It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The World's Policeman

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 09:41 PM
link   
The Unites States has just put in motion what is called the "Regional Maritime Security Initiative". President Bush announced the establishment of the Proliferation Security Initiative which would result in the creation of international agreements and partnerships that would allow the US and its allies to search planes and ships carrying suspect cargo and seize illegal weapons or missile technologies.

The Navy’s, Pacific Command has undertaken and begun one of the most ambitious and complicated ventures in the war on terrorism as it seeks to prevent seaborne terrorist and criminal assaults on nations bordering the Pacific and Indian oceans. Called the Regional Maritime Security Initiative, it is intended to prevent terrorists from seizing a vessel(s).

The U.S.’s Regional Maritime Security Initiative (RMSI), the forming of a regional peacekeeping force, and the expected entrance of Pakistan into the ARF. In spite of Washington’s attempt to allay regional fears by stating that RMSI is open for change and accommodating to regional desires, the press reaction was mixed. While some welcomed the proposal, Indonesian Foreign Ministry spokesman, Marty Natelegawa, stated that the ‘proposal is one that should be initiated and led by countries in the region.’ Malaysia’s decision to host a maritime security seminar later this year will provide all parties another opportunity to discuss the future of RMSI.

So in other words, the USA has unilaterally undertaken using its Navy to patrol the waterways (first in the waters of S.E. Asia) to stop and search the ships of foreign nationals with the pretext of searching for WMD and fighting the war on terrorism.

I had always been under the impression such an act was technically an ‘act of war’.

But I guess those “treaties” Bush spoke of were mere formalities; that the misunderstanding Rummy speaks of is the ignorance of those who do not understand that “might makes right” and the “ends justify the means”.

Remember 2000 Bush Campaign for the Presidency. Did he not promise that the US would not be the World’s Policeman?

But of course this must be different, I wonder what, as they say in French - crottin de b¯uf – they will concoct.

www.nytimes.com...
quote.bloomberg.com...
www.buenosairesherald.com...
www.globalsecurity.org...




posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 09:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by gmcnulty
Remember 2000 Bush Campaign for the Presidency. Did he not promise that the US would not be the World’s Policeman?



Good job on learning to cite, but you still might want to use the quote feature offered for free on this board!


Moving on to my point, this maritime patrolling is simple preemptive planning. It is not a police action its far different from any action Bush was speaking about when he made that campaign promise.

Last time I checked the navy was putting its budget to good use protecting the nation from WMD shipments across unregulated channels, and not bombing trucks in Kosovo. That was a police action my friend, this is security.



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 10:22 PM
link   
Didnt the brits do much the same thing in the 18th -19th c?...not like our capt.'s get a bounty...prize

searching and sinking are two different things...



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 10:45 PM
link   
Doing don't make legal..............

.............stopping a ship of another is I believe a technical 'act of war'



"As four of the 11 nations, namely the United States, Australia, Japan and France, will send ships to the western Pacific next week for an exercise simulating an interception, China, which, with Iran, is the hermit regime's main political supporter and trading partner, has warned the PSI group that its decision on inspecting ships in high seas could be illegal.

But John Bolton, the US under secretary of state for arms control and international security, rejected concerns that the initiative launched by President George W Bush in May risked breaking international law and said participating states had agreed a set of guidelines on how they would carry out interceptions of ships or aircraft. "


www.atimes.com...

[Edited on 4-6-2004 by gmcnulty]



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 10:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by gmcnulty
I don't think so.............


Actually he was right, the British practiced Impressment. They would board an American ship and seize a couple sailors who they claimed were english deserters. This eventually prompted the war of 1812.

Before you can say its an act of war you might wanna try and find the international statute that says stopping a ship is an act of war. It happens pretty regularly in the world as part of the war on drugs.



posted on Jun, 5 2004 @ 12:05 AM
link   


participating states had agreed a set of guidelines on how they would carry out interceptions of ships or aircraft. "


If they agreed to it, I don't see how it could be illegal...

It might also give them a good chance to locate those 3 Iraqi ships that have been missing since before the war started ( still haven't heard if they have been found yet )...



Three huge cargo ships feared to be carrying Iraqi weapons of mass destruction are being tracked around the world by British and American intelligence.

The vessels, which have been at sea for three months, are believed to be carrying weapons smuggled out through Syria or Jordan.

They are all refusing frequent requests to provide details of their cargo or destination and officials are worried that the vessels are maintaining radio silence in clear contravention of maritime law, which states all ships should be in constant communication.

Despite grave suspicions of what is on board, Britain and the US are afraid to order interception by naval ships because of fears the crews would scuttle the vessels, each between 35,000 and 40,000 tonnes. If they are carrying chemical, biological or nuclear weapons this could cause catastrophic environmental damage.

The vessels have called briefly at a handful of Arab countries, including Yemen, but they have been resupplied at sea with food, fuel and water by other ships. All three were chartered by a shipping agent based in Egypt and are understood to be sailing under three different flags of convenience.


www.thisislondon.com...



posted on Jun, 5 2004 @ 12:24 AM
link   
I agree…………if countries agree by treaty to accept then I too see no problem. Yet as far as I can see from the news reports…….no one has.

Countries of SE Asia will be meeting soon to talk about it; yet it seems the US Navy has instituted the patrols.

There is - what appears to be sound reason for this approach because of the threat of terrorism - but here we go again, all alone with no support from others in the world.

“Who died and made us God?”

It is no way to build friends with our acting unilaterally…………..look at what happened with the UN…………
Bush treated then and the member nations like dirt – squandering all the good-will from 9/11 – and now we’re going to eat crow and be force to give into every demand made just to get the resolution to save us from being buried by the shortsightedness of Bush’s war with Iraq……………….and he’ll sign on to anything just to get elected once more.

What is this new Plan?

Bush International Stupidity II?

I am reminded of something relevant that Benjamin Disraeli said: "He was distinguished for ignorance - for he had only one idea and that was wrong."

I’ve seen this picture and we both know how it ends………….



posted on Jun, 5 2004 @ 12:40 AM
link   
It is well known that the nation of possessing and selling most of WMD in the world is US! To think the so-called Iraqi WMD is sold by US during the Reagan-administration.
To remember US has earned most money in the world by selling WMD.
To recall the very US supprted Israel to possess nukes and has been pretending not to know anything abuot it.

US should search WMD in your own Ship



posted on Jun, 5 2004 @ 12:43 AM
link   
tell me something we all don't know..............

what's you point?



posted on Jun, 5 2004 @ 12:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by gmcnulty
tell me something we all don't know..............

what's you point?


My point is that I strongly oppose the current policy of US. It is totally wrong for US to resolve the international things only by military means. Besides, US must show it is a candid and responsible nation, and only so US can gain the peace.



posted on Jun, 5 2004 @ 01:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by devmim
It is well known that the nation of possessing and selling most of WMD in the world is US! To think the so-called Iraqi WMD is sold by US during the Reagan-administration.
To remember US has earned most money in the world by selling WMD.
To recall the very US supprted Israel to possess nukes and has been pretending not to know anything abuot it.

US should search WMD in your own Ship


This is such a lie, the US is not the nation that possesses neither sells the most WMDs. In fact the US no longer sells WMDs to anyone even its allies per the "non-proliferation acts". Russia is the nation both with the most WMDs, Nuclear, Chemical and Biological, and it can not verify that it does not have rogue parties proliferating them.

I've never seen a more disgusting error than yours you foolish Chinaman.

As for mcnutty.

International waters are fair game, I can go out there and rob and plunder and kill anyone I want. Unless a nation is willing to stop me. The fact is piracy is the most profitable crime in the world.

3 million dollars a job usually, and the last time they ever caught, arrested, and jailed a pirate was 50 years ago.



posted on Jun, 5 2004 @ 02:06 AM
link   
If you can't win , change the rules , If that dosen't work , be a big bully .

GWB (Grossly Weak Bystander)



posted on Jun, 5 2004 @ 05:56 AM
link   
Listen pal


You're may be one of the oldest continuious cultures on the face of the earth...............but please try not to lecture anyone, especially us here in the USA, about responsible nationhood............you folks were first in line selling and installing the fiber optics systems to old Saddam so he could communicate and coordinate his SAM sites in violation of his 'terms of surrender in Gulf War I..............and yours, sure sell more then your share of arms thru out the world.............does the contenent of Africa ring a bell for you...............or did THEY not tell you yet..............how are you on the internet? You're not in the PRC..........and if so.........probabaly is spy school practicing your english,! Right!

Want some practice? Figure out what this means!

ESAD



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join