red China. They are teetering now, just a little push....

[wbarmy]

Merchant class built and maintained a trade “empire” which enriched and strengthened all of America. Maintaining the seaways for the free transport of goods and commerce benefits us and others.

The use of USA military vessels to protect those routes is beneficial to all of us. Just because other nations get a free ride on our protection does not mean that it is not worthwhile.

[DIRTYSECRET]

Still what would Trump do?

[NohSpinZone]

From the halls of Montezuma,

To the shores of Tripoli...

[Reily]

If you study Jefferson in detail your admiration diminishes and your regard for some of the Federalists increases!

[Parmenio]

I completely agree with you.

[rollo tomasi]

Jefferson wrote the "entangling alliances" phrase not Washington whose farewell addressed the avoidance of "permanent alliances".

Barbary pirates were clients of the Ottoman Empire and considered a trade problem. Once taken care of, of course the merchant owners made out. Did you want Jefferson to become some sort of totalitarian and confiscate merchants' profits from trading? I don't like paying for roads but like driving on them. Should we confiscate the wealth of all the contractors and builders?

[Boston Blackie]

John Adams fought against the naval buildup.

Where the hell does that come from. Someone has turned history upside down.

[DIRTYSECRET]

Let’s see. Jefferson OPPOSED to building the Navy? He met Adams and some muzzle bigwig in 1787. Decided he was going to go to war with them should he lead our country. At the time we had no navy.
Sea lanes open? It was James Baker under 41’ who said oil at market prices prompting the left’s ‘no blood for oil’ chant. Others benefit to which we are no longer going to be the world’s chumps-thanks to DJT. 41 put an alliance together at least on paper for those reluctant. Confiscate wealth? No but Trump talked about taking the oil if we do it again. Those contractors would not argue.

[paddles]

I commend the book “Six Frigates” by Ian Toll to anyone interested in this period in our country’s history. It’s a great read!

[JohnBrowdie]

history.fail.spectacularly.

[Reily]

whatever

[Mollypitcher1]

Remember Commodore Stephen Decatur.

[Louis Foxwell]

Trump’s plan is more strategy than LRP. the underlying principle is the good of our country as measured in economic terms. So long as this is accomplished with fair play and regard for Christian morality there is no problem. Trump is a pragmatic genius with a strong set of moral values.
A Pence presidency in 6 years will usher in foundational faith practices as implemented by the Washington presidency. We are on our way to restoring our republic.

[catnipman]

“Jefferson built a Navy that all Americans paid for while it was the merchant class that got most of the benefits.”

hogwash. Fighting the Islamists instead of paying them ransom like the rest of the lilly-livered so-called world powers, established the U.S. as a world power with all the attendant benefits to the populous

btw, i believe Jefferson fought the Islamists because he felt the U.S. government didn’t have the money to pay them, i.e., Jefferson elected to use our navy instead of raising taxes on the populous ...

[catnipman]

“If you study Jefferson in detail your admiration diminishes and your regard for some of the Federalists increases!”

totally ...

[rollo tomasi]

Dear Sir … I ask a fleet of 150 guns, the one half of which shall be in constant cruise. This fleet built … will cost 450,000 pounds sterling. It’s annual expence is 300 pounds sterling a gun, including every thing: this will be 45,000 pounds sterling a year. … Were we to charge all this to the Algerine war it would amount to little more than we must pay if we buy peace. But as it is proper and necessary that we should establish a small marine force (even were we to buy a peace from the Algerines,) and as that force laid up in our dockyards would cost us half as much annually as if kept in order for service, we have a right to say that only 22,500 pounds sterling per annum should be charged to the Algerine war. - Thomas Jefferson from Paris in a letter to John Adams 1786 on behalf of appealing to the Continental Congress for consideration).

Also, your are confusing commissioning per certain instances with the establishment of standing armies (That was constantly leading to drawn out wars, especially in Europe). Of course you conveniently forget that Adams promoted paying the bribes. As you can see from the letter, Jefferson long-standing solution was eventually solving that situation through force which he ordered during his presendency.