USA Acquirement of overseas territories
http://nationalatlas.gov/mld/usacqup.html
See my "Insular data" .... classifications, etc.
https://www.google.com/search?q=%E9%9D% ... +territory
New video ideas
Re: New video ideas
The number of essays, reports, books, theses, etc. regarding the development of Taiwan over the last 140 years is truly prodigious. However, over 98% of the authors overlook one important topic.
That topic is: the customary laws of warfare of the post-Napoleonic period. These customary laws are illustrated in many US Supreme Court cases.
Here is an example from the Mexican American War.
In late October, 1846, under onslaught by the US navy warships, Mexican forces in the port city of Tampico determined that their situation was indefensible, and abandoned the city. On November 14, US troops captured the city without a fight. The US flag was raised.
Was Tampico now part of the USA?
= = = = = = = = =
=== 1 ===
That topic is: the customary laws of warfare of the post-Napoleonic period. These customary laws are illustrated in many US Supreme Court cases.
Here is an example from the Mexican American War.
In late October, 1846, under onslaught by the US navy warships, Mexican forces in the port city of Tampico determined that their situation was indefensible, and abandoned the city. On November 14, US troops captured the city without a fight. The US flag was raised.
Was Tampico now part of the USA?
= = = = = = = = =
=== 1 ===
Re: New video ideas
Controversies regarding the legal effect of the US "liberation" (or "conquest"), of Tampico, Mexico, reached the US Supreme Court.
The Justices ruled that the city was under military occupation, it was not annexed. Hence, Tampico was not part of the United States' domestic territory. It was most properly described as an independent customs territory under USMG on Mexican soil.
But what is USMG?
As later affirmatively clarified by the US Supreme Court in 1866, and currently defined in US military regulations, the form of administration by which an occupying power exercises government authority over occupied territory is called "military government."
Hence the abbreviation USMG means "United States Military Government."
The meaning of "occupied territory" is to say territory under the control of foreign armed forces. Customary precedent relating to military occupation are part of the customary laws of warfare.
= = = = = = = = =
Many people know that the United States had a Dept. of War from 1789 to 1947. By 1949, this had evolved into the Dept. of Defense.
However, most people are unaware of USMG.
As originally clarified by the US Supreme Court in 1866, and currently defined in US military regulations, the form of administration by which an occupying power exercises government authority over occupied territory is called "military government."
A corollary to this would be to say that the fundamental nature of territory under USMG jurisdiction is occupied territory of the United States.
Hence the abbreviation USMG means "United States Military Government."
The meaning of "occupied territory" is to say territory under the control of foreign armed forces. Customary precedent relating to military occupation are part of the customary laws of warfare.
=== 2 ===
The Justices ruled that the city was under military occupation, it was not annexed. Hence, Tampico was not part of the United States' domestic territory. It was most properly described as an independent customs territory under USMG on Mexican soil.
But what is USMG?
As later affirmatively clarified by the US Supreme Court in 1866, and currently defined in US military regulations, the form of administration by which an occupying power exercises government authority over occupied territory is called "military government."
Hence the abbreviation USMG means "United States Military Government."
The meaning of "occupied territory" is to say territory under the control of foreign armed forces. Customary precedent relating to military occupation are part of the customary laws of warfare.
= = = = = = = = =
Many people know that the United States had a Dept. of War from 1789 to 1947. By 1949, this had evolved into the Dept. of Defense.
However, most people are unaware of USMG.
As originally clarified by the US Supreme Court in 1866, and currently defined in US military regulations, the form of administration by which an occupying power exercises government authority over occupied territory is called "military government."
A corollary to this would be to say that the fundamental nature of territory under USMG jurisdiction is occupied territory of the United States.
Hence the abbreviation USMG means "United States Military Government."
The meaning of "occupied territory" is to say territory under the control of foreign armed forces. Customary precedent relating to military occupation are part of the customary laws of warfare.
=== 2 ===
Re: New video ideas
As discussed above, the form of administration by which an occupying power exercises government authority over occupied territory is called "military government."
A corollary to this would be to say that the fundamental nature of territory under USMG jurisdiction is occupied territory of the United States.
(no lettering) USMG = United States Military Government
How does the above analysis relate to the defense responsibility for Taiwan ?
Before we answer this question, let's overview the "defense responsibility" for other historical instances of territory "liberated" (or "conquered") by US military forces.
= = = = = = = = = = =
According to the best information which can be assembled, in the WWII period beginning Dec. 1941 through Fall 1945, over 96% of military attacks against (Japanese) Taiwan were made by US military forces.
Note: the costal areas of mainland China were under military occupation by the Japanese during most of this period, and ROC military forces were unable to launch military attacks against targets in (Japanese) Taiwan or the four main Japanese islands.
Although the post-WWII San Francisco Peace Treaty did not award (grant, transfer, etc.) Taiwan to any other country, the term USMG is mentioned.
=== 3 ===
A corollary to this would be to say that the fundamental nature of territory under USMG jurisdiction is occupied territory of the United States.
(no lettering) USMG = United States Military Government
How does the above analysis relate to the defense responsibility for Taiwan ?
Before we answer this question, let's overview the "defense responsibility" for other historical instances of territory "liberated" (or "conquered") by US military forces.
= = = = = = = = = = =
According to the best information which can be assembled, in the WWII period beginning Dec. 1941 through Fall 1945, over 96% of military attacks against (Japanese) Taiwan were made by US military forces.
Note: the costal areas of mainland China were under military occupation by the Japanese during most of this period, and ROC military forces were unable to launch military attacks against targets in (Japanese) Taiwan or the four main Japanese islands.
Although the post-WWII San Francisco Peace Treaty did not award (grant, transfer, etc.) Taiwan to any other country, the term USMG is mentioned.
=== 3 ===
Re: New video ideas
The legal occupier (sometimes called the principal occupying power) should protect the lives and property of the people in occupied territory.
By mid-October 1846, Mexican military forces had abandoned Tampico. US military forces had assumed jurisdiction over the city. In the event of any attack from neighboring countries, clearly the US military forces would be in charge of the defense of the city.
Let's look at California territory.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interim_g ... California
Next we can move on to a discussion of Spanish American War territories.
=== 4 ===
By mid-October 1846, Mexican military forces had abandoned Tampico. US military forces had assumed jurisdiction over the city. In the event of any attack from neighboring countries, clearly the US military forces would be in charge of the defense of the city.
Let's look at California territory.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interim_g ... California
Next we can move on to a discussion of Spanish American War territories.
=== 4 ===
Re: New video ideas
The four theatres of the Spanish American War were Guam, Cuba, the Philippines, and Puerto Rico.
The Spanish surrender ceremonies in each theatre were held on the following dates.
- - - - -
- - - - -
- - - - -
- - - - -
The surrender ceremonies mark the end of hostilities, not the end of the war. The end of the war occurs when the peace treaty (or formal peace settlement) comes into force.
After the surrender ceremonies, these islands were under military occupation, They were not annexed.
Nevertheless, US military forces had assumed jurisdiction over each of these island groups, with a separate USMG for each. In the event of any attack from neighboring countries, clearly the US military forces would be in charge of the defense of these islands.
=== 5 ===
The Spanish surrender ceremonies in each theatre were held on the following dates.
- - - - -
- - - - -
- - - - -
- - - - -
The surrender ceremonies mark the end of hostilities, not the end of the war. The end of the war occurs when the peace treaty (or formal peace settlement) comes into force.
After the surrender ceremonies, these islands were under military occupation, They were not annexed.
Nevertheless, US military forces had assumed jurisdiction over each of these island groups, with a separate USMG for each. In the event of any attack from neighboring countries, clearly the US military forces would be in charge of the defense of these islands.
=== 5 ===
Re: New video ideas
Let's review some important US Supreme Court cases regarding military occupation.
If a portion of the country be taken and held by conquest in war, the conqueror acquires the rights of the conquered as to its dominion and government . . .
. . . . the conquered inhabitants pass under a temporary allegiance to the conqueror, and are bound by such laws, and such only, as he may choose to impose. The sovereignty of the nation which is thus unable to protect its territory is displaced, and that of the successful conqueror is substituted in its stead.
The local government being destroyed, the conqueror may set up its own authority, and make rules and regulations for the conduct of temporary government, and to that end may collect taxes and duties to support the military authority and carry on operations incident to the occupation.
In light of all the information presented above, how are we to determine which country fulfills the role of "the legal occupier" ?
= = = = = = = = = = = =
=== 6 ===
If a portion of the country be taken and held by conquest in war, the conqueror acquires the rights of the conquered as to its dominion and government . . .
. . . . the conquered inhabitants pass under a temporary allegiance to the conqueror, and are bound by such laws, and such only, as he may choose to impose. The sovereignty of the nation which is thus unable to protect its territory is displaced, and that of the successful conqueror is substituted in its stead.
The local government being destroyed, the conqueror may set up its own authority, and make rules and regulations for the conduct of temporary government, and to that end may collect taxes and duties to support the military authority and carry on operations incident to the occupation.
In light of all the information presented above, how are we to determine which country fulfills the role of "the legal occupier" ?
= = = = = = = = = = = =
=== 6 ===
Re: New video ideas
An additional US Supreme Court case clarifies:
The right of one belligerent to occupy and govern the territory of the enemy while in its military possession is one of the incidents of war, . . . . . . .
