Our long history of violating international law continues…

  • TheJesusaurus@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    I guess there is some stupid argument that the US government doesn’t consider it piracy… We kind of assumed that. Other governments think it’s piracy, and US DoJ memos don’t apply to those

    • arrow74@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      No governments would ever consider this piracy because it’s not.

      Since it was done using the military it’s an act of war

        • shalafi@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 day ago

          Yes. And those are privately owned vessels acting under a government’s letter of marque. Private, it’s in the name. :)

            • shalafi@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              21 hours ago

              Warships are by definition owned and operated by a government. Privateers are private vessels operating under cover of law by a government.

              So, yeah? Warships cannot commit piracy, technically. Really, the whole conversation here is about words and meanings.

        • arrow74@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          Yes I have. Privateers are private individuals that commit piracy on behalf of the state.

          The US did not hire or sanction a mercenary group to take this tanker.

          The US used its military. That makes it not piracy, but that does make it an act of war