Posted on 01/28/2025 9:21:45 AM PST by Red Badger
U.S. Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) has an amazing plan to fight the cartels: bring back legal pirating, which is fully authorized in our Constitution.
Check out his thread on how it will work:
1/ What Are Letters Of Marque And Reprisal And How Could They Be Used To Weaken Drug Cartels?
2/ Letters of marque and reprisal are government-issued commissions that authorize private citizens (privateers) to perform acts that would otherwise be considered piracy, like attacking enemy ships during wartime Privateers are rewarded with a cut of the loot they 'bring home'
3/ Legal Basis in the U.S. The U.S. Constitution authorizes these commissions in Article I, Section 8, giving Congress the power to 'grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal' While Congress hasn't issued one in over a century, the authority to do so still exists
4/ Modern Context: Mexican Drug Cartels Using letters of marque could be a novel, but effective response to unique threats posed by drug cartels — especially in response to threats by the cartels to target U.S. planes returning illegal immigrants to their countries of origin
5/ How Could They Be Applied? - Authorization: Congress could issue letters of marque and reprisal authorizing private security firms or specially trained civilians to intercept cartel operations, particularly those involving drug shipments or human trafficking across borders - Targets: Focus on disrupting supply lines, capturing high-value targets, or seizing assets like boats, vehicles, cash, gold, or equipment used in criminal activities
6/ Advantages - Flexibility: Private entities operate with more agility than the government, adapting quickly with the tactics of cartels - Cost: Would reduce the financial burden on taxpayers, as privateers receive only a cut of what they recover & return to the U.S.
7/ Criticism The use of letters of marque and reprisal would undoubtedly draw criticism, especially from those inclined to elevate abstract, often-inchoate principles of what they deem 'international law' above the sovereign interests of the United States
8/ Dismissing the possible use of letters of marque to combat Mexican drug cartels — either on the basis of 'international law' or otherwise — overlooks the clear and present threat posed by those cartels to the U.S. This could prove to be an effective alternative to war
9/ We have no desire to go to war with our southern neighbor But we also can't ignore the fact that drug cartels are now threatening to target U.S. planes deporting illegal aliens That sounds like a great reason to consider issuing letters of marque and reprisal
10/ Letters of marque and reprisal have worked well for the U.S. — and countless other countries — in the past We'd be wrong not to consider using them against the cartels
We're entering into an extraordinary period of history. Think of Queen Elizabeth I and the famous privateer Sir Francis Drake.
So what do you say, folks? Want to come down to the border and be a pirate privateer with me?
Just waiting to see how many idiots there are, and what the scope of the problem is.
Looks pretty bad.
“Privateering” was the mark of a weak nation, attempting to extend the appearance of legitimate authority to those that were not much more than ‘nationalist’ pirates.
Left to their own devices and tactics, the thin veneer of moral authority would quickly wear through, with resulting acts that would make Blackwater types look like angels.
And who literally expects that any captured or cornered privateers will not be ‘rescued’ by regular military forces - would the US stomach seeing these paramilitary proxies tortured and killed, and do nothing?
That’s what old privateers got - usually disclaimed or ignored. They were cutouts to protect a weak nation.
I’ll double-down on this - anyone advocating ‘privateers’ is either ignorant or an idiot, or both.
So basically, putting a bounty on the Cartels and their people.
I could see some enterprising ex-SpecOps guys getting in on this
Only drawback could be massive amounts of bloodshed, should the cartel field personnel fight back and start shooting anyone that approaches
They filmed the movie “Patton” with the intention that the viewers would wind up not liking Patton. Instead, the opposite happened. It was supposed to have anti-war connotations, as it was made during the height of The Vietnam War.
How would the privateers get paid? They can’t sell the weapons and drugs they confiscate
Ok, let me clarify I am not talking about our borders at all. I am talking about taking the fight to the cartels on their own home turf wherever they are located. Trust me, there are private organizations who have all the funds, equipment, and resources they need already to go.
If a privateer wants to take full risk for this themselves as a business why not let them? It is all on them... All they have to do is abide by the contract of the Letters. Basically a Cartel against Cartel action but one is considered legal by us with limits to the what the end result will be.
They cannot take over and replace the target with the very same illegal activity when they are done eliminating the target organization.
You answered your own question in #62.
> They filmed the movie “Patton” with the intention that the viewers would wind up not liking Patton. <
I didn’t know that. But I’m not surprised.
> Instead, the opposite happened. <
I suppose George C. Scott deserves much of the credit for that. He played Patton as a somewhat flawed general, but brilliant - a guy you’d certainly want on your team.
RRRR matey. Blow me down. Shiver me timbers. Yo Ho Ho and a bottle of Rum. This plan might work.
“Privateering” was the mark of a weak nation, attempting to extend the appearance of legitimate authority…”
It’s in the Constitution. That makes it legitimate.
“And who literally expects that any captured or cornered privateers will not be ‘rescued’ by regular military forces.”
I would certainly hope so. A few passes from an A-10 or Predator would probably do it.
“That’s what old privateers got - usually disclaimed or ignored.”
This ain’t the old days, Skippy.
“I’ll double down on this.”
Stupid usually does that.
L
I’m not foolish, I am educated about what they are. There are conditions in the contract.
https://constitution.org/1-Activism/mil/lmr/lmr.htm
I saw him on Benny Johnson today discussing this. It’s very interesting.
Something else interesting... On War Room I heard that PDJT is floating a new idea of dealing with repeat offenders. “Farm them out” to other countries to be imprisoned there. Two words for them: “Turkish prison”. That could make them straighten up and fly right.
However, I would only consider using it if the drug cartels become a problem.
—
So far cartels have fired on BP agents, set IEDs along highways in Shasta county, CA. Are they problems? Or would you prefer to wait until the cartels set more IEDs along highways near you?
They will only be allowed to use A-10s for near border operations and AC-130Js for long range penetration strikes. And the Marines can use 81mm mortars and HIMARS cluster munitions where necessary.
Its actually a really good idea. You just give them a cut of what they seize and if they get caught or killed not the government’s problem.
“Privateers are rewarded with a cut of the loot they bring home”
—
“So they get to have some of the cocaine and fentanyl?”
—
Cartels do not count their money, they weight it. Privateers are only allowed to take their own body weight in cash.
. Special Forces are perfect for lightning raids. Get in, get the job done, get out
—
Just take into account that cartels are very well-trained, battle hardened troops with heavy weapons they use frequently on each other and the Mexican Army.
> Just take into account that cartels are very well-trained, battle hardened troops with heavy weapons… <
True that. I’m too lazy to look for it now, but awhile back I watched a video of a cartel armored column moving down a Mexican road. An armored column!
We are lucky (or perhaps blessed) that Trump won last November. Otherwise the Mexico of today might have been our tomorrow.
larrytown wrote:
“
So, Mike Lee has a drinking problem?
Sheer idiocy.
“
It’s in the Constitution.
Good enough for me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.