Post to the Straight Dope from a world where Santa Claus is real.

[Mr.Excellent]

@Sunspace

Didn’t the UN try to renegotiate the Claus charter that time? Did anything come of it?

Sorry, Sunspace - didn’t see your post. No, so far as I know, the California case didn’t lead to much - the DEA backed down once the guy who got the bong sent them a letter claiming that it was actually a hookah, meant only for tobacco use. It was a fig leaf, of course - and I’ve always suspected that the DEA suggested it to the fellow themselvs, in order to avoid an international incident. But it worked.

[Skald_the_Rhymer]

@Mr.Excellent

Perhaps I wasn’t clear. I agree with you regarding Santa’s right to meet force with force - we only disagree regarding his options when states do not bring force to bear against him. Allow me to clarify:

In 1942, the Japanese government declared that it would use force to prevent Santa from delivering presents to children within Japan or any territory administered by the Japanese government. And it tried to carry through on that threat - anti-aircraft batteries surrounding Tokyo fired upon the sleigh. This, of course, triggered Article 9, and Santa immediately fired upon the anti-aircraft guns, destroying them and killing their crews. When Imperial Japanese Army soldiers attempted to engaged Santa with small-arms fire while he delivered gifts, he then escalated to the destruction of most of the military facilities in mainland Japan, and disabled nearby warships. This, too, was in full compliance with the terms of Article 9, which affords Santa the right to use “reasonable and proportionate” force in reply to force directed against himself or those in his employ. And the devestation of the Japanese military left Japan defenseless against US Naval and Marine forces, thus leading to surrender.

However, Article 9 is very clear about the context in which it applies - it affords Santa the right to self-defense while carrying out his mandate, and has been interpreted to permit preemption. (As in 1992, when Santa bombed Iraqi military airfields prior to conducting his deliveries). But so long as states don’t interfere with the gift-delivery process, it’s hard to read Article 9 as permitting force in response to regulation of these gifts after they’re delivered, even if that regulation is draconian in character.

Upon review you have a point there.

I still think wonder whether FDR … encouraged … events to play out the way they did. Weren’t some of the Christmas-celebrators later alleged to be deep cover American agents? And if so, wouldn’t Mr. Roosevelt have been on the naughty list in perpetuity for gaming the system? (Admittedly he hadn’t long to live even by mortal standards, much less Noldorin.)

I still can’t find the alternate history story about the Santa-less world in which WW II lasted until 1944.