Japanese ram what may be the next ST movie ship

[Tyyr]

Yes.

After watching Whale Wars you'll never attribute anything these guys do to anything but gross incompetence and a total lack of a clue.

[Sionnach Glic]

I won't and you can't make me.

You should. It's hilarious.

[Reliant121]

Okay, I have never seen this before but thats...thats insane.

[Tyyr]

I have got to remember to find the South Park episode "Whale Whores" and watch it.

[Reliant121]

According to the Guardian, the Japanese are considering to increase protection of it's whaling fleets...What can they actually do?


The collision viewed from the Bob Baker (left) and the Shonan Maru (right)

[sunnyside]

According to the Guardian, the Japanese are considering to increase protection of it's whaling fleets...What can they actually do?


The collision viewed from the Bob Baker (left) and the Shonan Maru (right)

My understanding was that the ship that hit them was there to protect the rest of the fleet. Presumably through use of those hoses we saw blasting away. Or, you, know, a little ramming.

The Japanese have a problem though in that the new Bob Barker might be to big to manhandle the way they could the Stever Erwin and Ady Gil, hence a need for something else. Maybe a bigger ship to block for the fleet, a ship with hoses mounted higher than barkers decks, or a bunch of tugs to shove Barker around.

Hmmmmm. From a capitalist perspective, I wonder if flipping the issue might garner enough support for something to actually be done. Currently it's being framed in a "save the whales" manner. But some level of harvesting should be ecologically balanced. By circumventing policy in this way, Japan has nearly granted themselves a monopoly on whaling.

Thus it hurts other countries financial interests AND means I can't have some delicious Minke steaks.

Maybe that could get enough support for the US to do something about it. My understanding is there could be legal grounds for shutting them down but it'd be complicated and a little shakey. However, as the US has demonstrated on a few occasions, international law is something we are able to treat as optional when circumastances dictate and we're certainly able to act freely within grey areas.

I think Japan could quickly be made to see it's in their best interests to sit at the negotiating table so we all get a cut of the yummy whales.

[Aaron]

According to the Guardian, the Japanese are considering to increase protection of it's whaling fleets...What can they actually do?


The collision viewed from the Bob Baker (left) and the Shonan Maru (right)

Escort them with the Navy, this is little more then piracy after all.

[Reliant121]

Is it open waters? if so then I cant see the problem with throwing a naval vessel in, part from logistical cost.

[Aaron]

Is it open waters? if so then I cant see the problem with throwing a naval vessel in, part from logistical cost.

Around Antarctica? I believe so and considering their engaged in perfectly legal business, you could make an argument that they should be escorted by the nation that owns them if they aren't.

[Tyyr]

According to the Guardian, the Japanese are considering to increase protection of it's whaling fleets...What can they actually do?

Well, they once mounted LRAD's on their ships but I don't think they used them. Alternately they could escalate to actually carrying firearms. The actions of the Shepherds, especially in that god forsaken stretch of water, could very well get people killed. For instance trying to foul a ship's props in an iceberg infested storm wracked stretch of sea. That's not protest, that's attempted murder of everyone on that ship. Frankly if the whalers took a small cannon with them and put a few across the bow of these guys when they started this shit it'd end real fast.

Hmmmmm. From a capitalist perspective, I wonder if flipping the issue might garner enough support for something to actually be done. Currently it's being framed in a "save the whales" manner. But some level of harvesting should be ecologically balanced. By circumventing policy in this way, Japan has nearly granted themselves a monopoly on whaling.

The whaling industry is dead. Having the market cornered on whaling is like having the market cornered on the manufacture of buggy whips. Congratulations on your stunning achievement. In 2005 Iceland left the whaling game not because of international pressure, but because it simply wasn't a viable industry anymore. Even if you could freely hunt whales do you think there's any market for them? No one in the western world will be lining up to buy a Free Willy steak, well, not in quantities sufficient to make it worth doing. Outside of some island communities in the Pacific and a few other places and the Japanese no one is much interested in whale meat when domesticated animals are far more inexpensive.

I posted this over on dakkadakka in their thread about this:

This actually has me interested in something. From some quick research it appears that the whale meat market is not that strong. The most recent data I found (a 2005 Icelandic report as to why whaling was not economically viable for them) puts the price of whale meat in the far east at between $70 and $200 USD/kg with total consumption of whale meat in Japan being approximately 3,000 tons per anum. Now, the Japanese claim that it's part of their culture, etc. but when that little meat is consumed at that high of a price how is that part of the culture as a whole? To give you an idea of how much whale meat is eaten per year in Japan it's about 0.023kg, or 23 grams of whale meat per person at the cost of between $1.61 and $4.60 per morsel. That's nothing. There are more grams of fat in your average burger than whale meat consumed by your average Japanese citizen in a given year. You can't compare whaling in Japan to the consumption of domesticated animals like cows, chickens, and hogs in other parts of the world because its so utterly inconsequential. If you eliminated whaling entirely you'd be denying them 23grams of protein over the course of an entire year, I think they'll survive without one piece of sushi.

