Replies

and the only option we have is a military one.

That's why we have a Navy, to protect free navigation and our sovereign territory.

And we don't have to beg the United Nations and its unelected international bureaucrats to exercise it, either.

73 posted on 03/21/2011 10:51:26 AM PDT by EternalVigilance (Pay heed to your principled position and you won't have to worry about your political position.)

and the only option we have is a military one. That's why we have a Navy, to protect free navigation and our sovereign territory. And we don't have to beg the United Nations and its unelected international bureaucrats to exercise it, either.

Okay, maybe we're getting somewhere. If a putative President Palin told Russia, "You stake claims off the coast of AK, and we are going to blow your drilling ships out of the water" would you support that? You really want us to challenge each and every mineral claim with a show of force?

Seems like a bit of overkill to me. I could see whacking a belligerent that bypassed the diplomatic process (e.g., the AOC); but every one? Going to get messy quick.

76 posted on 03/21/2011 10:57:45 AM PDT by backwoods-engineer (Any politician who holds that the state accords rights is an oathbreaker and an "enemy... domestic.")

Thanks for the links / posts on LOST aka UNCLOS. Very important reading for anyone concerned about ceding what little sovereignty the US has left.