LOST - Are they trying to Boil the sea?
POSTED BY: SheWolf
UPDATED: Saturday, August 21, 2004 13:33
VIEWED: 9750
PAGE 1 of 4
I recently have come across some information that has me concerned. It is true, you have to do the research yourself to see whether you believe or not. This is for the many wonderful people here who have many different views about our upcoming Presidential race. I have no problem saying I'm for Bush. Alot may not agree, but that's what is wonderful here, you don't have too. I'm not sure Bush supports this, I have read that Kerry does. The LOST stands for The Law of the Sea Treaty. This treaty was killed during the Reagan years, it came back up during Clinton, and now again during Bush. If I understand this correctly, this would give the UN control of the sea. What sea you ask? All of it, 70% of the mass of the Earth. That is a scary thought. What is the UN? I know it stands for the United Nations, but are they a government and if so who do they govern. I don't remember anyone asking me to vote for a UN election. So why should they control our borders that are on the coasts. Think of the possiblity, could they decide if you fish, would you need a permit. Can they tell us when, where and what we can drill for off of our coast. I live in a state that drills off of it's coast for gas and oil, I have no problem with them doing it. We do need alternative sources though. And why don't we drill off of Cailfornia or Florida, it it because it could mess up a beautiful view. The UN could also impose new taxes on things that are being shipped over the sea. Who would that effect, everyone, no country would be exempt. But who would get the larger taxes. The good old USA. The UN office is in New York if I'm correct, why? Is it for the prestigous honor to say they are here. I read where they were remodeling there offices but the USA was paying for most of it, why? If it stands for the United Nations then the group as a whole needs to fork out some money, instead of the USA footing the majority of the bill. I understand they do some great things but we have our own programs and problems that our tax money should go for. They could also decide what ships we could board and ships we could not, there is whole new threat for terrorism. Not that it's not there, but it we were attacked by sea, could we blame the UN, of course not.
Please read about it for yourself, It was very easy to find on the internet. There are so many that are informed, that have great discussions about issues, on this site, and can tell you where to find out for yourself. It gives a new reality to Boil the sea.
SheWolf
LoUiSiAna
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Yeah, but because of that money, the US owns the UN.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Then why do we need to ask for there permission to defend ourselves. I don't feel we own them, yeah some higher ups do, but who's interest do they serve.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Okay... Right now (correct me if I'm wrong) all countries with a coastline 'own' the first 100 miles or so of ocean off their coast, it's considered territorial waters. Everything after that isn't owned by anyone... I think there's some maritime laws that apply out there, I dunno.
Anyways, do you know if they intend to do away with the territorial waters bit, or if they're just talking about the open ocean that nobody 'owns' ???
100 miles isn't alot, but allows for some defence and patrolling.
Hack the planet!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Like all political organizations whether it be the UN, the US government or the AFL-CIO, they all start with good intentions and achieve mild success, then become bloated and corrupt. I do believe the UN serves a valuable purpose but it's time for a big @ss overhaul.
BTW Bush does support this treaty, much to the dismay of hardened conservatives.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I hope Bush doesn't support this. I did read that a Republican had reintroduced it to be voted on. I'm a conservative, but I can make up my own mind, I don't blindly follow the flock. But for those of us that are Republican in name, doesn't look good that they would support this.
We do have a certain amount of sea that we would consider "Our" waters, I believe it is 100 miles. I just think this needs some looking into.
Government is ok to an extent, we need laws, but it seems like everyone doesn't have to follow them. Just the few, the proud, the poor, middle class.
There are only two things I have to do.
Pay taxes and die.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SheWolf:
Then why do we need to ask for there permission to defend ourselves. I don't feel we own them, yeah some higher ups do, but who's interest do they serve.
So that we look like we followed the rules in the eye of the public?
And, really, I don't know if asking for permission was exactly what we did. It was more like we wanted to do this, and if whichever country don't let us, we're not going to support them in anything they want in the future--like blackmail.
Besides, and we could probably debate this forever, going after Bin Laden and the Taliban in Afghanistan was defending ourselves.
Invading Iraq and going after Saddam was not.
When it comes to politics, I'm a bit of a cynic.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
From my understanding of this treaty it focuses more on undersea mineral deposits than anything else. I also understand that it has been rewritten several times. Just a guess but I'll bet it now allows US oil companies greater access to drilling. Personally I'd like to see a giant floating derrick right off the coast from Barbara Streisands Mansion!!!!
And yes the issue was pushed through by longtime Indiana Republican Richard Lugar chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee.
And Bush's support of this comes from White House press secretary Scott McClellan.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Haken:Quote:
Originally posted by SheWolf:
Then why do we need to ask for there permission to defend ourselves. I don't feel we own them, yeah some higher ups do, but who's interest do they serve.
So that we look like we followed the rules in the eye of the public?
And, really, I don't know if asking for permission was exactly what we did. It was more like we wanted to do this, and if whichever country don't let us, we're not going to support them in anything they want in the future--like blackmail.
Besides, and we could probably debate this forever, going after Bin Laden and the Taliban in Afghanistan was defending ourselves.
Invading Iraq and going after Saddam was not.
.
Pretty much took the words right out of my mouth, Haken, thanks.
Peace
FS
... like having your brains smashed out by a slice of lemon wrapped around a large gold brick.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Haken:
Yeah, but because of that money, the US owns the UN.
There is no emoticon to express just how funny ( and silly ) that statement is...' the U.S. OWNS the U.N.'...too funny! roflmbo!
" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME