Piracy is a criminal act, not a military one. Some folks get confused because it is usually opposed by the world's Navies, not by some sort of seagoing police force. As good as it might make one feel, simply shooting the pirates would be the equivalent of vigilantism.
The applicable laws are those of the country whose military ship was involved, so long as the conflict occurs in international waters. Each ship must follow it's country's law. We here in the US really have not dealt seriously and systematically with pirates for nearly 200 years - then during the two Barbary Wars. Thus our laws are a bit archaic but are sufficiently robust that they should prove useful in the current conflict. They are, however, OUR laws. Canadian law is different. I, for one, shall be interested to see what the Canadian PM does about them.
For the most part, modern piracy always occurs (or at least worsens) in the presence of power vacuums (i.e. ineffective government). Such is the case now around the horn of Africa, and such was the case almost 200 years ago along the Barbary coast of Africa as the Ottoman Empire declined.
This stuff interests me for obvious reasons. I mention the information below in the hope that it might interest folks here too. To sample a little flavor of the history of piracy as seen from the US perspective without spending a long time reading, I recommend reading the "Barbary Wars" entry in Wikipedia. While there, also look up the entry for Captain William Bainbridge, USN. He featured prominently in the Barbary Wars. His namesake, the USS Bainbridge, was the USN ship involved in the current scuffle.
Thomas P. Donnelly
CAPT, USNR (ret)
Quote:
Originally Posted by sailingdog
Ummm.. why are we letting them leave with their boat... Scuttling the boat should be a minimum... shooting them, if caught in an actual act of piracy, should also be a minimum. The pirates need to learn that piracy is NOT AN ACCEPTABLE WAY TO MAKE A LIVING.
|
Connect with Facebook
