• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Greenpeace piracy?

I am guessing that in the end they will be released, but with a tacit agreement don't try it again.

And greenpeace won't try it again.
 
gumboot said:
It does if you don't have permission.





If your nation has a pre-existing agreement with the nation under whose flag the vessel is flying, permission has already been granted.

You're acting like countries haven't thought about these issues in advance. The US anti-narcotics agreement in the Caribbean, for example, requires signatory nations to provide expedient confirmation of the flagged status of their vessels to ships conducting anti-narcotics operations.

Protocols and facilities are established such that operational vessels can confirm the validity of a flagged vessel's status in a matter of moments.




It has been well established that armed forces personnel have a legal duty to refuse to follow unlawful orders. Boarding the flagged vessel of a foreign nation in international waters without the permission of that nation is illegal. (Obviously if you're at war with that country it's another matter!)




See my previous comments. Also:




There are several options here;

1. The Royal Navy routinely violates international law.

2. You were not privy to all communications that occurred between your vessel and the flag nations of ships of interest.

3. You were not familiar with all treaties existing between the UK and the flag nations of ships of interest.


It's pretty obvious which is the least likely explanation.
Click to expand...


Don't be so melodramatic.
If a ship is suspect it will be boarded. If there is any doubt about the status of the flag etc it will be sorted later.
I think you will find that the Captain of a RN Warship would be happy to stop and board any ship he thought he needed to regardless of its flag and I don't think I ever met a crewman who would think twice about following orders to stop and board it or if it wasn't obeying commands to open fire on it.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Don't be so melodramatic.
If a ship is suspect it will be boarded. If there is any doubt about the status of the flag etc it will be sorted later.
I think you will find that the Captain of a RN Warship would be happy to stop and board any ship he thought he needed to regardless of its flag and I don't think I ever met a crewman who would think twice about following orders to stop and board it or if it wasn't obeying commands to open fire on it.
Click to expand...


Now I'm pretty sure you're just trolling.
 
cullennz said:
That is awesome Gumboot, but do you actually think that will stop Russia putting them through a court case?
Click to expand...

I don't think they have any intention whatsoever of putting them on trial. I wouldn't be surprised if some underling loses his job/life quietly once all this is over.

Their own freaking President said it's "obvious" they're not pirates.

Putin, speaking at a forum on Arctic affairs, was quoted by the Interfax news agency as saying: "I don't know the details of what went on, but it's completely obvious they aren't pirates."

He added, however, that the officers "didn't know who was trying to seize the platform under the guise of Greenpeace. Especially in view of the events in Kenya, really, anything can happen."

The Guardian
Click to expand...

It sounds to me like a zealous Coastguard officer has been overly eager and created an international situation right at a time when Russia really doesn't need bad international publicity. Remember, Greenpeace did exactly the same thing a year ago, and has been protesting in the area for over a month with absolutely no action taken by Russia.

In a hysterical turn of events, a domestic abuse investigation in the Netherlands reveals the extent of Russia's hypocrisy.

Speaking during a visit to Indonesia, Mr Putin told reporters: "This is the most gross breach of the Vienna Convention [on Diplomatic Relations].

"We are waiting for explanations and apologies and also for those guilty to be punished. We will react depending on how the Dutch side behaves."
Click to expand...
 
gumboot said:
Now I'm pretty sure you're just trolling.
Click to expand...

Not at all, why would I?

Your theoretic application of some abstract International Law is all veru well. Out in the ocean if you want to stop a ship you stop it according to the orders you are working under. Any political fallout will be handled by the politicans and diplomats.

Get them stopped, get aboard and search. Apologize later if you need to. A delay will result in any contraband being dumped or the target ship getting somewhere it can't be stopped.

It's surprising how persuasive a few rounds of cannon fire into the water can be.
 
gumboot said:
I don't think they have any intention whatsoever of putting them on trial. I wouldn't be surprised if some underling loses his job/life quietly once all this is over.

