Putin and Obama at the G20

[mendeleyev]

Some key items were discussed. Putin's team said talks were "frozen" while the Obama team touted them as "constructive."

Lesson: Putin is far more straightforward than Obama--one of the reasons why the Russia president despises Mr. Obama. When you hear "constructive" from the Obama team, that means about as much as "you can keep your doctor" in real life. Obama is in full bullshit mode as he needs to prop up Hillary. Putin rarely has to worry about elections that much.


Sanctions: This was concern number one for the Russians (they could care less about the US view on Syria). Despite all the nonsensical BS from some quarters about "sanctions aren't working," for some reason the Kremlin is desperate to have them lifted. Yes, desperate. I saw a report this week that the typical "new Russian" (middle class person is the current definition of that phrase) who used to earn 3-5K monthly in dollars, is now lucky to earn between 1-1.5k in dollars. That is over half of an income that has simply vanished--but prices continue to rise. When the cuts are that sharp to the middle class, imagine what this has done to the lower class (Putin's base).



Syria: Russia would be happy if the US joined the Russian team for PR purposes at home, but they really don't care. The USA really tries to stay away from killing babies for the most part. According to the Syrian Human Rights Network in the past twelve months ISIS has killed 2,686 civilians in Syria. Of those, 368 were children. Meanwhile, the human rights group says that Russian bombing in Syria has killed 2,704 civilians. Of those, 746 were children. The group reports that neither of those totals include the death toll by Syrian government forces against the population. In the month of July alone, 10 journalists were killed in Syria and 21 were injured.

When it comes to Syria, Obama has no idea who is the enemy or who is a friend. The team of John McCain and Hillary Clinton thought that they had formed a "Free Syrian Army" but that group is only a trace these days, and most of the arms we supplied (via Benghazi) has ended up in the arms of ISIS. The USA is a fcuktard when it comes to foreign policy these days.

As to the USA joining Russia in the fight against ISIS the Syrian population, not a chance. Maybe staying out of the local fight against Assad is the best option given our track record as of late.



Turkey: Washington is concerned about losing Turkey. Too late, she is already gone. It wasn't that long ago that Russia and Turkey were at each others throats over Turkey shooting down (justified) Russian fighters. The coup in Ankara wasn't as much as a shock as it was a clue of what has been transpiring for some time. The former secular state is returning to her Islamic roots and that is bad news for NATO as it means that the second largest standing NATO army will be an Islamic one.

In a short time, Putin has already "turned" president Erdoğan. In reality, the two have more in common that does Ankara and Washington. They are virtually neighbors in the same region and with lots of shared interests. Together they can have more complete control over the Black Sea, Aegean Sea, etc. Then, there is OIL along with the pipelines that carry oil. There is significant tourism between the two nations, and Turkey is a major supplier of fresh farm foodstuffs to Russia. Together they form a much stronger trading bloc.

Religion also plays a role over which both nations can help each other to balance competing population groups. Istanbul, the former Constantinople, is an important city to Orthodox Christianity. Islam is the second largest religion in Russia. Good relations with Turkey will help Russia keep radical Islam in check, and vice versa for Turkey. It would also lead to Russia stepping back from aiding Iran because Turkey would be a better, and more stable, ally. If forced to chose, Moscow would prefer Ankara over Tehran.

At some point our NATO alignment in regards to Turkey will simply have to change. And in the long term, that might be better for everyone concerned.



Romania: this is a concern for Moscow regarding a former Soviet satellite-client-ally of sorts. (You can take the Soviet out of the Union, but you can never take the Union out of the Soviet.) The idea that Washington might move nukes from Turkey to Romania is Obama's way to play with Putin's mind. But, that is all that it is--play. Washington is not about to give the keys to such toys to the emerging third world inhabitants of Bucharest. At least not yet. The USA would be wise to move them out of Turkey however, likely to existing stockpiles in places like the Netherlands. I do expect to see some in Poland--that would not be a bad move no matter how many tears Vladimir manages to conjure up.

Putin goes to sleep with images of the Romania that was formerly allied with Nazi Germany and it gives him nightmares.


For Obama to find any of this to be "constructive" is frightening.

[Gator]

Excellent report Mendy.  Far more information than I could find in the US media, who mostly follow Obama's lead.  It seems Obama is not leveling with us about the changing face of the Middle East.  The White House has little to say about Turkey and seems perplexed about Russia. 

