Thursday, March 26, 2015

ANNALS OF LIBERTARIANISM, PART FFS.

At The Federalist, Georgi Boorman gives us the usual rightwing schtick about ISIS (i.e., Obama's a pussy let's get our war on):
Despite Boko Haram’s purported pledge of fealty to ISIS, apparently neither organizations’ bloody rampages have reached the level of egregiousness that stirs the executive branch to crush the evil gobbling up Iraq and surrounding territories. President Obama has told us repeatedly that there will be “no boots on the ground” save for “advisers, trainers, and security personnel.” Regardless of whether the advisory missions happen to put those advisers in a combat role, the goal, apparently, is to keep us “out of another ground war.” 
Whether this be on principle of non-interference or sheer ignorance of an organization that will, if unchecked, eventually threaten global stability, the result is inaction (save for a few airstrikes).
By "a few airstrikes," Boorman of course means over 1,300 as of December 2014. At The Federalist, bullshit walks and talks!
The U.S. military wears a heavy boot, but at the moment it does nothing more than cast a shadow over the growing terrorist threat.
With a prose style like that Boorman will go far in the movement. But she still has to thread the needle: something that looks like a solution to ISIS but doesn't come with blinking QUAGMIRE tags all over it. Her Big Idea: Bring back privateers!
“Privateers” were given letters of marque permitting them to capture and plunder enemy ships; an admiralty court adjudicated on the legality of the capture... 
To fight war tourists like Jihad John, hire some guns! Maybe they'll be dashing, shiver-me-timbers young libertarians looking for adventure! Or Somali pirates fresh out of prison!  (Probably, though, they'll be petty criminals and navy rejects with nothing left to lose.)
Some will rightly point out the potential for abuse, as there almost certainly will be, as with all social and governmental institutions. However, the U.S. government would be holding accountable a much smaller group of individuals, whose scope of operations are far more limited than the expansive U.S. military. If abuse were to be found, processes for investigation and prosecution would be in place to swiftly bring to account and deal punishment for violations, as they had in the past.
You know, like with Blackwater.
Some less rational factions will undoubtedly hail this as a crazy right-winged conspiracy to privatize the military. But Founders did not design a Constitution with powers that undermine other powers. If letters of marque were a tool of privatization, what good would it have been to include provisions, just a few lines below this, “to raise and support armies” and to “provide and maintain a Navy”?
I dunno -- the Post Office is also in the Constitution, but conservatarians want to privatize that, too. Self-evidently, their dream is to strip the federal government for parts and empower privateers to handle all its former functions. Of course, the ones who would be fighting ISIS for us would be flying no flag but the Jolly Roger, and if it should turn out that someone else is offering better pay than Uncle Sam, there's nothing to stop them from turning their guns around. That's what happens when you love the market more than your country.

151 comments:

  1. coozledad12:20 PM

    If abuse were to be found, privateers could always relocate to Dubai.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Some less rational factions will undoubtedly hail this as a crazy right-winged conspiracy to privatize the military.

    Yes, some less rational than, say, the readers of Reason.

    ReplyDelete
  3. This time they mean it - this REALLY will be the Last Remake of Beau Geste.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Steve-O12:41 PM

    Isn't this a slightly warmed up bucket of spit of an idea (roundly mocked) that Bill O'Reilly proposed a while back?

    ReplyDelete
  5. "the u.s. army wears a thick glove, but at the moment it does nothing more than weakly blink on and off."


    "the u.s. army sports a fine tassled cap, but at the moment it does nothing more than stink like yesterday's fish."


    "the u.s. army shows off its gorgeous legs and bodacious rear end in a short skirt, but at the moment it does nothing more than wheeze and groan."

    ReplyDelete
  6. Meanie-meanie, tickle a person12:50 PM

    PART FFS

    Have Roman numerals entered the digital age in some unforeseen and unnecessary manner?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Meanie-meanie, tickle a person12:53 PM

    "the u.s. army shows off its gorgeous legs and bodacious rear end in a
    short skirt, but at the moment it does nothing more than wheeze and
    groan."


    And her radiator's steaming and her teeth are in a wreck
    And she won't let you kiss her, but what the hell did you expect?

    ReplyDelete
  8. "The U.S. Military wears a lot of leather, but at the moment it does nothing more than tease the bad guys with its crop and...What were we talking about, again?"

    ReplyDelete
  9. In lieu of a detailed breakdown as to how this little scheme has failed us in the very recent past, I'd like to say this to Ms. Boorman: I too enjoyed MGS4, but I'm pretty sure Kojima meant for that to be the bad future.

    ReplyDelete
  10. "Some less rational factions may point to recent events that suggest that putting our faith into glorified mercenaries is a bad idea. But precedent is just one of those things (like facts and human suffering) that distracts from the purity of our thought experiments."

