Posted on 09/14/2001 11:15:24 PM PDT by Uriel1975
As you've probably heard, Bin Laden's al-Qaeda terrorist organization is estimated at as many as 20,000 followers in a loose-knit collective spanning as many as 37 countries. While Federal military action is entirely justified against the actual nation-States proven to be active sponsors and harbors of organized terrorist operations, surely we do not expect to declare National War on all of these countries where recruitment, support, and training cells exist. Nor should we trust the (shall we say, not 100% perfect) resources of US counter-terrorist Intelligence, hamstrung in their operations by the "rules of engagement" imposed upon them by the nature of their work and by their host countries to effectively eliminate these cancers. So -- what are we to do?
The Issuance of Letters of Marque and Reprisal is a fully-Constitutional Federal Power which was specifically intended for the prosecution of Vengeance against the "stateless terrorists" of the Founder's day -- Pirates, Brigands, private armies, military adventurers, etc.
The purpose of a Letter of Marque and Reprisal is to create a financial incentive for private-sector military professionals -- trained mercenaries with an ability to travel individually or in small groups without detection -- to bring justice to those "stateless terrorists" identified as enemies of the citizenry. To gather intelligence on the ground, hunt these individuals down where they are hiding, and apprehend or eliminate them in their nests. The advantages of these private, paramilitary units (which are NOT mutually exclusive to a purposeful and directed Military response against defined physical targets) may suggest themselves already; so let's address the disadvantages first:
-- so does the US Criminal Justice system, every year... but we still prosecute Murder, because Murders must be avenged. But - bearing in mind for a moment that this is not a perfect world - ask yourself this: Who is likely to kill more innocent people -- a private mercenary unit who is looking for a specific individual so that they'll get paid, and knows that getting caught "in-country" could leave them at the mercies of a hostile foreign kangaroo court if they hit the wrong target..... or a B-52 bomber at 20,000 feet??
-- They already did try to kill the President (and Congress, too), and the soon-to-be-coming mass bombing raids against diverse and sundry Jihadistans aren't very likely to make them cozy up to us and play nice.
-- September 11, 2001. And what is stopping them from doing it again, using different tactics, against different civilian targets is... what? The point is bloody well moot.
-- Yes, and I'm proposing to pay them a heck of a lot more than the average 18-year old infantryman we're about to put into harm's way - and only if they volunteer for the mission, at that.
-- Puh-leeze. Congress just busted the budget to the tune of $40 Billion for what may turn out to be the preliminary battles in a long war. We could bounty the heads of every single al-Qaeda operative at $1/2 million apiece for a quarter of that. And amounts averaging that level are probably appropriate, given a desire for swift and effective retribution, and the dangers that private contractors will face.
Those objections addressed, let's now consider a proposal.
RESOLVED, That the Senators and Representatives of the United States in Congress Assembled, acting by the Powers granted them under Article 1, Section 8, Clause 11 of the Constitution of the United States of America, do hereby issue and grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal against those agents and operatives of the Al-Qaeda Terrorist Organization, such as the Department of Defense acting on the direction of the President in consultation with this Congress, shall specify. Terms:
In support of the prosecution of these Letters of Marque and Reprisal, the Congress of the United States directs the Department of Defense to provide registered contractors with such armaments, equipment, logistical support, and intelligence as the contractors shall reasonably require; and may provide such discrete transportation and assistance in the prosecution of these contracts as the Department of Defense shall deem appropriate. However, in the case of capture by a hostile agency, the Department of Defense shall have the right to disavow any knowledge of, or responsibility for, the contractors in question; especially in the case of any contractor action against targets not specified for Reprisal by the Department of Defense.
I like it. I like it a lot.
No new programs. No new regulations. No new restrictions on Liberty.
BTTT. Congrats on a job well done. You deserve a bounty yourself for pushing this.
3) that good innocent people aren't taken out?
It's a war, remember? Shit happens. This will produce some collateral damage of course, but a lot less than more traditional tools like napalm do.
To hell with this "21st century war" bullshit. It's a 12th century opponent, lets fight an 18th century war!
I think it might be best to restrict it to American citizens though ... if the Israelis like the idea, they can always copy it.