Much of what you say I had predicted in a discussion with BC about the Presidential election and the implications of our withdrawal.  I knew nothing about Romania, and it seems you feel they will not serve a major role.


Russian Move into Middle East

In Obama's haste to withdraw from Iraq, sign a treaty with Iran,  and "pivot' to Asia, he created a vacuum.   ISIS moved in quickly, and Russia saw the opening and moved in as well.  It was Russia's first positioning in the Middle East ever since Egypt evicted them over 40 years ago. 

And move in they did, in force, under the disguise of fighting "terrorists," who would be anyone against Assad.    Russia propped up Assad, who may have been close to falling had Russia not intervened.    Obama did little to counter Russia's move except to express surprise and predict Russia would become bogged down.  NOT!
 

Iran

Russia also worked out some arrangement with Iran.  Iran deployed more forces in Syria to fight Sunni rebels and ISIS.  And Russia later moved a fleet of bombers to Iran where it launched bombing raids into Syria.
 

Turkey 

Russia was very restrained towards Turkey after Turkey downed a Russian jet.  Turkey was not pleased that the Russians were bombing rebels in Syria allied with Turkey, allied in the sense they were fighting the Kurds, a mortal enemy of Turkey.   The coup came and the US did not extradite the Turkish citizen Gulen accused of orchestrating the coup.  Somehow Russia forgot about the downed jet and cleverly forged an even stronger relationship with Turkey. 

Turkey invaded Syria with ground troops and tanks.  The Turks captured a number of ISIS-held centers near the Turkish border, and the Turks also widened the wedge that exists between two Kurd populations along the border.  The US-supported Kurds in the east had been advancing westwards, but were told by the Turks to stop.  The Kurds stopped, and many of the Arabs fighting with them have moved out.  The Kurd advance is over.


ISIS Caliphate

Iraq advances from the south, with US special forces support,  against ISIS territory.  Fierce battles in Iraq has taken its toll of ISIS fighters defending those positions.  Kurds with US backing were advancing from the east.   Turkey is advancing from the north.  And Assad's troops and rebel troops are to the west, although not yet engaging ISIS fully.

ISIS has lost many of its fighters.  ISIS will have trouble finding recruits to replace those killed.   The ISIS caliphate should crumble in a matter of months if not sooner.   Its spiritual movement will persist for a long period with attacks in Europe and elsewhere, but it will be a mere shell of its former self.


Aftermath

Russia, Turkey and Iran are free to roam in the Middle East.  The US is out and Europe never entered.   The Sunni nations never put together a viable force to fight something as small as ISIS.  Saudi Arabia is fighting a deadlock with little Yemen.  The Gulf nations can do little against Iran, especially if Turkey and Russia lend support.  I would imagine the Gulf  oil states are very nervous. 

The US will likely do little outside of diplomacy.  First, the US has few places from which to rebuild even if the US wanted to play a larger role.  Second, the US is not in the mood to back the Gulf states in an armed conflict.  Third, the US is energy independent so we do not need the Middle East oil.  Europe certainly does need the oil as do Asian economies.   Saudi Arabia may very well be persuaded to agree to reduce its production, enabling Russia and Iran to benefit from high production and high prices. 

I predict many new agreements, with the US having a smaller role in the world.  Welcome to the new world.  Implications are many. 

[Gator]

MORE SABER RATTLING TODAY

After the "frozen" dialogue between Obama and Putin at the G20 summit, Ash Carter, US Secretary of Defense, spoke Wednesday morning in Oxford.  He accused Russia of "sowing seeds of global instability."  “Despite the progress that we made together in the aftermath of the Cold War, Russia’'s actions in recent years — with its violations of Ukrainian and Georgian territorial integrity, its unprofessional behavior in the air, in space, and in cyberspace, as well as its nuclear saber rattling - all have demonstrated that Russia has clear ambition to erode the principled international order."

How did Russia respond?  Fox News:   "A Russian fighter jet zoomed within just 10 feet of a U.S. Navy spy plane over the Black Sea on Wednesday."  I call that thumbing one's nose. 

[BC]

Gator,

Yes, Russia, Iran, Turkey, Mexico and others due to the long and turbulent election window, stumped Congress and lame duck presidency will take advantage of every minute they can to forge ahead.  It's like throwing away the last year of the presidency.

The geopolitical shifts are profound, but in hindsight long coming.  With economic might comes political power and folks will flex their muscles here and there.. 

See the attachment.. still a far cry from US GDP but might explain why and how some of this political shift is happening and what makes it possible.

The political and economic weaknesses of the US, wars and massive spending over the last decades starting in 2001 have dampened the power and influence the US has over the rest of the world.  I fear a new era is coming regardless which candidate wins the election.  The rest of the world is saying 'We can too..'

[Gator]

See the attachment.. still a far cry from US GDP but might explain why and how some of this political shift is happening and what makes it possible.

I thought economic theory says prosperity brings peace.  Let us hope no one upsets the increased prosperity enjoyed by so many by flexing too much muscle. 

As far as the Middle East, who knows what will unfold.  Iran is flexing its muscle and wants more.   I sense if the world left the Middle East alone, they would continue holding their grudges and killing each other.    Russia represents a new card in the deck, and a wild card at that with plenty of muscle.

I thought through this sometime ago.  I bought some (not much)  RSX in March after a couple months of recovering from a January low.  Price has increased since then, yet I am holding, not selling. 

[BC]

I thought economic theory says prosperity brings peace.  Let us hope no one upsets the increased prosperity enjoyed by so many by flexing too much muscle. 

As far as the Middle East, who knows what will unfold.  Iran is flexing its muscle and wants more.   I sense if the world left the Middle East alone, they would continue holding their grudges and killing each other.    Russia represents a new card in the deck, and a wild card at that with plenty of muscle.

I thought through this sometime ago.  I bought some (not much)  RSX in March after a couple months of recovering from a January low.  Price has increased since then, yet I am holding, not selling.

It would be nice if economics worked that way.. USA would be the most peaceful country on earth   What actually happens is economics brings power which allows greater political leverage.  Like with exchange rates between currencies, it's all relative so what we see is that relative 'power' of other countries driven by their increasing economics is allowing them to catch up with us quickly.

[Gator]

It would be nice if economics worked that way.. USA would be the most peaceful country on earth  

With prosperity and freedom comes the need to defend them from attack. 

Over the past 100 years, the US has endeavored to foster peace and improve the lives of others in the world.  Yet, we have many episodes of not being so peaceful.  Our military actions and campaigns have usually been undertaken to defend ourselves or to defend allies. 

There are exceptions.   The most regrettable was Iraq, when it seems an excuse to defend ourselves from WMD had a second objective of creating a democracy so as to improve the lives of Iraqi people and bring stability and peace to the Middle East.  Yes, a "do good" mission.  Oddly, Obama withdrew from the mistake of Iraq, yet subsequently used our military might to support regime changes in Libya and Syria albeit without ground troops. 
 

      What actually happens is economics brings power which allows greater political leverage.  Like with exchange rates between currencies, it's all relative so what we see is that relative 'power' of other countries driven by their increasing economics is allowing them to catch up with us quickly.           

As an ex-employee of the UN, I consider that good.  The global pie gets bigger, and although the US share may shrink as a percentage of the total pie, our slice is bigger and better than the past slices.  And our fellow man has a better life. 

That is the way it should be for the world.   The only debate is the method and means.  If the method is capitalism, I have no fear for America as shown by the past success of American businesses.   

Also, that is the way it should be within the US.   Is it consistent to pursue capitalism in the world and depend on socialism within the US?   

[Muzh]

With prosperity and freedom comes the need to defend them from attack. 

Over the past 100 years, the US has endeavored to foster peace and improve the lives of others in the world.  Yet, we have many episodes of not being so peaceful.  Our military actions and campaigns have usually been undertaken to defend ourselves or to defend allies. 

 


Over the past 100 years we have been exporting "democracy" American-style. I am convinced you see nothing wrong with that. However, it might explain why we have to defend ourselves and our allies.

There are exceptions.   The most regrettable was Iraq, when it seems an excuse to defend ourselves from WMD had a second objective of creating a democracy so as to improve the lives of Iraqi people and bring stability and peace to the Middle East.  Yes, a "do good" mission.  Oddly, Obama withdrew from the mistake of Iraq, yet subsequently used our military might to support regime changes in Libya and Syria albeit without ground troops. 


As an ex-employee of the UN, I consider that good.  The global pie gets bigger, and although the US share may shrink as a percentage of the total pie, our slice is bigger and better than the past slices.  And our fellow man has a better life. 

That is the way it should be for the world.   The only debate is the method and means.  If the method is capitalism, I have no fear for America as shown by the past success of American businesses.   

Also, that is the way it should be within the US.   Is it consistent to pursue capitalism in the world and depend on socialism within the US?   

I'm positive you had a problem with the USSR trying to do the same, didn't you?

[deccie]

Agree completely with your view on Turkey Mendy. And it is a huge headache for Europe.
Plus, I suspect their leader plans to setup himself and his family as a new Emir/Sultan/King/whatever royal title he can think of to create a new "dynasty"...

[Muzh]

Agree completely with your view on Turkey Mendy. And it is a huge headache for Europe.
Plus, I suspect their leader plans to setup himself and his family as a new Emir/Sultan/King/whatever royal title he can think of to create a new "dynasty"...

It is looking like that.


Kinda go against "democracy" American-style.

[deccie]

Over the past 100 years, the US has endeavored to foster peace and improve the lives of others in the world.  Yet, we have many episodes of not being so peaceful.  Our military actions and campaigns have usually been undertaken to defend ourselves or to defend allies. 

There are exceptions.   The most regrettable was Iraq, when it seems an excuse to defend ourselves from WMD had a second objective of creating a democracy so as to improve the lives of Iraqi people and bring stability and peace to the Middle East.  Yes, a "do good" mission.  Oddly, Obama withdrew from the mistake of Iraq, yet subsequently used our military might to support regime changes in Libya and Syria albeit without ground troops. 
 

Libya is a complete mess. Whilst the US has not had substantially higher migration as a result - Europe has. Libya previously acted as a block for a lot of refugees coming from Africa to Europe - that block is now gone and Europe reaps the result of that. Of course the flow is also increased from Syria as well which so far also looks like a complete mess...

But as for your history - how was the US acting "peacefully" towards the Allende regime in Chile and facilitating his removal and assassination? The involvement of the whitehouse, (especially Kissinger) and the CIA is now well documented. Hardly promoting democracy to facilitate a military dictatorship to come to power is it.

[BillyB]

Ash Carter, US Secretary of Defense, spoke Wednesday morning in Oxford.  He accused Russia of "sowing seeds of global instability." 

If Russia can't bring themselves up to everybody's level, the option is to bring everybody down to their level. Global instability hurts the best economies the most. This is the way Putin brings sanctions to the West in retaliation for the West's sanctions on Russia. Russia hurts from sanctions but so does Europe and that is why Europe wishes the Ukraine problem goes away soon.

Libya is a complete mess.

Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan are still messes too. Both Bush and Obama has shown they are incapable of stabilizing those nations. How can we maintain influence over there if those nation's governments are on the edge of getting toppled by radicals. Russia knows the secret and that is to install hard line leaders that execute anybody that disagrees with policy. Unfortunately the West thinks leaders like that are inhumane. What is inhumane is putting nice guys in charge which makes it easier for the radicals to take control. If the West wants to stabilize the Middle East, totalitarian governments may be the answer.

[Gator]

But as for your history - how was the US acting "peacefully" towards the Allende regime in Chile and facilitating his removal and assassination?

I said there were exceptions.  Keep in mind global communism was perceived to be a huge threat for many years following WWII.  The Soviet's heavy response to revolts in Hungary and Czechoslovakia reinforced that opinion. 

There are other Allende examples (Google Mosadegh, Pahlavi, Iran).  The Vietnam war was also wrong, and I was there for a year believing it was right.  In retrospect, events are far better understood than at the time they happened.  We are far from perfect, yet our history is far more peaceful than Europe's. 

IMO these covert actions are small compared to what we did  during and after WWII, a war we tried to avoid.   At the conclusion of WWII, the US could have assumed any role in the world order.  We chose peace, and we were instrumental in supporting the recovery of Germany and Japan, unlike the Europeans and post-WWI Germany.   If the CCCP were the dominant power following WWII, what role would they have taken?   

[deccie]

The Marshall Plan was certainly very effective and helped to rebuild both Japan and West Germany after the war. By contrast, East Germany was stripped of anything useful and had it  shipped back to the Soviet Union.

After living here for some years now I find the one part of the war Russians don't want to talk about in any way is the way the Soviet Union dealt with Poland  - particularly the carving up of Poland by both Hitler and Stalin. Justifications I have heard included that Poland had invaded Russia several times in the preceding centuries...

My Dad is also a Vietnam Vet. Indeed I am a Vietnam baby as I was conceived shortly before his departure. I'm not sure I was planned either! :-)

Whilst I have talked to him about his service whilst  in the country we are yet to discuss the politics of the war in any great detail.

Still, I find the way modern America talks to the world (even their allies) somewhat disturbing. Big corporate America seems to control everything these days and I'm not sure I like the result at all..  The TPP is certainly an agreement I would like to see fail primarily due to the agreement that companies can sue government simply for passing laws that hurt their profits.

I greatly respect the generation of US Presidents of Roosevelt and Eisenhower.  Not at all the generation of Bush/Clinton/Obama.

[Gator]

What is interesting is that you know more about American politics than I know about "down under" politics.  I saw a few Ozzies in Vietnam, with the hats turned up on one side. 

I play golf with a helicopter pilot who did three tours in Vietnam.    He and I converse, but it is one-sided as I never fired my weapon in the year there and he was shot out of the sky twice, once losing his entire crew.  He was in a hospital for over two months.  While in bed, he made a commitment to live the rest of his life for himself with malice towards none.  Fine gentleman.  He says good words about the Ozzie soldiers. 

[tfcrew]

About this stuff...so far, not a peep from Barry

The UN Security Council has agreed to begin drawing up new sanctions against North Korea over its fifth and reportedly biggest nuclear test.
The decision was taken at an urgent meeting of the 15-member council.
South Korea earlier accused the North's leader Kim Jong-un of "maniacal recklessness". China said it "firmly opposed" the test, while Japan "protested adamantly".
Pyongyang has carried out two nuclear tests this year despite the UN ban.
Kim Jong-un's rhetoric has also become increasingly aggressive, analysts say.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-37317782

[BillyB]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-37317782

This is a joke, right? Are you sure this is happening? In the video below Bill Clinton announced a nuke deal with North Korea to make the world a safer place. The deal was so good Obama decided to make one himself with Iran and steal a few of Bill's lines. If Obama followed Bill's blueprint for peace, do you think Iran will follow North Korea's song and dance for nukes?

[deccie]

What is interesting is that you know more about American politics than I know about "down under" politics.  I saw a few Ozzies in Vietnam, with the hats turned up on one side.

Australian politics is largely irrelevant to you but well, you can have great impacts on us.

The perennial sore points between Australia and the US include your agricultural subsidies vs our medical Pharmaceutical Benefits scheme. Your big medicine companies don't make as much out of us as they would like... and our farmers who are not subsidized need to compete on an unequal basis with yours.

The slouch hat you refer to is not worn  in the field - just for official and ceremonial duties.
The Air Force has the same hat but theirs is not turned up at the side - but it has the fittings on it for it so the hat itself is identical.  What is worn in the field has for many years been referred to as a "giggle hat". I have no idea as to the origins of the name. My Dad wore his for many years after his military service ended just for doing stuff like mowing the yard. I got one as well once I joined cadets and I still have it.

As for Aussies in Vietnam the guys who get a lot of attention are those who fought at Long Tan where D Company of just over 100 men took on well over 1000 Vietnamese regulars. D company had artillery and helicopter support (for ammunition supply  as I don't think gunships were used) and also had M113's arrive for support towards the end of the battle.
It was a significant defeat for the Vietnamese forces. It is still sensitive today as just recently the Vietnamese government denied access for a memorial to happen there very, very recently.  Another significant battle was the Battle for Fire Support Base Coral where we used both artillery and Centurion tanks to great effect.  RAAF Units to get commendations included 2 SQN flying Canberra bombers and 35 SQN flying Caribou transports. By the time I was in cadets the Canberra had left service but I enjoyed many flights in the Caribou over the years and it was an amazing aircraft. There is nothing flying today with similar performance in hot and humid conditions. The RAAF only retired their last aircraft about 6-7 years ago.  C-27J is replacing it in RAAF service but the performance is inferior.
We also had destroyers and carriers in Vietnam. One destroyer  - a Charles F Adams class DDG - HMAS Hobart  was hit by missiles from US Aircraft. I don't believe in the blanket "thank you for your service" given out to any serviceman as there are good and bad in all groups of people.  The are rapists and murderers in the military just as there are outside. And I do have a problem with those who enjoy killing. But, I'm also conscious of there being a lot of good and brave people in service as well and that our freedoms have depended on their sacrifice. (Battle of the Coral Sea being a good example in the Australian context - USS Lexington and USS Yorktown were hugely important ships to me as child growing up). Plus, when I lived in Townsville many years ago (which was a huge US airbase in the war) I made sure to visit the local cemetary and pay my respects to those buried there. I have also visited Guadalcanal. The significance of that place I'm sure is known to you. 

