Comments on: Somali Pirates ‘Child’s Play’ Compared to L.O.S.T.

By: hotoffthepress2

hotoffthepress2 — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 13:34:22 +0000

Caitlyn — You may be right, but I’m going to have to trust the folks at the Heritage Foundation when it comes to knowing how Ronald Reagan would view L.O.S.T. Thanks for visiting.

By: Caitlyn

Caitlyn — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 09:41:24 +0000

Under the Reagan Administration we had very explicit instructions approved by the White House when we went to the final negotiating session for the LOS Convention in 1982, and they did not object to any part of the convention outside of the deep seabed mining part. There were no objections to the navigation provisions and no objections to the dispute resolution provisions. President Reagan was very explicit that if the seabed mining provisions were fixed, then he would sign the convention.

The US Chiefs of Naval Operations going back for 40 years (other than Adm. Boorda who died before having the chance to sign on board) have all come out in support of the Convention as being in the interest of the US and beneficial to the mission of the Navy. I’ll take their position over that of a few DC-based think tank staff who have never dealt with real-world naval issues.

In the real world, the LOS Convention improves our position at sea over the 1958 Geneva Conventions on the Territorial Sea and on the High Seas. If one is opposed to the LOS Convention, then in consistency one should be arguing that the US should denounce the 1958 conventions. So, since you post argues that the 1982 Convention is bad for the US, where do you stand on the 1958 Geneva Conventions?

I know what Reagan would do because he told us back in 1981 and 19892. Now that the problems he identified with the seabed mining provisions are fixed, he would support US becoming party to the LOS Convention and the 1994 Agreement on its implementation.

By: Skunkfeathers

Skunkfeathers — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 00:04:41 +0000

Over at Right Truth, I postulated that the answer to the Somali pirates problem would be an easy one if the US committed it’s forces to deal effectively with it, aka 1805. Ronald Reagan or Theodore Roosevelt would go after the basta…turkeys.

But one commenter objected to the use of “Somali” pirates, or calling them Muslims. So, I reckon our current government-in-forming would prefer diplomacy. Thus, we have the UN send a letter to the “buccaneers of no specified nationality or religious affiliation”, asking them to please stop with their bad behavior, even though they may feel justified in behaving thus because all the bad things in the world right now are the fault of America and that waskily Dubya.

Or words to that effect.

Personally, I’d say blast the basta…turkeys off the face of the ocean.