Palin backs Trump

This is the place where you comment about politics and news that does not relate to the Navarre Beach Greater Area. Do NOT post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, taunting, sexually-oriented, spam, religious attack or any other material that may violate any applicable laws.
User avatar
bjrichus
Power User
Power User
Posts: 2459
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2012 1:28 pm
Location: Looking forward to the next trip to Navarre Beach! WOO HOO!

Sat Jan 23, 2016 4:48 pm

Linda wrote:I love history and source documents. The Treaty of Tripoli is an interesting read.

As even minded men had to deal with the same issues we deal with today, great strides were taken to establish diplomacy that actually worked.

We should aim for the same. No one side should supersede the other in a country built on freedom.
Are you thinking about Article 11 Linda?

Looking back at the treaty of 1796/7 is interesting.

Let me pull it up and re-read it...

[Later]... Yup. Does make for interesting reading. Shame so many never even heard about it in civics class (or were sleeping when the Barbary wars were covered).
bjrichus (also known as Brian)
NavarreBeachLife.com Moderator
Linda
Power User
Power User
Posts: 890
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 8:11 am

Sat Jan 23, 2016 4:59 pm

I agree.
User avatar
Pete
Power User
Power User
Posts: 1956
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 8:26 am
Location: Navarre - Hidden Creek Estates

Tue Jan 26, 2016 9:16 am

Keep in mind that the Treaty of Tripoli - adapted under G. Washington's presidency, was basically paying a bribe to the Muslim pirates to leave our merchant ships alone (not take the ships, and press the crews into slavery) - as the new USA had a very weak to non-existent navy - and both Britain and France had withdrawn naval protection of USA merchant ships.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Tripoli

As General William Eaton informed newly appointed Secretary of State John Marshall in 1800, "It is a maxim of the Barbary States, that 'The Christians who would be on good terms with them must fight well or pay well.'"

However, before anyone in the United States saw the Treaty, its required payments (bribes), in the form of goods and money, had been made in part.

The treaty was broken in 1801 by the Pasha of Tripoli over President Thomas Jefferson's refusal to submit to the Pasha's demands for increased payments. (getting greedy?) And with now a stronger USN - and USMC "shores of Tripoli" - went to war to stop the piracy.

Through subsequent battles, Tripoli eventually agreed to terms of peace with the United States. Tobias Lear negotiated a second "Treaty of Peace and Amity" with the Pasha Yusuf on June 4, 1805. To the dismay of many Americans, the new settlement included a ransom of $60,000 paid for the release of prisoners from the USS Philadelphia and several U.S. merchant ships. By 1807, Algiers had gone back to taking U.S. ships and seamen hostage. (Broke the "treaty" again - Muslims cannot be trusted?). Distracted by the preludes to the War of 1812, the United States was unable to respond to the provocations until 1815, with the Second Barbary War, thereby concluding the encompassing the First Barbary War and the Second Barbary War (1800–1815).

And then there is the whole controversy that "Article 11" of the English version is not found in the Arabic version, nor exactly who/how it got there?

A prominent member of Adams' cabinet, Secretary of War James McHenry, protested the language of article 11 before its ratification. He wrote to Secretary of the Treasury Oliver Wolcott, Jr., September 26, 1800: "The Senate, my good friend, and I said so at the time, ought never to have ratified the treaty alluded to, with the declaration that 'the government of the United States, is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.' What else is it founded on? This act always appeared to me like trampling upon the cross. I do not recollect that Barlow was even reprimanded for this outrage upon the government and religion."

A second treaty, the Treaty of Peace and Amity signed on July 4, 1805, superseded the 1796 treaty. The 1805 treaty did not contain the phrase "not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion."
Cheers, Pete
Go Vikings!
Linda
Power User
Power User
Posts: 890
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 8:11 am

Tue Jan 26, 2016 9:39 am

Maybe my history class is dull in my mind. Thought that the treat was introduced to Congress by President John Adams??
User avatar
David
Power User
Power User
Posts: 1226
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 10:41 pm
Location: Navarre, FL

Wed Jan 27, 2016 11:32 am

My memory is that Adams presented the treaty, for ratification, a couple of months after he became President in March. The treaty was first signed in Tripoli in November of the year previous while Washington was still President as Pete stated.

Paper work took a while to move around the world in those days. Those darn wind boats just did not transport as fast as planes, faxes, and e mail. Signed in November, presented for ratification in June, 7 months later.

Not so sure deplomacy worked so well, then or now, since the treaty was harshly broken in less than 5 years of its signing and only the gained naval power of the USA led to a second treaty being negotiated. We should take !essons from past experience. Some just can not be trusted and only show respect for power, not deplomacy, unless it is backed with a show of action.
David
Post Reply

Return to ““We the People” ~ National Politics, National News, World News and Humor”