They can HAVE the oceans! After all, they're all bottom-feeding scum suckers! Just leave the land masses to the sane people!
Ping!
President Bush is just lucky there was no conservative alternative. I never thought I would live to see an American president agreeing to the ratification of a treaty that could have been drafted at any politburo meeting.
If someone can cite paragraph and sentence in the UN's Convention on the Law of the Sea, that guarantees "Joining the convention will advance the interests of the United States military," I'd like to see it.
I'd also like to see that this treaty "will gain economic and resource benefits from the convention." Again, cite paragraph and verse.
Finally, cite paragraph and verse that guarantees this - "And the United Nations has no decision-making role under the convention in regulating uses of the oceans by any state party to the convention."
I anxiously await an answer...
The only "law of the sea" is whoever has the biggest and best Navy... This thing is really stupid.
Any company wanting to mine the sea floor would have to pay a big chunk of the profits into a UN fund that would be distributed to all the mismanaged American hating third world countries of the world.
That RINO needs to be recalled - he's been esconced in his Senatorial throne for so long that he's no longer a Hoosier, but another fatcat Washington insider, and a thrice-damned internationalist (a nice word for "traitor" if you ask me) at that.
Oceans and Law of the Sea Home Page
* FINAL ACT OF THE THIRD UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON THE LAW OF THE SEA (1982) *later amendments and agreements not included
Please let us know what you discover and what its potential impact on American Sovereignty might be. I can't get through all of it, but the main part of the provisions start on page 19 of 35.
Hope you have better luck getting through it than I did.
The UN isn't going away anytime soon. There are too many dictators with designs on the US and the world to switch it off all at once. Perhaps the only way to keep the beast on a leash is to keep a seat at the table, until widespread liberty takes hold and generations of wise men and women arise who will see the UN for what it is and kill it. A generation hence at the earliest, and that's if everything goes well.
If it's something the UN wants, then you can just about count on two things: (1) it will enhance UN power and UN finances, and increase its appetite for meddling in the affairs of sovereign nations; and (2) it will erode U.S. sovereignty and place a claim on U.S. taxpayers.
I am opposed to the Law of the Sea Treaty and have so informed my Congressman and Senators.
It would please me greatly to see the UN kicked the hell out of the United States. They are a useless collection of third world thugs from fifth rate countries. Not only do we not need them, they are harmful to U.S. interests.