When something is that scare and that expensive how is it a part of the culture anymore? If you want to say its a tradition then fine, do it traditionally. Grab a wooden boat and a hand thrown harpoon and get to it. Keep that tradition alive.

I'm just really not grasping the Japanese position on this beyond anything besides just trying to piss in the face of the rest of the world.

Maybe that could get enough support for the US to do something about it. My understanding is there could be legal grounds for shutting them down but it'd be complicated and a little shakey. However, as the US has demonstrated on a few occasions, international law is something we are able to treat as optional when circumastances dictate and we're certainly able to act freely within grey areas.

The problem is that the 1986 moratorium by the International Whaling Commission isn't a legally binding order by any stretch of the imagination. No one HAS to follow it. Most countries choose to but its purely voluntary. There's no legal basis to prosecute whaling unless the home country has laws against it. You can guess the Japanese legal system's stance on whaling.

I think Japan could quickly be made to see it's in their best interests to sit at the negotiating table so we all get a cut of the yummy whales.

It's a dead industry. Anyone getting into it will be crucified in the court of public opinion. Even if you could whale good luck finding anyone to actually front the money to start a business.

[Mikey]

Except for the fact that they aren't engaged in a legal business by any rationalization except that of their own patently spurious justification.

If they were, I could see your point. But no matter how kooky the Sea Sam Shepherds are, let's say one of them was a U.S. citizen. Now, let's pretend that this American was killed by a Japanese frigate while "protesting"/sabotaging/whatever a Japanese national ship engaged in such internationally-illegal whaling. I think you see where I'm going with this...

If you want to say its a tradition then fine, do it traditionally. Grab a wooden boat and a hand thrown harpoon and get to it. Keep that tradition alive.

Ah, but we can claim "tradition" when it's convenient, but abandon it when it suits us, right?

*EDIT* I'm not familiar with the subtexts which Tyyr mentions... I'm led to believe that the moratoria established on whaling are, in fact, considered binding to all particapatory parties.

[Tyyr]

Nope, the IWC is a purely voluntary organization. Nothing it does is legally binding in any way shape or form. They can kick someone out if they want to but that's about it. They have no legal authority to do anything. If someone wants to consider it binding they can, but no one HAS too.

It's actually rather interesting, Japan is on the IWC and many environmental organizations are accusing Japan of trying to buy votes of other member countries by offering aid to them in exchange for their votes. However the amount of aid these countries receive annually from Japan is about equal to the total economic footprint of whaling in Japan. So either something else is going on, like honest aid, or the whaling industry OWNS the Japanese government. Which given that its not even a billion dollar industry I find very unlikely.

[Sonic Glitch]

Anyone else noticed Sonic's penchant for sounding rather creepy?

In order: I'm not sure how to take that, and my apologies it was not my intention. I've been led to believe it's an old army-related joke in which the drill sergeant replies to someones refusal to do something with "Well we can't make you do it, but we can make you wish you had."

And I apologies for not bringing anything substantial to the debate, but judging by my quick Wikipedia search it seems the moratorium is binding except for "Aboriginal subsistence whaling" and "whaling for Scientific Research" and Iceland which apparently has some sort of special relation with the ICW?

[Tyyr]

The moratorium isn't binding. The member countries abide by it as members in good standing with the IWC but the IWC is not a governmental body. It's rulings and guidelines are not laws. Membership is voluntary and not required. You might have to obey the moratorium to remain a member of the IWC but it is in no way a legal ruling.

[Reliant121]

Anyone else noticed Sonic's penchant for sounding rather creepy?

In order: I'm not sure how to take that, and my apologies it was not my intention. I've been led to believe it's an old army-related joke in which the drill sergeant replies to someones refusal to do something with "Well we can't make you do it, but we can make you wish you had."

And I apologies for not bringing anything substantial to the debate, but judging by my quick Wikipedia search it seems the moratorium is binding except for "Aboriginal subsistence whaling" and "whaling for Scientific Research" and Iceland which apparently has some sort of special relation with the ICW?

I forgot sarcasm is particularly difficult to show over a forum. I meant my statement in jest