Posted on 07/28/2023 1:55:09 PM PDT by Mariner
A video capturing a disturbing incident in the Black Sea, where a Russian military vessel was seen menacing a civilian ship, was shared by the State Border Guard Service on Telegram on July 28.
“Russian military ships continue to act aggressively and audaciously in the waters of the Black Sea, violating all norms of international maritime law,” the post stated.
The video captures a conversation between the Russian ship and the civilian vessel while the latter was passing a Ukrainian seaport. Initially, the Russians inquire about the nationality of the people onboard, followed by questions about the cargo and the presence of any weaponry.
“I am warning you against approaching Ukrainian ports,” the Russians blustered.
“The transportation of any cargo to Ukraine by sea is considered by the Russian side as a potential transfer of military goods.”
Furthermore, they added that “the country under whose flag the ship is sailing will be considered involved in the conflict in Ukraine.”
Earlier, Natalia Humeniuk, spokesperson for Ukraine’s Operational Command South, revealed that there are signs pointing to Russia’s preparations for establishing a full blockade of the Black Sea. Notably, Russia has been conducting military exercises that include simulations of attacks on civilian vessels.
(Excerpt) Read more at yahoo.com ...
No, it means we have the flexibility to address our national interests as we see fit. The US would be the most affected by the treaty, and no doubt we concluded that not being bound by it would be best for our interests. We have taken similar positions on other international accords (such as the ICC).
Other countries have taken similar positions on other issues that they felt best served their interests.
BTW: Are you a big fan of the UN?
See: How fast the US changes its mind on cluster bombs, which are only violations of international law when the Russians use them.
If it feeds the MIC beast, it's okay for Ukraine to use ours against the Russians, the outcry from other NATO members be damned.
When did the uUS change its mind about cluster bombs and what was the change?
This idea that the U.S. has a national interest in protecting navigation in international waters for foreign vessels is a lot of nonsense.
As recently as the last time they were used against the CIA trained "moderate" rebels in Syria...that really incensed the uUS.
Thank you for replying. It seems discouraging that we spend 10 times what the Russians do on defense yet seem severely limited in what we can do in a proxy war with them because of their nuke threats. What are we getting for that defense budget? Is it corruptly diverted or mis applied? We seem poorly served by our choices here financially. If Russias and others nukes threats really negate our options then the lesson to Iran and others is to develop their own nukes at any cost to negate our influence. This assumes our influence is benevolent and righteous. If it is not due to lies and corruption then reality is worse than I feared.
Many things can possibly go wrong in life and the answer is not to refuse to get out of bed in the morning out if fear of what is. That said, deliberately being reckless isn’t wise either. Fortune favors the bold and life itself is a gamble. Do we have a dog in the Ukraine fight worth existential level gamesmanship to the brink of thermonuclear war? How would you counter Russias moves in Ukraine effectively? What we are publicly doing isn’t going to lead to Russia withdrawing. Do you believe there are things going on by us out of view that will force Russia to withdraw? Ever?
You didn’t tell me anything.
What specifically did they change their mind about?
Why don’t you do some real work for a change?
I gave you the chronological reference point, go look it up.
Stop acting smart by playing stupid.
So, you don’t know what you were talking about and can’t explain it.
Since I have to guess, I will point out that the US never changed its mind about using cluster bombs against civilians because when President Trump changed our policy on CBs it wasn’t about Syria and the Russians using them against civilians there.
Only a deceitful neo-liberal would characterize wahabbi terrorists as “civilians”...thanks for playing.
A year ago (when it was the Russians who were accused of using them, of course), the US position was inline with the rest of the world: they were illegal.
But being the US, we flipped our position the moment it became expedient.
Was our position that CBs are banned or that they aren’t to be used against civilians in war crimes?
When has the US said that CBs are “illegal” and then reversed ourselves?
“The Defense Department had been due by 2019 to stop use of any cluster munitions with a rate of unexploded ordnance greater than 1%. But the Trump administration rolled back that policy, allowing commanders to approve use of such munitions.”
The Trump administration cancels a plan to curtail the use of cluster bombs
November 30, 2017
“The policy change, which reverses a 2008 decision by the George W. Bush administration”
“The 2008 policy would have banned the use of all cluster munitions that have an unexploded ordnance rate above 1 percent. Going forward, the U.S. military will be allowed to buy cluster bombs that don’t meet that standard, so long as they have “advanced safety features” such as self-destruct mechanisms that would kick in after they are dropped.”
We are in it to win it. By hook or by crook. If the Russians advance we will give Zelenskyy a few nukes to flatten Moscow. The Kremlin gone, Putin’s evil crushed for good and the world will be a better place. Just like the death of Hitler ended all problems in the world. The UN has brought us close to world peace and a Star-Trek one world, ready to join the Federation of Planets.
The official position is that are banned for use against civilians.
But we have certainly made statements that their use at all is criminal.
(The official US position has been to play cute with the topic, which means the usual drivel: It's bad when they [insert propaganda target country here] use them. What we won't announce is that we use them as well."
“”””But we have certainly made statements that their use at all is criminal.””””
What does that mean? Where have we issued those official statements?
This lesson should be apparent to any national leader with an IQ of room temperature.
We're not the good guys anymore, and we won't be for as long as Hydra is running the show in this country. (That most Americans don't beat their wives or kick their dogs is hardly sufficient reason for the rest of humanity to trust the US.)
I see what you did there.
For crying out loud, do you have any sources for your claims or not?
Apparently an Israeli ship.
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.