- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: People Happy With Kirk Assassination Want Due Process for Fentanyl Smugglers
Posted on 11/17/25 at 4:34 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
Posted on 11/17/25 at 4:34 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
quote:
Please provide the name of this purported treaty. Cards on the table, I think you are … misinformed.
now pay close attention child because i'm going to be specific and hope you're man enough to admit you were wrong.
The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), also called the Law of the Sea Convention or the Law of the Sea Treaty, is an international treaty that establishes a legal framework for all marine and maritime activities. As of October 2024, 169 sovereign states and the European Union are parties,[4] including all major powers except the United States.
it's colloquially refereed "treaty of the seas"
here's what it says about unflagged vessels
UNCLOS generally states that a vessel must have a flag of a state to sail the high seas and is subject to that state's exclusive jurisdiction
. However, stateless vessels are an exception, as they have no flag state protection and are subject to the jurisdiction of all states. This means any state can board, inspect, or take enforcement action against a stateless vessel on the high seas
now don't you feel stupid! are you representative of the kind of retards they're cranking out at A&M
1
Posted on 11/17/25 at 4:38 pm to dickkellog
quote:No. Not in the slightest. I agree with all of that.
The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) (says that) stateless vessels ... are subject to the jurisdiction of all states. This means any state can board, inspect, or take enforcement action against a stateless vessel on the high seas
now don't you feel stupid!
The point of contention here is your assertion that this means a nation-state can just blow such vessels to smithereens (killing all on board) without ever boarding them, because it THINKS they might be carrying contraband.
THAT is a moronic contention, and the High Seas Convention does not remotely support your position.
This post was edited on 11/17/25 at 5:11 pm
Posted on 11/17/25 at 5:06 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
so in other words you aren't man enough to admit you were wrong that's for playing jethro!
Posted on 11/17/25 at 5:09 pm to dickkellog
quote:Mein Gott, you are a legitimate idiot.
so in other words you aren't man enough to admit you were wrong that's for playing jethro!
You did EXACTLY what I thought you would do. You cited some broad terms that are not remotely controlling of the issue underlying the discussion on this thread, and now you are doing a victory dance for it.
You put the "special" into "special education," didn't you?
Posted on 11/17/25 at 5:12 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
quote:
The point of contention here is your assertion that this means a nation-state can just blow such vessels to smithereens (killing all on board) without ever boarding them, because it THINKS they might be carrying contraband. THAT is a moronic contention, and the High Seas Convention does not remotely support your position.
Who says we can’t?
Posted on 11/17/25 at 5:13 pm to Lighteningbolt
quote:
Makes me wonder what this board’s reaction would be if Biden were doing the same thing.
I for one would be applauding, just like I applauded Obama for smoking terrorists.
Posted on 11/17/25 at 5:22 pm to 3down10
3down10 is right.
Our government should not be picking out small boats in international waters to blow up and kill everyone on board, I do not care what they suspect is on those boats.
Everyone that is citing “international law” and other such administrative a$$ covering should think hard about what is being done.
Our government should not be picking out small boats in international waters to blow up and kill everyone on board, I do not care what they suspect is on those boats.
Everyone that is citing “international law” and other such administrative a$$ covering should think hard about what is being done.
Posted on 11/17/25 at 7:16 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
let's look at this another way you tell what regulatory entity protects these unflagged vessels in international waters? the justice league? the super friends? the league of extraordinary gentleman? just tell me and provide a link. which you won't do.
Posted on 11/17/25 at 7:44 pm to dickkellog
So every country now has the green light to drone whomever they deem "terrorists" anywhere on the planet?
Posted on 11/17/25 at 8:34 pm to Bunk Moreland
quote:
So every country now has the green light to drone whomever they deem "terrorists" anywhere on the planet?
yes you've stumbled on it skunk congratulations you've figured it out!
just tell me one of you people, you inbred encephalitic morons what governing body protects unflagged ships in international waters?
the super friends? the justice league? thor? iron man? good lord you people are children.
