Sorry, no win. You missed the goal, even though you are very close.
Here is another analogy why:
Lets assume you are in the garden under an apple tree and you are hungry. There is an apple hanging on the tree but you can't reach it.
Would you argue that you are no longer hungry, because the apple can't escape?
'Sometimes' you have to accept reality
Nah... because its a war game, not picking apples... surround is perfectly viable strategy. I mean, For most cases, it is better than direct confrontation, as it leads to surrender.
Yeah, its a skill issue, not being real about it.
Hmmm, Analogy did not work, but i guess i found the problem.
You assume, that surround leads to surrender, but that is wrong. Only a threat leads to surrender. Without a threat you can live happily ever after in your position.
With that in mind the genius inventors of chess created the wise rule, that, if you are not in a threat but have no legal move, the result is a draw.
hope this helps
Yeah. threat... here is the threat... and i have already said a couple of times, so people should really understand the things already said, but here goes: The threat is as a follows... either you think about your options, and let the time run out. or you make an "illegal" move, and get knocked out. Those are the options, so just resign, like a good sport would.
Crooked rules. Jump through hoops, which dont make much sense.
Kinda sounds like coomie rules... yeah, communists liked chess veryvery much... send them straight, as long as there is a carrot at the end of the road. But whatever - stop stupid, commies are stupid. Not very genius at all... our spy gave them nukes... which was a damn shame.
No, there is no thread 
Time is not part of the chess rules. Time limits are only recently introduced, i guess to make tournaments.
So it is just a Deadlock Situation and to me a Draw is a reasonable Solution.
Ahh, transcend. All that is not important, except the girl part... make sense of it... seems like people just happen to be stupidly biased.
So the question is quite funny... are these 600 millions of people reasonable, or just fools for rules. Game theory and development. Think about it.
It doesnt require any thought. Any way you look at it, you are wrong!
Okay, how am i wrong, cause i explain how i am right? I already did... can you explain how am i wrong? I know, rulesrulesrules and 600 million supposed to mean somethin... well, here is the memo - the rules dont make much sense.
The point is... its a win. Maybe not as clean, but its a win.
I'm not going to bother to read the additional pages.
You are wrong and you will remain wrong right up until you get FIDE to change the rules. Note that if the rules are changed then under FIDE a lone king can win on time against an opposing player that still has every piece because there will be theoretical help(stale)mates that can arise. Those rules regarding the results of flagging would be drastically affected by your proposed change.
After you get the FIDE rules changed you can re-open the thread. You will need to get it on the agenda to be addressed by the FIDE rules committee and then brought up for vote at the FIDE conference at the Olympiad. Maybe you can overcome the great odds against you.