SENATE BILL: A Farewell to Privateers Amendment (Failed)

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: Lumine

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Senator you have 24 hours to ocmmence with advocacy for this.

[Lumine]

Thank you, Senator.

Well, this one is pretty straight forward, an attempt to modernize our constitution and our foreign policy instruments and attributions at the same time. I explained this back in my office, and the point of this is that our current Constitution allows the Senate to grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, which means to give a formal licence to a person (a Privateer) to attack and capture enemy vessels or effect a reprisal. Now, this was of course used during the XVIII century in the world as piracy was widespread in the Atlantic and the Mediterranean as well, but the last time Atlasia used one of these was in 1812. Quoting from my earlier speech on this, in 1856 most European nations gave up privateering, and then they were joined by about fifty nations over the next decades, but we never followed that lead. We all know we are probably not going to use this privilege, but even so, I feel we should get rid of this obsolete practice. There has been some talk in past years of using it to hunt down Somali pirates, but if there's a single place in which the free market shouldn't really get that involved, well, that's the military. I don't think it's a good idea to essentially hire mercenaries to track down foes that can be targeted arbitrarily while probably breaking international law, and it's better to eliminate this before anybody thinks we should actually use these Letters of Marque and Reprisal.

Questions, thoughts?

[TNF]

Looks good, Senator.

[bore]

I agree that this amendment makes sense.

It's worth noting though that throughout the constitution there are things like this which need changing, and I'm not sure it's sensible to do this piecemeal.

Reason 876 for a ConCon, I suppose

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

It is not that the general approach (Commerce Raider Doctrine I suppose it would be term) hasn't been used since 1812, it is just that it has evolved with time and technology. Submarines, which becauase of expense are the preserve of the military establishement not to mention very good other reasons, largely took over that role. Also in the modern era, therei s little need to blockade commerce unless it were shipping to a country that we had sanctions against.

The shift to submarines also meant that it was easier to sink then to capture the ship, which eliminated the key aspect of prizes. Prizes were not confined to the Privateer, and typically the regular Navy used them as well, with Privateer as an augmentation of that effort as well, particularly when the Navy was so small as during the Revolution and War of 1812. Therefore I don't really consider thme mercenaries in the traditional sense, but more in line with the relationship of the militia to the Army in the Revoluntionary War period, if that make sense.

Doesn't change the fact that it is probably an unnecessary and/or undesirable practice in the modern age thoguh.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

This can be voted on tomorrow.

[Lumine]

It is not that the general approach (Commerce Raider Doctrine I suppose it would be term) hasn't been used since 1812, it is just that it has evolved with time and technology. Submarines, which becauase of expense are the preserve of the military establishement not to mention very good other reasons, largely took over that role. Also in the modern era, therei s little need to blockade commerce unless it were shipping to a country that we had sanctions against.

The shift to submarines also meant that it was easier to sink then to capture the ship, which eliminated the key aspect of prizes. Prizes were not confined to the Privateer, and typically the regular Navy used them as well, with Privateer as an augmentation of that effort as well, particularly when the Navy was so small as during the Revolution and War of 1812. Therefore I don't really consider thme mercenaries in the traditional sense, but more in line with the relationship of the militia to the Army in the Revoluntionary War period, if that make sense.

Doesn't change the fact that it is probably an unnecessary and/or undesirable practice in the modern age thoguh.

Certainly, Senator, and I stand corrected over the mistakes made (my research certainlywasn't as intensive as it should have been). It seems this one might actually pass easily, xD

[Deus Naturae]

I implore the Senate to vote down this amendment. Letters of marque and reprisal are a useful, if extremely underutilized, tool that is certainly preferable to declaring war. Imagine the lives that could have been spared if we had simply issued a letter of marque against Osama bin Laden instead of launching a full-on invasion of Afghanistan.

[Lumine]

I implore the Senate to vote down this amendment. Letters of marque and reprisal are a useful, if extremely underutilized, tool that is certainly preferable to declaring war. Imagine the lives that could have been spared if we had simply issued a letter of marque against Osama bin Laden instead of launching a full-on invasion of Afghanistan.

You're not really suggesting we should have hunted down Osama Bin Laden using private citizens and private property while leaving the Taliban alone in Afghanistan, are you? You do realize that would probably breach international law and that we would use a practice that most of the world banned more than a century ago?

