NationStates Jolt Archive

Greetings,
I have just submitted a revision to the proposal concerning the I.R.C.O that was recently passed.
The grave mistake made by the last proposal was that it completely ommited all non-un nations.
This new proposal will change that.
More and more unsound proposals continue to be passed, simply because no one takes the time to read what they vote on.
This practice must be stopped.
I urge you all to view my amendment proposal and endorse it.
Thank you.

Oh I disagree. UN proposals only affect UN members in this world. It's impossible. That and I personally think that if you want the benefits of the UN you should accept the penalties (stupid resolutions) from the UN too.

That is what makes me afraid. Once you are able to affect the whole world with one proposal, what stops the next?

Simple. The odds are somewhat against stupid proposals, and so over time the laws governing the UN will tend to get better. Have faith...

dont you find an organization that would only help out UN member nations, that tend to be far wealthier,and in less need of foriegn aid, elitist in the extreme?
the whole idea is for this organization to help those in need....regardless of the political views of its government.

Simple. The odds are somewhat against stupid proposals, and so over time the laws governing the UN will tend to get better. Have faith...

Just LOOK at proposals passed so far. How many loopholes can you think of in each? You don't even need to go through every one before you realize that yes bad proposals WILL be passed by people who are dumb enough to think everyone will follow the SPIRIT of a proposal. People vote for proposals that are fundamentally good, but upon further inspection those proposals either overlook and limit some good things, don't address importiant issues, or allow giant loopholes.

dont you find an organization that would only help out UN member nations, that tend to be far wealthier,and in less need of foriegn aid, elitist in the extreme?

Not really. Poor nations can join the UN too. If they want UN aid they can join the UN. Besides, the fact still stands that a resolution changing game mechanics (allowing the UN to affect non-UN members) isn't acceptable and this is fundamentally flawed.

the whole idea is for this organization to help those in need....regardless of the political views of its government.

I thought the idea of the UN was to have a say in matters of other nations and be able to push your agenda on as many nations as possibly through resolutions. That and as much international stability as possible. UN aid organizations are just frosting on the top that we choose to enact in order to empower ourselves. Just becasue resolutions only affect UN members, doesn't mean we can't kick the asses of people we don't like. UN nations and the UN as a whole could concievably declair war on anyone it doesn't like. If we can't reach a favorable end through diplomacy we'll reach it through overwhelming force.

At least that's what I thought it was. Tell me if I'm wrong and I'll gladly argue that point.

sir, I think you miss the point entirely

We would feel better about a proposal in which the IRCO asks the local authorities for permission to intervene before going off to help non-UN members. UN members CHOSE to have branches of IRCO present on their soil, through a democratic vote; non-member nations did not.

Non-member nations would not need to donate anything to the UN fund to recieve the IRCO's help, of course; it simply makes humanitarian sense for the IRCO to become involved in helping the victims of a major disaster no matter where such a disaster has occured, if the local authorities will let us.

In any case, concerning UN resolutions affecting non-UN members: Just think of it as a bit of your nation's money going to help people in non-UN states who are facing some sort of disaster. A little like foreign aid. Makes sense to us.

As to the honorable government of Oonamahambra's statement, regarding "people who are dumb enough to think everyone will follow the SPIRIT of a proposal," by "people who are dumb enough" possibly meaning our colonial government.

Yes, the UNITED NATIONS, as a DEMOCRATIC ORGANIZATION which is dominated, as anyone who will look over the resolution archives will realise, by nations which care about human rights and democracy, will, as a body, follow the spirit of the resolutions. Perhaps certain corrupt governments will, indeed, try to skew some UN resolutions when passing the national laws required to ensure compliance with those resolutions. But the IRCO resolution CAN NOT be skewed by corrupt national governments, because what this resolution does is it creates a new UN body, which will not be controlled by a few corrupt nations, but which will be ruled democratically by a large group of nations, most of which do care about the original, humanitarian, spirit of the resolution.

And may we suggest that representatives of the honorable government of Oonamahambra talk to some Real World judges and ask them whether when making a ruling they follow the law in a rigid, perfectly literal, to-the-letter manner, or whether they sometimes need to try and interpret what the law was designed to do - its spirit. Better yet, we advise some members of Oonamahambra's government to read a high school law textbook or two, and seek relevant information there.

Sir, I think you got the point and spirit of what Im proposing.
I hope more of you do.

Right on brotha man.

If we make the IRCO have power outside the UN, there is little to stop them from saying "We demand all non-UN nations comply with basic whole human rights standards." What happens if the nation express a need but the government refuses the help or the government accepts but the populace refuse? Going back to the human rights issue, as long as money is involved, whoever has control of it has ultimate say where it is to be spent. They could refuse to send money simply because "We don't like you.

:cry: "

If we make the IRCO have power outside the UN, there is little to stop them from saying "We demand all non-UN nations comply with basic whole human rights standards"

How about the United Nations? They would probably stop any corrupt, deranged head of the IRCO who would somehow get elected and then would proceed to infringe on the sovereignty of non-member states.

It could cause as much problems as it tries to solve... :cry: