President Bush tells base to "get LOST"

Center for Security Policy ^ | May 10, 2007 | CSP Decision Brief

[upchuck]

The Law of the Sea Treaty will impede the U.S.'s ability to defend its interests in time of war.

President Bush is expected shortly to announce his determination to secure the early ratification of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, better known as the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST).  This treaty, which was rejected by President Ronald Reagan and bottled up by the Republican Senate in the last Congress, promises further to weaken the President's already plummeting support among his political base, on and off of Capitol Hill.

LOST has long been the crown-jewel of a community known as the transnational progressives ("transies") found in various quarters of this and foreign governments, international bureaucrats and non-governmental organizations.   The transies seek to have supranational institutions govern world affairs, circumscribing the freedom of action and undermining the sovereignty of the American people and those of other freedom-loving nations.  

The Bush Administration's strong enthusiasm for subjecting this country to such an accord compounds concerns about its penchant for other Transie initiatives, including the North American Union/Security and Prosperity Partnership (NAU/SPP) now being stealthily negotiated between U.S., Canadian and Mexican officials and interest groups.

A Bill of Particulars

Among the problems inherent with the Law of the Sea Treaty are the following:

• U.S. ratification of LOST would give real substance to the supranational organization it established, the International Seabed Authority, an entity charged with governing activity on 2/3 of the earth's surface. The Authority (as it is ominously known) has powers unprecedented in the history of multilateral institutions – for example, the power to levy what amount to international taxes, with the intention of transferring wealth from developed nations, like the United States, to the developing ones.
  
  
• LOST has its own court – called the Law of the Sea Tribunal – that will be able to dictate to this country on a host of matters bearing on our security, our sovereignty and our economic well-being.  The United States may not even be represented on this politicized, multinational court, let alone be able to prevent its adverse rulings.   For similar reasons, the Bush Administration has wisely worked to keep its interests and officials out of the clutches of another such panel, the International Criminal Court.
  
  
• The Law of the Sea Tribunal determines its own jurisdiction.  It is reasonable to expect that it will feel free to assert authority over U.S. naval activities that: allegedly affect whales; involve intelligence and submerged operations in territorial waters; and attempt to prevent terrorist attacks and proliferation by stopping and searching ships on the high seas.  The Tribunal has already claimed jurisdiction over a nuclear power plant ashore in Great Britain!
  
  
• LOST would oblige the United States to transfer possibly militarily significant technology and information to the UN's International Seabed Authority and its member states, including possibly America's adversaries.   This could result in the compromise of technologies that could be used, for example, in anti-submarine warfare and will afford them data (detailed imagery of underwater access routes, off-shore hiding places, etc.) that could be used to facilitate attacks on this country.  It is not consistent with either American principles or interests to provide enemies with tools to use against us.
  
  

• LOST is emboldening Communist China to become ever more aggressive , threatening regional and global security and economic interests.  China has used its own interpretation of LOST to assert control over much of the South China Sea in its quest for access to vast quantities of natural resources, potentially sparking conflict with its neighbors.  In addition, China has expressed its willingness to use LOST as a legal mechanism to prohibit other countries from coming to Taiwan's defense in the event that the mainland decides to attack the island.
  
  
• LOST sets a dangerous precedent that could be used to deny the U.S. "freedom of space."  Just as American naval power has assured and safeguarded "freedom of the seas" for many decades, this country's ability to have assured access to and use of space is vital for both our own national security and commercial interests and those of the Free World.  Adversaries recognize this reality, and as with the Law of the Sea Treaty and our planet's oceans, they are attempting to inhibit our dominant position in and control of space through the imposition of international laws and regulations.   LOST will be a model for a new multilateral regime to govern the last so-called "global commons": outer space.

The Bottom Line

One would think that the last thing President Bush needs at the moment is to alienate those who have stood beside him – through thick and thin – as he has striven to do the hard things needed to protect the security and (to a lesser extent) the sovereignty of the United States.  He is unlikely to get much credit from the transnational progressives, who detest him, for this concession to their agenda.  His embrace of that agenda, however, puts at grave risk the support the Administration could otherwise expect, and will certainly need, from those who have admired him and oppose what the transies have in mind for America.

[SaxxonWoods]

The problem is more than just Bush, it’s the entire party. Yes, we are losing the battle against the UN, which is our enemy. We are losing a lot of battles these days. We are losing almost as many battles to Republicans as to Democrats.

Could it be that Republican politicians are ignoring the base these days because they think too much of the base stays home or votes third party? Just asking. Do they think the base is too small to influence the RINOs, who are perhaps the majority of Republican politicians these days? Again, just asking. Politicians do a lot of internal polling that we don’t see. Most aren’t leaders, they are followers, we know that.

Perhaps, just perhaps, we are losing the battle of ideas at this time. That doesn’t mean we are wrong, it means we aren’t getting our ideas across to enough voters. Which could be why we have this current spineless Congress, and why we may see the Clintons in the White House again.

[Reagan Man]

Ronald Reagan respected the Constitution like the Founders did. In some cases, maybe even more. Reagan was an internationalist, but always placed US interests first and foremost. Reagan was no globalist.

When it comes to foreign affairs, like trade and immigration, George W.Bush has shown a total disrespect for the Constitution. A globalist he is!

Rudy Giuliani is also a globalist. He has no idea what the phrases “original intent” and “original meaning” stand for in the context of the Constitution. God help America if that repugnant creature ever gets elected.