    ReplyDelete
  11. BigHank531:10 PM

    Privateers operated on the open ocean, which belongs to no nation. ISIS is notably land-based in Iraq (which is not a country that belongs to us) and Syria (which is not a country that belongs to us). For the purposes of argument I suppose I'll even grant the existence of Kurdistan, which makes a grand total of three countries that do not belong to the USA and whose laws we have exactly bup and kis authority over. A formal Letter of Marque would do less than nothing to combat ISIS, as it would waste the time we could be using to discuss solutions that stand a chance of working.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Meanie-meanie, tickle a person1:11 PM

    Dang, Ed, you're really scraping the bottom of the barrel here. Hope you didn't get any on ya...

    Some less rational factions will undoubtedly hail this as a crazy
    right-winged conspiracy to privatize the military. But Founders did not
    design a Constitution with powers that undermine other powers.



    I can't even. I feel myself getting stupider just reading that.

    ReplyDelete
  13. There are the usual giggle-inducing comments over there in response to Georgi girl's smashing idea, but this one was adorable:

    Somebody could setup a Kickstarter-like web site so people could fund their own mercenary.



    Much like purchasing a cargo container and then tracking it around the world, mercenary funders could follow their little soldier all over the globe as he/she delivers bullets to the baddies, rescues proper-colored folk from mud people and delivers American exceptionalism to the darkest reaches of the globe.


    Own a mercenary or two? Find other folks with mercs and form a team! Mercenary a little banged up? Put him/her on the injured reserve and bring in a mercenary from the bench! Just like a fantasy league but with real bullets and stuff, and all from the comfort of your monitor in your den!


    Just think, one day a whole league could be formed, divisions created, a playoff format devised. A commissioner would run the whole thing, individual trophies could be established ("man, I would kill to be MVP this season") and cheering squads and fan clubs would masturbate furiously to "bring the Merc Cup home." It would supplant football as America's number one sport, and all the doves would be eaten by the chickenhawks.


    Man, I'm getting a stirring in my loins just thinking about all the possibilities here...

    ReplyDelete
  14. Megalon1:15 PM

    Uhh, am I missing something here? How many "enemy ships" could these privateers really capture? Daesh is not exactly known as a great maritime power. Also, this stuff seems just a little past it's sell date. It's looking like IS may have already peaked, thanks to Kurdish fighters along with airstrikes and more problematically, Iranian backed sectarian forces as well (thanks again neo-cons!) IS may not be defeated totally any time soon, but I don't expect there to be any more major advances from them either. They've clearly been "checked" at least.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Brother Yam1:15 PM

    I think that the reason you only do one post a day is because you ghost-write brain-dead articles for schmibertarian web sites. The next day you cut up your previous day's work.

    I refuse to believe that an actual, above-room-temperature IQ human writes these things and means it. I mean, c'mon, nobody's that fucking stupid...

    Right?

    ReplyDelete
  16. That's just tiny thinkin', BH53.


    Incorporate this idea and include language for its inclusion in the Trans-Pacific Partnership and, viola!, we're all dancin' to the fiddle of privateers and corporate pirates!


    I mean, the TPP is gonna' fuck us all anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  17. zencomix1:20 PM

    "Self-evidently, their dream is to strip the federal government for parts and empower privateers to handle all its former functions."


    This is why some of them are still clamoring for Romney.

    ReplyDelete
  18. ColBatGuano1:22 PM

    I'm glad to see that libertarians are on board with supporting Iran in their efforts to take full control of Iraq.

    ReplyDelete
  19. sharculese1:24 PM

    Back in '08 the Paul crowd tossed around bringing back letters of marque, although I don't think their idol ever formally endorsed it.

    As for this: If letters of marque were a tool of privatization, what good would it have been to include provisions, just a few lines below this, “to raise and support armies” and to “provide and maintain a Navy”?



    Well gee, it's almost as a semi-private army was a thing that was viewed with much less suspicion and probably much greater need two hundred and fifty fucking years ago, and we've since learned that unaccountable roving death squads is a bad idea that we shouldn't do thanks to this crazy new thing called history.

    ReplyDelete
  20. letter of marque?

    ReplyDelete
  21. hellslittlestangel1:31 PM

    Homer Simpson: Oh, Kent, I'd be lying if I said my men weren't committing crimes.

    Kent Brockman: Touché.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Yeah, that was the first bit of this idiocy that leapt out at me. Privateers were only possible because they could take things from the enemy that had great value, namely ships and their cargoes.
    What the fuck does Boko Haram or IS have that I want badly enough to arm up and fight for it?
    If I really want a beat-up 20-year-old Toyota pickup with a machine gun mounted, there's easier ways to get one than taking one from bloodthirsty maniacs in a foreign country. Pretty sure I can just buy one in, say, Columbia. Or possibly Arizona.

    ReplyDelete
  23. satch1:44 PM

    Heard this on Morning Edition just today:
    http://www.npr.org/2015/03/26/395475128/south-african-mercenaries-play-crucial-role-in-fight-a

    Why should South Africa get glory that OUR armed forces have earned with their heavy boots and big shadows.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Bitter Scribe1:49 PM

    ...if it should turn out that someone else is offering better pay than Uncle Sam, there's nothing to stop them from turning their guns around.


    Not to mention, if it should turn out that they're losing, in either the short or long term. Mercenaries come up notoriously short in the giving-their-lives-for-the-cause department. As one wise and cynical soldier said: "The thing about mercenaries is how many of them live to write their memoirs."

    ReplyDelete
  25. satch1:50 PM

    Man, I'm getting a stirring in my loins just thinking about all the possibilities here...

    Hey, how about a fund drive something like this:
    http://www.feedthechildren.org/

    I mean, your average mercenary eats more than your average child, but not THAT much more

    ReplyDelete
  26. Halloween_Jack1:56 PM

    if it should turn out that someone else is offering better pay than Uncle Sam, there's nothing to stop them from turning their guns around.


    And ISIS has lots of oil money.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Meanie-meanie, tickle a person1:59 PM

    The U.S. military wears a heavy boot, but at the moment it does nothing
    more than cast a shadow over the growing terrorist threat.


    Whilst hopping all over the Middle East on its single boot, pumping its single sequined glove in the air, shouting "beat it! beat it!" .

    ReplyDelete
  28. I don't know, satch. Isn't sending children off to fight ISIS a little cruel? Even if they are all full before they go?

    ReplyDelete
  29. merl12:00 PM

    I think that was a sarcastic joke.

    ReplyDelete
  30. If Obama starts upping the ante against ISIS prepare for wingnuts to do their inevitable geopolitical 360 and accuse him of backing Iran and its regional allies against Our Suddenly Noble Sunni Friends (who we've been accusing Obama of being in bed with as well, it's very complicated).

    ReplyDelete
  31. Ripley2:01 PM

    Dear Iraq,


    Please let Epstein and his friends kill ISIL and take their things.


    Signed,


    Epstein's Mother

    ReplyDelete
  32. satch2:01 PM

    "It's looking like IS may have already peaked, thanks to Kurdish fighters along with airstrikes..."


    Well, isn't it obvious? Our armed forces have to get in there NOW, before Kurds and Shiites solve the ISIS problem all on their own!

    ReplyDelete
  33. You say "privateer", I say "State-sponsored terrorist". Potato, potahto, let's call the whole thing off.

    ReplyDelete
  34. JennOfArk2:03 PM

    And when the mercenaries rape and torture and murder children, the US can just say, "hey, why are you looking at US? Our military didn't do any of that. We just paid the guys who did it."

    ReplyDelete
  35. Yep. And some more rational factions will hurt themselves laughing at this moron.

    ReplyDelete
  36. dstatton2:04 PM

    [crickets]

    ReplyDelete
  37. satch2:04 PM

    I meant something along the lines of feed the mercenaries.org

    ReplyDelete
  38. JennOfArk2:04 PM

    So the US military is into Doc Martens now? I had no idea our forces had been hipsterized.

    ReplyDelete
  39. dstatton2:05 PM

    I'm OK with the idea only if they are paid with bitcoin.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Smurch2:08 PM

    Aaaarrrrrrrgh, matey!


    (Sorry, I just couldn't resist.)

    ReplyDelete
  41. Look, the real problem with war has always been that there's no real way to maximize the profits for bootstrapping private enterprise. Oh, we've tried--Dick Cheney came awfully close to libertarian utopia by funneling all military logistic support functions to Haliburton and then ordering the military to pay for/provide all of Haliburton's transport and manpower needs.

    But, really, in the end there's just no way to squeeze the last nickel out of carnage like commissioning mercenary armies and handing them official leave to plunder foreign lands and enslave their captives. Only by getting back to just solid 10th-century practices can we hope to combat 6th-century jihadists.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Perfect! A kickstarter-funded mercenary army fed, clothed and supplied by generous donation!

    ReplyDelete
  43. ISIS is notably land-based in Iraq (which is not a country that belongs to us) and Syria (which is not a country that belongs to us).

    No problem--all your country are belong to us.

    ReplyDelete
  44. gratuitous2:20 PM

    Refresh my memory: Wasn't the genesis of all our current troubles military action in the Middle East, complete with indiscriminate bombing, torture, black ops, privateers, wet jobs and other assorted skullduggery? It seems the solution to the problem is to use the very same tools that created the problem in the first place.

    And yet Georgi Boorman sits, safe in her sinecure, well-paid and insulated from the normal and natural consequences of her lunatic proscriptions.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Wrangler2:20 PM

    I have an even better idea than Boorman. Why don't we just call up that old rogue, Snake Plissken? He'll know what to do, and we have a way to keep him accountable!

    ReplyDelete
  46. Obligatory:


    https://youtu.be/UvTv-I2Y390

    ReplyDelete
  47. Jaime Oria2:40 PM

    Snake Plissken? I thought he was dead!

    ReplyDelete
  48. bekabot2:42 PM

    Historically, people who've employed privateers have often had cause to regret it, because the privateers, of course, don't feel any more loyalty toward their employers than they do toward their targets. Of course, as with all rules, there are two or three exceptions here. One is: when the privateers do in fact feel some loyalty toward their employer (whoever that happens to be) and are operating "independently" for deniability reasons. (Example: Queen Elizabeth I and the English pirates who worked for her.) Another is: when the nation who employs the privateers/independent contractors/rogue agents/whatever controls them, their organization, the publicity they get (if any) and everything around them with an iron fist (the example there would be the French Foreign Legion). But neither of these alternatives are discussed or even mentioned in this case.

    I smell trouble. There are cures worse than any disease.

    ReplyDelete
  49. bekabot2:43 PM

    A grown-up's riposte to The Hunger Games. I like it...

    ReplyDelete
  50. What the fuck does Boko Haram or IS have that I want badly enough to arm up and fight for it?

    Blood diamonds and oil, respectively. Plus the $400 million ISIS plundered from the commercial bank they took over. Plus whatever Rolexes/Timexes they personally have.

    ReplyDelete
  51. GeniusLemur2:46 PM

    Yep, another right-wing with the "idea" that "If we can't send the army, we can send mercenaries! I figure it'll be a hundred, tops, because the "mercenaries" we'll hire will all be just like Rambo, right?"

    ReplyDelete
  52. If letters of marque were a tool of privatization, what good would it
    have been to include provisions, just a few lines below this, “to raise
    and support armies” and to “provide and maintain a Navy”?Similarly, if the Second Amendment were all about unlimited personal firearm ownership for the purpose of violently overthrowing the democratically-elected government, what good would it have been to include, in its very first clause, "a well-regulated militia"?

    ReplyDelete
  53. GeniusLemur2:49 PM

    "But Founders did not design a Constitution with powers that undermine other powers."
    Guess he hasn't heard of that "checks and balances" thing.

    ReplyDelete
  54. GeniusLemur2:50 PM

    Can't beat right-wingers for "cures" that make a hundred problems, including the one they're supposed to address, 10 times worse.

    ReplyDelete
  55. bekabot2:53 PM

    As in: Nancy Reagan comes up with a meme and a middling-bad drug problem turns into a decades-long miasma which leads to the highest rate of incarceration on Earth.

    See also: features versus bugs.

    ReplyDelete
  56. although I don't think their idol ever formally endorsed it.In October 2001, Ron Paul introduced bills
    H.R. 3074, Air Piracy Reprisal and Capture Act of 2001, and H.R. 3076,
    September 11 Marque and Reprisal Act of 2001, to authorize the U.S. State
    Department to issue letters of marque and reprisal against terrorists. He tried again in 2007, and in 2009 proposed addressing Somali piracy the same way. So yeah, Crazy Uncle Liberty has been all in on the concept.



    Even though the US was never a signatory to the Paris Declaration of 1856 banning the use of privateers, we've always officially abided by its provisions, not having actually employed letters of marque since the War of 1812 for some liberal, America-hating reason.


    On the other hand, I almost wish we had stuck with the discomfort about a permanent standing army, because we seem to keep having strong urges to use it as long as it's lying around.

    ReplyDelete
  57. Bigger hammers are always the solution for these people. In most every instance:


    Problem with guns?
    Why, more people with guns will solve that!


    Morons.

    ReplyDelete
  58. You're thinking of Mr. Wizard Jacob McCandles.

    ReplyDelete
  59. Or possibly Arizona.Hey, in Arizona they're used by lawless gangs who roam the desert in open defiance of federal authority. So just get your member of Congress to write you a letter of marque and reprisal, and go and take one. You'll still have to deal with bloodthirsty maniacs, but they tend to be much more pathetic than the ones in IS or Boko Haram.

    ReplyDelete
  60. . . . apparently killing people is held to less rigorous standards.

    Non-White people dead? Yes? Success!

    Who sez there's no standard?

    ReplyDelete
  61. Couldn't we just hire ISIS to fight the Iranians and the Iranians to fight ISIS. They are already in the area and seam willing to do the job anyways.

    ReplyDelete
  62. . . . a permanent standing army, because we seem to keep having strong urges to use it as long as it's lying around.

    Which, of course, is the problem with having your standing army lying around. A standing army didn't sit well with the founders, either.

    ReplyDelete
  63. Some will rightly point out the potential for abuse, as there almost
    certainly will be, as with all social and governmental institutions.Yes, indeed, all social and governmental institutions carry the potential for abuse. Therefore, we might as well leap straight to setting up institutions with the greatest possible potential for abuse. I mean, hey, any damaged innocents can simply sue, right?


    Now, if you'll excuse me, that old Far Side cartoon has inspired me to set up a daycare next door to a dingo farm. After all, all daycares contain the potential for trouble.

    ReplyDelete
  64. Fleurdesel3:34 PM

    And look there would be awesome financial savings later when none of our fine mercenaries were eligible for VA benefits to help with their PTSD and various injuries! Win win!

    ReplyDelete
  65. Our liberal media hosted John Bolton to promote the bombs away.

    Again.
    ~

    ReplyDelete
  66. montag23:48 PM

    Oh, yeah. Small change got rained on with his own .38.

    Something like this?

    ReplyDelete
  67. Helmut Monotreme3:48 PM

    Why send Americans when foreign born fighters will do it for pennies on the dollar? That way when and if the dust settles, they can be cut loose for the bargain price of nothing, and cheated out of their last paycheck to boot.

    ReplyDelete
  68. So I called the offices of the New York Times and said, "I'd like to use some of the most valuable editorial real estate in the country to advocate for killing random people in another country in a way that will set off a chain of events likely to not only produce exactly the opposite of the desired results, but also to further destabilize the entire Middle East and result in yet more violence and extremism." The editor was silent for a moment, and then said "Can you have that emailed to me before 5PM today so I can run it tomorrow? If not, just dictate it to me and I'll write it down. Is $10,000 enough to cover this? Or do you need more money?"

    So I called the offices of the New York Times and said, "I'd like to use some of the most valuable editorial real estate on the country to advocate that we not treat poor people as though they're diseased, and maybe consider some programs that could help them actually climb out of poverty." The editor was silent for a moment, and then said "Is this some kind of joke? We can't run communist stuff like that. And besides, poor people smell bad, and they fuck on the couch all day long when they're not eating T-bone steaks and talking on their Obama phones. If you wanna write about the poor, you should be telling them to be more moral and pull themselves up by their bootstraps." And then he hung up.

    ReplyDelete
  69. basenjibrian4:28 PM

    A bad idea for whom? I think the South American 1% still loves roving death squads!

    ReplyDelete
  70. PersonaAuGratin4:38 PM

    I would like to play Stand Sit Lie with this comment.

    ReplyDelete
  71. I'm imagining the commercials: [Sad music; a kindly but somber white-bearded gentlemen sits with a mercenary on his lap.]

    "This is Screamin' Eagle'76. He's a private military enhancement operative in the Sunni Triangle. This is his village, which he conquered days ago by summarily executing the local warlord. But supplies are running low and rumors of a large force of Daesh fighters in the region are growing.



    "Every day, contractors like Screamin' here are facing more local unrest, harsh environments and possible indictment for war crimes. For just thousands of dollars a day, you can sponsor a grey-ops commando like Screamin', so he can keep fighting the 'good' fight. We'll even send you a picture of your operative and this certificate of non-uniformed quasi-sanction for whatever he does.


    "Please call now, or go to our website. It only costs as much as feeding a school full of hungry children for a year. And you'll feel great, because you won't have to think about the details of armed conflict in a region you know nothing about. They're counting on you. Don't let this bullet, be his last."

    ReplyDelete
  72. PersonaAuGratin4:47 PM

    I mean, your average mercenary eats more than your average child,

    I think they usually save the average child for dessert.

    ReplyDelete
  73. montag24:52 PM

    I am imagining that this Boorman disaster came out of some conversation she overheard at some get-together at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, where some Milo Minderbinder was mulling over how to make ever more money on war: "It's not enough to profit on the back end. We have to figure a way to commodify war, to monetize it. And get the government to pay the up-front costs."


    So, the model is not so much fantasy football as it is a mart. And just think of the derivatives the fuckers could dream up to sell on war! The Treasury could auction off letters of marque like they do bonds. A whole new trading vehicle! The stock market would go through the friggin' roof when corporations could legally field their own armies! Get the government off the mercenaries' backs! Cut out the Pentagon middleman! NSA, a wholly owned subsidiary of Google. CIA, a division of ExxonMobil (well, at least that would be truth in advertising). The Department of Homeland Security, brought to you by Correctional Corporation of America. "Lockheed Martin: We have a monopoly on war."


    "The war between the forces of Halliburton and Anadarko for oil fields north and west of Basra enters its third month, after Halliburton routed Sinclair Oil in a surprise attack last year. A planned merger between Halliburton and ammunition supplier Remington is expected to raise Halliburton's share price by 4%, after a 1/2% drop last week when civilian casualty numbers were announced. In related news, Alibaba's arms division has finalized its purchase of China. The centerpiece of the deal, China's nuclear weapons, will be spun off in an IPO at a later date."


    Privatizing the military was such a success, why not go ahead and privatize war?

    ReplyDelete
  74. smut clyde5:02 PM

    For thirty years Caesar ruled with an iron fist. Then with a wooden foot, and finally with a piece of string

    ReplyDelete
  75. smut clyde5:03 PM

    http://media.oglaf.com/comic/newmodelarmy3.jpg

    ReplyDelete
  76. TGuerrant5:07 PM

    It's comments like this one that tell me I belong here.

    ReplyDelete
  77. smut clyde5:08 PM

    Once your army and navy are officially self-funding on a spoils system, you aren't going to be fighting poor countries for long, because that's not where the money is.

    ReplyDelete
  78. DN Nation5:11 PM

    "Some less rational factions will undoubtedly hail this as a crazy right-winged conspiracy to privatize the military."


    NO U!

    ReplyDelete
  79. TGuerrant5:11 PM

    I wanna give this comment a spit-shine and a freshly sharpened bayonet.

    ReplyDelete
  80. Smarter than Your Average Bear5:12 PM

    The U.S. military wears a heavy boot, but at the moment it does nothing more than cast a shadow over the growing terrorist threat.


    So does that come with Brown Shirts or not

    ReplyDelete
  81. TGuerrant5:13 PM

    St. Louis County must be farther south than I thought.

    ReplyDelete
  82. Bog's bulleted balls, your ad copy is golden.


    I wonder if John McCain is willing to grow a beard?

    ReplyDelete
  83. Jay B.5:15 PM

    If abuse were to be found, processes for investigation and prosecution would be in place to swiftly bring to account and deal punishment for violations, as they had in the past.

    That's hilarious. I mean has that ever happened, anywhere? I seem to remember Condi Rice threatening the government of Iraq for their entirely reasonable demand that people from Blackwater be subject to the laws of the land they were running amok in...Oh, wait, it wasn't even Iraq, it was Congress — Rice's State Department told Blackwater to ignore Waxman's inquiry. I always forget that no matter how poorly I remember the Bush Administration, it was always worse than that.

    ReplyDelete
  84. basenjibrian5:15 PM

    I actually missed dex's link! It's a doozy. But sure. Given that we train the South Americans on how to keep the little people in place...

    But at least Christians in Indiana (the Alabama of the Midwest) don't have to be oppressed by serving them evil Sodomites! Praise Jeebus!

    ReplyDelete
  85. Jay B.5:17 PM

    Oh yeah:


    L. Paul Bremer III, the former U.S. administrator for Iraq, granted contractors immunity from prosecution in an order he signed the day before handing over sovereignty in June 2004.

    ReplyDelete
  86. smut clyde5:20 PM

    processes for investigation and prosecution would be in place to
    swiftly bring to account and deal punishment for violations, as they had
    in the past.


    A clause in the contract specifies that any complaints will undergo arbitration through a private agency, because FREEDOM.

    ReplyDelete
  87. smut clyde5:26 PM

    Ron Paul introduced bills H.R. 3074, Air Piracy Reprisal and Capture Act of 2001
    The mechanics of placing a boarding party onto a hijacked plane in midair -- to fight their way up the aisle to the cockpit, cutlasses flashing -- might be more complex than Ron Paul imagined, even for a libertarian privateer.

    ReplyDelete
  88. TGuerrant5:37 PM

    Those silly Saudis. Good thing they're friends of ours.

    ReplyDelete
  89. mgmonklewis6:15 PM

    How could dependence upon mercenaries ever go wrong? Take the Byzantine Empire, for example. Wait . . . bad example.

    ReplyDelete
  90. satch6:16 PM

    "Our Suddenly Noble Sunni Friends"


    Oh, they've always been our pals, ever since The Surge(tm) facilitated the Sunni Awakening(tm).

    ReplyDelete
  91. mgmonklewis6:18 PM

    Artist's conception: https://youtu.be/ZcJjMnHoIBI

    ReplyDelete
  92. BigHank536:20 PM

    I'm sure that was the a priori assumption of the big-brained libertarians at Reason, which is why they work at Reason giving knob-jobs to the Kochs instead of a job with actual responsibilities, like assembling burritos.

    ReplyDelete
  93. BigHank536:25 PM

    Never, ever, underestimate the imagination of a libertarian. They imagine that Ayn Rand can write. They imagine that Rand Paul is doing more than lining his pockets. They've imagined seasteading, for fuck's sake.

    ReplyDelete
  94. You could call it World of Warcraft


    ...or something.

    ReplyDelete
  95. smut clyde6:32 PM

    The thing about a self-financing spoils-grabbing mercenary army is that any country can set one up. Why is this specifically the responsibility of the US, which as we are regularly reminded, is an impoverished country with crippling deficits to pay? Perhaps Boorman's advice would be better directed at, I dunno, Saudi Arabia.

    ReplyDelete
  96. The U.S. should arm libertarians and send them to fight in the Middle East, with the proviso that they keep the land they conquer- grant each of them six feet of Syrian soil.

    ReplyDelete
  97. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ao70mYTLn1Q

    ReplyDelete
  98. I was thinking of Hessians. Maybe that hits a little too close to home?

    ReplyDelete
  99. I have two words for you: atomic zeppelins.

    ReplyDelete
  100. ... and perhaps a Kung-Fu Grip™.

    ReplyDelete
  101. John Wesley Hardin7:52 PM

    In re Boorman's appetite for war, the estimable John Boehner apparently said today that "The world is starving for American leadership, but America has an anti-war president," which tells you all you need to know about SO many subjects.

    ReplyDelete
  102. glennisw8:13 PM

    Outsource it!

    ReplyDelete
  103. carbonbased8:33 PM

    A Goon Show reference! I'm home.

    ReplyDelete
  104. AlanInSF8:41 PM

    I was going to say, 'Is she fucking nuts?' And then I realized what a stupid question that was.

    ReplyDelete
  105. YNWA405158:54 PM

    Poe's law makes it really, really hard to tell with conservatives and fundies.

    ReplyDelete
  106. The U.S. military wears a heavy boot, but at the moment it does nothing more than cast a shadow over the growing terrorist threat.



    That wouldn't be the jackboot that the octopus wore while singing its swansong, would it?

    ReplyDelete
  107. YNWA405159:05 PM

    Some less rational factions will undoubtedly hail this as a crazy right-winged conspiracy to privatize the military.


    And of course, some more rational factions will rightly be wondering if my decision to stop taking my anti-psychotic medication was the right one. Be that as it may . . .

    ReplyDelete
  108. billcinsd9:47 PM

    No, I think they like Steppenwolf

    ReplyDelete
  109. billcinsd9:52 PM

    bring back Operation Condor

    ReplyDelete
  110. Proteus45410:31 PM

    "But Founders did not design"


    Something about the way she writes that - not even THE Founders, just Founders - chills me to the core. Like she's sinking into Newspeak.

    ReplyDelete
  111. Atomic zeppelins: Wasn't that the brassiere style Madonna invented back in the '80s?

    ReplyDelete
  112. AGoodQuestion11:10 PM

    Some less rational factions will undoubtedly hail this as a crazy right-winged conspiracy to privatize the military.
    "But I maintain that it is a brilliant right-winged conspiracy to privatize the military, and you're welcome!"

    ReplyDelete
  113. AGoodQuestion11:13 PM

    Thousands of dollars a day? Why that's just what I spend for a cup of coffee, if you add rent for the winter place in Brazil.

    ReplyDelete
  114. Was Machiavelli rational?



    "Mercenaries and auxiliaries are useless and dangerous; and if one holds his state based on these arms, he will stand neither firm nor safe; for they are disunited, ambitious and without discipline, unfaithful, valiant before friends, cowardly before enemies; they have neither the fear of God nor fidelity to men, and destruction is deferred only so long as the attack is; for in peace one is robbed by them, and in war by the enemy. The fact is, they have no other attraction or reason for keeping the field than a trifle of stipend, which is not sufficient to make them willing to die for you. They are ready enough to be your soldiers whilst you do not make war, but if war comes they take themselves off or run from the foe; which I should have little trouble to prove, for the ruin of Italy has been caused by nothing else than by resting all her hopes for many years on mercenaries, and although they formerly made some display and appeared valiant amongst themselves, yet when the foreigners came they showed what they were."

    http://www.constitution.org/mac/prince12.htm

    ReplyDelete
  115. AGoodQuestion11:18 PM

    That's wild, man. Like it was born to be wild.

    ReplyDelete
  116. AGoodQuestion11:29 PM

    You can't make this stuff up. Not without being placed on suicide watch, at least.

    ReplyDelete
  117. AGoodQuestion11:36 PM

    Like she's sinking into Newspeak.
    Pretty sure she would consider it ascending.

    ReplyDelete
  118. Gromet11:42 PM

    Is Boorman for combatting ISIS because it's the right thing to do? If so, what's to stop her would-be privateers from getting their guns and heading over there just to do it? You know, the way Jihad John did. Surely they could join up with some ISIS-opposing local militia, and if there's enough of them, they'll run it by majority like all those guys who moved to Texas when it was still part of Mexico came to run it. Then what President is going to prosecute a victorious band of Americans who just beat ISIS? But as it is Boorman is positing thousands of combat-trained Americans who are thinking "I would go defeat the terrorists, because it's the right thing to do, but eh, I refuse to try until it pays better."

    ReplyDelete
  119. Yeah, what could go wrong with Saudi Arabia funding paramilitary groups? This time, I mean?

    ReplyDelete
  120. They're probably too busy picking lettuce for fifty bucks an hour.

    ReplyDelete
  121. billcinsd12:07 AM

    who doesn't love the Republican game

    ReplyDelete
  122. redoubtagain1:26 AM

    feedthechildrenbullets.org

    ReplyDelete
  123. redoubtagain1:37 AM

    This explains why I refer to a certain notorious "contractor" as "Prinz Erik von Schwarzwasser zu Abu Dhabi."

    ReplyDelete
  124. Mary Ellen Sandahl2:35 AM

    Hessians were not mercenaries. Very interesting Wikipedia article about them. They were often farm laborers or other working class men who were press-ganged into the armies of small German states like Hesse-Kassel. The rulers of these principalities, margravates, etc. rented their soldiers by the regiment to other rulers. The German potentate would get money, the renting potentate would get troops that he would not have to recruit, train, or equip.

    ReplyDelete
  125. Suttree2:57 AM

    Sally Struthers libel!!111!!!

    ReplyDelete
  126. smut clyde4:38 AM

    Is that a challenge?

    http://longstreet.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83542d51e69e201538e7d4aea970b-pi

    http://longstreet.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83542d51e69e2014e8870b10b970d-pi

    ReplyDelete
  127. BadExampleMan5:05 AM

    This women needs to beaten about the head and shoulders with a trade paperback copy of Barbara Tuchman's A Distant Mirror: The Disastrous Fourteenth Century.

    ReplyDelete
  128. That is definitely one big fuckin' boot.

    ReplyDelete
  129. Lurking Canadian7:49 AM

    She's thinking too small. There's gotta be a way to deploy those kids that Megs has been training to rush at gunmen. Talk about risk-free revenue streams!

    ReplyDelete
  130. Robert William Alexander Jr.8:23 AM

    My son in law's Navy: his ship is in the Persian Gulf. And believe me, we are at war, de facto, with ISIL/ISIS.

    ReplyDelete
  131. LookWhosInTheFreezer10:39 AM

    Operators are standing by. Major credit cards accepted, Bitcoin preferred.

    ReplyDelete
  132. That's it exactly. Notice the helicopter deck and the lowerable / detachable section of the gondola? Board and storm, just like the ol' Galactic Patrol days.

    ReplyDelete
  133. J Neo Marvin12:05 PM

    Now I know where John Cale got those lyrics from.

    ReplyDelete
  134. Howlin Wolfe12:13 PM

    Loving the market more than their country quintessentially sums up the conservatarian ethos. Their love of country, such as it is, doesn't extend to its people, except for their little clique.

    ReplyDelete
  135. FFS, Machiavlli argued against the use of mercinaries, and he wasn't exactly a flaming liberal.

    ReplyDelete
  136. I had never heard of the song, thanks!

    ReplyDelete
  137. Howlin Wolfe1:07 PM

    Upvoted for the Tom Waits reference and also too the irony of it all.

    ReplyDelete
  138. StringOnAStick1:08 PM

    And yet our illustrious media doesn't have much to report about this. Huh.

    ReplyDelete
  139. bekabot1:29 PM

    No, you don't have to be a liberal to be against this. (Though I suspect this argument was never sincerely intended and was only used as midweek filler. But still.) I would argue that anyone who claims to be a Real True heartfelt Libertarian ought to be against it, because first, the basis upon which a Libertarian accepts the necessity of a State is that a State is there to take on the responsibility for Army and police power and to guarantee its citizens greater physical safety than they would otherwise know. Start to employ mercenaries and you break up the State's monopoly of force, which (if you ask the Libertarians) is the only reason for the State's existence. Without that monopoly you, as a Libertarian, are no longer what you claim to be: you're not a Libertarian, you're an anarchist. And second (of course) there's no way to make certain costs expand uncontrollably than to unhook the people who are doing the labor (the soldiers or cops or whatever) from the people who are paying the bills (the citizens). So if you want to market this idea as a money-saver you're entirely off-base, because the only way to keep the costs down is to make certain both parties to the transaction are accountable to each other (as in contract law — and it doesn't always work even then). But the one way to ensure that it won't work is to remove the accountability altogether.

    So, all in all, this is a super bad idea, and it's such a super bad idea that you don't have to be a liberal to think so.

    ReplyDelete
  140. This privateer idea is getting close to peak cray. It is still in the exponential foothills but the ascendance is a-comin'

    ReplyDelete
  141. All I want from a time machine is one Founder to come forward and say "Ma'am you're crazy, The actual fuck? This is what we meant..."

    ReplyDelete
  142. smut clyde3:46 PM

    I retract "cutlass" and substitute "space-ax".

    ReplyDelete
  143. I keep forgetting that you are aware of all sci-fi traditions.

    ReplyDelete
  144. Gabriel Ratchet6:15 PM

    My life's greatest regret is that the failure of the zeppelin to catch on as a viable mode of transport, combined with my own crippling fear of heights, has meant that my childhood dream of being an Airship Pirate will forever go unfulfilled.




    Thanks Obama!

    ReplyDelete
  145. Gabriel Ratchet6:24 PM

    And whatever priceless ancient relics they haven't destroyed as "blasphemous".

    ReplyDelete
  146. M. Krebs8:33 PM

    My favorite Holdsworth record! You da man, Jeffraham.

    ReplyDelete
  147. No, that only works for welfare fraud.

    ReplyDelete
  148. Well, I was involuntarily committed back in late October...

    ReplyDelete
  149. J Neo Marvin11:47 AM

    Now we need some really long commercials featuring Sally Struthers and showing teary-eyed mercenaries gazing desperately into the camera.

    ReplyDelete
  150. J Neo Marvin11:49 AM

    Clearly I should have scrolled down first.

    ReplyDelete
  151. J Neo Marvin12:13 PM

    Is she referring to the paranoid shapeshifters from Deep Space 9?

    ReplyDelete