Andrew C. McCarthy: Pirates Test the ‘Rule of Law’

National Review Online ^ | April 10, 2009 | Andrew C. McCarthy

[kellynla]

“but what exactly is the solution?”

no need in telling the world what my fellow Marines are gonna do...
you are AWARE that the muzzies view these websites...

[pnh102]

what part of “quit bothering me” don't you comprehend?

If my comments bother you then you are more than welcome to quit the thread, or ignore me.

[70th Division]

Sorry. I play percentatges. I will go into a firefight with a guy who HAS practiced or has been there before. You stay with the low percentage “We don’t need no stinkin’ practice. Most perps DON’T practice. That would be the advantage you have.

[Mr Rogers]

I never said, “Don’t practice.” In my case, I’d fired perhaps 10,000 rounds thru the .22...but practice on the range is NOT the same as previous experience.

Still, in ANY firefight, I’d rather be armed than not. And THAT is the point - arm the ships with something so that fighting back is possible.

[browardchad]

 Why don’t the crews of these ships pack heat?

"Article 110 of the U.N.'s Law of the Sea Convention -- ratified by most nations, but not by the U.S. -- enjoins naval ships from simply firing on suspected pirates. Instead, they are required first to send over a boarding party to inquire of the pirates whether they are, in fact, pirates. A recent U.N. Security Council resolution allows foreign navies to pursue pirates into Somali waters -- provided Somalia's tottering government agrees -- but the resolution expires next week. As for the idea of laying waste, Stephen Decatur-like, to the pirate's prospering capital port city of Eyl, this too would require U.N. authorization. Yesterday, a shippers' organization asked NATO to blockade the Somali coast. NATO promptly declined"

-- from WSJ essay linked by McCarthy at NRO, well worth reading:  Why Don't We Hang Pirates Anymore?

We haven't yet ratified the LOS Convention, but it's on the transnational progressive agenda of Obama and Congressional Democrats.

[kellynla]

And I thank you for your service, BUT you know as well as the next guy who ever saw combat, it’s one thing to be trained to kill and quite another to do the deed!

I just get tired of reading these posts from these FR “keyboard cowboys” who if they were ever in a “firefight” they’d probably shiite all over themselves!

I guess I’ve just seen too many dead Marines...
these posters throw around war like it’s some kind of computer game!

[70th Division]

Yes we agree! No 22s though. LOL

[Mr Rogers]

I thank you for your service as well. My Dad was killed in a helicopter crash in Vietnam in ‘72...his 3rd war. He never told me anything about his combat experiences - although my Mom told us later that he had nightmares regularly. And he never told my Mom what they were about.

I have no ideas what tactics would be best for dealing with this problem. I do believe that it is better for the Captain to die, if need be, than for the US to be seen as weak, or unable to act because one human life is too precious for us to protect all the thousands who will follow that path in years to come.

[rbg81]

no need in telling the world what my fellow Marines are gonna do...you are AWARE that the muzzies view these websites...

---

Oh, absolutely. In fact, I’m sure those pirates are busily trolling FR in order to devise a Course of Action. Hell, I might even be one. [/sarc]

Seriously, that is one weak a$$ answer. So you know what your fellow marines are going to do? Really? You can say whatever you like here—it doesn’t mean that the AD military leadership is going to follow your advice one iota. If you don’t know what to do, that’s fine—but you come off sounding like a blowhard.

BTW—I am retired AF. And I know enough to understand that once you’re off AD, you’re out of the loop. And the longer you’re out, the less your opinion is worth. You can speculate all you want and it doesn’t mean Jack.

[Gritty]

Why don’t the crews of these ships pack heat?

1. Their maritime insurance carriers will steeply raise their insurance rates.

2. In many ports it is illegal for civilian vessels to enter if they possess weapons.

3. Various International Laws and Treaties have progressively hamstrung civilian maritime self-defense. IOW, when guns are outlawed, only outlaws (or pirates) will have guns.

4. Most carriers have standing orders for the Captain and crew to give pirates what they want and not resist. It's a "liability" and lawyer thing, making it cheaper to surrender and submit to robbery and kidnapping or murder than resist and face years of court costs and lawsuit liability. The insurance companies have built "ransoms" into their operating costs.

Frankly, the seas and seafaring choke points are increasingly dangerous places, and most of the really dangerous areas are infested by Muslim pirates who operate with impunity. They prey not only on commercial shipping but private vessels as well.

[rbg81]

Yes, that is a good paragraph. Where is it from? I’d like to reference it.

I do agree the West has become so civilized that we’ve lost our edge. Our adversaries smell weakness and our response doesn’t help.

IMHO, a big part of the problem is that there is almost no incentive for the pirates to stop what they are doing. You need to deter them on several levels. Plaing superior weapons & trained personnel on the ships would help. But that would raise the cost of shipping and related wrongful-death lawsuits. So, you also need to make an example of these pirate communities so that no one would contemplate doing it for some time to come. Unfortunately, that would not be perceived as “civilized”, so it will not happen. Pinprick strikes might be just, but they seem to have zero long term deterrent value.

[Vaduz]

Obama’s rule of law is catching on around the world rule #1 there is no law wing it.

[Lucretia Borgia]

And we have a winner!

I read this book recently. If you haven't read it, you'd probably appreciate it.

It's well-researched and supports and confirms your points, plus adds two more. One is that a U.S.-flagged ship with an all-U.S. crew has become a real rarity these days, and the Indonesian and Chinese pirates in particular have gotten really good at planting insiders on prospective target ships. Arm the crew, and you also arm the "inside" men.

Another is that in this era of bigger-than-supertankers, owners are more afraid of gunfire possibly starting a fire and thereby causing them to lose the ship, the cargo, and years of Exxon Valdez-type environmental lawsuits than they are of paying ransom to pirates.

I guess it all depends on who you'd rather pay ransom and tribute to: a bunch of pirates or Greenpeace. And the advantage the pirates hold here is that you can reason with pirates.

[Rocky]

The paragraph I quoted is from the column by Andrew McCarthy in the original post. Go to the link at the top of this thread.

[CRBDeuce]

Pirates Test the ‘Rule of Law’

Now enough about Obama testing the rule of law...that's racist! ohh.

[CRBDeuce]

There remains something in the American character that won’t slide so easily into the straitjacket.

Well spoken....words to live by!

[CRBDeuce]

yep....we LOST, They won.......until the repeal of LOST!

[CRBDeuce]

wow...

[CRBDeuce]

payment will be in Euros...

[CRBDeuce]

When it wears off fear will set in and with fear, doubts and then a different perspective on reality.

good points, and they're already at 'different perspective on reality'! they dumped their satphone overboard, thinking that somehow it was 'tipping off' the good captain! These guys are amateurs taking advantage of the new LOST world! UN and Obozo offerings notwithstanding! HS dropouts with jon boats trumping the world's navies, holding hundreds of 'hostages' to LOST. Since the 'elders' will continue to enjoy the world's 'generosity' to their 'coast guard', waiting for them to do anything will be like waiting for Obozo to do anything!