I don't think that individuals, even in groups can be at war with a nation.
I think that's a mistaken idea. It reminds me of the idea that only a nation state can issue money, which is patently false.
It does take the claim to be in possession of a souvereign territory to declare war upon another.
They do claim to be in the possession of a sovereign territory, and they accept e-gold! http://www.principalityofcaledonia.com/Main.htm
So, technically those guys are contraband, rebells at best.
Horse feathers. Rebels are not contraband.
That then brings up the issue that rebels are exempt from the Geneva Conventions
No, they are not. You should read the Geneva Conventions and not just summarize them here, please. Show me the passage in the current Geneva Conventions which prevents an individual from engaging in rebellion, or eliminates such an individual from the obligations of the convention.
and Aussies could just lock them all up without due process
What else is new? I think it is just such unlawful detentions which the Caledonians dislike.
in a big camp and throw away the key.
Really? And you'd support that?
Not to forget that Australia could call on her allies to hunt theses guys down if they were to succeed to bring a square foot of soil under their control.
Certainly. That's what military alliances are all about.
But, to invoke such an alliance, Australia would have to declare war on these people.
Why can't people read more before they act?
Like, read what? The Geneva Conventions? Google 'em up. I read them all back when I was interim secdef for a separatist group.
Occupy an unhabited Island,
There are no islands unclaimed on Earth.
declare independence and write to the UN for recognition.
What on Earth would that serve? The UN is a bunch of socialistic twits with their thumbs up their butts. The notion that they represent world opinion or anything else is nonsense.
Besides, seeking recognition from them and getting it are two very different matters.
Independence may be declared and upheld, but the UN's recognition of independence isn't meaningful or desirable.
Once that letter is sent off, a process (futile as it may be) has been initiated and Australia as a self-proclaimed civilized nation
Any nation which denies its people access to the tools of self defense is not civilized and should be obliterated.
would need to negotiate or invade - using armed forces, rather than police.
You amuse me with your naive thoughts on how nation states behave.
Both would look bad in the public eye and chances are that the occupants of the formerly unihabited island would be ridiculed and largely left alone.
I disagree. Look at what happened in 1972 to the Principality of Minerva which Sir John Templeton financed and which Mike Oliver built on sea mounts 400 miles from Tonga. The CIA got the King of Tonga to invade and the conquest was brutal and rapid.
Then they can look at annexing Australia...
Which is an island, so that part works.
With all the technology and potential the human race has at it's disposal
You mean "its disposal".
I will never be able to understand why people still have to fight over pieces of dirt.
People have to fight to protect their property. Some people own dirt. Few have the means to reach other planetary bodies.
There is enough space for everyone and many more.
True.
And it would be corporations who feed everyone, not governments...
Also true, although I would say "companies" or even "businesses" because "corporations" are creatures of the state.
Regards,
Jim http://www.ezez.com/
--- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Use e-gold's Secure Randomized Keyboard (SRK) when accessing your e-gold account(s) via the web and shopping cart interfaces to help thwart keystroke loggers and common viruses.
