Make your mind up:hmmm:
Are they a signed up or not?
Hint ( the answer is yes they signed)
If you want the full run down this is from the document both countriues submitted to the UN as the agreed maritime boundaries.
Point (1) is the most western point which is the intersection of the geodetic line drawn between point (0) having the coordinates of 55°42'15" E 26° 14' 45" N and point (2) having the coordinates of 55°47' 45" E 26° 16' 35" N with the lateral offshore boundary line between Oman and Ras Al Khaimah.
Long. E Lat. N Point (2) 55 47 45 26 16 35 Point (3) 55 52 15 26 18 50 Point (4) 56 06 45 26 28 40 Point (5) 56 08 35 26 31 05 Point (6) 56 10 25 26 32 50 Point (7) 56 14 30 26 35 25 Point (8) 56 16 30 26 35 35 Point (9) 56 19 40 26 37 00 W. Intersect of Larac 12m. Point (10) 56 33 00 26 42 15 E. Intersect of Larac 12m. Point (11) 56 41 00 26 44 15 Point (12) 56 44 00 26 41 35 Point (13) 56 45 15 26 39 40 Point (14) 56 47 45 26 35 15 Point (15) 56 47 30 26 25 15 Point (16) 56 48 05 26 22 00 Point (17) 56 47 50 26 16 30 Point (18) 56 48 00 26 11 35 Point (19) 56 50 15 26 03 05 Point (20) 56 49 50 25 58 05 Point (21) 56 51 30 25 45 20
Point (22) is the most southern point located at the intersection of the geodetic demarcation line drawn from point (21) (specified above) at an azimuth angle of 190° 00' 00" and of the lateral offshore boundary line between Oman and Sharjah.



If you wish to dispue any of those points on the map or find any gap in the established legal line then feel free to do so.
If however you are unable to dispute the legality of the stated and registered territorial position of both states then it comes back to the initial statement, which was "balderdash".

HMS Oberon reporting.

Iran did sign the convention of UNCLOS, but has not ratified it:

http://www.un.org/Depts/los/conventi...on%20signature

There are a number of concerns it had, mostly more to do with its neighbours than with the likes of the US, back in the aftermath of the Iran/Iraq war. To be honest, if the US signed the UNCLOS it might actually be to its advantage when it comes to legal challenges in the Straits of Hormuz.

Oh, and in regards to Russkie ships passing through the Channel, it happens annually, I think even the Admiral Kuznetsov went through last year, probably to be near a port in case it broke down. It's nothing major, we usually just kick out a patrol boat, it comes over and says
Zdravstvuyte, tracks them in the waters to make sure they don't collide with a merchant vessel (which is a bigger threat than hitting a rogue missile whilst transitting the Channel) and then points them towards Murmansk or Syria when they come out the other side.

Now with Gibraltar...that's a bit more complicated... :dead:

The key to the matter is the use of the term "innocent passage".
By using the term they admit that they recognise the legitimate territorial claim and the soveriegn authority of the state in question.
Innocent passage does not apply to international waters, it only applies to territorial waters.

Balderdash indeed!
 

Rule 1: to every solution there is a problem; Currently there is the USS Truman solution to any foreseeable problem:O:

Quote:

Furthermore, with regard to "Compulsory Procedures Entailing Binding Decisions" the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran, while fully endorsing the Concept of settlement of all international disputes by peaceful means, and recognizing the necessity and desirability of settling, in an atmosphere of mutual understanding and cooperation, issues relating to the interpretation and application of the Convention on the Law of the Sea, at this time will not pronounce on the choice of procedures pursuant to articles 287 and 298 and reserves its positions to be declared in due time."

