Subject: Re: More holes in the world EEZ<br/>
Date: Dec 10, 2001 @ 20:06<br/>
Author: granthutchison (&quot;granthutchison&quot; &lt;granthutchison@...&gt;)<br/>
<a href="5049.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Topic&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="5065.htm">Next</a>&emsp;[<a href="topic2480.htm">All</a> Posts]<br/>
<a href="5058.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Time&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="5060.htm">Next</a><br/>
<br/><br/>
<div id="ygrps-yiv-1838124097">Michael:<br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt; i have no idea about the paracels or scarboro reef but from this map<br/>
&gt; & a more detailed one in prescott i surmise there may be as many as <br/>
&gt; 33 spratly islands not only capable of habitation but in some cases <br/>
&gt; actually occupied by nationals of various claimant countries<br/>
 </span></blockquote>Prescott doesn&#39;t give a high seas enclave here, presumably because<br/>
it&#39;s going to end up tiled over *somehow* with various claims. The<br/>
&quot;habitability&quot; aspect is hilarious, apparently sometimes involving<br/>
Chinese soldiers standing knee-deep in seawater at high tide. But I<br/>
think the stopper might be that some islands are subject to several<br/>
claims, so it is going to be difficult to nail down even potential<br/>
borders.<br/>
<br/>
Grant</div>