NationStates Jolt Archive

Had to cut it down to fit the requirements.

===========================
VERSION AS POSTED
===========================

WOLFISH CONVENTION - LAND WAR
Description: This Resolution will come into force on the day of its passage.

While preserving peace and preventing conflicts is paramount it is necessary to prepare for time when conflict is unavoidable;

Thinking it important, to define laws and customs more precisely, or to set limits where possible;

The High Contracting Parties, who, found in good form, have agreed to define the laws and customs of war as follows:

These provisions are only binding on the Contracting Powers, in case of war between two or more of them.
SECTION I: ON BELLIGERENTS
Article 1
The laws, rights, and duties of war apply to armies, militia and volunteer corps or those that take up arms upon an enemy’s approach provided they respect the laws and customs of war.

For the purpose of this Act – the aforementioned shall be referred to as armies or belligerents.
SECTION II: ON HOSTILITIES
Article 2
The right of belligerents to adopt means of injuring the enemy is not unlimited.

It is prohibited to:

A] To kill or wound an enemy who has surrendered at discretion;
B] To declare that no quarter will be given;
C] To purposefully employ weapons causing superfluous injury;
D] To make improper use of a flag of truce, the national flag, or military ensigns and the enemy's uniform;
E] To destroy or seize property, not demanded by the necessities of war.
Article 3
Ruses of war to obtain information about the enemy and the country, are considered allowable, notwithstanding Article 1, item D.
Article 4
The attack, target or bombardment non-belligerents, excluding Spies (Section III), unless such action is deemed to be unavoidable due to enemy tactics or strategies.
Article 5
In sieges and bombardments all necessary steps should be taken to spare as far as possible edifices devoted to religion, art, science, charity, hospitals and places where the sick and wounded are collected, or of historic significance, provided they are not used at the same time for military purposes. The besieged should indicate the locations of such to the assailants.
SECTION III: On Spies
Article 6
An individual can only be considered a spy if he seeks to obtain information of a belligerent with the intention of communicating it to the hostile party, or operates to commit acts of sabotage, assassination, or subversion, or counsels others to commit such acts clandestinely.

Thus, soldiers not in disguise, who have penetrated into the zone of operations of a hostile army to obtain information are not considered spies.

For the purpose of this Act, spies are NOT considered combatants, and therefore receive no protection under this, or the Wolfish Convention on Prisoners of War.
SECTION IV: On Flags of Truce
Article 8
An individual is considered an envoy that is authorized by one of the belligerents to enter into communication with the other, has a right to inviolability, as well as an interpreter accompanying him.

In case of abuse, the enemy has the right to detain the envoy temporarily, subject to conditions as outlined in the Wolfish Convention on Prisoners of War.

The envoy loses his rights of inviolability if it is proved beyond doubt that he has taken advantage of his privileged position, in which case he would be considered a combatant.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF the undersigned, having deposited their respective full powers, have signed the present Convention.

glorious

Its a bit long...I'm modifying it from the Hague Conventions from the League of Nations.

Anyone know if there is a limit on resolution length?

Tap - for addition to first post.

Please Introduce This! I love your Conventions...they are clearly within the mandate of the UN and are good ideas for protecting people during wars.

Lord Evif, Goobergunchian UN Ambassador
DU Regional Delegate

Please Introduce This! I love your Conventions...they are clearly within the mandate of the UN and are good ideas for protecting people during wars.

Lord Evif, Goobergunchian UN Ambassador
DU Regional Delegate

Thank you.

I do intend to introduce it shortly - however, with the last Convention, I found some of the ideas presented were worthy of an amendment. This time, I'd like to be able to make them.

Cheers,
W.

Unfortunately, this will be one of those resolutions in which we get whiners coming in the forums saying 'I voted against this because it is too long.'

I will re-read it several times before giving an opinion - there are a couple of things that worried me on my first quick skim.

Unfortunately, this will be one of those resolutions in which we get whiners coming in the forums saying 'I voted against this because it is too long.'

I will re-read it several times before giving an opinion - there are a couple of things that worried me on my first quick skim.

That was my chief concern with this one (and another reason to give it some time on the forum before proceeding). Unfortunately, unlike the previous convention, there was not much I could cut from this.

They have a fixed distinctive emblem recognizable at a distance;
They carry arms openly;

Doesn't this outlaw Special Forces and Commando Units?

They have a fixed distinctive emblem recognizable at a distance;
They carry arms openly;

Doesn't this outlaw Special Forces and Commando Units?

Not at all. As a commander, you could handle Spec-Ops in two different ways. If they operate "openly" meaning in uniform with identifying markings (rank, unit etc) - they would be considered combatants, and protected under this Convention.

If you wished them to operate secretly - they would fall under Section III on spys - and would not be protected.

I think there are limits to the length. There are all kinds of similar limits.

Steph - as a MODALERT - do you know if this will post? It's about 1500 words give or take.

Steph - as a MODALERT - do you know if this will post? It's about 1500 words give or take.

I'd break it up anyway...people won't vote for something that they don't feel like reading.

While this is definitely a praiseworthy proposal, I do not see any provisions made in it for the protection of non-belligerents (i.e. civilians who do not resist the attacking forces). I would propose adding Section II, Article 1(F):

(It is prohibited to:)

F) To designate non-belligerent individuals or groups, excepting Spies (defined below, Section III) as targets to be killed. Causing the collateral death of non-belligerents may be forgiven if the commander of the attacking force determines that it is the only feasable means of neutralizing an opposing belligerent force, but the death of non-belligerents must never be in itself a goal.

I support Wolfish. Propose this and I will make sure it makes it to the final vote.

http://www.hostmysig.com/data/raziel/Icon8.jpg
Immortal Emperor Tobias Raziel
Holy Empire of Penguenia
Penguenian Lady Guard (http://boards.gamers.com/messages/overview.asp?name=Penguenia)

While this is definitely a praiseworthy proposal, I do not see any provisions made in it for the protection of non-belligerents (i.e. civilians who do not resist the attacking forces). I would propose adding Section II, Article 1(F):

(It is prohibited to:)

F) To designate non-belligerent individuals or groups, excepting Spies (defined below, Section III) as targets to be killed. Causing the collateral death of non-belligerents may be forgiven if the commander of the attacking force determines that it is the only feasable means of neutralizing an opposing belligerent force, but the death of non-belligerents must never be in itself a goal.

Thanks - I think this is a great idea.

And BTW - this does fit as a single proposal - so I think I'll file it as such - splitting it up would, I think, cause confusion.

Cheers,
W.

I think it's very important that this proposal is broken up. Especially the part about dealing with the aftermath of war. The whole of section VI will be a great source of dispute, I reckon, and it would be wise to deal with this issue separately. I would try limiting this resolution to the way people should act during war time. You are talking about the conflict here, I would say (even though this might sound paradoxal) that the aftermath is part of preventing further conflict, instead of talking about how to engage in conflict. So, scrap section VI, you might want to put it up for a new resolution, it sounds interesting. Apart from that, there were a couple of points I found difficult to ratificate.

One quick mention before I start: I would advise you to name your articles subsequent numbers, and do not start from 1 at the start of each chapter. You will see that the UN does the same in its manifest. The reason for this, is that UN members debate and amend articles, not chapters; they are discussed separately, and thus it is easy to refer to an article which has a fixed and unique numbers.

About Section II, Article 1e) :

This is impossible to control. The besieged are very likely to 'disguise' their military activities in hospitals and the likes, if such an article would be valid. It's near to impossible to prove that destruction of such hospitals is necessary. I feel that abuse of this article is very easy, and therefore it's best to just scratch it.

Article 1d also is a bit dubious. Since a spy can do such activities mentioned in this article, I would simply add in this article that whoever commits such activities, would be considered a spy, and hence loses all rights entitled to belligerents.

Article 2, combined with article 1d, again makes it impossible to control the follow-up of these articles. The distinction between actions falling under 1d and 2 is undefinable. Especially concerning the part about spies, I think Article 2 is redundant.

My awe is directed at article 4, which I find creative and insightful.

Respectfully,
Michael Malthus
Minister of Communications

Ursoria wishes to thank Wolfish for coming forth with this proposal. We feel that it represents an important step forward for humanity, and will, if adopted, do much to reduce the suffering caused by warfare.

However, we hope that this resolution will be viewed, not as an end in itself, but as a step toward the day when the world is totally freed from the "scourge of war".

When that day comes, we will have truly earned the respect of our compatriots and the gratitude of posterity.

The resolution has been somewhat shortened, and an addition regarding non-combatants added.

This will be posted on Monday.

Thanks.

W

The resolution has been somewhat shortened, and an addition regarding non-combatants added.

This will be posted on Monday.

Thanks.

W

You've got my endorsement as soon as I see it.

A perfect plan for the rules of war

A perfect plan for the rules of war

Thanks.

---Post deleted by NationStates Moderators---

Tap - updated with final proposal. Please support this effort.

W.

The government of the Republic of Sparkinia will vote for this should this proposal reach resolution stage.

Sincerely,
The President of the Republic of Sparkinia

The Empire of Sizzle fully supports these articles.


Herby W. Jackson
.::Political Envoy::.

I'm all for it.

Lord Evif pulls out a large purple stamp and stamps the following on the proposal:

Goobergunchia (Democratic Underground Regional Delegate) approves this proposal.

Ever hear the phrase "All's fair in love and war?"

That's a right fine piece of writin' there, Wolfish. It's bang on just what the U.N. is here for.

Alabammy'll support ya on this proposal.

-Prez Billy Bob Hicklee

As always, you have Fyrehearts support in this matter.

I have approved it though I will lose delegate powers in a few hours.

I have approved it though I will lose delegate powers in a few hours.

Gotta say - that's a first - you and I on the same side of an issue. Wow.

Looks like you're trying to imitate Geneva, only in your own words eh Wolf? :wink:

I can't wait until you get to protection of civilians. I'll pester fellow delegates myself if need be to get the a civilian one passed. :P

I endorsed this one earlier anywhen.

Looks like you're trying to imitate Geneva, only in your own words eh Wolf? :wink:

I can't wait until you get to protection of civilians. I'll pester fellow delegates myself if need be to get the a civilian one passed. :P

I endorsed this one earlier anywhen.

My first convention was Geneva - this one is Hague. There will be a part two to this one dealing with civilians.

With all due respect to your ongoing debate - get the hell out of my thread.

http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/gallery/2001/03/16/hijack5.jpg

HIJACKED!

And now - back to our regularly scheduled program

Just so all delegates know - I will not be tg-ing anyone to support this proposal as I did with the last one.

I figure there is so much complaining about too many tg's that I'll see if something CAN pass with just forum posts.

So, please support this proposal.

Cheers,

W.

I love that hijacked pic. I'm using it on nationstates from now on.

With all due respect to your ongoing debate - get the hell out of my thread.

[ooc: I concur. modalert split the Libertarian Paradise debate off so we can get back to the subject at hand.]

Just so all delegates know - I will not be tg-ing anyone to support this proposal as I did with the last one.

I figure there is so much complaining about too many tg's that I'll see if something CAN pass with just forum posts.

Although I would be tempted to contact other delegates on this matter, I will defer to the representative from Wolfish and refrain from doing so.

Lord Evif, Goobergunchian UN Ambassador
DU Regional Delegate

Although I would be tempted to contact other delegates on this matter, I will defer to the representative from Wolfish and refrain from doing so.

Lord Evif, Goobergunchian UN Ambassador
DU Regional Delegate

Thank you m'Lord - and again - thank you for your support. Consider this a "social experiment." I can always repost it if it fails.

At the request of the thread author, iSplit.

The split topics can be found....

/me tries to find them; doesn't find them where he thought he put them.

...where the hell did they go? :shock:

Give me a few minutes to find it.

Okay, I can't find the posts that I split off. It looks as though they're not recoverable. :oops:

Those discussing the situation in "Libertarian Paradise" may start a new thread about it in "NationStates". Again, I'm sorry for losing your posts; I think the forum server messed up, somehow.

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation
NationStates Forum Moderator

The Wolfish Convention in its new form shows what democratic discussion is worth. I applaud the changes made, which are an image of respect for the other member states. I will support this resolution.

The Wolfish Convention in its new form shows what democratic discussion is worth. I applaud the changes made, which are an image of respect for the other member states. I will support this resolution.

Thank you - your support is welcomed.

The following statement has been issued from the Central Headquarters of the Protectorate of Grotia:

The Protectorate of Grotia continued its experiments in limited democracy today by putting the text of the Wolfish Convention to its people in a yes/no binding referendum, on the orders of the ALMIGHTY LEADER himself!!! The people of Grotia almost wholeheartedly (97%) supported the Wolfish Convention, thereby allowing the ALMIGHTY LEADER to grant full support to the proposal, and will lobby our local UN delegate to support it. (The 3% who voted no have been found to be suffering from various mental diseases, and have been hurried to our psychiatric hospitals where they will recieve immediate and caring treatment. It is thought these illnesses were caused by shock when they were given a choice in deciding government affairs. Well, no one said this democracy thing would be easy...)

Perhaps in the future, we could amend the matter of targeting enemy forces who have hidden among civilians. The ALMIGHTY LEADER was rather concerned about this.

Ich Dien!!!!

Lowly Bootlicker
Secretary of Public Pronoucements for the ALMIGHTY LEADER
Protectorate of Grotia

Statement ends.

Perhaps in the future, we could amend the matter of targeting enemy forces who have hidden among civilians. The ALMIGHTY LEADER was rather concerned about this.

Ich Dien!!!!

Lowly Bootlicker
Secretary of Public Pronoucements for the ALMIGHTY LEADER
Protectorate of Grotia

Statement ends.

This is actually covered - should military forces hide among civilian targets - the area is fair game as a military target - though one would hope that the attacker would use restraint.

Well - without lobbying in the form of telegrams, this proposal died without anywhere near the required support.

This suggests to me that telegrams are necessary - as I believe that this proposal had merit, and met with little complaint.

I'll repost it in a short time, when I have the time to lobby properly.

Hopefully those against tgs see this.

Cheers,
W.

Well - without lobbying in the form of telegrams, this proposal died without anywhere near the required support.

This suggests to me that telegrams are necessary - as I believe that this proposal had merit, and met with little complaint.

I'll repost it in a short time, when I have the time to lobby properly.

Hopefully those against tgs see this.

Cheers,
W.

I sincerely hope you'll have more luck this time around.

Respectfully,
Walt Dixie