You can have effective jurisdiction at any distance. It's how US controls Hawaii and Guam, and at one point, entirety of Philippines, almost 11000km away.
Miscellaneous News
- Thread starter bd popeye
- Start date
The question is whose 'laws'? Your assumptions lack depth, much more populist than legalistic.
Non-Western countries have always practiced 'Suzerainty'. 'Sovereignty' and 'Delineated Border' are relatively recent concept started in the 1400's thus these 'Historical' disputes. Distance is totally irrelevant.
I hope you know EEZ is NOT 'sovereign' rights as you claimed. A country's EEZ is only well-defined for 'Undisputed' areas.
If by UN you mean UNCLOS, I hope you know UNCLOS explicitly excludes all disputes and claims prior to 1983.
Bilateral negotiations is what UNCLOS recommends but Laws of the Jungle applies in practice. Most disputes happen because both sides have valid points but what weights to apply to each point is objectively undecidable so in the end, whoever willing and able to defend its claim gets to keep it. Should the US give back all the land illegally taken away from Native Americans?
Last edited:
plawolf
Lieutenant General
Who’s the one to try to use force first? It wasn’t China. What China is doing is using extremely restrained proportional force to stop the Philippines trying to make land grabs with military forces.
If China were to swap places with any western nation, copious amount of live ammo would have already been used to settle the matter. So if anything, the only reason this issue remains unresolved is because of excessive Chinese restraint. And it seems like the Philippines is desperate to rectify that situation.
Also, it’s beyond idiotic to compare claims made through peaceful discovery with claims based on religious texts. Discovery remains the only peaceful means for a nation to expand its territory unilaterally.
So if your neighbour had a bigger yard, you think you have the right to some of that land just because it’s closer to your house than theirs? What kind of nonsense is this?
Laws you clearly have zero actual idea about. Because UNCLOS absolutely does not say anything of the sort. The Philippines does not enjoy an EEZ in the disputed territories per the UN itself.
Also, times might have moved on, but the Doctrine of Discovery is very much still a key cornerstone of international law.
That’s basically what happened post opium wars and century of humiliation, The American industrialisation was basically underwritten by Chinese plunder from the opium wars and the forced opium trafficking that occurred afterwards. Now, the west needs another open door policy with China because their plunder vampiric economies are sorely in need of another large market and Indians are too poor and tightarse to be that market.
EEZ applies to territory not already owned by someone else.
UN consider status of Palestine and Israel as unsolved. Which effectively does allow both sides to fight over it.
Then you can speculate a lot into the fact that there's no real claims for a colonizing khazarian dominated state there, other than ones based on illegal British invasion. But as far as UN is concerned, both sides can fight over the area because it's in dispute, which is why many are pumping aid into Palestine and Lebanon to help resist Israel, while other countries are (keyword) trying to condemn Israeli brutality. If Israeli "claim" was recognized by UN, an attack on Palestine would be a genocide against its own people (as recognized by the UN), there would be trying for condemnation, they would simply be immediately condemned.
Meanwhile in SCS, Philippines is moving into territory that are internationally legally speaking, Chinese. But China recognises ambiguity in unpopulated territories, which is why instead of facing gunfire and crowd control weapons like Indians marching over the border, Philippines is only facing marine policing units, and China is maintaining a dialogue with Philippines to solve the issues through negotiation.
Right. So claim it by force and annexation. Rule of the jungle.
Yes that is what the Phillipines is trying: using force to annex territory it has neither historical claim or population on with the proximity argument, much like Nazi Germany's lebensraum argument.
Now you are slowly learning. Rules of the Jungle are Mother Nature's Laws. It works. Is it fair for smarter and more aggressive people to get ahead? We have rules so we can avoid the costs of settling disputes. Don't equate these rules as right or wrong and cling to them as Holy Bible. There are many practical benefits to Might makes Right. A lot of people see things in black'n'white and that is precisely why these 'judgmental' people make terrible judges.
Cici pizza went from $2.99 to $12.99
Monetization of the debt. Bottom 90 percent of Americans will be at poverty level soon...
Not gonna work a second time around lol, no more continential scale of plunder of China in the age of thermonuclear warheads
Even without the threat of federal government debt default, inflation can destroy the largest economy in the world. Hence why they're trapped between the rock of keeping interest rates higher for longer in the hopes of taming inflation and the hard place of insane quantities of existing US debt being rolled over at those higher interest rates starting from 2025 (a pivotal year for a shit ton of previous debts coming to term). This would fuel a feedback loop of both rapidly escalating debt growth across the board (government and non-government) and non-government debt defaults which will further decrease tax revenues. Even if they manage to avoid that, you can already see with recent data how insanely fast their debts are growing just purely from deficit spending. For the federal government, a trillion USD in newly-accrued debt every couple of months, if I recall correctly.
Last edited: