- George Zimmerman will not be charged in domestic dispute
- Russian officials press bilateral U.S. trade deal
- Selfies at Funerals blog creator retires after Obama flub: ‘Our work here is done’
- New Obama adviser Podesta is against Keystone but will steer clear of pipeline deliberations
- 40 Australian adults, children found in ‘one of the worst accounts of incest ever made public’
- Venezuela’s Maduro calls on student ‘price vigilantes’ to hit the streets, report businesses
- Atheists smug as Hindus join Satanists to demand display at Oklahoma Statehouse
- Bow before Valkyrie, NASA’s ‘superhero robot’ entry in DARPA challenge
- 10-year-old Pennsylvania boy suspended for pretend bow-and-arrow shooting
- Budget deal exposes GOP divisions; conservatives slam tax hikes, vague cuts
Tell treaty advocates to get LOST
Question of the Day
The United Nations Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) now before the U.S. Senate for deliberation was met in 1982 with disapproval by President Reagan, British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and later, Donald H. Rumsfeld, the secretary of defense from 2001 to 2006.
It would create a new, international seabed authority that would nationalize about two-thirds of the Earth’s surface, and could be the largest power grab for redistribution of ocean wealth in history, taking much wealth from America without being accountable to the American people.
LOST is as harmful today as it was 30 years ago because hundreds of billions of dollars could be taken from the United States and redistributed as massive welfare all over the globe. On March 10, 1983, Reagan declared an exclusive ocean economic zone by presidential proclamation, and America is a founding member of the Arctic Council. In 1990, the council set our continental-shelf boundary with Russia in the Arctic. According to former Attorney General Edwin Meese, treaties cannot give any new sovereignty or rights to the United States we do not already have.
The U.S. Navy is perfectly able to protect the freedom of seas and American interests, and there is no reason to trust our security and economy to an international treaty with some U.N. members who wish us harm. According to proponents of LOST, which is supported by President Obama, all living secretaries of state, Secretary of Defense Leon E. Panetta and some military leaders, the treaty is needed to subordinate America’s sovereignty in order to help settle disputes in the South China Sea and in other places. Toward that end, the Obama administration apparently wants to allow encroachment in our waters by foreign powers, to burden and constrain the U.S. Navy and to subject the United States to international judgments by U.N. bureaucrats.
Reagan rightly believed LOST was a U.N. scheme to raid America’s treasury for billions of dollars and then redistribute that wealth to the rest of the world. The current administration has revived LOST based on its support for redistribution ideology. Pre-planned talking points have been presented in one-sided hearings to generate support for treaty ratification.
In my opinion, Reagan’s decision should stand and LOST should remain relegated to the trash bin of history.
LT. COL. DOMINIK GEORGE NARGELE
U.S. Marine Corp. (retired)
© Copyright 2013 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
By Matt Kibbe
The short-term deal will assure long-term overspending
Get Breaking Alerts
- Rand Paul: Budget deal 'shameful,' 'huge mistake'
- Teen thugs in D.C. run wild -- even while wearing GPS ankle bracelets
- KIBBE: Another Republican budget surrender
- Study IDs reasons for late-term abortions
- Obama takes 'selfie' at Mandela's funeral service
- Obama administration blasts GOP for criticism of Castro handshake
- CARSON: Why did the founders give us the Second Amendment?
- Obama's antics at Nelson Mandela tribute: Jovial conversation, handshake with Raul Castro
- Biden guarantees victory on immigration reform
- VEGAS RULES: Harry Reid pushed feds to change ruling for casino's big-money foreigners