| safe distance at 200 not 12 miles
That may be so in occasions, but you may ask yourself the question if in the case of Cuba 1962 it would have made any difference if Cuba where 100 additional miles away from the US - it is not about the distance it is about the (real or percieved) molestation…pointing nuclear missiles at somebody is a kind of “offense without a safe milage” this seems also to be the case for “real or percieved” king throw over messages…
The point being that the exact number of the distance is by far less important than it was painted - in fact the theory that the ocean is split into zones with borders like on land, and that this world order is overseen by the authority of the UN is just a UN promoted (wanna be important) narrative … no more… and it does not hold up to the facts of the global marine come togehter…ask Chad Elwartowski how helpful the UN was to enforce his rights…
If cuba where mobile and run like monaco it would have been tolerated and welcome at spit distance from the US coast…like any cruise ship…
It is about customary tolerance levels under the allside convenient arrangement of the freedom of the seas…
The last time i looked even the thai king was fine with cruise ships…althoug he seems to go hyper-critical with modest family homes on masts promoted in internet videos…as “first ever seasteads” that allow glorious freedom from all tyrants of the world…
What brings us back to the thesis of 2010 where i postulated that the size of your political ambition should be driven and supported by the size of the seastead.
If Chad would have made a video about his “modern style kelong” (which is the traditional floating stilt hut in the andaman sea) the thai press might not even have dedicated a line to the venture…or praised him for holding up and revitalize a beloved asian marine tradition.
It might not be about distance at all but rather about media spin and communication.