[dragnet2]

Could it be that Republican politicians are ignoring the base these days because they think too much of the base stays home or votes third party?

You suggest it's the fault of the American people or the base that our sovereignty and independent nationalism are being auctioned off?

[Regulator]

Could it be that Republican politicians are ignoring the base these days because they think too much of the base stays home or votes third party?

If they believe that, they should resign now, or start packing because they won't be there in another cycle.

Trying to cobble a win by straddling the middle only works for a while. Eventually the opposing party puts up a candidate who simply cops a few issues and says, "why vote for a fake when you can have the real thing?".

Since Mr. Bush's sympathies clearly lie with the ideas and concepts of the Internationalists of the Socialist Party (that's all the modern "Democrats" are, since about 1928), it ain't gonna be long now for him and his buds.

Unfortunately a lot of damage done will be undoable, a fact that Teddy understands.

Bit nauseating to see that guy smirking and laughing while the hapless remaining Republicans fight a delaying action against "their own" President.

[upchuck]

hand our government to the demcorats completely

Sorry, I can't see how my lessening support for W hands the gvt to the RATS.

Now if I had said my support of conservatives is lessening, I'd have to agree w/ you. But that's not what I said. My stance is about just W.

[Regulator]

Good comment.

It's all our fault 'cuz we don't get in line for the plunge over the cliff.

Stupid Party = Lemming Party

[SaxxonWoods]

“You suggest it’s the fault of the American people or the base that our sovereignty and independent nationalism are being auctioned off?”

I’m looking for ideas about the current state of affairs, and looking for solutions. I will admit that I’m at a bit of a loss in analyzing things right now. I’m not blaming anyone, besides the base is part of the American people, as are our politicians. It would seem blame can be widely placed.

[dragnet2]

Good comment. It's all our fault 'cuz we don't get in line for the plunge over the cliff. Stupid Party = Lemming Party

Amazing. As I was reading the comments out loud to my wife, I started reading yours, I got to Stupid Party = and before I got to the next two words she said the exact same thing.

[SaxxonWoods]

“If they believe that, they should resign now, or start packing because they won’t be there in another cycle.”

I appreciate your comments, but “they” probably believe they are doing what will keep them in power. Politicians tend to do what they believe will keep them in office.

They aren’t alway right about that, but given how many incumbents get reelected over and over, most of them know how to survive.

As I said in a post just above, I’m at a loss for solutions right now. That doesn’t mean I’ve given up, though.

[traviskicks]

Libertarian ping! To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here.

[n-tres-ted]

Fred Thompson? What exactly has FT provided towards the well-being of the nation’s leadership since 9/11? I wish him well and would far prefer him over anyone in the opposition. But I have been listening carefully and have heard nothing from him except grandfatherly platitudes so far. If he wants the nomination, much less actual election, he must rise to the bait like a fighting marlin and run with it until he pulls every other candidate into the water. I haven’t seen anything like that so far.

And don’t forget, GWB won the presidency twice, which has saved this nation and the world from lots of grief that otherwise would have come our way. That’s no reason not to complain when we disagree with one policy or another, but it is not right to attack personally a great president.

[izzatzo]

I have supported GW wholly; but, like many of the sentiments expressed in this thread, mine are of disappointment with GW, too. That leads me to say that I think you are deluding yourself in saying that the “great Bush... short end of the stick.” Jeb and GW are chips off the old block(GHWB), they are all of the same mold, i.e., “moderates” with no really conservative principles(that’s the reason GHWB got stuck with breaking his “no new taxes” pledge); and, like Rush says, there are no truly great moderates.

GW has lowered taxes, responded to 9/11, and appointed two apparently right-minded judges to the USSC, all of these executive actions being no-brainers in my book. But, when you get down to the nitty-gritty, what else has he done that conservatives can be excited about? Worked with Teddy Kennedy on education, did not veto McCain-Feingold even though he allegedly had misgivings about its constitutionality, created the biggest government yet, instituted a “new tone” that has been an abject failure in the eyes of many supporters, etc., ad infinitum. I cannot get excited about that. Jeb would be more of the same.

[airborne]

This is bad for America.

[Inquisitive1]

...George W. Bush can no longer claim the mantle of the Ronald Reagan legacy.

He's not enough to 'shine RR's shoes"

[hedgetrimmer]

LOST PING

[meyer]

He’s taking the Republican party and the United States down together.

[Carry_Okie]

Long term Sea security is in the interest of the entire free world.

LOST isn't it.

I don’t want it to be our Coast Guard that enforces that, do you?

You would prefer the UN?

[hedgetrimmer]

Its time to recall, impeach and jail the criminal sellouts. Citizens must reassert their authority over this government, which has a closer resemblance to a rogue communist government, than a free, independent voice of the American citizen.

[dragnet2]

I don’t want it to be our Coast Guard that enforces that, do you?

You would prefer the UN?

Excellent.

Someone mentioned lemmings above. It's a perfect analogy.

[Gatún(CraigIsaMangoTreeLawyer)]

Hey, Isom35,

I got into this a little late because I had to take one of my pets to the vets for a shot (and yes, it is Sunday).

I’m LOST! LOST comes on too late for me…Yes, yes, 9:00 p.m. rather than 10:00 p.m. because of no daylight saving time in Panama. I go to bed early; and therefore, I am LOST.