WASHINGTON -- American officials urged the Senate on Monday to quickly endorse the international treaty on the Law of the Sea, saying it's vital to U.S. security and access to untapped Arctic energy resources.
"Robair" said What is the reasoning behind their "30 degree slant" claim?
Extensions of borders into waters frequently take the form of a line along which you're equally close to both jurisdictions. In this case, the shoreline runs about 30 degrees south of due east, so the border would run roughly perpendicular to that.
yea, well, that sucks, because overall the shoreline is fairly east-west, it's just the one bay where the shoreline is angled like that, so the line wouldn't equally divide at all.
"hurley_108" said What is the reasoning behind their "30 degree slant" claim?
Extensions of borders into waters frequently take the form of a line along which you're equally close to both jurisdictions. In this case, the shoreline runs about 30 degrees south of due east, so the border would run roughly perpendicular to that.
Without the treaty, which came into effect in 1994 and has been ratified by 155 countries including Canada, the United States has no ability to assert rights over offshore areas thought to be rich in oil and gas.
No ability my ass. The US military has every ability to assert US rights over what properly belongs to the USA.
Canada insists the international border continues through the ocean in a straight line from the land along the border between Alaska and the Yukon.
And in this case I side with Canada that the line should go straight north from the Yukon-Alaska border.
If some international panel awards obviously Canadian offshore territory the the USA then Canada should withdraw from the treaty and maintain her rights over the area.
Frankly, that treaty is going to screw Canada out of the Northwest Passage which is why I recommend withdrawing from it as soon as is possible anyway.
"Robair" said What is the reasoning behind their "30 degree slant" claim?
and the fact that Canada isn't willing to do too much to assert her own sovereignty in the area. They see a plum ripe for picking and while, yes, it is in your backyard, you aren't going to pick it so these folks think the USA should get it before the Russians do.
I'm sure a few nukes would make enough of a noise and light impact. although the environmentalists and peace activists would shit themselves ten times over.
"BartSimpson" said Withdraw and then open fire on any one who sticks their nose up there.
I agree. But first you gotta have someone there and then with a decent enough noisemaker. Then mine it I really don't care if it is a dude sitting in a row boat with a machine gun. Open fire.
lol, wouldn't that prove the Americans right with their Canadian navy photo of a guy in a dingy awhile back? Surely we could do something better then that.
Screw this shit!!! Pull our troops outta Afganistan....time to defend ourselves.
Fuck this passive response to the Northern border...its time we showed the world we wont be walked all over...we back down on this...what will be next?
What is the reasoning behind their "30 degree slant" claim?
Extensions of borders into waters frequently take the form of a line along which you're equally close to both jurisdictions. In this case, the shoreline runs about 30 degrees south of due east, so the border would run roughly perpendicular to that.
What is the reasoning behind their "30 degree slant" claim?
Extensions of borders into waters frequently take the form of a line along which you're equally close to both jurisdictions. In this case, the shoreline runs about 30 degrees south of due east, so the border would run roughly perpendicular to that.
I see. Sounds somewhat legit...
No ability my ass. The US military has every ability to assert US rights over what properly belongs to the USA.
And in this case I side with Canada that the line should go straight north from the Yukon-Alaska border.
If some international panel awards obviously Canadian offshore territory the the USA then Canada should withdraw from the treaty and maintain her rights over the area.
Frankly, that treaty is going to screw Canada out of the Northwest Passage which is why I recommend withdrawing from it as soon as is possible anyway.
What is the reasoning behind their "30 degree slant" claim?
and the fact that Canada isn't willing to do too much to assert her own sovereignty in the area. They see a plum ripe for picking and while, yes, it is in your backyard, you aren't going to pick it so these folks think the USA should get it before the Russians do.
Withdraw and then open fire on any one who sticks their nose up there.
I agree. But first you gotta have someone there and then with a decent enough noisemaker.
Withdraw and then open fire on any one who sticks their nose up there.
I agree. But first you gotta have someone there and then with a decent enough noisemaker.
Fuck this passive response to the Northern border...its time we showed the world we wont be walked all over...we back down on this...what will be next?
Fuck im pissed!!!
lol, maybe it should be tattood girl we stick in that rowboat.
If that is what it takes im in!!!
Hell Ill sit in a kayak...way more manuverable than a row boat
Canada isnt the US's or any other countrys lap dog...Fuck all those that think we are and will be!!