Their own freaking President said it's "obvious" they're not pirates.



It sounds to me like a zealous Coastguard officer has been overly eager and created an international situation right at a time when Russia really doesn't need bad international publicity. Remember, Greenpeace did exactly the same thing a year ago, and has been protesting in the area for over a month with absolutely no action taken by Russia.

In a hysterical turn of events, a domestic abuse investigation in the Netherlands reveals the extent of Russia's hypocrisy.
Click to expand...


No one will lose his job, whoever did it was working under orders. You don't produce helicopter of SPec Ops guys from nowhere.

As for the 'Diplomatic' incident. Entering a Diplomatic Residence and arresting accredited Diplomants is a whole different kettle to boarding a ship in international waters .
 
Just 'cause I think someone should be combatting Somalian waste treatment problems next the marine environment. :D:D:D
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Your theoretic application of some abstract International Law is all veru well. Out in the ocean if you want to stop a ship you stop it according to the orders you are working under. Any political fallout will be handled by the politicans and diplomats.

Get them stopped, get aboard and search. Apologize later if you need to. A delay will result in any contraband being dumped or the target ship getting somewhere it can't be stopped.

It's surprising how persuasive a few rounds of cannon fire into the water can be.
Click to expand...


You have no idea what you're talking about.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
As for the 'Diplomatic' incident. Entering a Diplomatic Residence and arresting accredited Diplomants is a whole different kettle to boarding a ship in international waters .
Click to expand...

Or it was simply the police doing its job and not realizing they were dealing with a diplomat:
According to various eyewitness claims in different media, Borodin was ‘totally drunk’ and had 'dragged his children by their hair through the house and garden. His wife is said to have hit several other cars while driving drunk.
Click to expand...

And this all happens in the Netherlands-Russia Year which is meant to celebrate the long-standing mutual relations. :)
 
I don't know who the PR firm is for Greenpeace, but they should be sacked.

Who advises trying that when everyone is concentrating on Russia's policy with Syria?
 
cullennz said:
I don't know who the PR firm is for Greenpeace, but they should be sacked.

Who advises trying that when everyone is concentrating on Russia's policy with Syria?
Click to expand...


I think you'll find Greenpeace's protest efforts against drilling in the Arctic has been going on for a while. The Arctic Sunrise set out on this particular voyage before the Ghouta chemical attack happened.
 
gumboot said:
You have no idea what you're talking about.
Click to expand...

Nope - a few rounds from a naval cannon pretty close to your water line tends to have a nice scare effect. And not doing what you are told at that point tends to make you very wet and without a place to stand. YMMV - but not really.:)
 
Note: I have no problem with Greenpeace persons protesting. I have a problem with them committing acts that are or should be illegal (attempting to prevent the use of private property, attempting to block the legal movement of any transportation devices, committing any acts that can harm anyone simply working for a company/agency, etc. I also disagree intensely with (and, if I have missed anything about this please let me know)laws like (as I am given to understand is UK law) not charging protestors who commit acts (hopefully not including murder or assault)they believe are necessary to bring attention to things they don't like/enter and do things to property of those doing/promoting such. Your conscience should not be an excuse to harm someone else.
 
fuelair said:
Note: I have no problem with Greenpeace persons protesting. I have a problem with them committing acts that are or should be illegal (attempting to prevent the use of private property, attempting to block the legal movement of any transportation devices, committing any acts that can harm anyone simply working for a company/agency, etc. I also disagree intensely with (and, if I have missed anything about this please let me know)laws like (as I am given to understand is UK law) not charging protestors who commit acts (hopefully not including murder or assault)they believe are necessary to bring attention to things they don't like/enter and do things to property of those doing/promoting such. Your conscience should not be an excuse to harm someone else.
Click to expand...


Do you have a problem with people who haven't done anything illegal being illegally detained by a repressive regime and held pending trial on charges the regime's own leader thinks are nonsense?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom