Was there a Congressional Declaration of War on the Barbary Pirates? ( Maybe not!)

Various ^ | Nov. 20, 2001 | Self

[MindBender26]

The concept of Congress not needing to declare war, but effectively being able to declare “no-war” by cutting off funding is totally correct; Vietnam, Contras, etc.

The fact the Roosevelt asked for recognition that a “state of war has existed” (for some period without a formal declaration of such) and Congress, by so doing, gives precedence and Congressional acknowledgement for the legal points we discussed.

Commercial law also gives full acknowledgement that there are two kinds of war, declared and non-declared. The Act-of-War exclusion contained in many property damage policies contains the phrase that …….coverage is not extended to damages as a result of “war, declared or undeclared.”

This again puts “undeclared” war on equal footing with “declared” war.

[MindBender26]

"It only takes an act of congress for the president to enforce his constitutional powers as Commander in Chief in a state of war."

I would argue that no such astion is necessary, or even proper, as the Constitution gives the power (and responsibility) of Commander in Chief to the President at all times, war or no war.

[MindBender26]

", It (FR) will turn up dozens of articles and posts stating that there was a formal declaration of war on the Barbary pirates and that Bush and congress must do the same or this is not a "war"

Unfortunately, those posts are totally incorrect. There was no declaration of war against the Barbary Pirates. Like the resolution passed after 9/11, Congress asked President Jefferson to take action against those who would harm America and Americans, but there was never a formal declaration of war, or anything close to it.

The U.S. has formally declared war only four times, 1812, Spanish-American, WW1 and WW2.

Yes, I know posts on FR say we did declare war, but they are wrong. For backup, check Congressional Archives, Heritage Foundation, CATO. All agree, no formal declaration of war with Barbary Pirates.

Don't feel bad. Wait till you see some of the tin hat posts...

[Wm Bach]

Good scholarship! I had been under the impression that a DOC was required, regardless of whether we were attacked or not. Thanks for the info.

[RightWhale]

Today I took an informal poll. Asked 20 people if we are at war or if this is just another police action or like the war on drugs or the war on poverty. 19 out of 20 said Congress didn't declare war, so we aren't at war. But one did mention the special war powers act, which he said the president is using. Another one said that we were attacked, on our own soil no less, and a state of war exists, and Congress was very generous in providing the President the wherewithall to pursue the war. One out of 20. Now it is probably 3 out of 20 that understand we are at war. The other 17 are all liberals.

[RightWhale]

War is an act of a state against a state

They talk about nations, not states. They aren't the same thing. If a nation attacks the United States, the United States is at war. An entity such as a recognized state or country is not required, a nation will do: The stateless nation of terrorists.

[Texasforever]

One out of 20. Now it is probably 3 out of 20 that understand we are at war. The other 17 are all liberals.

I think it goes deeper than that. A certain segment of people that would blast any Republican administration have latched on to the "absence of declared war" to condemn anything Bush does. They don't really believe the argument but it "sounds right" and gives a thin veneer of respectability to hide their actual agenda.

[hsszionist]

Wasn't the fleet issued Letters of Marque?

[Texasforever]

Wasn't the fleet issued Letters of Marque?

That I don't know.

[Jay W]

Part of the war powers of Congress, and a power specifically meant for pirates, was to grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal.

So, now, did your research show whether Congress granted any Letters of Marque and Reprisal against the Barbary Pirates?

A Letter of Marque and Reprisal probably wouldn't be needed to get bin Laden dead or alive.

A Letter of Marque and Reprisal, according to my dictionary, is a license granted by a state, such as the United States, to a private citizen to capture the merchant ships of another nation.

So, it probably would not apply, unless bin Laden or the Taliban had some merchant ships, but if they did, the U.S. Navy could handle these without needing the assistance of private citizens. On the other hand, the camel is the "ship of the desert," right? If we stretched the definition of "merchant ship" to include any bactrian camels that bin Laden or the Taliban ride around on, then why not issue some Letters of Marque and Reprisal to some private citizens to go after bin Laden???!!!

Anyway, since you've already delved into this historical research, let us know if the Congress did grant any Letters of Marque and Reprisal against the Barbary Pirates, if you don't mind.

[Texasforever]

Anyway, since you've already delved into this historical research, let us know if the Congress did grant any Letters of Marque and Reprisal against the Barbary Pirates, if you don't mind.

I have seen absolutely nothing on Letters Of Marque so I would only be guessing. However, the 25 million dollar reward on Bin Laden’s head dead or alive seems to be similar wouldn't you say?

[Jay W]

By the way, I agree that no formal declaration of war is needed to go after bin Laden or the terror network.

But I supported and still do the proposal that Congress Declare War, and here's why:

There would be no doubt, no uncertainty, on the part of anyone whether we were at war or not. Yes, we are at war, I know. But as we all know, a helluva lot of people, mostly brain dead liberals, don't know, or pretend not to know. A Delcaration would leave no doubt.

Also, a lot of people are concerned about the gradual erosion of civil rights. Well, in a Declared War there would also be no uncertainty about removing the right of habeas corpus, if necessary. There would be no dispute, no confusion, and no debate about it. (Or, if there were, the opponents of the war could be shut up pretty damn quickly.) The right of habeas corpus is the one upon which all other rights stand. It can be suspended, legally, under the Constitution when there's an invasion, a rebellion, or if the public safety requires it.

There's been a lot of discussion about the public safety of late, especially about airport security, the anthrax issue, and so on. If war were Declared, then there would be far less controversy about suspending habeas corpus, and it would be viewed as justified, end of story. There would be no dispute about rounding up anyone who presented a threat to public safety.

But, for Bush to do what he's doing, he doesn't need a declaration of war, and frankly, really doesn't need Congress' approval. He's the Commander in Chief of our Armed Forces. Presidents have always had that awesome power to order our military forces into harm's way.

[Jay W]

I have seen absolutely nothing on Letters Of Marque so I would only be guessing. However, the 25 million dollar reward on Bin Laden’s head dead or alive seems to be similar wouldn't you say?

Sort of similar, except that Letters of Marque and Reprisal are for the purpose of seizing the merchant ships of enemy nations.

To put out a reward for bin Laden would not require a Letter of Marque or Reprisal, and I don't think such a Letter would truly apply in this case, since bin Laden's not a merchant ship or a nation.

On the other hand, 25 mil is tempting, and if I were younger and in a "Soldier of Fortune" frame of mind, hells bells, 25 mil could come in handy. ;-)

I wonder if 25 FReepers would want to go in for 1 mil apiece and go over there and bring back that terrorist bastard's head on a pike. Fantasies....

[Texasforever]

There would be no doubt, no uncertainty, on the part of anyone whether we were at war or not. Yes, we are at war, I know. But as we all know, a helluva lot of people, mostly brain dead liberals, don't know, or pretend not to know. A Delcaration would leave no doubt.

I don't pretend why there have only been 4 "declared wars" in this nation's history I only have intuitive opinions since no one in Congress or the administration has stated their reasons. I will take a shot and give you a few of my opinions:

In the 4 wars that were formally declared we were at war with not only the nation's governments but the people of those nations that provided the governments with popular support.

If we formally declared war would the members of the coalition be required to do the same? I don't have the answer to that.

A formal declaration of war would place certain international treaties in play that may hinder the tactics that we must use in this situation.

Like I said, I can only rely on intuitive reasoning at this point.

[Jay W]

Two "by the ways":

First, your history research on this is excellent and to be commended.

Second, didn't William Shatner star in a short-lived TV series about the Barbary Pirates?.... Or am I thinking of some other short-lived show in the 70s? ;-)

[Texasforever]

Second, didn't William Shatner star in a short-lived TV series about the Barbary Pirates?....

Sorry I don't remember it. I believe there was either a tv program or a movie called the "Barbary Coast".

[Jay W]

Well, it was short-lived. My memory was only partly correct. It was, as you said, Barbary Coast, a western:

Barbary Coast

Welcome to the Barbary Coast guide at TV Tome.

Show Information
First Aired September 1975
Last Aired January 1976
Running Time 60 min
Country United States
Currently Appears Monday 8:00 PM
Network ABC

Show Stars
Richard Kiel - Moose Moran
Doug McClure - Cash Conover
William Shatner - Jeff Cable
Dave Turner - Thumbs