Zeal For Truth

In the early history of this country, in fact even prior to that - many of the world’s governments faced a serious threat which disrupted their trade and transit of critical natural resources, murdered innocent civilians and terrorized budding settlements and colonies. This threat was unique - murderers and thieves, often with no state alligance, had declared war on the vulnerable satellites of European governments and newly established countries like the United States. Conventional armies could not hope to fight them, failing miserably in every attempt - the terrorizers were far too innovative and mobile. Even warring with the states that sometimes sponsored them bore no good results, and often only exasterbated the problem.

Pirates, though often the word now conjures a clowny, disney-type rendering with a comical accent, were the terrorists of their era. We only mock them now, because upon learning how to deal with them, they were quickly and effectively eradicated - so completely and swiftly that they seem more like myth than the very real an pressing threat that brought the pre-industrial world to it’s knees.

The Illumination of the Constitution
The US, which relied heavily on a secure flow of goods to and from Europe, made it clear in the constitution how to deal with such unconventional threats:

The Congress shall have power… to declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water…

States finally realized that fire must be fought with fire - no standard army or navy could hope to rid the world of the complicated and evasive net of pirates, private or state-sponsored. Instead of mounting costly no-win wars to secure resources or fortify settlements, they issues letters of marque and reprisal. These official warrants were granted to private citizens, with the promise of a large reward, to use whatever means and innovation at their disposal to capture or kill these pirates.

Pure Efficiency
The process worked so well, that governments soon abandoned the practice with the Treaty of Paris, as the only pirates left were state-sponsored ones. France and England especially realized that, for all intents and purposes, they were really just fighting a war with the letters.

That’s right, pirates, the terrorists of their day, were wiped out. No large scale global war lasting generations and requiring continued sacrifice of its citizens was needed - there never was a “War on Pirates.” Instead, governments took a little time to think before they acted, and formulated a plan that was tremendously efficient and successful.

The Modern Solution
In modern times, the legacy of pirates has been taken over by Islamic Terrorists and the rouge states that sponsor them. These terrorists are mobile, evasive and nearly impossible to capture and bring to justice. Conventional war against them has been largely a complete waste of resources and lives. Terrorists jump from state to state, place to place despite ever increasing security measures; even “invading” peaceful nations posing as citizens to create further destruction and loss of life.

In a report published in the Indiana Law Journal, the inclination to go after terrorists is alive and well:

[A letter of marque and reprisal]—requiring at base the employment of private citizens to conduct a military operation—is far from unprecedented. During the 1979 Iranian Revolution, billionaire H. Ross Perot funded a private military team in an operation to rescue two of his company’s employees imprisoned in Iran. More recently, prominent American actor Bruce Willis has offered million-dollar bounties for the capture of former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, as well as terrorist leaders Osama bin Laden, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, and Ayman al-Zawahiri. With the advent of formalized privateering, it is certainly plausible to infer that other offers would surface.

The best part about this idea, is that not only is the desire to go after terrorists a popular and likely well-funded endeavor, it would be effective:

As Major Christopher M. Supernor has argued, [the private sector is] well-equipped to conduct the hunt. In rejecting a licensing system for oversight of international bounty hunters, Supernor argues that private enterprise would likely achieve greater success without governmental involvement. According to Major Supernor, governmental regulations would (1) prohibit opportunistic captures (thereby indirectly reducing the number of people engaged in the hunt), and (2) allow a host state to thwart bounty hunting efforts.

We cannot help but remember that Bill Clinton twice had Bin Laden in his scopes and failed to act. However, we must not blame Clinton, rather we should look to the very nature of governments, which are unable to deal dynamically and rapidly in the real world, being heavily burdened by bureaucracy and regulations. Whether it is George W. Bush or Clinton, the government itself is inept at fighting this kind of threat. Fortunately, history has shown that unconventional wars can be fought and won, but they require unconventional methods.