Said positions to be declared by Orla Trees:

Quote:

Point (1) is the most western point which is the intersection of the geodetic line drawn between point (0) having the coordinates of 55°42'15" E 26° 14' 45" N and point (2) having the coordinates of 55°47' 45" E 26° 16' 35" N with the lateral offshore boundary line between Oman and Ras Al Khaimah. Long. E Lat. N Point (2) 55 47 45 26 16 35 Point (3) 55 52 15 26 18 50 Point (4) 56 06 45 26 28 40 Point (5) 56 08 35 26 31 05 Point (6) 56 10 25 26 32 50 Point (7) 56 14 30 26 35 25 Point (8) 56 16 30 26 35 35 Point (9) 56 19 40 26 37 00 W. Intersect of Larac 12m. Point (10) 56 33 00 26 42 15 E. Intersect of Larac 12m. Point (11) 56 41 00 26 44 15 Point (12) 56 44 00 26 41 35 Point (13) 56 45 15 26 39 40 Point (14) 56 47 45 26 35 15 Point (15) 56 47 30 26 25 15 Point (16) 56 48 05 26 22 00 Point (17) 56 47 50 26 16 30 Point (18) 56 48 00 26 11 35 Point (19) 56 50 15 26 03 05 Point (20) 56 49 50 25 58 05 Point (21) 56 51 30 25 45 20 Point (22) is the most southern point located at the intersection of the geodetic demarcation line drawn from point (21) (specified above) at an azimuth angle of 190° 00' 00" and of the lateral offshore boundary line between Oman and Sharjah.

Well Done!:salute:

The problem with your solution to the problem is that after spending a lot of money handing Iraq to the Iranians you now find yourselves with them as allies in your fight against the Islamic Reformation upstarts in Syria.
It isn't a great solution to a problem to be rattling your sabre at your new bestest buddies.
Instead it would appear to be a very silly approach to a problem.

Said position lodged with the UN as a binding treaty signed by both Iran and Oman

I view the situation with circumcision:doh: ....It's all about the economy! I$I$ will do as good a job as Japan, Germany, Vietnam and the former Soviet Union and then China if any one's around in 4 years to partake of the 'tree of prosperity'- talk about Halacha BBY!:up:
(reread my sig)

That's quite a strawman you've built new guy but sorry no, I am not saying that at all. Hawkishness is certainly not the only reason for someone needing to be prompted into action and if you are familiar with "my" president then you'd know what those reasons might be. Hint, they're the same reasons that the operation fell apart in the first place. :yep:

Edit: BTW if you or anyone else is interested in this subject I found a rather well written article from July of 1980 that gives a good account of the incident. http://spectator.org/articles/34807/why-rescue-failed

I see. So your president was extremely reluctant to order a mission which your military was most probably incapable of achieving.
So should he be praised for his reluctance in ordering a near imposible mission, or praised for attempting the long shot, or praised for scrubbing the mission when it fell apart?

Obviously you didn't read the article that I linked so...

Do you know the meaning of the word "obviously"?
I am seriously struggling to see your point.
It strikes me that you will just condemn your president regardless of the actions he took or the outcome.
Is it perhaps a party political issue you have? As in he is simply of the wrong party for you.
Your article states that the problems with the military capabilities available date from the era of the Vietnam fiasco. That puts the problem back to a decade before that President took office,
So how is he to blame for the long running problem stemming from a failed adventure launched on false information?

But I do like the soviet comparrison in your article. Not really relevant though is it, as firstly there were already soviet troops on the ground, they also had local allies on the ground in large numbers, and most importantly there was no evacuation or rescue planned with the airborne assault element of the invasion.
So in essence it is an entirely irrelevant attempt at a comparrison.
But as a bonus it was written before the Soviet adventure ended in the forgone conclusion of a humiliating military and poltical defeat.

So in conclusion it remains as, does your initial post have any validity at all?
or is just ya boo party political posturing?

Well, that seems to be the end of that...young man.

Ah, was it the voice from the limbo? :hmmm:

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/images/multi.jpg

Is this a sneak peek at SubSims version of monopoly? :hmmm:

If so when does it go on sale?

It's been out for some time now, and for free. All you have to do is play your cards wrong.

I shall past on that.

I want the board game where the winner is who has bought the most sub fleets. :)

:sign_yeah: He seemed a tad abrasive for a 'newcomer' who shouldn't have an axe to grind...till I looked up orla trees and got a handle on uncircumcised fruit And jus figgered he warn't...kosher :woot: Two past candidates, now conspicuously non participatin' came to mind.:hmmm:

So who was the troll? I think the membership have a right to know who would pull a stunt like that on us.

First thing I have to do in 2016 is to agree with August.
This is the end! :har:

No, really, I agree.

Why not.
I also agree with August :)

I'm Brian and so's my wife!