Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Time to Ratify the Law of the Sea (Barf-0-Rama)
Foreign Policy In Focus ^ | June 6, 2007 | Don Kraus

Posted on 06/11/2007 9:29:54 AM PDT by processing please hold

Finally, on May 15, 2007, President Bush publicly urged the Senate to “to act favorably on U.S. accession to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea during this session of Congress.” He said that joining “will serve the national security interests of the United States, including the maritime mobility of our armed forces worldwide. It will secure U.S. sovereign rights over extensive marine areas, including the valuable natural resources they contain. Accession will promote U.S. interests in the environmental health of the oceans. And it will give the United States a seat at the table when the rights that are vital to our interests are debated and interpreted." His support, along with that of the Pentagon and State Department, as well as the Navy and Coast Guard, has created the political space to secure the support of 75 to 85 senators—far more than the 67 needed for accession.

(Excerpt) Read more at fpif.org ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: barforama; lost
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-107 next last
To: Waverunner
"And it will give the United States a seat at the table when the rights that are vital to our interests are debated and interpreted"

"seat at the table"- this means a seat on the technical committee.

"rights that are vital to our interests"- our rights to the oil on the continentnal margins that are beyond the 200 nautical mile boundry(EEZ).

"debated and interpreted"- the US has spent 20 plus years and lots of money mapping our shelf and margins. This data supports our right to submerged lands that extend beyond the 200 mile EEZ on 60% of our coast, including 600 miles north from the Alaskan coast and sizable distances on the Gulf and Atlantic coasts. If the US does not have a seat on the tech committee, those submerged lands can not be claimed and will fall into the hands Russia, Cuba, Mexico, or become part of the world's commons.

61 posted on 06/11/2007 12:45:38 PM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin
There will be 140 votes in the un on various topics. The U.S. will have 1(one) vote.

How do the countries vote at the un when it's us doing the asking?

A pisspot country, ran by a despot potentate will have as much power as we do.

62 posted on 06/11/2007 12:52:33 PM PDT by processing please hold (Duncan Hunter '08) (ROP and Open Borders-a terrorist marriage and hell's coming with them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: processing please hold

I understand that you and others here have your sources of insight on this treaty. OTOH, I have different sources that are infinately more credible. In fact, what I see posted by the anti crowd is mostly mis-info.


63 posted on 06/11/2007 1:05:04 PM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin
"I have different sources that are infinately more credible. In fact, what I see posted by the anti crowd is mostly mis-info."

Really? And who are your "infinitely more credible sources", Ben? Someone from the DNC or RINO Central?

What do you do when you aren't busy flacking for: (1) the pro-illegal alien/amnesty crowd, or (2) the CFR/NAU anti-US sovereignty elites.

64 posted on 06/11/2007 1:35:00 PM PDT by Czar ( StillFedUptotheTeeth@Washington)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin
Oh so the Russian or Cuban navy is going to shut down US oil platforms because we don't want to agree that the UN has the right to divvy up the world. - Sorry - don't buy it. If we think someone is violating our declared economic zones, we can escort them out. it's called national interest and sovereignty .. Like having borders, although Congress doesn't want us to have those. Are you saying that the same people that are protecting our economic interests vis a vis the open border to the south will now insure that we have protection at sea. dream on ..
65 posted on 06/11/2007 1:39:19 PM PDT by Waverunner ( "Think for yourselves and let others enjoy the privilege to do so too." Voltaire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Czar; processing please hold
Well sure, I'll be glad to trade links with you. Based on what happened the last time we agreed to exchange links, I doubt that you will follow thru.

As I did last time, and to show my good faith, I will provide the first link and then you can provide your link/source to dispute my link.

As I have already provided a summary, in my reply above, on the geology and the minerals issue of the treaty, I'll give you the link to an article from a crdible source dealing with that in greater detail.

Geo Times article on LOST

66 posted on 06/11/2007 1:57:04 PM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Waverunner

How are you going to escort them out if the Admirals support the treaty?


67 posted on 06/11/2007 1:58:44 PM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin

I beliebe that the military of this country is still under civilian control. If we don’t ratify the treaty, it doesn’t carry any legal weight under US law. ( like Kyoto). Then US law applies. I believe we claim a 200 mile economic zone.
Congress can vote to extend that at any time. The US Navy and Coast Guard then enforces it. remeber the UN now has Zimbabwe on the Suatinable development commsion, Libya on Human rights, and Iran on disarmament. maybe China will get to run LOTS. NOT...


68 posted on 06/11/2007 2:14:25 PM PDT by Waverunner ( "Think for yourselves and let others enjoy the privilege to do so too." Voltaire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: processing please hold

I fully expect this one to be pushed really hard once he’s gotten his amnesty for criminal illegal invaders.


69 posted on 06/11/2007 2:46:45 PM PDT by zeugma (Don't Want illegal Alien Amnesty? Call 800-417-7666)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin; processing please hold
Here's something a little more recent than your cite (2002): http://www.newswithviews.com/DeWeese/tom10.htm

And: http://townhall.com/columnists/PhyllisSchlafly/2007/05/21/deep-six_the_law_of_the_sea?page=full&comments=true

Sorry these aren't hot links--I've never managed to master that HTML code...

70 posted on 06/11/2007 2:58:08 PM PDT by Czar ( StillFedUptotheTeeth@Washington)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin
If you want it straight from the horses mouth, go to the un site.

What your problem is I have no idea, and to be truthful, I don't care.

The Law Of Sea Treaty is being pushed and pushed hard now just like the shamnesty bill is, and by the same man...our president.

http://www.un.org/Depts/los/index.htm
http://www.unausa.org/site/pp.asp?c=fvKRI8MPJpF&b=393103

71 posted on 06/11/2007 3:48:04 PM PDT by processing please hold (Duncan Hunter '08) (ROP and Open Borders-a terrorist marriage and hell's coming with them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: zeugma
I fully expect this one to be pushed really hard once he’s gotten his amnesty for criminal illegal invaders.

A loud resounding agreed!

72 posted on 06/11/2007 3:50:17 PM PDT by processing please hold (Duncan Hunter '08) (ROP and Open Borders-a terrorist marriage and hell's coming with them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: processing please hold

Hang on to your box o’ treasure mateys. Captain Boosh is takin’ us down!


73 posted on 06/11/2007 3:51:40 PM PDT by dforest (Fighting the new liberal Conservatism. The Left foot in the GOP door.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: indylindy

Each day, another nightmare. ;(


74 posted on 06/11/2007 3:55:58 PM PDT by processing please hold (Duncan Hunter '08) (ROP and Open Borders-a terrorist marriage and hell's coming with them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: processing please hold

A non stop assault on the American people by a government that has run amuck.

God, help us!


75 posted on 06/11/2007 3:58:34 PM PDT by dforest (Fighting the new liberal Conservatism. The Left foot in the GOP door.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: indylindy
by a government that has run amuck.

Perfect expression.

76 posted on 06/11/2007 4:26:31 PM PDT by processing please hold (Duncan Hunter '08) (ROP and Open Borders-a terrorist marriage and hell's coming with them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: processing please hold; Czar
I've read all that. I am well informed on the cons and I am well informed on the pros. I am certain that I know more about cons than you do about the pros. There are a number of documents on the internet that show the points of contention side by side. The Congressional Research Service's Issue Brief written for Congress is one.

While Phyllis Schlafly may be anti, her opinion is irrelevant in comparison to the admirals/pentagon's support. Gaffney's opposition is nothing compared to the US intelligence agencies' support. The sheer number and credibility of those supporting overwhelms the anti group, who can be characterized as reincarnated Birchers and Dixiecrats plus senile old-timers with a 30-50 year old worldview.

77 posted on 06/13/2007 4:58:51 AM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin

Ahh, you’re a one worlder, Ben, I understand now.


78 posted on 06/13/2007 6:53:58 AM PDT by processing please hold (Duncan Hunter '08) (ROP and Open Borders-a terrorist marriage and hell's coming with them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: samtheman
"Is it really all neocons, or just Bush and his friends?

I’m asking because I don’t know, not to argue with you."

It's all of them, samtheman.

Our President has salted his administration with over 200 of the most powerful and well-connected "neo-con" globalists.

These "insiders" are the ones who are working feverishly toward one goal; a one-world socialist government run by (guess who?) themselves.

If you would like to do some further reading, and find out their names and their affiliations, pick up a copy of "The Insiders".

BTW: the appencices also list the corporate members as well.

79 posted on 06/13/2007 7:16:07 AM PDT by Designer (When "taking a chance" on the outcome is not an option.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: processing please hold
I guess you could also say that the admirals/pentagon are one- worlders, or, in the last Congress, 90% of the Senate and 100% of the Senate Committee were one-worlders. You could also say that the US based fishing industry is one-worlder. Or, recreational divers are one-worlders. The list goes on and on.

One thing for sure, the world is getting smaller and smaller.

80 posted on 06/13/2007 7:16:08 AM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-107 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson