|
Post by fiasco007 on Jun 16, 2009 3:54:55 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by fiasco007 on Jun 16, 2009 4:00:05 GMT -5
Also, why wasnt that mofo depth charged back to the stone ages?
|
|
|
Post by Wolferuns on Jun 16, 2009 6:43:40 GMT -5
The story said it was an unintentional incident. You would be surprised at the number of incidents that are not unintentional. One navy harassing another is nothing new. During the cold war near collisions were not uncommon. I can remember a time on the Nimitz that we and the Kiev, I think that was the name of it, a Russian carrier were danger close. It was like a giant 4 hour game of chicken. We were close enough to through hold back fittings across their deck. the thing that would bather me about this story is this statement
There are reasons that incidents are not made public. Usually they are classified for one reason or another. If this "official" is discovered he should be prosecuted.
|
|
|
Post by Life's too short. on Jun 16, 2009 9:24:34 GMT -5
This was the USS John McCain again. They must be specializing in dealing with Chinese subs.
|
|
|
Post by Wolferuns on Jun 16, 2009 9:47:02 GMT -5
Take away their sonar aray and give them a net.
|
|
|
Post by fiasco007 on Jun 16, 2009 17:11:19 GMT -5
I agree. And yeah i know this stuff happens alot. But wouldnt a Chinese sub that far away from China draw some flags? I can speak on behalf of the AF when flying through over other countries. We have to get their permission way in advance before they give us the green light. Even NATO and allies like France and UK. Its a long tedious process just to fly over.
|
|
|
Post by Wolferuns on Jun 17, 2009 8:34:23 GMT -5
It was in international waters. You can go just about anywhere you want to out there. A sub is not going to be giving awy it's location on purpose, that would be like a sniper wearing florecent orange vest and cap. It defeats the mission. You would be supprised at the number of time a sub gets hit while trying to just sit quiet.
International water history
The UNCLOS replaces the older and weaker 'freedom of the seas' concept, dating from the 17th century: national rights were limited to a specified belt of water extending from a nation's coastlines, usually three nautical miles, according to the 'cannon shot' rule developed by the Dutch jurist Cornelius van Bynkershoek. All waters beyond national boundaries were considered international waters — free to all nations, but belonging to none of them (the mare liberum principle promulgated by Grotius).
In the early 20th century, some nations expressed their desire to extend national claims: to include mineral resources, to protect fish stocks, and to provide the means to enforce pollution controls. (The League of Nations called a 1930 conference at The Hague, but no agreements resulted.) Using the customary international law principle of a nation's right to protect its natural resources, President Truman in 1945 extended United States control to all the natural resources of its continental shelf. Other nations were quick to follow suit. Between 1946 and 1950, Argentina, Chile, Peru, and Ecuador extended their rights to a distance of 200 nautical miles to cover their Humboldt Current fishing grounds. Other nations extended their territorial seas to 12 nautical miles.
By 1967, only 25 nations still used the old three-mile limit, while 66 nations had set a 12-mile territorial limit and eight had set a 200-mile limit. As of May 28, 2008, only two countries still use the three-mile limit: Jordan and Palau.[3] That limit is also used in certain Australian islands, an area of Belize, some Japanese straits, certain areas of Papua New Guinea, and a few British Overseas Territories, such as Anguilla.
|
|