There are arguments for and against the idea. On the one hand, we don't want to utilize undependable contractors. Loose lips sink ships. On the other hand, we do want to avail ourselves of the best and broadest pool of mercenaries available, for maximum speed and efficiency of execution. The UK has a LOT of counter-terror experience among their ex-military. And the Israelis have some mean fighters who could probably be motivated to tear some vicious holes in Bin Laden's organization -- remember, the Israeli Druze Arab minority is a persecuted offshoot of Islam which is fanatically loyal to Israel (Israel protects them from the mainstream Islamic Arabs, for one thing). Would be nice if some of those guys were on our side in this snake-hunt.
Bottom line: Let's get this Bill to Congress. Whether the final bill is US mercenaries only, or US+UK, or US+UK+Canada+Israelis, I'll support whichever version we can get to a vote. You too?
I had previously written my Congresscritters suggesting that known terrorist camps be removed one by one with strategic nuclear weapons, until people all across the Third World start to figure out that if they've got this sort of neighbor they'd best go rend them limb from limb if they want to save their own skins.
This proposal will cause far less "killing of inappropriate folks" and "bacll;ash" than either conventional warfare or my proposal.
Mea Culpa!!
SOURCE: The Forward
July 31, 1998
Alisa's Marque
The express power to "grant letters of marque and reprisal"... is often a measure of peace, to prevent the necessity of a resort to war. Thus, individuals of a nation sometimes suffer from the depredations of foreign potentates; and yet it may not be deemed either expedient or necessary to redress such grievances by a general declaration of war. Under such circumstances the law of nations authorizes the sovereign of the injured individual to grant him this mode of redress, whenever justice is denied to him by the state, to which the party, who has done the injury, belongs. In this case the letters of marque and reprisal...contain an authority to seize the bodies or goods of the subjects of the offending state, wherever they may be found, until satisfaction is made for the injury....
That excerpt from the Commentaries on the Constitution by Justice Story was wired to us the other day by Stephen Flatow, the father of the young Jewish woman from New Jersey, Alisa Flatow, killed in 1995 by an Iranian-funded terrorist attack at Israel. We had called him to ask about letters of marque and reprisal because of a little debate that has arisen over the now-famous lawsuit he has brought against Iran under the new anti-terrorism law. A lot of us have been concerned that it's poor public policy to deal with terrorist states by litigation. Or, as someone asked us the other day, why is the country transferring Article I matters to Article III courts. It was a reference to Article I of the Constitution, in which powers are delegated to the Congress, and Article I, which vests the judicial power in one Supreme Court and such inferior courts as Congress sets up. The question sent us scurrying to the Constitution to see just what the Article One powers are. It turns out that in the same clause in which Congress is granted the power to declare war it is also given the power to grant letters of marque and reprisal. They are license to private persons to seize enemy vessels and individuals and goods on the high seas. Letters of marque have gone out of use since the middle part of the last century, but the authority is still there in the Constitution. At the bottom of his wire to us Mr. Flatow writes: 'Maybe the Anti-terrorism Act is a letter of marque with a fancy title." Of course, he didn't mean that in the literal sense, but the point is there is plenty of Constitutional bedrock on which to base the idea that Mr. Flatow can be empowered to carry on this fight. Justice Story adds, incidentally, that the power of reprisal is "plainly derived from that of making war" and "often ultimately leads to a formal denunciation of war, if the injury is unredressed."
SEE ALSO:
"REGULATING THE NEW PRIVATEERS: PRIVATE MILITARY SERVICE CONTRACTING AND THE MODERN MARQUE AND REPRISAL CLAUSE" by Matt Gaul here.
If you haven't already done so, you should consider faxing your "modest proposal" to all of the conservative and libertarian pundits, as well as to any members of Congress who might be sympathetic to this idea. The membership of the Liberty Caucus might be a good place to start. As to whether it would help to send a copy to the conservative/ libertarian think tanks either( CATO, Heritage, Reason foundation, etc.), and to as many some conservative economic and Constitutional scholars such as Walter Williams and Thomas Sowell.
Yes. I was just trying to figure out what variant is most likely to pass.
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.