Skip to comments.
Submarine Carrying 5 tons of Cocaine Seized Off Guatemala
FOX ^
| 08/23/07
| Unknown
Posted on 08/23/2007 12:30:24 PM PDT by Froufrou
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-87 next last
To: BearCub
“Yes, if it’s stopping vessels that aren’t either in or entering U.S. waters or waters of nations we have a treaty with. Stopping a vessel on the high seas is piracy.”
Wouldn’t the fact that it wasn’t a flagged vessel have a bearing on it?
61
posted on
08/23/2007 3:33:45 PM PDT
by
dljordan
To: dljordan
Wouldnt the fact that it wasnt a flagged vessel have a bearing on it? Nope. If the boat is flying the flag of a nation we have a treaty with, our military can stop it. With no flag visible there is even less justification.
62
posted on
08/23/2007 3:59:18 PM PDT
by
BearCub
To: BearCub
Yeah Right!
I'm sure this "submarine" was a fully registered "foreign merchant vessel" with the Guatemalan registry.
Send your question about violation of the "Geneva Convention" to the nation of registration.
63
posted on
08/23/2007 4:09:59 PM PDT
by
jnsun
(The LEFT: The need to manipulate others because of nothing productive to offer)
To: Calpernia; Velveeta; DAVEY CROCKETT; FARS; milford421
64
posted on
08/23/2007 8:03:32 PM PDT
by
nw_arizona_granny
( God loaned us many of the Brave people, those who keep us free and safe and for balance liberals..)
To: Froufrou
352 million? Shit, no wonder cocaine is abundant. This is more than Guatamala’s annual GDP!!!
65
posted on
08/24/2007 12:09:32 AM PDT
by
xc1427
(It's better to die on your feet than to live on your knees...Midnight Oil (Power and the Passion))
To: StormEye
Hmmm...would that start a gang war of global proportions? That may be a good thing...
66
posted on
08/24/2007 7:24:01 AM PDT
by
Froufrou
To: colorado tanker
They have to contact the country under which the vessel is flagged and get permission.
Then they board.
If it is a US flagged ship, and in international waters, they can board. That’s how they caught the notorious ‘little tiger’ drug running gangster 12 miles off the coast of Mexico, now on trial in San Diego.
67
posted on
08/24/2007 7:30:58 AM PDT
by
hedgetrimmer
(I'm a billionaire! Thanks WTO and the "free trade" system!--Hu Jintao top 10 worst dictators)
To: jnsun
I'm sure this "submarine" was a fully registered "foreign merchant vessel" with the Guatemalan registry. Send your question about violation of the "Geneva Convention" to the nation of registration. I never said it was. I was just speculating about the practice of stopping vessels on the high seas (i.e., not in anyone's territorial waters). I'm not sure if that's what happened here - my question was academic.
68
posted on
08/24/2007 7:31:10 AM PDT
by
BearCub
To: xc1427
The US is pretty much the only country in the hemisphere that can afford it. That’s why pretty much all production ends up here.
69
posted on
08/24/2007 7:32:17 AM PDT
by
hedgetrimmer
(I'm a billionaire! Thanks WTO and the "free trade" system!--Hu Jintao top 10 worst dictators)
To: BearCub
70
posted on
08/24/2007 7:32:52 AM PDT
by
hedgetrimmer
(I'm a billionaire! Thanks WTO and the "free trade" system!--Hu Jintao top 10 worst dictators)
To: hedgetrimmer
They have to contact the country under which the vessel is flagged and get permission. ...and if the vessel isn't flying a flag, they can only board it if it's American.
71
posted on
08/24/2007 7:33:03 AM PDT
by
BearCub
To: BearCub
and if the vessel isn't flying a flag
There are other ways to ID a vessel.
72
posted on
08/24/2007 7:33:50 AM PDT
by
hedgetrimmer
(I'm a billionaire! Thanks WTO and the "free trade" system!--Hu Jintao top 10 worst dictators)
To: hedgetrimmer
See post #71 re if they refuse to show their nationality.
73
posted on
08/24/2007 7:34:22 AM PDT
by
BearCub
To: karnage
Panama, Guatemala, whatever it takes.
74
posted on
08/24/2007 7:37:00 AM PDT
by
Rb ver. 2.0
(Reunite Gondwanaland!)
To: StormEye
“Why bother seizing the sub. Just torpedo or depth charge it. No one would admit to knowing it was missing.”
What? And miss out on all that “winning the WOD” PR?
75
posted on
08/24/2007 7:40:57 AM PDT
by
Rb ver. 2.0
(Reunite Gondwanaland!)
To: BearCub
I think Bear Cub, once it was observed that cargo was being tossed overboard, one of two things could be noted:
1. The vessel was in distress and required assistance.
2. The crew was in the act of polluting the environment or destroying evidence of a crime.
I think any of the above constitutes grounds to investigate further by the USCG.
76
posted on
08/24/2007 7:53:02 AM PDT
by
fatboy
To: Froufrou; coloradan
77
posted on
08/24/2007 9:50:40 AM PDT
by
Ken H
To: hedgetrimmer
Thanks for the info. Coasties are good people, I knew they wouldn’t be out breaking the law.
78
posted on
08/24/2007 10:56:16 AM PDT
by
colorado tanker
(I'm unmoderated - just ask Bill O'Reilly)
To: All
I think the guys who bailed out and left all that coke behind are dead men.
79
posted on
08/24/2007 11:00:56 AM PDT
by
4yearlurker
(He who angers you controls you.)
To: Rb ver. 2.0
Reunite Gondwanaland, eh?
I say...
FREE CONSTANTINOPLE!
80
posted on
08/24/2007 11:25:43 AM PDT
by
karnage
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-87 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson