Warships sunk during Guadalcanal
January 2nd, 2009 From
>Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 07:41:27 -0500
>From: “Mark J.Perry”
>To: mahan@microworks.net
>Subject: Re: Warships sunk during Guadalcanal
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>Reply-To: mahan@microworks.net
>
>
>
>Tom Robison wrote:
>
> > Tom Lewis wrote:
> >
> > >According to an article in this week’s Navy News (Australia), > the hulks are
> > >leaking oil and killing off local fishlife and coral. The > government there
> > >are appealling to the governments who “own” the ships for help.
> >
> > This brings up the age old question, who “owns” old wrecks. Once a wreck is
> > abandoned in international waters, it is fair game for salvage.
> >
> > But some of these ships are in Solomon Island waters. Are they still
> > considered fair game for salvage, are they property of the Solomons by
> > default, or do they still belong to the country who caused them > to be there?
> >
> > Which brings up another question. If the US and Japan are responsible, are
> > they responsible for their own ships, or each other’s? I.e., the US caused
> > the Japanese ships to be sunk, and the Japanese caused the Allied ships to
> > be sunk. So, are we responsible for bringing up the Japanese ships, and
> > vice-versa?
> >
> > Still sounds to me like a scam to fleece Uncle Sugar. How much oil can be
> > leaking? Yes, I know, the Arizona is still fouling Pearl Harbor, but how
> > serious can the pollution problem be in The Slot?
>
>Warships are always considered sovereign territory wherever they sink.
>Essentially, they are military cemetaries. There was a case off Newport, RI
>where divers brought up some remains from a sunken U-Boat. The >diplomatic flap
>was pretty hot and there was a military burial with full honors in Newport.
>
>Mark Perry