Yeah, but we dawdled for about the first 30 years of this country before we sailed over there and kicked their asses once and for all. In the intervening years, the Muslim pirates continued to make a killing in “white gold” (European slaves) and ransoms.
The British didn’t mind it so much because they controlled the seas and it suppressed the papists.
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
This might include hitting the shore bases they are using. “Shores of Tripoli”…it’s more then a line in a song.
Yeah, but we dawdled for about the first 30 years of this country before we sailed over there and kicked their asses once and for all. In the intervening years, the Muslim pirates continued to make a killing in “white gold” (European slaves) and ransoms.
The British didn’t mind it so much because they controlled the seas and it suppressed the papists. [/quote]
The British were willing and able to pay off the corsairs. It wasn’t the Barbary pirates that were suppressing the papist, aka Knights of Malta (formerly the Knights Hospitalier) but Napoleon.
The US was willing to pay off the corsairs as well, but they asked for more than Congress had allocated. So, we send out a squadron of ships including the original USS Enterprise. Between a costly sea blockade and daring raids by Marines & mercenaries, the Barbary pirates decided that the most profitable course of action was to sign a treaty with the Americans.
This seems like more of a defense of US economic interests more than a confrontation between Christianity and Islam. In fact, the Treaty of Tripoli includes:
Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion;
as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.
Looks like the pirate ports are falling into the hand of the jihadists (Peaceful Inner Strugglers):
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/dangerous-seas-when-pirates-become-islamists/
Some pictures of Chinese sailors fighting pirates with moltov cocktails.
[quote]Christine wrote:
Some pictures of Chinese sailors fighting pirates with moltov cocktails.
I heard about that today.
The Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) started out in piracy before they got into jihad.
SigArms Academy has come up with some courses to train crews and ship security officers to defend against pirates.
Shipboard Security Crew Operations
Duration: 6 days
Abstract
Designed for the crew members of private or commercial vessels, this 6 day class takes the mariner through a blended mix of classroom and range training designed to maximize the crew?s survivability in shipboard attacks.
Overview
* The 4 most common types of pirate activities
* Identification
* Attack techniques and tactics
* The shipboard security team
* Exterior defensive tactics
* Interior defensive tactics
* Non-lethal tools and tactics
* Vigilance as a mindset
* Employing a risk matrix
* Armed response to deadly threat encounters (rifle, shotgun, pistol)
* Force on force scenario based training in a maritime environment
http://www.sigarmsacademy.com/Courses/ShowCourseDetails.aspx?cid=249&ccid=24
Q&A with a pirate.
Arrrg.
[quote]Christine wrote:
Q&A with a pirate.
Arrrg.[/quote]
I just found an interesting tidbit:
[quote]Some of the leaders of the Islamists now fighting the Somali government have criticized pirates for giving the country a bad name, and for attacking Muslim-owned ships like the Sirius Star.
The Islamists have a memorandum of understanding with us. What they are saying to the media is not their real position. They just want to send a message to their Arab friends who sometimes fund them.[/quote]
Arabs funding Islamists?!?
[quote]pushharder wrote:
Does anyone recall how the (real) pirates of the Caribbean during the “Golden Age of Piracy” during the 1600s and 1700s were eventually eliminated?[/quote]
I hope that you’re not trying to imply that Captain Jack is not real.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
Christine wrote:
pushharder wrote:
Does anyone recall how the (real) pirates of the Caribbean during the “Golden Age of Piracy” during the 1600s and 1700s were eventually eliminated?
I hope that you’re not trying to imply that Captain Jack is not real.
Cap’n Jack is deppinitely real.[/quote]
Thanks. You got me worried.
Please then, sir, I know nothing about the Golden Age of Piracy.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
Christine wrote:
pushharder wrote:
Christine wrote:
pushharder wrote:
Does anyone recall how the (real) pirates of the Caribbean during the “Golden Age of Piracy” during the 1600s and 1700s were eventually eliminated?
I hope that you’re not trying to imply that Captain Jack is not real.
Cap’n Jack is deppinitely real.
Thanks. You got me worried.
Please then, sir, I know nothing about the Golden Age of Piracy.
Sheesh.
[/quote]
I am but an ignorant wench. Please have pity on me, sir.