It looks to me like (on this map) barely both NW and
SE corners are cut off making it a five sided figure.
But if this is the case it can't be a polygon since
the EEZ side would be a curve.
--- aletheiak <
aletheiak@...> wrote:
> i should have mentioned
> this is a cia map circa 2002
> but hard to find
> so possibly disavowed later
>
> & i dont know whether to prefer the fresher &
> coarser cia
> intelligence to the older & finer middlebury data
>
> but tho the area on this cia map corresponding to
> the sexicountry
> quadrilateral you have identified on the middlebury
> map is a bit
> harder to see clearly
> your polygon appears here either to still be
> scarcely quadrilateral
> or else it could perhaps be only triangular now
> if the malaysia claim doesnt in fact outreach the
> combined brph
> claim in the northwest
>
>
>
> there are 2 other important differences between
> these maps tho
>
> first
> the cia has not acknowledged the vietnam petroleum
> block claim
> that we found so peculiar & offputting in the
> middlebury map
> & indeed it is a relief to find it absent
>
> & second
> the cia has added the hypothetical but possibly most
> significant
> eez outline at a distance labeled
> 200nm from coastal states
>
> & the resulting tetradecagonal or pentadecagonal
> concave
> arcuate hole that is left in the middle of this
> outline is of course
> hypothetical everyones land
> & exciting to encounter here in the middle of the
> spratlys
> where the sovereign rights claims of so many as 6
> countries
> already overlap anyway
>
> exciting because pandominium
> or lets call it omnidominium to put a softer edge on
> it
> is an easier sell wherever multidominium is already
> envisaged
>
>
> but the main consequence of this new line & concept
> here for
> polygon freaks is that
> because its conventional legality more than trumps
> the
> unconventional eez claims of both brunei & the
> philippines
> as well as the conventional but differently based
> territorial sea
> claims of malaysia
> it is in fact the only line on the map will full
> multilateral coherency
>
> so our 6country fruit salad polygon must not only
> include this line
> but must actually begin with it
> since what is outside this hole is not everyones
> land but surely
> someones land
> & the polygon thus becomes actually a 7country fruit
> salad hole
> or mold including first & foremost everyones land
>
> for only the tiniest southeast corner of your
> polygon
> if indeed any of it
> is truncated by the 200nm from coastal states limit
>
>
> the difficulty here again
> just as at the northwest corner of the cia version
> of the polygon
> is in discerning whether there has in fact been any
> truncation of
> the middlebury version of the polygon here
>
> but evaluating both these difficult northwest &
> southeast corners
> as optically equal here
> since they do at least appear rather balanced if not
> perfectly
> symmetrical & isosceles
> it appears your sexinational quadrilateral
> has become a septinational polygon
> tho whether quadrilateral or triangle or pentagon
> isnt clear
>
>
> in any case i cant stop marveling at how perfectly
> harmonious &
> isosceles this completely fortuitous multi right
> polygon looks in
> any or all of its geometric permutations
> when viewed from the base in the northeast facing
> the vertex in
> the southwest
>
> --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "aletheiak"
> <aletheiak@y...> wrote:
> > on this map the putative sexicountry claim area
> has a different
> > shape
> >
>
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/images/schinasea.jpg
> >
> > but note here also the differences between the
> 12nm territorial
> > sea claim limits & 200nm eez claim limits
> > both as authorized by unclos
> > & the unauthorized claim limits beyond 200nm
> >
> > so whatever the true shape of the sexicountry
> claim area
> > it is not just apples & oranges but full blown
> fruit salad
> >
> > --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "aletheiak"
> > <aletheiak@y...> wrote:
> > > right
> > > if it exists
> > > & whatever it means
> > > this is a 6country quadrilateral rather than a
> 6country
> pentagon
> > >
> > > & thus it has only 24 countrysides rather than
> 30
> > > oops
> > >
> > > but the natures of the overlapping claims
> > > not to mention its megapoint corners
> > > are apparently quite various & heterogeneous
> > > & not well understood
> > > by me at least
> > >
> > > --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, Michael
> Kaufman
> > > <mikekaufman79@y...> wrote:
> > > > Ok, if CN, VN, and TW claim all of the islands
> and
> > > > water then that makes sense. So a
> 5-country-claimed
> > > > reef. And then we do have that small piece of
> ocean
> > > > as a 6-country-claimed region. Of course it
> is not
> > > > pentagonal but rather quadrilateral since it
> only has
> > > > 4 sides.
> > > >
> > > > --- aletheiak <aletheiak@y...> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com,
> Michael
> > > > > Kaufman
> > > > > <mikekaufman79@y...> wrote:
> > > > > > The map in the link says nothing about
> Taiwan and
> > > > > > Louisa Reef as far as I can see.
> > > > >
> > > > > true but taiwan claims all the spratlys
> > > > > with no known exceptions
> > > > > just as do china & vietnam
> > > > >
> > > > > so i have assumed each of their claims
> includes
> > > > > louisa reef
> > > > >
> > > > > & malaysia & brunei lay explicit claim to
> louisa
> > > > > also
> > > > > but without claiming all the other spratlys
> > > > >
> > > > > i dont know what the vietnam petroleum block
> claim
> > > > > is or means
> > > > >
> > > > > but there is no reason to suppose it limits
> the
> > > > > vietnamese claim
> > > > > to all the spratlys
> > > > > & there are many reefs & shoals beyond it
> with
> > > > > vietnamese
> > > > > names
> > > > > apparently including the vietnamese occupied
> pigeon
> > > > > reef
> > > > >
> > > > > the small pentagonal ocean area you identify
> below
> > > > > as claimed
> > > > > by 5 countries is more likely actually
> claimed by
> > > > > all 6
> > > > > presumably including taiwan
> > > > > since maritime claims follow from land
> claims
> > > > >
> > > > > neither the map nor list purports to be
> exhaustive
> > > > > so not every claim to every spratly is shown
> &or
> > > > > mentioned
> > > > >
> > > > > & of course not every claim to every spratly
> is
> > > > > backed up by actual
> > > > > occupation
> > > > >
> > > > > in fact most of them are deserted
> > > > >
> > > > > end inserts
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > And it looks like it
> > > > > > falls outside the Vietnam Petroleum Block
> Claim.
> > > > > On
> > > > > > the basis of the map alone, it looks like
> China,
> > > > > > Brunei, and Malaysia claim it. There is
> one small
> > > > > > ocean area - China, Brunei, Malaysia,
> Philippines,
> > > > > > Vietnam - with no depicted islands or
> reefs.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- aletheiak <aletheiak@y...> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > tho the philippines do claim several of
> the
> > > > > spratly
> > > > > > > islands
> > > > > > > & tho all 6 bncnmyphtwvn countries claim
> at
> > > > > least 1
> > > > > > > spratly each
> > > > > > > the philippines dont claim louisa reef
> as the
> > > > > > > bncnmytwvn 5 do
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > moreover
> > > > > > > since none of the other individual
> spratlys is
> > > > > > > claimed by more
> > > > > > > than 4 of the 6 spratly countries
> > > > > > > & since no other place in the world is
> claimed
> > > > > by
> > > > > > > more than 3
> > > > > > > countries
> > > > > > > louisa reef stands alone as the hottest
> real
> > > > > estate
> > > > > > > on earth
> > > > > > > &or under the sea
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > for the basis of my arithmetic
> > > > > > > please refer again to message 14049
> > > > > > > & especially to the color coded
> annotated map in
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > link there
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com,
> Michael
> > > > > > > Kaufman
> > > > > > > <mikekaufman79@y...> wrote:
> > > > > > > > Why not 6 country with Philippines?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --- aletheiak <aletheiak@y...> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > yes we have had this report at least
> since
> > > > > > > message
> > > > > > > > > 14049
> > > > > > > > > when i still imagined she was only a
> > > > > 4country
> > > > > > > reef
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > see under louisa in alphabetical
> list of
> > > > > > > spratlys in
> > > > > > > > > the middlebury
> > > > > > > > > link there
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > only later did it dawn on me that
> the
> > > > > bruneian
> > > > > > > claim
> > > > > > > > > to her was
> > > > > > > > > just as real as the 4 others
> > > > > > > > > despite its being unique in not
> > > > > acknowledging
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > reef as dry
> > > > > > > > > land but only as maritime territory
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > but i generally prefer my theories
> as spare
> > > > > &
> > > > > > > lean
> > > > > > > > > as possible
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --- In
> BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com,
> > > > > "Lowell G.