Of course, the meaning of the phrase "in its military possession" must be understood within the framework of the customary laws of warfare. After the close of hostilities, territory is under military occupation, it is not annexed. Private property is not seized. The local inhabitants are not mass naturalized into the nationality of the legal occupier.
As a general rule, the legal occupier must adhere to the international rules of usufruct.
Usufruct [define].
However, in summary, what we conclude from the above overview is that the legal occupier is the country that conquerors (or "liberates") the territory.
For Taiwan, we are faced with the question of
Which country liberated Taiwan from Japanese sovereignty?
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
The codification of many of these was done at the 1907 Hague Conference, and promulgated as the Annex to the 1907 Hague Convention, aka the "Hague Regulations," or simply HR.
Speaking of the 1907 Hague Convention and its annex:
In 1946 the Nuremberg International Military Tribunal held that " . . . by 1939 these rules . . . were recognized by all civilized nations and were regarded as being declaratory of the laws and customs of war."
In other words, these rules have become part of international law, and are binding on all states.
In relation to WWII in Asia, a handy compendium of the Hague Regulations (HR) and other customary laws of war precedent is available in the Rules of Land Warfare, FM 27-10, published by the US Dept. of War, October 1, 1940.
=== 7 ===
The right of one belligerent to occupy and govern the territory of the enemy while in its military possession is one of the incidents of war, . . . . . . .
Of course, the meaning of the phrase "in its military possession" must be understood within the framework of the customary laws of warfare. After the close of hostilities, territory is under military occupation, it is not annexed. Private property is not seized. The local inhabitants are not mass naturalized into the nationality of the legal occupier.
As a general rule, the legal occupier must adhere to the international rules of usufruct.
Usufruct [define].
However, in summary, what we conclude from the above overview is that the legal occupier is the country that conquerors (or "liberates") the territory.
For Taiwan, we are faced with the question of
Which country liberated Taiwan from Japanese sovereignty?
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
The codification of many of these was done at the 1907 Hague Conference, and promulgated as the Annex to the 1907 Hague Convention, aka the "Hague Regulations," or simply HR.
Speaking of the 1907 Hague Convention and its annex:
In 1946 the Nuremberg International Military Tribunal held that " . . . by 1939 these rules . . . were recognized by all civilized nations and were regarded as being declaratory of the laws and customs of war."
In other words, these rules have become part of international law, and are binding on all states.
In relation to WWII in Asia, a handy compendium of the Hague Regulations (HR) and other customary laws of war precedent is available in the Rules of Land Warfare, FM 27-10, published by the US Dept. of War, October 1, 1940.
=== 7 ===
Re: New video ideas
As discussed previously, during most of the WWII period, due to the fact that the costal areas of mainland China were under military occupation by the Japanese, ROC military forces were unable to launch military attacks against targets in (Japanese) Taiwan or the four main Japanese islands.
Wartime records show that 96% of military attacks against (Japanese) Taiwan were conducted by US military forces. In addition, the US did extensive bombing of the four main Japanese islands, culminating in the dropping of two atom-bombs in August 1945.
The Japanese surrendered.
Fast forward to late April 1952. In the post-war treaty, Japan renounced its sovereignty over Taiwan but no "receiving country" was specified. From the perspective of the customary laws of warfare, it would seem clear that Taiwan would remain under USMG jurisdiction. The United States of America fulfills the role of "the principal occupying power." Indeed, the SFPT contains these stipulations.
Accordingly, the United States of America bears the responsibility for Taiwan's defense.
=== 8 ===
= = = = = = = = = =
Wartime records show that 96% of military attacks against (Japanese) Taiwan were conducted by US military forces. In addition, the US did extensive bombing of the four main Japanese islands, culminating in the dropping of two atom-bombs in August 1945.
The Japanese surrendered.
Fast forward to late April 1952. In the post-war treaty, Japan renounced its sovereignty over Taiwan but no "receiving country" was specified. From the perspective of the customary laws of warfare, it would seem clear that Taiwan would remain under USMG jurisdiction. The United States of America fulfills the role of "the principal occupying power." Indeed, the SFPT contains these stipulations.
Accordingly, the United States of America bears the responsibility for Taiwan's defense.
=== 8 ===
= = = = = = = = = =
Re: New video ideas
Unresolved issues
a) In territory separated from the mother country by peace treaty after war, when does USMG end?
b) What is the status of ROC in Taiwan?
The Republic of China is fulfilling the role of "subordinate occupying power," or in more modern terminology "proxy occupying forces."
=== 9 ===
a) In territory separated from the mother country by peace treaty after war, when does USMG end?
b) What is the status of ROC in Taiwan?
The Republic of China is fulfilling the role of "subordinate occupying power," or in more modern terminology "proxy occupying forces."
=== 9 ===