I play golf with a helicopter pilot who did three tours in Vietnam.    He and I converse, but it is one-sided as I never fired my weapon in the year there and he was shot out of the sky twice, once losing his entire crew.  He was in a hospital for over two months.  While in bed, he made a commitment to live the rest of his life for himself with malice towards none.  Fine gentleman. 

I think that is the only way to deal with it in the long run as in the end anger is self destructive.

[Gator]

The slouch hat you refer to is not worn  in the field - just for official and ceremonial duties.

I saw them during my one trip to Saigon, so maybe they had just come from a ceremony.  They were not wearing a dress uniform.  The Ozzies were stationed near the rubber plantations not far from Saigon. 

I have also visited Guadalcanal. The significance of that place I'm sure is known to you. 

For sure.  The Japanese had rapidly captured French Indochina, British Malaya, and Dutch East Indies and were not stopping  [and people today consider America imperialistic].  Australia would be next.  The battle for Guadalcanal and the naval battle in the Coral Sea bordering Australia stopped the Japanese advance.  It was the "end of the beginning"   in the Pacific theater. 

[Anotherkiwi]

I have also visited Guadalcanal. The significance of that place I'm sure is known to you.

I spent two months in Honiara a few years ago, working on a project for my company.  On the only full day off that I had in the entire time, I visited the cemetery beside the airport, had a quick look at one of the wrecked warships which was run aground on one of the beaches about an hour to the west of the town, and also visited an outdoor war museum (all sorts of aircraft and artillery relics) at Vilu in the hills behind the same area (see photos below).  I was flabbergasted to find out that they actually have a formal ANZAC Day service up there every year (25th April for the non-Aussies and Kiwis), complete with Government representatives, as well as one at Parliament.

For those who aren't students of Pacific war history, the area directly north of Guadalcanal is known as "Iron Bottom Sound" for the number of warships which were sunk during the battle in November 1942.  This area has become one of the best diving sites in the world, and probably the premier site for wreck diving.  It must have just been coincidence that most of my team were actually qualified open-water divers, and several were able to fit in wreck dives on their days off.

[SANDRO43]

probably the premier site for wreck diving.

Others claim that the Truk Lagoon has the honour .

"see the ghost fleet of Truk Lagoon, the world's best shipwreck destination"

[BillyB]

China refused to roll out a staircase for Obama during the G20 summit. Obama had to exit out of the ass of the plane said one Chinese official. If Air Force One didn't have it's own staircase, I think Obama may have missed the G20 summit.

http://theconversation.com/a-us-24b-summit-about-a-staircase-lessons-for-germany-and-the-2017-g20-leaders-64874

Others claim

Talk about claims, China's Ministry of Education has redrawn the map that shows China owns most of the Pacific ocean including Hawaii. Got to get those youngsters education right while they're young so they grow up angry wondering why America and other nations have claims in the Pacific Ocean.

http://www.miniharm.com/2014/08/27/chinas-world-map-claims-hawaii-micronesia/

[Anotherkiwi]

Others claim that the Truk Lagoon has the honour .

Both extremely sad destinations on one hand, but amazing on the other.

[Gator]

Others claim that the Truk Lagoon has the honour .

Thanks to Jacques Cousteau. 

Aren't the sunken ships considered war graves?   No one is allowed to explore USSS Arizona at the bottom of Pearl Harbor. 

[BillyB]

Aren't the sunken ships considered war graves?   No one is allowed to explore USSS Arizona at the bottom of Pearl Harbor.

I think it depends of who writes the laws. After the Pearl Harbor bombing, most ships were raised, had the bodies removed, repaired and put back in action. The USS Arizona was not raised but divers when down there to salvage metal for the war effort. If you view some photos of the Arizona from the sky, you'll see it's missing it's main turrets and superstructure on the deck was removed. I don't know what they did with the bodies that were in the superstructure.