> > > > > > > > > McManus"
> > > > > > > > > <mcmanus71496@m...> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Each theory is as good as the
> other.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Do we know for fact that the
> lighthouse or
> > > > > > > > > navigation beacon
> > > > > > > > > was Malaysian, or
> > > > > > > > > > is that theory too?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Lowell G. McManus
> > > > > > > > > > Leesville, Louisiana, USA
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > > > > > From: "aletheiak" <aletheiak@y...>
> > > > > > > > > > To:
> <BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com>
> > > > > > > > > > Sent: Monday, September 06, 2004
> 1:47 PM
> > > > > > > > > > Subject: [BoundaryPoint] Re:
> Possible
> > > > > > > BNCNMYTWVN
> > > > > > > > > 5-Country Reef and Obelisk
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > well no need to postulate a
> greater
> > > > > mystery
> > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > > order to solve
> > > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > > > lesser one
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > & i think a single 5country
> obelisk in
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > sea
> > > > > > > > > is plenty for the
> > > > > > > > > time
> > > > > > > > > > > being
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > the so called lighthouse or
> beacon
> > > > > > > > > > > whether it was mounted atop the
> obelisk
> > > > > or
> > > > > > > not
> > > > > > > > > > > could easily have just been a
> small
> > > > > > > reflector or
> > > > > > > > > glow type
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > the lawn of my estate here on
> cream hill
> > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > littered with solar
> > > > > > > > > > > powered night lights comprised
> of 6inch
> > > > > > > plastic
> > > > > > > > > cubes that
> > > > > > > > > just
> > > > > > > > > > > stick into the ground
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > & the 2 blocklike forms you have
> spotted
> > > > > on
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > reef could
> > > > > > > > > easily
> > > > > > > > > > > have come from the top of the
> single
> > > > > known
> > > > > > > > > obelisk
> > > > > > > > > > > the height of which does indeed
> appear
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > have
> > > > > > > > > been
> > > > > > > > > reduced
> > > > > > > > > > > as detailed below
> > > > > > > > > > > by the necessary 15 or 20
> percent to
> > > > > account
> > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > them
> > > > > > > > > > > give or take a beacon
> > > > > > > > > > > & were perhaps shot down by the
> same
> > > > > chinese
> > > > > > > > > gunboat
> > > > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > > > perhaps shot out the light
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > leaving stone markers to claim
> > > > > sovereignty
> > > > > > > over
> > > > > > > > > islets
> > > > > > > > > > > &or destroying such markers to
> deny it
> > > > > > > > > > > has been a fixture thruout the
> china
> > > > > seas
> > > > > > > since
> > > > > > > > > 1895
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > after malaysia destroyed the
> chinese
> > > > > marker
> > > > > > > here
> > > > > > > > > > > it seems to me
> > > > > > > > > > > the least china could have done
> was
> > > > > destroy
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > malaysian
> > > > > > > > > light
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > anyway so little for my theory
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > __________________________________
> > > > > > > > Do you Yahoo!?
> > > > > > > > Yahoo! Mail - You care about security.
> So do
> > > > > we.
> > > > > > > > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________
> > > > > > Do you Yahoo!?
> > > > > > Shop for Back-to-School deals on Yahoo!
> Shopping.
> > > > > > http://shopping.yahoo.com/backtoschool
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > __________________________________
> > > > Do you Yahoo!?
> > > > New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free
> storage!
> > > > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
>
>
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Shop for Back-to-School deals on Yahoo! Shopping.
http://shopping.yahoo.com/backtoschool