• @FlowVoid@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    11 year ago

    If you tried to transport a kilo of Mexican cocaine through another country and were caught, do you really think Mexico would get its cocaine back?

      • @FlowVoid@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        2
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        No, but they control what happens aboard ships that fly American flags.

        Do you think the ocean is some sort of lawless no man’s land, where captains do as they please with crew and passengers?

        Well, it isn’t. The ship has a flag, and while aboard you follow the laws of that flag.

          • @FlowVoid@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            31 year ago

            They are not illegal. All sovereign countries can refuse to trade with any other country or restrict the use of their own currency.

            Which is all that these sanctions amount to.

            • @TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              -1
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I should have said unethical or extrajudicial. The United States is preventing a sovereign country from trading. Just because it is “legal” by American law doesn’t make it ethical. You can argue the legality. You may even agree with the ethics. But it is outside international law and condemned by the UN. I never argued the legality of the U.S. law. I am arguing that the sanctions are inhumane and unnecessary. So the ship should have never been seized.

              • @FlowVoid@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                3
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Trade embargoes do not violate international law. Otherwise, we would condemn Iran for its embargo against Israel. But Iran is free to pursue whatever trade policy it wants.

                And don’t confuse a statement by a UN employee for a statement by the UN.

                Iran sanctions are meant to slow their nuclear program and thus de-escalate the region. It’s possible they are now counterproductive. But it’s also possible that without them, a paranoid right wing Israeli government would have openly attacked Iran by now. So it may well be the lesser evil.

                • @TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  01 year ago

                  Trade embargoes do not violate international law.

                  International laws do not exist. Source. Thus, the unilateral sanctions of the U.S. is beyond the law, and could be considered an act of war. The geopolitics of the region is not my concern. The unethical sanctions are.

                  And don’t confuse a statement by a UN employee for a statement by the UN.

                  The United States will not allow a vote in the UN on sanctions. That’s why they have to do press releases. It is from the UN. The nuclear sanctions are supported by the UN, but not the economic sanctions. Which is why the tanker was seized.

                  • @FlowVoid@midwest.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    2
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    International laws do not exist.

                    Alena Douhan, the Special Rapporteur you cited.

                    States have an obligation under international human rights law

                    Make up your mind. If they don’t exist, then what she said is meaningless.

                    And on the subject of Ms Douhan…

                    The Special Rapporteurs are part of what is known as the Special Procedures of the Human Rights Council. … Special Procedures’ experts work on a voluntary basis; they are not UN staff and do not receive a salary for their work. They are independent from any government or organization and serve in their individual capacity.

                    Looks like she was speaking for herself, not for the UN.