• JackbyDev@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    Maritime Law (the oldest of international law)

    Source?

    freedom flotilla yahoos […] doing things that will hurt your feelings. […] sovcit […] pretend

    Ew.

    • Samskara@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      https://openyls.law.yale.edu/bitstream/handle/20.500.13051/8684/43_101YaleLJ893_1991_1992_.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=y

      Page 898

      Outside the blockade area and on the high seas,34 belligerents relied on the practice of "visit and search"3s to stop vessels suspected of carrying “con-traband” to the enemy.36 A belligerent warship sailing on the high seas had the right to visit and search all merchant vessels. Merchants found carrying enemy contraband were captured and escorted to the belligerent’s nearest home port. The belligerent nation’s prize court then determined the fate of the captured ship and cargo.37 In cases where merchants resisted either capture or visit and search, the blockading force was entitled to pursue and, if neces-sary, damage or destroy the vessel to force the ship to submit.

      Page 901

      belligerents today continue to enforce blockades from long distance or through blockade zones. They do so because of three twentieth-century developments in maritime warfare: first, the growing importance to belligerents of conducting economic warfare in conjunction with armed con-flict;s3 second, the introduction of a large array of new weapons to the maritime battlefield; and third, the proliferation of modern weapons to less powerful nations incapable of conducting traditional blockade. In combination, these three developments have forced states to replace traditional blockade form with long-distance blockade or blockade zones.

      • Madison420@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 hours ago

        A. The first quoted section is providing past practice not current.

        B. They weren’t suspected of carrying contraband, they were boarded and none was found and yet their property was seized and they were then trafficked through multiple countries against their will.

        B². Point to where it says they could seize a ship and take it as prize that was not caught with contraband.

        C. Your second quoted section provides no relevant reason to capture a neutral humanitarian ship.