Hacker News Reader

Actually not. Agressive war is no longer legal (you can end up in Hague).

Perhaps, but you'd be stretching the definition of "legal".

That's horrible the us and eu countries must be going before the Hague then for the Libian bombings. Oh wait that's right they write the rules so it does not apply to them just to governments with less military might.

What is "non" Agressive war is always defined by who holds the biggest gun.

http://www.sealandgov.org/history.html

In August of 1978, a number of Dutch men came to Sealand in the employ of a German businessman. They were there to discuss business dealings with Sealand. While Roy was away in Britain, these men kidnapped Prince Roy's son Michael, and took Sealand by force. Soon after, Roy recaptured the island with a group of his own men and held the attackers as prisoners of war.

Peter Thiel could afford an Apache, an F-16, some small gun boats and a bunch of mercenaries. He could probably even afford a nuke if he could get away with it.

You think the residents won't have weapons?