Ron Paul vs PIRATES, Thinking outside the box

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: theflyingpig
This is brilliant. Using private citizens to take care of the pirate problem is an excellent, and cost effective strategy. It also keeps the media out of the picture, which will allow the pirates to be slaughtered like dogs. Even though the US military is heavily armed, the pirates don't fear them like they should. The pirates *will* fear private citizens, who are heavily armed and, most importantly, they will be effectively accountable to no one. No media = tortured and slaughtered pirates. If this plan is enacted, the fish stocks in the waters off Somalia will be well fed. Well fed indeed.

And just think how easy it will be to get rid of the mistakes. No media = no accountability!

 

[theflyingpig]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: theflyingpig
This is brilliant. Using private citizens to take care of the pirate problem is an excellent, and cost effective strategy. It also keeps the media out of the picture, which will allow the pirates to be slaughtered like dogs. Even though the US military is heavily armed, the pirates don't fear them like they should. The pirates *will* fear private citizens, who are heavily armed and, most importantly, they will be effectively accountable to no one. No media = tortured and slaughtered pirates. If this plan is enacted, the fish stocks in the waters off Somalia will be well fed. Well fed indeed.

And just think how easy it will be to get rid of the mistakes. No media = no accountability!

Exactly. The basic rule will be don't be a pirate, don't look like a pirate. This climate of fear is exactly what is needed for this situation. As of now the pirates believe they can operate unchallenged. Having armed civilians in the area will change that.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: her209
Blackwater USA 2.0

This,
because the land version worked so well in Iraq.

Also I love how this thread is a Paulnut circlejerk already, complete with youtube reducation videos.

No shit, eh?

This worked really well in Iraq.


I can't believe the amount of blowjobbery Paul Bots are willing to give him when he comes up with another antiquated idea from the 18th century to match his ossified economic and political ideas, and his fossilized brain. I've long established his ideas would do nothing more than make us pig farmers and nail makers (much like the Libertopian hero, Thomas Jefferson, who died a deadbeat debtor and failed businessman and nearly bankrupted the US while getting it into an eventual war), but now they want us to sanction pirates?

What the fuck is wrong with you guys? Haven't you learned from the above cases that not being able to control the actions or at least punish the actions of those acting in our name is a horrible idea?

 

[PrinceofWands]

Honestly, after my father passes, that's something I'd be willing to consider as a career choice. I've always enjoyed sailing, and I seem to come out on top in fights. Add to it the lack of corporate surroundings and it's really a pretty good job.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: theflyingpig
This is brilliant. Using private citizens to take care of the pirate problem is an excellent, and cost effective strategy. It also keeps the media out of the picture, which will allow the pirates to be slaughtered like dogs. Even though the US military is heavily armed, the pirates don't fear them like they should. The pirates *will* fear private citizens, who are heavily armed and, most importantly, they will be effectively accountable to no one. No media = tortured and slaughtered pirates. If this plan is enacted, the fish stocks in the waters off Somalia will be well fed. Well fed indeed.

Yeah, blackwater was such a great, "cost saving" adventure, eh? They cost 5x as much as a soldier, can't be ordered around, have no tie back to the US with regards to the Code of Military Justice, and like baboons on a crack rage while in Iraq.

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: Schadenfroh

Originally posted by: bamacre
This man should be our President.

I cannot believe that I think that I am slowly becoming a Ron Paul bot.

wait, Ron who?

 

[theflyingpig]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: theflyingpig
This is brilliant. Using private citizens to take care of the pirate problem is an excellent, and cost effective strategy. It also keeps the media out of the picture, which will allow the pirates to be slaughtered like dogs. Even though the US military is heavily armed, the pirates don't fear them like they should. The pirates *will* fear private citizens, who are heavily armed and, most importantly, they will be effectively accountable to no one. No media = tortured and slaughtered pirates. If this plan is enacted, the fish stocks in the waters off Somalia will be well fed. Well fed indeed.

Yeah, blackwater was such a great, "cost saving" adventure, eh? They cost 5x as much as a soldier, can't be ordered around, have no tie back to the US with regards to the Code of Military Justice, and like baboons on a crack rage while in Iraq.

You are a fool. The Navy is not the Army. You know nothing of the ways of war. Why don't you try thinking a little before you post.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: theflyingpig

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: theflyingpig
This is brilliant. Using private citizens to take care of the pirate problem is an excellent, and cost effective strategy. It also keeps the media out of the picture, which will allow the pirates to be slaughtered like dogs. Even though the US military is heavily armed, the pirates don't fear them like they should. The pirates *will* fear private citizens, who are heavily armed and, most importantly, they will be effectively accountable to no one. No media = tortured and slaughtered pirates. If this plan is enacted, the fish stocks in the waters off Somalia will be well fed. Well fed indeed.

Yeah, blackwater was such a great, "cost saving" adventure, eh? They cost 5x as much as a soldier, can't be ordered around, have no tie back to the US with regards to the Code of Military Justice, and like baboons on a crack rage while in Iraq.

You are a fool. The Navy is not the Army. You know nothing of the ways of war. Why don't you try thinking a little before you post.

LOL. What's the difference? You know a lot of the "ways of war"? Please, oh wizened combat veteran, please tell me how these private contractors are going to adhere to any higher code of morality when their only loyalty is to the dollar, not to the country or commander?

Why don't we just turn over all of our fighting forces to "contractors"? That way we can just absolve ourselves of any responsibility....

 

[theflyingpig]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: theflyingpig

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: theflyingpig
This is brilliant. Using private citizens to take care of the pirate problem is an excellent, and cost effective strategy. It also keeps the media out of the picture, which will allow the pirates to be slaughtered like dogs. Even though the US military is heavily armed, the pirates don't fear them like they should. The pirates *will* fear private citizens, who are heavily armed and, most importantly, they will be effectively accountable to no one. No media = tortured and slaughtered pirates. If this plan is enacted, the fish stocks in the waters off Somalia will be well fed. Well fed indeed.

Yeah, blackwater was such a great, "cost saving" adventure, eh? They cost 5x as much as a soldier, can't be ordered around, have no tie back to the US with regards to the Code of Military Justice, and like baboons on a crack rage while in Iraq.

You are a fool. The Navy is not the Army. You know nothing of the ways of war. Why don't you try thinking a little before you post.

LOL. What's the difference? You know a lot of the "ways of war"? Please, oh wizened combat veteran, please tell me how these private contractors are going to adhere to any higher code of morality when their only loyalty is to the dollar, not to the country or commander?

Why don't we just turn over all of our fighting forces to "contractors"? That way we can just absolve ourselves of any responsibility....

lol. Go back to Disneyland, child. There are pirates there for you to use your strategies on.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: theflyingpig

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: theflyingpig

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: theflyingpig
This is brilliant. Using private citizens to take care of the pirate problem is an excellent, and cost effective strategy. It also keeps the media out of the picture, which will allow the pirates to be slaughtered like dogs. Even though the US military is heavily armed, the pirates don't fear them like they should. The pirates *will* fear private citizens, who are heavily armed and, most importantly, they will be effectively accountable to no one. No media = tortured and slaughtered pirates. If this plan is enacted, the fish stocks in the waters off Somalia will be well fed. Well fed indeed.

Yeah, blackwater was such a great, "cost saving" adventure, eh? They cost 5x as much as a soldier, can't be ordered around, have no tie back to the US with regards to the Code of Military Justice, and like baboons on a crack rage while in Iraq.

You are a fool. The Navy is not the Army. You know nothing of the ways of war. Why don't you try thinking a little before you post.

LOL. What's the difference? You know a lot of the "ways of war"? Please, oh wizened combat veteran, please tell me how these private contractors are going to adhere to any higher code of morality when their only loyalty is to the dollar, not to the country or commander?

Why don't we just turn over all of our fighting forces to "contractors"? That way we can just absolve ourselves of any responsibility....

lol. Go back to Disneyland, child. There are pirates there for you to use your strategies on.

Answer the question. What is the difference?

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller
What the fuck is wrong with you guys? Haven't you learned from the above cases that not being able to control the actions or at least punish the actions of those acting in our name is a horrible idea?

You mean like the banks? Oh wait, you think throwing money at them with no oversight is a great idea. Carry on then.

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: nobodyknows
I hear Blackwater is looking for work.

:laugh:

 

[theflyingpig]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Answer the question. What is the difference?

