Comment on China says US broke international law by seizing oil tankers off Venezuela
Archangel1313@lemmy.ca 15 hours agoYour entire premise is actually backwards. You are claiming that international laws are arbitrary, and don’t have any “moral/ethical value”. That is completely incorrect. They are based on common sense, fair practices that seek to reduce or eliminate conflict between nations. The entire point is to sustain a moral and ethical balance, where everyone’s rights are respected.
It isn’t the same thing as declaring cryptography illegal. That would be an example of an arbitrary law. In the case of international waters being open for anyone’s use, it is anything but arbitrary. Other countries have every right to use those waters for trade and travel. Restricting their access to those waters represents an infringement on their rights.
What you’re saying China had every right to do, directly violates someone else’s right to do the same thing. That is why it is illegal. No one is out there in the South China Sea, stopping China from moving through the area, are they? No one is stopping them from sending ships past the North American coast to Panama either. The US has no right to patrol those waters and harass ships that use them…because those waters belong to everyone.
What the US is doing right now in the Caribbean however, IS illegal for exactly the same reason. It’s even worse, because they’re also just blowing up boats that they claim are transporting drugs…but even if all they were doing was seizing those vessels or harassing traffic through the area…they would still be violating the law.
It doesn’t matter what justification they claimed they had, regarding their own “security”…they have no right to restrict other countries access to trade and travel, through territory that belongs to everyone.
frisbird@lemmy.ml 11 hours ago
Right, so your position is that everyone has to follow the rules even if doing so puts them in a weaker position that could be exploited by the USA, because defending against potential violations of international law by the USA which pose existential threats to your nation is not valid and instead the rights of fishermen trump the right to national self defense because we say so.
Archangel1313@lemmy.ca 11 hours ago
Ok, so did you not actually read my comment? I have no idea what you’re even responding to here.
I literally said the US has no right to police international waters, no matter what their “justification”. Just like you can’t close the street in front of your house, just because you’re worried that criminals might use it. It doesn’t belong to you, and you can’t prevent other people from using it just because you feel threatened.
I’m starting to be a little confused by your argument here. Are you in favor of the US’s actions in the Caribbean? Because you seem to be making the argument that they have the right to “defend themselves” in this manner. Or is it just China that should be allowed to do stuff like this, and the US is still wrong?
frisbird@lemmy.ml 11 hours ago
The US isn’t behaving defensively, it’s behaving offensively. Maybe that’s why you’re confused about my position.
Let’s take your example. Criminals on the street.
Let’s say you’re a black person in America living in a predominantly black neighborhood. Some neo-Nazis have been roving the streets for the last couple of years, robbing people, beating them up, breaking into homes, vandalizing homes, killing people, kidnapping and torturing people, etc.
But those neo-Nazis also own the newspapers and TV stations and they produce media saying that the black neighborhood you live in is a terrible place and needs to be cleaned up.
You and your neighbors beseech the police to protect you, but they do nothing.
So you and your neighbors take it on yourself to blockade the street to protect yourselves.
And then the neonazi news media says you’re violating the law and then people on Lemmy argue that violating laws like this is terrible no matter what.
Do you get it now?
Archangel1313@lemmy.ca 8 hours ago
It’s funny that you think your opinion about their motives even matters here. It doesn’t. They can say whatever they want in defense of their crimes…just like China can. China is literally using the exact same defense of their actions in the SCS. What makes their excuses valid, while the US’s excuses are not?
Let’s look at your analogy, from a rational perspective…I assume the “neo Nazis” you’re talking about, represent the US? So, you’re suggesting that the US has been roving around in the South China Sea, randomly robbing and killing people recently, and that China is only trying to protect itself? When did these attacks happen? Because the US hasn’t been involved in any conflicts in that region since at least the end of the Vietnam war. That makes your entire analogy invalid. China isn’t “defending itself” against anyone. No one in that region is currently threatening China, in any way.
It’s just a bullshit excuse, no different than the one the US is trying to use in the Caribbean.
That’s why reasons like these are not valid justifications for breaking the law. You don’t just get to pick and choose what laws apply to you, based on your excuses. You either think they should apply to everyone equally…or you don’t. And if you don’t…then you can’t complain when other people ignore those laws, too.