Posted on 11/17/25 at 10:07 pm to 3down10
quote:
Extrajudicial killings are not a good thing.
They can be. Such as in the situation at hand. You retarded or something?
Posted on 11/17/25 at 10:14 pm to Barstools
quote:
They can be. Such as in the situation at hand. You retarded or something?
Does wanting a government that follows the law regardless of which party in charge make someone retarded?
Because to me it would seem as if defending a lawless government makes you retarded.
Not to mention the majority of fentanyl is made in Mexico by the drug cartels anyway. This doesn't even have much to do with fentanyl, it's just a bull shite excuse to push the neocon policy of regime change.
And if we really wanted to stop drugs from coming in this way, we should be setting up some kind of overall defense along the coast for ALL types of illegal smuggling activity. Including shite like human trafficking. Maybe we could use some of the money we keep sending other countries to do that.
Maybe there is a better way than spending a bunch of money to use drones to blow up some boats illegally.
Posted on 11/18/25 at 4:56 am to dickkellog
They are subject to the jurisdiction of the courts of the nation whose navy boards them.
In this case, that would be US courts ... if our Navy (not their fault) were boarding them, rather than illegally killing them.
In this case, that would be US courts ... if our Navy (not their fault) were boarding them, rather than illegally killing them.
This post was edited on 11/18/25 at 5:00 am
Posted on 11/18/25 at 4:56 am to dickkellog
quote:From you, I can only consider the source.
good lord you people are children.
This post was edited on 11/18/25 at 5:11 am
Posted on 11/18/25 at 4:59 am to Barstools
quote:A government which fails to constrain itself to act within the law vis-a-vis ONE person will eventually see no reason to act within the law vis-a-vis ANY person.quote:
Extrajudicial killings are not a good thing.
They can be. Such as in the situation at hand. You retarded or something?
"You retarded or something?"
Posted on 11/18/25 at 6:48 am to Timeoday
Is that how we declare war now. We don't even pretend to care about the constitution
Posted on 11/18/25 at 6:50 am to RelentlessAnalysis
quote:
They are subject to the jurisdiction of the courts of the nation whose navy boards them.
no son they're bound by the laws and the protections of the state that flags them that's maritime law. these boats are unflagged they have no protections. what you're making is a moral argument rand paul"s point we shouldn't be blowing people out of the water based on what? rand paul's morality? i don't pretend to know what that is.
the biggest mistake this country ever made was not using nukes in korea by truman as if somehow that was going to absolve him from nuking japan. if we had used them north korea wouldn't exist.
that's the thing that always drove me nuts about baby bush his "born again baby jesus evangelical christian morality" which i have no way of knowing if he was sincere but i can tell you there was nothing universally moral about fighting a 20 year war in afghanistan so that women could vote and girls could go to school.
had bush chosen to bomb afghanistan into oblivion and told the taliban to hand over bin laden, the way nixion did hanoi think how many american lives would have been saved and we wouldn't have to listen to trace adkins pimping for the wounded warrior project!
Posted on 11/18/25 at 6:56 am to RelentlessAnalysis
quote:
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq., the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA),50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq. it is hereby ordered:
Section 1. Purpose. This order creates a process by which certain international cartels (the Cartels) and other organizations will be designated as Foreign Terrorist Organizations, consistent with section 219 of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1189), or Specially Designated Global Terrorists, consistent with IEEPA (50 U.S.C. 1702) and Executive Order 13224 of September 23, 2001 (Blocking Property and Prohibiting Transactions With Persons Who Commit, Threaten to Commit, or Support Terrorism), as amended.......
It Is a LAWFUL Order.
Posted on 11/18/25 at 6:58 am to dickkellog
We Need More Thinkers Like Dick Kellogg!
Posted on 11/18/25 at 7:05 am to Schleynole
Can you provide us with a more "Clear and Present Danger" to American lives right now than the illegal drug business? If POTUS Trump has done anything wrong, he will be prosecuted.
Page 5 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News