Ships under attack in the middle east

Soldato
Joined
12 Jul 2007
Posts
7,864
Location
Stoke/Norfolk
After the UN split the land between both groups in late 1947 the Arabs started numerous wars to get it back and lost and every time they lost more and more land. If you lose your land after being defeated in wars that you and your allies started, you rarely get that land back unless you play nicely with the victor (see Sinai in '78 after the '67 invasion) or the land is worthless to the victor.

As it stands today I don't see Israel ever giving any land back as I don't think Israel believes the Palestinians "deserve" their land back after the wars that've been fought over it, nor would Israel feel "safe" if forced to give the land back for the same reason.
 
Soldato
Joined
20 Apr 2004
Posts
4,365
Location
Oxford
By "who's land it is", who are you referring to, just Jewish people? I don't think you can claim land based on MAYBE being related to someone who used to live there thousands of years ago, that's quite obviously ridiculous. By occupying illegally I'm referring to the rulings by the UN

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_Nations_resolutions_concerning_Israel

I'm not just talking about the Jewish people, point is its changes so many hands over the past couple couple of thousands of years you can go on a while saying X people took/illegally occupy land from Y people.

Anyways the UN is pretty toothless and inept due to veto powers.
 
Soldato
Joined
10 May 2012
Posts
10,054
Location
Leeds
I'm not just talking about the Jewish people, point is its changes so many hands over the past couple couple of thousands of years you can go on a while saying X people took/illegally occupy land from Y people.

Anyways the UN is pretty toothless and inept due to veto powers.

I don't disagree that the UN is toothless, but they're the arbiters of international law and we all signed up to agree to that. It's not relevant who land belonged to thousands of years ago.
 
Soldato
Joined
20 Apr 2004
Posts
4,365
Location
Oxford
I don't disagree that the UN is toothless, but they're the arbiters of international law and we all signed up to agree to that. It's not relevant who land belonged to thousands of years ago.

So you say who was on that same bit of 1000 years ago don't matter how about 500 or 100 years ago ?
 
Soldato
Joined
25 Nov 2005
Posts
12,444
So somewhat related

It seems we (The UK) have seized an Iranian supertanker in the Gibraltar straights, under the guise of "we won't let you sell your oil to Syria"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48871462

What I don't get though, the sanctions the BBC links to seem to apply to European nations ? Iran isn't in Europe, so why aren't they able to sell their oil to whoever they wish ? Just because we decide Syria are "baddies" nobody on the planet is allowed to do business with them ? :confused:

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/sanctions-on-syria
 
Caporegime
Joined
23 Dec 2011
Posts
32,910
Location
Northern England
So somewhat related

It seems we (The UK) have seized an Iranian supertanker in the Gibraltar straights, under the guise of "we won't let you sell your oil to Syria"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48871462

What I don't get though, the sanctions the BBC links to seem to apply to European nations ? Iran isn't in Europe, so why aren't they able to sell their oil to whoever they wish ? Just because we decide Syria are "baddies" nobody on the planet is allowed to do business with them ? :confused:

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/sanctions-on-syria

It was sailing through territorial waters, was it not?
 
Caporegime
Joined
23 Dec 2011
Posts
32,910
Location
Northern England
Soldato
Joined
25 Nov 2005
Posts
12,444
They're completely different circumstances. If the UK was to let the tanker sail through it's territorial waters then it becomes complicit in breaking the sanctions.

So Iran has the right to block the straight of Hormuz ?

This doesn't set a very good example to them when we're telling not to do things in their own waters with foreign ships while we're freely hijacking their ships in our waters
 
Caporegime
Joined
23 Dec 2011
Posts
32,910
Location
Northern England
So Iran has the right to block the straight of Hormuz ?

This doesn't set a very good example to them when we're telling not to do things in their own waters with foreign ships while we're freely hijacking their ships in our waters

The UK hasn't blocked the straight. Its seized a prohibited cargo.
Iran attacked ships in another country's waters that were not in breach of any embargo.

Again, completely and utterly different circumstances.
 
Soldato
Joined
25 Nov 2005
Posts
12,444
The UK hasn't blocked the straight. Its seized a prohibited cargo.
Iran attacked ships in another country's waters that were not in breach of any embargo.

Again, completely and utterly different circumstances.

It's not really utterly different

So Iran can seize cargo going to say Saudi Arabia if they decide SA are no longer suitable to deserve trade as they're equally as tyrannical as Syria :)
 
Caporegime
Joined
23 Dec 2011
Posts
32,910
Location
Northern England
It's not really utterly different

So Iran can seize cargo going to say Saudi Arabia if they decide SA are no longer suitable to deserve trade as they're equally as tyrannical as Syria :)

No. You're still wrong. Iran doesn't own the straight of hormuz so to block the straight and seize cargo would be illegal.
IF Iran had sanctions against SA (which it doesnt) it would be illegal UNLESS that vessel was in Iranian waters.

So 1/ Iran would need to have internationally ratified sanctions against SA. Which it doesn't.
2/ the Saudi vessel would need to pass through Iranian waters, not those belonging to the Arab states.

So like I said, utterly different.
 
Soldato
Joined
25 Nov 2005
Posts
12,444
Well no because according the UN

https://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/part3.htm

We can't claim ownership of a navigational strait, like Iran can't claim ownership of the strait of Hormuz

Also going by international law, Morroco and Spain have more of a claim of ownership of the strait of Gibraltar than we do (hell even Spain would contend that Gibraltar should be rightfully their land)

So it seems we're setting a bad example to Iran if all it takes to seize ships in international waters is arbitrary sanctions against x country and partial claim to a strait :)

If we're going to play world police with the USA we should really lead by example, not "do as I say, not what I do"
 
Caporegime
Joined
23 Dec 2011
Posts
32,910
Location
Northern England
Well no because according the UN

https://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/part3.htm

We can't claim ownership of a navigational strait, like Iran can't claim ownership of the strait of Hormuz

Also going by international law, Morroco and Spain have more of a claim of ownership of the strait of Gibraltar than we do (hell even Spain would contend that Gibraltar should be rightfully their land)

So it seems we're setting a bad example to Iran if all it takes to seize ships in international waters is arbitrary sanctions against x country and partial claim to a strait :)

If we're going to play world police with the USA we should really lead by example, not "do as I say, not what I do"

I'll say again, because you seem to be struggling here.

IT WAS IN BRITISH TERRITORIAL WATERS
 
Back
Top Bottom