Posted on 09/16/2007 7:12:18 PM PDT by kellynla
The justification for U.S. ratification of the Law of the Sea treaty is simple: trillions of dollars of undersea mineral wealth just waiting to be exploited.
The United States stands to gain nearly 300,000 square miles of additional ocean holdings, including an estimated 400 billion barrels of untapped undersea oil and gas, experts say.
That's because the treaty allows countries to extend their claims beyond the current 200-mile limit, if they can demonstrate the continuity of their continental shelf.
The result could make the 1849 Gold Rush and the Texas oil boom seem trivial by comparison. Not surprisingly, U.S. oil and gas companies support ratification.
To gain control over those vast new expanses of ocean, however, the United States must submit extensive map information about the ocean floor and other data to international authorities for review.
U.S. scientists are already busy in the Arctic gathering the requisite data aboard the Coast Guard icebreaker Healy, which is mapping the ocean floor to support U.S. claims if the treaty is ratified.
Newsmax reached chief expedition scientist Larry Mayer aboard the Healy. Although Mayer isn't taking sides on the politics of the treaty, he speaks enthusiastically about the potential windfall.
"I will say that the seafloor beneath the oceans has tremendous potential with respect to resources," he tells Newsmax.
oh please we can’t drill where there is oil as it is!
Let’s just take it and tell the UN to piss off.
ping
“can’t?”
the last four letters of American spell “I can”
I’m buying this carp. Yep the U.N. will entice until it has the signators it wants. Then it will be free to rewrite the orginal laws by less than majority vote.
The ratification of the International Criminal Court is an excellent example. It was ratified by something like 33% of world nations signing on board. Even then it didn’t require passage by any legislatures. It was okay for the top politico in any nation to sign on, without ratification inside the nation.
Bush waited eighteen months before objecting to the ICC, and after many of our friends had already signed. Some leader. Now he’s ready make us not only subservient to a world body for laws, he’s also willing to give up rights to what we do or don’t do on the high seas. He’s already made it pefectly clear he wants our nation subservient to others on issues of security and trade.
Bush has more than lived down to everything I expected of him in 2000 when I refused to vote for him. Jimmy Carter, look out. There’s a new dufus on the block.
The treaty is only for big business. Screw sovergnity.
As I said in another related post. There is a UN arbitration panel to settle disputes according to the treaty.
The UN could order our warships to stay in port when we need to deploy them in an offensive or defensive posture for national security.
Do we want a biased, anti American United Nothing panel of arbitrators to hold a hearing, at their liesure, to decide if our naval action is necessary or would violate their treaty?
I say NO!
I think the Bushes finally joined the elite one world government club at the UN.
There was a time the Bushes wouldn’t even let Maurice Strong
in the door, but suddenly that changed a couple years ago.
Our founding fathers fled from less than this to create this nation. It’s beyond comprehension that any government official of the United States would recognize an outside authority over us.
This is about as close to using the “T” word in conjunction with Bush, that I have every come. And I think he deservies it.
I agree with your comments.
This is commonly known as selling your birthright for a pot of porridge.
The only problem is, this isn't Bush's or the Senate's birthright. It is ours.
I am skeptical of the promises made here.
Barnum was right.
L.O.S.T. is bad news. Here’s some fine print from an FR post from last year:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1766001/posts
If it sounds too good to be true....
If I’m not mistaken this also provides the UN with a hefty tax base.
Please people remember it is deadly to provide the UN with an independent tax base.
when the UN gets an independent tax base then they will act more independently.
their first acts of independence will be to erode American sovereignty every day at every opportunity.
This would be as natural as breathing for the UN.
The people who will pay most dearly for this loss of sovereignty will be the American middle class.
btt
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.