[Deus Naturae]

I implore the Senate to vote down this amendment. Letters of marque and reprisal are a useful, if extremely underutilized, tool that is certainly preferable to declaring war. Imagine the lives that could have been spared if we had simply issued a letter of marque against Osama bin Laden instead of launching a full-on invasion of Afghanistan.

You're not really suggesting we should have hunted down Osama Bin Laden using private citizens and private property while leaving the Taliban alone in Afghanistan, are you? You do realize that would probably breach international law and that we would use a practice that most of the world banned more than a century ago?

We could have issued as many letters as necessary for the national defense of Atlasia. It would have been far better than the bloody and expensive mistake that was the War in Afghanistan.

[Lumine]

I implore the Senate to vote down this amendment. Letters of marque and reprisal are a useful, if extremely underutilized, tool that is certainly preferable to declaring war. Imagine the lives that could have been spared if we had simply issued a letter of marque against Osama bin Laden instead of launching a full-on invasion of Afghanistan.

You're not really suggesting we should have hunted down Osama Bin Laden using private citizens and private property while leaving the Taliban alone in Afghanistan, are you? You do realize that would probably breach international law and that we would use a practice that most of the world banned more than a century ago?

We could have issued as many letters as necessary for the national defense of Atlasia. It would have been far better than the bloody and expensive mistake that was the War in Afghanistan.

Aha. You would rather have our government with the power of arbitrarially marking someone as a pirate so he could be hunted down by pretty much anybody without regarding the consequences or caring about the collateral damage? No, thank you, I prefer using our military forces and collaboration with other nations (as we did in Afghanistan) to achieve results instead of relying on such an undesirable system to work.

[Deus Naturae]

How is that any different than giving military bureaucrats the power to target anybody with no oversight from the Senate? At least with granting letters of marque and reprisal, we can decide who is being targeted.

[Lumine]

How is that any different than giving military bureaucrats the power to target anybody with no oversight from the Senate? At least with granting letters of marque and reprisal, we can decide who is being targeted.

Because they are experts in military and intelligence affairs and because they are under the SoEA and the President, they know what their are doing. It's a hundred (I might even say a thousand) times better than opening pandora's box and allowing everybody who has a gun to storm in there and go hunting enemies without even knowing what to do and caring about the process. Nobody else would recognize this letters of marque and reprisal legitimate or legal, if they were captured they would become criminals and pirates themselves, and we wouldn't be able to legally defend their actions, and it would probably constitute and act of war under international law.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

A Letter of Marque does not mean "allowing everyone who has a gun to storm in there."  It is issued to specific parties, specifying conditions which may include requiring adherence to relevant national and international law.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

How is that any different than giving military bureaucrats the power to target anybody with no oversight from the Senate? At least with granting letters of marque and reprisal, we can decide who is being targeted.

Because they are experts in military and intelligence affairs and because they are under the SoEA and the President, they know what their are doing. It's a hundred (I might even say a thousand) times better than opening pandora's box and allowing everybody who has a gun to storm in there and go hunting enemies without even knowing what to do and caring about the process. Nobody else would recognize this letters of marque and reprisal legitimate or legal, if they were captured they would become criminals and pirates themselves, and we wouldn't be able to legally defend their actions, and it would probably constitute and act of war under international law.

Deus would come back that they too have violated international law in various ways over the years.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I can start a final vote if such is desired?

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Is there anything to prevent the Administration from granting such letters if this amendment passes?

[President Tyrion]

Is there anything to prevent the Administration from granting such letters if this amendment passes?

No. If anything, the Senate can do it, too, in a particularly generous reading.

[Lumine]

Is there anything to prevent the Administration from granting such letters if this amendment passes?

No. If anything, the Senate can do it, too, in a particularly generous reading.

Certainly. I think I'll expand on this by offering the following amendment:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Wouldn't that would mean the Senate isn't able to prohibit anyone from capturing anyone?

[Cincinnatus]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Feedback: Origination
Status: 24 hours to object.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

I object

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

That is an extremely poor way to go about this. That means our navy could litteraly summarily execute anyone they capture in war or smugglers, pirates etc.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Still too soon to start a vote.