Territorial sea is a belt of coastal waters extending at most 12 nautical miles (22 km; 14 mi) from the baseline (usually the mean low-water mark) of a coastal state.
Once you bother actually reading your link, you’ll note the part about innocent passage there. Yemen considers itself to be at war with Israel and the entities backing it.
Everyone else on the planet considers merchant ships to be innocent passage by default regardless of cargo or destination. I can smell the copium through my screen, and I’m not sure why you so badly want to defend the attacks against unarmed vessels that are not even carrying weapons. Find a better hill to die on.
Innocent merchant ships from countries that aren’t participating in a genocide, such as ones from China, have no problems getting passage regardless of cargo or destination. All the western countries have to do is to stop participating in a genocide of Palestinian people.
Seems like all you’re doing here is projecting your own copium onto others. If the hill you’re choosing to die on is that there shouldn’t be any consequences for committing a genocide, then what else is there to say about you.
Countries operating those cargo ships do participate in the genocide. The sheer irony that you can’t wrap your head around that while talking about the depth of human stupidity.
The MV rubymar is (was) a ship owned by a UK company. Explain to me why those crew deserved to die. Not just some vague handwavy “they support a genocide”, I want a real argument from you for once.
UK supplies weapons to Israel and is a direct participant in the genocide. Yemen made it very clear that they would not allow the ships through their waters, and they gave plenty of warnings to the ship to turn around. Explain why the crew chose to risk their lives and ignore clear instructions not to sail through Yemeni waters. I want a real argument from you for once.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_waters
Yes congratulations on learning how to use wikipedia, now look up the general regime on straits. Almost there, buddy.
You know what, I’m sure you’ll have trouble doing actual research so I did it for you
https://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/part3.htm
Once you bother actually reading your link, you’ll note the part about innocent passage there. Yemen considers itself to be at war with Israel and the entities backing it.
Everyone else on the planet considers merchant ships to be innocent passage by default regardless of cargo or destination. I can smell the copium through my screen, and I’m not sure why you so badly want to defend the attacks against unarmed vessels that are not even carrying weapons. Find a better hill to die on.
Innocent merchant ships from countries that aren’t participating in a genocide, such as ones from China, have no problems getting passage regardless of cargo or destination. All the western countries have to do is to stop participating in a genocide of Palestinian people.
Seems like all you’re doing here is projecting your own copium onto others. If the hill you’re choosing to die on is that there shouldn’t be any consequences for committing a genocide, then what else is there to say about you.
Cargo ships do not participate in genocide, you simpleton. The depth of human stupidity will never cease to amaze me
Countries operating those cargo ships do participate in the genocide. The sheer irony that you can’t wrap your head around that while talking about the depth of human stupidity.
The MV rubymar is (was) a ship owned by a UK company. Explain to me why those crew deserved to die. Not just some vague handwavy “they support a genocide”, I want a real argument from you for once.
UK supplies weapons to Israel and is a direct participant in the genocide. Yemen made it very clear that they would not allow the ships through their waters, and they gave plenty of warnings to the ship to turn around. Explain why the crew chose to risk their lives and ignore clear instructions not to sail through Yemeni waters. I want a real argument from you for once.