Interesting to me as the daughter, niece, cousin of men crewing the merchant ships of WW2 (well, coastguard and navy too) and worked for international trading company, insurance firm for too long.
- The retribution for arming ghost vessels to get close to Russian shipping is at best an unfortunate idea. God help whoever volunteers. The complexity of international trade and naval law, not to mention courts ruling on same would go into overdrive after the first incident. And they wouldn’t be helping Ukraine or any ally who ever seeks maritime insurance and the behemoth of reinsurance. Sorry. (I support Ukraine) 🇺🇦
Thank you for your comments, they really mean a lot to me.
Well, I do have a few degrees on international law. Armed merchentmen are no war crime, they are legal under international law. It's ok if you don't believe me, but go ahead and find me even one instance of an armed merchant cruiser captain captured and then tried by an enemy court martial, which is a really low bar. There are no war crimes trials of armed merchant captains because it's not a war crime.
I wasn’t clear my apologies. Merchantmen are always armed of course - and have to defend themselves against pirates with some frequency (yes there are pirates though I doubt like Errol Flynn). My comment was about your suggestion that a friendly country equip a ship (or submarine)- for Ukraine - and pose as a merchant ship and attack Russian oil tankers.
(Gratifying image though it may be.) (the crew of a tanker may disagree)
Nope! Not pirates because state actors. Mercenary privateers might or might not be pirates. It is the state action that divides pirates from privateers.
Interesting to me as the daughter, niece, cousin of men crewing the merchant ships of WW2 (well, coastguard and navy too) and worked for international trading company, insurance firm for too long.
- The retribution for arming ghost vessels to get close to Russian shipping is at best an unfortunate idea. God help whoever volunteers. The complexity of international trade and naval law, not to mention courts ruling on same would go into overdrive after the first incident. And they wouldn’t be helping Ukraine or any ally who ever seeks maritime insurance and the behemoth of reinsurance. Sorry. (I support Ukraine) 🇺🇦
Thank you for your comments, they really mean a lot to me.
Well, I do have a few degrees on international law. Armed merchentmen are no war crime, they are legal under international law. It's ok if you don't believe me, but go ahead and find me even one instance of an armed merchant cruiser captain captured and then tried by an enemy court martial, which is a really low bar. There are no war crimes trials of armed merchant captains because it's not a war crime.
I wasn’t clear my apologies. Merchantmen are always armed of course - and have to defend themselves against pirates with some frequency (yes there are pirates though I doubt like Errol Flynn). My comment was about your suggestion that a friendly country equip a ship (or submarine)- for Ukraine - and pose as a merchant ship and attack Russian oil tankers.
(Gratifying image though it may be.) (the crew of a tanker may disagree)
there will be no shortage of volunteers. have i mentioned the laws of prize?
What state will accept a pirates (that would be their classification I’m pretty sure, absent a declaration of war) claim of possession? Listening.
Nope! Not pirates because state actors. Mercenary privateers might or might not be pirates. It is the state action that divides pirates from privateers.
Annuit Coeptis - He has favored our motherfucking Undertaking (loose translation) Or, as we say in Chinese "革命不是请客吃饭"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YST_ieSzhoo