It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Whether history repeats or rhymes... we've been here before.

page: 1

log in


posted on Aug, 13 2016 @ 08:25 PM
So I was conversing with an older lady yesterday about some world issues and the intent behind the second amendment... and the conversation turned to Thomas Jefferson and the Barbary wars.

She fancied herself a 'history buff' and was surprised that she knew so little about the US' first foreign war. It's not hard to find information on this as long is one is looking, so I will spare the deluge of links.

But essentially, the highlights of this conversation revolved around Jefferson's hesitation to start a navy to combat the Islamist pirates, as he did not want to the new government to amass such power over its own citizenry. (When we left the kingdom, we lost the alliances that came with the association with the Royal Navy and as a budding young nation, trade was of utmost importance.)

After many of our mercantile ships and sailors were captured, and a massive portion of the GDP was spent on ransom, Jefferson took over and decided that he was not having that. Adams,Franklin and Jefferson took a trip to meet up with the Tripoli ambassador and was told that,

“it was written in the Koran, that all Nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon whoever they could find and to make Slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and that every Mussulman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.”

... sooooo, not a whole lot of change in the 200 years since.

France was dealing with its own situation and was little help, although Sweden stepped up and gave us a hand. Go Swedes!!

Jefferson wanted to throw down, yet Adams disagreed, saying,

a battle against the pirates would be “too rugged for our people to bear.” Putting the matter starkly, Adams said: “We ought not to fight them at all unless we determine to fight them forever.”

It seems public education's focus on early US history ends with the Revolution, which is a shame because our current situation seems to have many rhyming verses with this time period. I do remember a teacher telling me that Morocco was the first country to recognize the United States' independence... though either intentionally or not... kind of left out the important context and seemed to think Morocco was in support of the US at the time.

Anyway... I am not here to recite a history lesson, my question to ATS is simple, have you heard about these conflicts? Do you see any modern parallels? Do you think it had been intentionally left out of history lessons for political reasons?

Can't wait to hear some thoughts.

I know I said I would spare the links, but in fact checking this post I found an article by Christopher Hitchens, which I now feel compelled to share.

posted on Aug, 13 2016 @ 11:15 PM
a reply to: chronfucius

To answer your question. No I have not heard of this and it is very interesting. Our failure to take care of the problem has only helped increase it.

None the less, I do admire our founding fathers for there understanding. And even with our reluctance to fight them at the time...I do believe we were destined to fight them forever.

Good post,

posted on Aug, 14 2016 @ 12:54 AM
a reply to: liveandlearn


I find these men fascinating as well. The more you learn, and the more human they seem, the more amazing they become.

If you are interested in these battles, and are down to listen to a one hour monotonous story with horrible audio quality (you would be the only one I have ever met, digitally or not) then you might enjoy this video.

I can picture an epic, multi-million dollar hit when I listen to this, something with the same naval battle intensity of Master and Commander. I'd even buy Russel Crowe as Decatur.

You wont hurt my feeling if you don't watch it though.

new topics

log in