I posted a very long response to something you said early on on this thread which your responses since PROVE you have not bothered to read. No drama except what you are attempting to create.
LOL! Bigun, I read what you posted...all of it, and it was a quick read because where ever you borrowed it from, I've read a fair bit of it before, but I'll admit I didn't go back to the 1100s. But my question for you my friend is, did you? You listed dozens of cases, books, treatises. Did you actually read them?
Early on you said you come down on the side of Vattel's definition and said the courts have never decided it. I showed you where they in fact have. Then you said the case had been Thoroughly discussed here and see no point in doing that all over again...until you posted the mother of all "arguments".
With all due respect, a suggestion. If you're going to post stuff like that, least summarize what your points are and if you feel we need to go back to the Treaty of Falaise from the 12th Century, put it in context. BTW, FWIW, William was a prisoner and simply signed it to keep his head. It was struck down a few years later. Again, the suggestion is made simply to advance what could be a good discussion.