The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
Int'l Law hypo: Iran closes Strait of Hormuz..
Poast new message in this thread
Date: February 25th, 2012 7:00 PM Author: dark library coldplay fan U.S. responds w/ military force. OK under intl law? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1883233&forum_id=2#20052778) |
 |
Date: February 25th, 2012 7:01 PM Author: frozen dilemma What is an international law bro? Sounds like flame to me brother. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1883233&forum_id=2#20052784) |
|
Date: February 25th, 2012 7:06 PM Author: dark library coldplay fan def. flame. pretend article 38 of ICJ means something for a moment. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1883233&forum_id=2#20052832) |
|
Date: February 25th, 2012 7:02 PM Author: Confused Roast Beef Article 2 of the UN Charter:
All members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations.
|
|
Date: February 25th, 2012 7:07 PM Author: dark library coldplay fan Carter Doctrine says fuck off to the applicability of this article. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1883233&forum_id=2#20052845) |
|
Date: February 25th, 2012 7:11 PM Author: gold beady-eyed set windowlicker Also violates Kellog-Briand Pact <-- although this is soft law. (not that all intl. law can't be regarded as soft law) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1883233&forum_id=2#20052875) |
|
Date: February 25th, 2012 9:33 PM Author: gold beady-eyed set windowlicker couldn't you argue the 2-mile wide shipping lane is international territory given the fact that so much of the world's oil flows through it each day? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1883233&forum_id=2#20054040) |
|
Date: February 25th, 2012 9:41 PM Author: galvanic sepia native halford explosive warheads generally cannot be argued against.
|
|
Date: February 25th, 2012 10:09 PM Author: Mewling Hell is the underlying principle here that a territory is international if a substantial proportion of the world's supply of an important commodity passes through the territory? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1883233&forum_id=2#20054312) |
Date: February 25th, 2012 7:12 PM Author: galvanic sepia native halford the strait is actually iranian territorial waters (21 miles across, well within the 200 mile water limits) shared jointly with UAE etc as it falls under all the countries territorial waters. they dont have to close it. all they have to do is say they will randomly fire a few hundred rounds from an artillery cannon with a 15 mile range across the strait every day. good luck getting insurance for your ships after that.
|
|
Date: February 25th, 2012 7:13 PM Author: Confused Roast Beef http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_the_seas (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1883233&forum_id=2#20052895) |
|
Date: February 25th, 2012 7:15 PM Author: galvanic sepia native halford freedom to hold naval exercises (like randomly firing a few hundred shells...) is not prohibited by that article mang. also the high seas are not territorial waters.
|
|
Date: February 25th, 2012 7:16 PM Author: gold beady-eyed set windowlicker (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1883233&forum_id=2#20052914) |
|
Date: February 25th, 2012 7:20 PM Author: swashbuckling weed whacker hospital It's treated like the high seas because it's a strait necessary for international commercial intercourse. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1883233&forum_id=2#20052947) |
|
Date: February 25th, 2012 7:51 PM Author: Green cruise ship wtf. territorial waters go out 12 miles, not 200 (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1883233&forum_id=2#20053111) |
|
Date: February 25th, 2012 7:56 PM Author: indigo public bath associate are you guys this dumb? blockading a country is an act of war closing the straights of hormuz is a naval blockade of Kuwait and Iraq, two of our allies. act of war against our allies may be treated as an act of war against the United States. the U.S. navy crushes the Iranian Navy and military withing 200 miles of the straits in about 12 hours. |
|
Date: February 25th, 2012 8:30 PM Author: dark library coldplay fan not to mention the fact that ~20 billion barrels of oil flow out of it each day. Wouldn't criticality of global commerce trump some vague territorial claims? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1883233&forum_id=2#20053504) |
|
Date: February 25th, 2012 9:36 PM Author: galvanic sepia native halford land based cruise missiles with passive IR seekers trump your vague "criticality of global commerce" claims.
|
|
Date: February 25th, 2012 10:09 PM Author: dark library coldplay fan bro, this is a discussion about intl law. Everyone here knows that intl law lacks an enforcement mechanism and is worthless, not to mention the fact that it has been rendered historically moot by numerous armed conflicts without any reprisal from international bodies. I am simply wondering about which intl. laws would apply in this scenario, not whether or not anyone would give a fuck. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1883233&forum_id=2#20054318) |
|
Date: February 25th, 2012 10:10 PM Author: Mewling Hell tbf, *masturbates furiously* (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1883233&forum_id=2#20054326) |
|
Date: February 25th, 2012 9:49 PM Author: Chocolate goal in life Wait for Iran to inevitably mine the strait or launch a missile or send out a speedboat-----Article 51 self-defense justification for use of force, bam. Tehran turns into a crater. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1883233&forum_id=2#20054160) |
|
Date: February 25th, 2012 9:56 PM Author: galvanic sepia native halford hence the iranian push to get nuclear warheads built.
you crater us, we crater you.
its how MAD works.
|
|
Date: February 25th, 2012 10:02 PM Author: haunting tan candlestick maker lol iran can't crater shit
noICBMpwnd |
|
Date: February 25th, 2012 10:05 PM Author: indigo public bath associate lol. even if iran developed nukes, or even if they developed ICBMs, we could utterly wipe them off the face of the map before they knew what hit them. 1. if we launched nukes from subs right off their coasts, there is no way they would detect them soon enough to launch a counterstrike 2. alternatively, we could have black ops smuggle some nukes into the country and detonate them at iran's nuclear silos. 3. or, of course, the united states could just drop some nukes from a B2 bomber |
|
Date: February 25th, 2012 10:16 PM Author: Twisted center THis is why ron paul's foreign policy makes sense ... and why the fear mongering re iranian nuclear capability is retarded. Largely about isreal's discomfort with a nuclear armed iran really (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1883233&forum_id=2#20054371) |
|
Date: March 10th, 2026 3:30 AM Author: pearly overrated den (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1883233&forum_id=2#49731211) |