I already answered it. You just failed to comprehend, which is an amazing feat of stupidity, given the fact that I spelled out the difference quite clearly.

 

[irwincur]

Here is a simple solution.

Convoys.

As ships come off the Red Sea (or another staging point at the other end somewhere in the Indian Ocean) we assemble them into convoys. Then we assign say three of four small, fast, but well armed warships to protect the convoy. This could be a UN measure, a NATO measure, or just a whoever wants to help measure. Using smaller ships will reduce costs, and lets face it, do we really need a destroyer to chase speedboats.

I have a feeling that this would quickly reduce the amount of piracy in the area. Anyone who prefers to operate outside of the safety zone can just assume their own risk. This way you do not have to cover huge areas and you can get much better results. Worked in WWI and II as well as other wars throughout history.

Oh, and when they see pirates, shoot to kill, this is not a police action.

 

[Turin39789]

Government = monopolization of violence.

Foolish to farm it out.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: theflyingpig

Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Answer the question. What is the difference?

I already answered it. You just failed to comprehend, which is an amazing feat of stupidity, given the fact that I spelled out the difference quite clearly.

This is what you said.

"You are a fool. The Navy is not the Army. You know nothing of the ways of war. Why don't you try thinking a little before you post. "


So, what is the difference? How do you plan to mitigate the human emotion of greed when it comes down to taking any actions needed to gain material wealth? How do you police and contractors in a way sufficient to adhere to international law?

You have answered none of the core problems when dealing with mercenaries.

 

[MotF Bane]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: LegendKiller
What the fuck is wrong with you guys? Haven't you learned from the above cases that not being able to control the actions or at least punish the actions of those acting in our name is a horrible idea?

You mean like the banks? Oh wait, you think throwing money at them with no oversight is a great idea. Carry on then.

Or those retention bonuses that don't work? Yeah, great idea there too. Those work so well, LK.

 

[FlashG]

Originally posted by: irwincur
Here is a simple solution.

Convoys.

As ships come off the Red Sea (or another staging point at the other end somewhere in the Indian Ocean) we assemble them into convoys. Then we assign say three of four small, fast, but well armed warships to protect the convoy. This could be a UN measure, a NATO measure, or just a whoever wants to help measure. Using smaller ships will reduce costs, and lets face it, do we really need a destroyer to chase speedboats.

I have a feeling that this would quickly reduce the amount of piracy in the area. Anyone who prefers to operate outside of the safety zone can just assume their own risk. This way you do not have to cover huge areas and you can get much better results. Worked in WWI and II as well as other wars throughout history.

Oh, and when they see pirates, shoot to kill, this is not a police action.

use these

 

[yllus]

Originally posted by: theflyingpig

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: theflyingpig
This is brilliant. Using private citizens to take care of the pirate problem is an excellent, and cost effective strategy. It also keeps the media out of the picture, which will allow the pirates to be slaughtered like dogs. Even though the US military is heavily armed, the pirates don't fear them like they should. The pirates *will* fear private citizens, who are heavily armed and, most importantly, they will be effectively accountable to no one. No media = tortured and slaughtered pirates. If this plan is enacted, the fish stocks in the waters off Somalia will be well fed. Well fed indeed.

Yeah, blackwater was such a great, "cost saving" adventure, eh? They cost 5x as much as a soldier, can't be ordered around, have no tie back to the US with regards to the Code of Military Justice, and like baboons on a crack rage while in Iraq.

You are a fool. The Navy is not the Army. You know nothing of the ways of war. Why don't you try thinking a little before you post.

What do mercenaries have to do with either the Navy or the Army?

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: Turin39789
Government = monopolization of violence.

Foolish to farm it out.

This.

 

[JeffreyLebowski]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Thump553
Letters of marque essentially created government sanctioned pirates. For example, letters issued by England would authorize attacks on French ships. It didn't matter what type of ship the French ship was or what it was doing.

Somalia pirates frequently disguise themselves as ordinary fishermen. Does Paul contemplate authorizing attacks on all Somalia boats and ships, regardless of what they are doing? Does he want the US to essentially declare war on Somalia?

What is the incentive to the privateers here? Grab a speedboat and a couple of guns?

These things faded away two centuries ago for lots of valid reasons. I'd like to see some input from an international law expert and a maritime law expert as to any validity of Paul's plan. I have grave doubts about it.

This problem will only be solved when Somalia gets a functioning government and when pirating is no longer a financially viable business for them (right now it is about the only way to make money in Somalia). I'd like to see Saudi Arabia and its rich neighbors pony up some of the cash to do so-Somalia is their neighbor and fellow Muslim state.

It's almost like Ron Paul's idea was quite likely a poorly thought out one, based on a lack of understanding of the consequences of his actions.

Oh wait, that's like pretty much every single other one of Ron Paul's ideas.

Kind of like every one of your idiotic posts.

If Somalians realyl wanted a functioning government they'd set one up. Sure as shit, if the Us tried to help them and institute a government and tried to protect it soemone would scream that we are empire building and only in it for ourselves. Most likely you and your like.
Ron Paul actually has ideas and plans. You fell for Hope and Change.
You know, if Somalis found out that getting killd for being a pirate was in their future they would look for new ways of making a living.
The problem in Somalia is not going to be fixed by instituting a new government, that entire continent needs a reboot.

 

[theflyingpig]

Originally posted by: yllus
What do mercenaries have to do with either the Navy or the Army?

How much do you think it costs to keep the Navy patrolling in that area?

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: MotF Bane

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: LegendKiller
What the fuck is wrong with you guys? Haven't you learned from the above cases that not being able to control the actions or at least punish the actions of those acting in our name is a horrible idea?

You mean like the banks? Oh wait, you think throwing money at them with no oversight is a great idea. Carry on then.

Or those retention bonuses that don't work? Yeah, great idea there too. Those work so well, LK.

I am not going to respond to this stuff in this thread, you want to debate it elsewhere, go ahead. This is a discussion of the merits of an 18th century concept of mercenaries, nothing else.

 

[theflyingpig]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

This is what you said.

"You are a fool. The Navy is not the Army. You know nothing of the ways of war. Why don't you try thinking a little before you post. "


So, what is the difference? How do you plan to mitigate the human emotion of greed when it comes down to taking any actions needed to gain material wealth? How do you police and contractors in a way sufficient to adhere to international law?

You have answered none of the core problems when dealing with mercenaries.

Amazing. You really don't get it do you? You have tunnel vision. That is why you are a fool.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: JeffreyLebowski

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Thump553
Letters of marque essentially created government sanctioned pirates. For example, letters issued by England would authorize attacks on French ships. It didn't matter what type of ship the French ship was or what it was doing.

Somalia pirates frequently disguise themselves as ordinary fishermen. Does Paul contemplate authorizing attacks on all Somalia boats and ships, regardless of what they are doing? Does he want the US to essentially declare war on Somalia?

What is the incentive to the privateers here? Grab a speedboat and a couple of guns?

These things faded away two centuries ago for lots of valid reasons. I'd like to see some input from an international law expert and a maritime law expert as to any validity of Paul's plan. I have grave doubts about it.

This problem will only be solved when Somalia gets a functioning government and when pirating is no longer a financially viable business for them (right now it is about the only way to make money in Somalia). I'd like to see Saudi Arabia and its rich neighbors pony up some of the cash to do so-Somalia is their neighbor and fellow Muslim state.

It's almost like Ron Paul's idea was quite likely a poorly thought out one, based on a lack of understanding of the consequences of his actions.

Oh wait, that's like pretty much every single other one of Ron Paul's ideas.

Kind of like every one of your idiotic posts.

If Somalians realyl wanted a functioning government they'd set one up. Sure as shit, if the Us tried to help them and institute a government and tried to protect it soemone would scream that we are empire building and only in it for ourselves. Most likely you and your like.
Ron Paul actually has ideas and plans. You fell for Hope and Change.
You know, if Somalis found out that getting killd for being a pirate was in their future they would look for new ways of making a living.
The problem in Somalia is not going to be fixed by instituting a new government, that entire continent needs a reboot.

Ron Pauls ideas are 18th century gimmickry that was proven ineffective and unwanted by modern society. He gets his support from disaffected fringe nutbars who can't stand the idea that their ideas are at the tails of a normal distribution.

Sorry, but the ideas of pig farming and nail making are over, as are the stupid ideas of sanctioned mercenaries.