Laserlight/RBW discussion:
> RBW wrote:I'd go for planetoid or artificial substitute, with generous
I think Laserlights comment on the insurance was pretty good -
especially given corrupt officials who may want to inflate the "actual" piracy
figures.... ;-)
> Does anyone know why Spain never took out Port Royal, or other such
> True but that doesn't explain why Spain never dropped a battalion or
But given the amount of damage that piracy on this scale actually did, it
wasn't worth it given that even if the known center's were destroyed, others
would pop up elsewhere: the ships didn't need as much as an FT ship (it may
seem obvious but it's a point worth making). Maybe I'm thinking a bit
Machiellellian but it seems better to have some control on what you know than
none on what you don't know (though i think I recall a few expeditions to try
and suppress some pirate havens).
We should also remember the wars in Europe in which Spain and Portugal were
involved at the time: very distracting for European powers as I'm sure the
Americans will (happily) tell us! ;-)
Yes, pirates caused some minor havoc at times but it was (IIRC) really the
burgeoning Royal Navy which caused the most damage to the pirates in terms
of stamping them out - and then not until around 1720-1730. Wartime,
government-sponsored piracy, such as the earlier British raids on
Spanish shipping, the (ealier and later) French "guerre du course" and the
later
American "piracy" did far more damage due to the scale and government support
it received.
Many "Pirates" started out as "Privateers" and just didn't hear the latest war
had ended (or the next one started) or just went 'rogue' ot just decided the
profit margin was too good to pass up...
On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 00:49:55 +0100 Tim Bancroft
> <tim@dragonshome.freeserve.co.uk> writes:
Another thought on this, is that instead of the pirates having some secret
base, out there on it's own, why not have them have "unofficially sanctioned
havens" in other "nations" territory.
Think about it this way. Say the NAC and the NSL aren't on really good terms.
Not openly hostile, but not really friendly either. The NSL has colonies and
support bases that are in the "boonies", so to speak. If there happen to be
unregistered freebooters who come there to trade goods, refit, and rearm, why
should the NSL care that most of the trade goods are actually obtained by
force of arms from NAC shipping, in NAC space? There is no open hostility on
the part of the NSL. They just don't enforce NAC laws on neutral parties who
want to trade or operate at their bases.
Now you have a foundation for pirates having someplace to go. This is not that
far from the Letters of Marque given to "privateers" in the 1700s.
:)
John L said:
> Now you have a foundation for pirates having someplace to go. This
Actually, it is quite different. A Letter of Marque and Reprisal is
essentially a government license for a privately-owned vessel to
operate in the capacity of a government warship. If the NSL is handing out
those Letters for privateers to go hunting NAC ships, then
the NSL is at war with the NAC (at least in the outer systems)--it's a
lot more directly hostile than merely "receiving stolen goods."
I sit happily corrected.:)
Everything I said should work, 'cept for the Letters.
A pirates life for me!
J
John K. Lerchey Computer and Network Security Coordinator Computing Services
Carnegie Mellon University
> On Sun, 26 Oct 2003, Laserlight wrote:
> John L said: