NationStates Jolt Archive

"Simply put, we ask that all oceanic dumping of toxic wastes in both territorial and international waters be banned.

Sovereignty arguments over territorial water rights are irrelevant because there is no way to prevent toxic waste dumped in one region from contaminating waters in neighbouring nations."

My personal view: I feel that there is no way that the United Nations could possibly regulate the dumping of toxic wastes. Why waste valuable time and money on an impossible feet? I mean, we have problems preventing this same issue in just our country, let alone the whole world. Vote no.

Yes, then everyone will feel that it's okay to dump toxic waste in the ocean. The water will in time become a stinking quagmire and all sealife will die. After that, the poisonous waste will spread through the soil, into drinking water, and slowly destroy the rest of life on the planet. Way to go.

Yshurak has voted FOR this resolution.

<snip>My personal view: I feel that there is no way that the United Nations could possibly regulate the dumping of toxic wastes. Why waste valuable time and money on an impossible feet? I mean, we have problems preventing this same issue in just our country, let alone the whole world. Vote no.

"If you can't control it in your nation....who's in control of your nation? since it's obviously not you or your government. It's not that hard to control, nations just got to make a list of businesses or locations that produce toxic waste. Make laws making it illegal to dump it without a permit, and charge a large fine or close down those who dump it in non-predermined locations. Sorry but my nation has voted yes to this proposal."

http://www.users.on.net/killerkoala/skambass.JPG
Ambassador Jade Purrlinda
The Free Land of Slagkattungerhttp://www.nationstates.net/images/un_member.gif
Politics is war without bloodshed while war is politics with bloodshed.
Email:- Slagkattunger@hotmail.com
Slagkattunger Nation Profile (http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=78165)
My Nations GDP (http://www.pipian.com/stuffforchat/gdpcalc.php?nation=Slagkattunger)
Covered by DRI (http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=83705)

It shouldn't be controlled internationally, but by individual nations. They should prevent the dumping from happenning in the first place. Its not the job of the UN, but the individual nations.

It shouldn't be controlled internationally, but by individual nations. They should prevent the dumping from happenning in the first place. Its not the job of the UN, but the individual nations.

"But not all nations are responsible about this Issue...so it does concern the UN. Why should our world be ruined by corrupt dictators and the like just because you don't like doing what the UN says?"

Wrong it's the job of whoever owns the land being polluted. The courts are there for a reason, you don't need to send in the secret police.

No single nation owns the ocean, so the UN should be able to regulate it.
Some businesses may be hurt by the regulations of their trade, but the regulation is necessary for safety and health.
Also, the regulation itself will require the introduction of new industry and technology to help monitor the oceans and keep them clean, in effect off-setting trade concerns.

No single nation owns the ocean, so the UN should be able to regulate it.
Some businesses may be hurt by the regulations of their trade, but the regulation is necessary for safety and health.
Also, the regulation itself will require the introduction of new industry and technology to help monitor the oceans and keep them clean, in effect off-setting trade concerns.
Not only does the resolution have the potential to create a new industry but it will help already existing industries such as the fishing, cruise boats, companies that make surf boards, jet skies, boats, fishing goods and ocean side tourism. Besides I would rather invest a little money in keeping the planet intact instead of having my nation wiped out by pollution in a few hundred years, so the Jurian States has voted for this proposal.

If no one is going to enforce it, then we'll dump where we please.

tHE un does not have the right to restrict our rights in our soveriegn lands, the proposal should out law dumping toxic waste only in international waters. It is an infringement of your nation's soveriegn right, let democracy dictate what is right. Believe the people.

The UN SHOULD be able to regulate the toxic waste dumpings because the oceans are not any single nation's property, as someone pointed out earlier. Although this may hurt Industry it'll be better for us.


ALL HAIL PRIME MINISTER DAIKU! THE SOVERIEGN ELECTED LEADER OF THE KAZARS!

__Ogdai Ngu, Kazar Ambassador to the UN__

Whats great is that even when the resolution is passed, you can just keep dumping waste because there isn't any penalties in the resolution. Sure, the UN might frown at you a bit, but hey? Who cares?

Abysseria's concern in this matter is that voting for this resolution may set a dangerous precedent in regards to UN regulations concerning other issues in international waters, such as deep sea drilling, deep sea mining, as well as deep sea fishing. Also at the heart of this matter is the compatibility of this resolution to those countries that establish different boundaries for their own territorial waters. Will the UN establish a standard measurement for countries in regards to where international waters begin/end? The United Nations, in attempting to regulate toxic waste dumping, is proposing a resolution that sets a dangerous precedent on a number of other issues.

That being said, environmental concerns are often over-looked by nations in search of the bottom line, and there is no way to ensure accountability or protect those harmed by pollution from other countries, which means, therefore, that international accords may be most relevent in solving this particular problem.

Abysseria has tentatively voted yes on this issue, as the environment is of primary concern and she is located in the Pacific, however, the nation is not above changing her vote if convinced in the fallacy of this resolution.

well, the truth is that this bill is so vaguely worded that it really doesn't DO anything anyway.

It's really more of a directive than an iternational law because we haven't established an enforcement policy. What happens to violators? How is it monitored? What constitutes toxic waste?

BAsically, if your country violates this "law", it will take a second resolution to do something about it since this one doesn't really enforce it. The chances of anything major being done like that are slim.

So, if you DON'T want taxic waste dumping in the ocean, by all means vote for this. Otherwise, don't be too upset by it, it's not really enforeceable anyway.

hi i am the delegate for Behazin2, in the region of Jafari.
Although my country is an economic powerhouse, i feel that the UN resolution will deter industry in my country and any other developing nation which is seeking better economic conditions.
i am environmentally friendly but i do not believe that this is in our or anybody elses interests right now.

hi i am the delegate for Behazin2, in the region of Jafari.
Although my country is an economic powerhouse, i feel that the UN resolution will deter industry in my country and any other developing nation which is seeking better economic conditions.
i am environmentally friendly but i do not believe that this is in our or anybody elses interests right now.
While this motion is not applicable to your nation, I do believe that it is relevent to other nations around the world. My nation firmly believes that while an important topic, the resolution expressed lacks clear language in reference to the boundaries it wishes the UN to enforce, and how it will to enforce them. Until these changes are made, it does not make sense to support this resolution openly.

So, if you DON'T want taxic waste dumping in the ocean, by all means vote for this. Otherwise, don't be too upset by it, it's not really enforeceable anyway.

Or, if you are tired of UN resolutions being meaningless drivel . . .
If you take the clarity of a resolution seriously . . . .
If you think that resolutions should be well thought-out and accordingly organized . . .
If you approve of efficacious resolutions rather than ineffective red-tape . . . .

Then vote no on principle, make someone think things through.


http://www.vialattea.net/sirtoli/svaghi/nietzsche.jpg

Luminary Hall

My good delegates, I agree with Abysseria: by allowing the UN to control yet another crucial part of our nation's economies, we give them all the more reason to completely control other aspects of our nations. The UN is meant, primarily, as a way of keeping the global peace, not as the governing body of the nation.

I now quote the honorable delegate from Yshurak:

"After that, the poisonous waste will spread through the soil, into drinking water, and slowly destroy the rest of life on the planet. Way to go."

This is a prime example of a "slippery slope" fallacy. By stringing together a slew of highly improbable conclusions, the delegate has, with each successive variation, created a larger and larger improbability of these aforementioned occurances from happening. It is like this: everyone will not "feel that it's okay to dump toxic waste in the ocean." In fact, ever to the contrary! A majority of the nations of this planet already control waste, and it would not be worth the money to regulate it in the UN.

The delegate from Aramar has voted AGAINST this resolution, and urges the others to do the same. Thank you.

how can this be passing?/?????? It explains nothing. It is completely open to interpretation and spells nothing out as far as guidlines.

tap water is toxic to many fish and other sea life, under the current plan I could consider any country who allows water to be dumped into the ocean to be in violation of this resolution.

On the other side it also allows me to dump absolutely anything I want into any of my many rivers which empty right into the ocean, after-all I would not be guilty of dumping into the ocean I would be guilty of dumping into my own rivers...I cant control nature if it takes my pcbs out to sea....

The basic idea behind this resolution is sound however it is full of holes and should NEVER be passed until it has been tweaked and refined.

PEOPLE, WERE NOT VOTING OVER WHATS FOR DINNER BY A SHOW OF HANDS......WE NEED TO DO THIS RIGHT!

This is a prime example of a "slippery slope" fallacy. By stringing together a slew of highly improbable conclusions, the delegate has, with each successive variation, created a larger and larger improbability of these aforementioned occurances from happening. It is like this: everyone will not "feel that it's okay to dump toxic waste in the ocean." In fact, ever to the contrary! A majority of the nations of this planet already control waste, and it would not be worth the money to regulate it in the UN.

The delegate from Aramar has voted AGAINST this resolution, and urges the others to do the same. Thank you.

Abysseria thanks the esteemed delgate from Aramar for their support and agrees expresses her solidarity with Aramar on this issue.

Greetings.

This resolution has been debated extensively in another thread in this forum. Please look for the thread.

While noble in intention, this resolution is ineffective in actuality.

However, despite my best efforts, this resolution will most likely pass anyway. Most nations agree with the premise, but disagree on the details. And this resolution has no details.

I am currently composing a new proposal that will amend this resolution. It will answer all questions necesitated by legislation. It will add definitions, methods, and consequences. If you would like to assist in writing this new proposal, please send Nikonia a telegram.

Thank you.

The Holy Emperor of Nikonia

This is a public message from the Neo-Communistic states to the Commonwealth of Giedi.

Our enviromentalists have found slightly higher traces of radioactive uranimum in your terretorrial waters than is the normal earth standard. We considered radioactive materials toxic. Though we know that your country is rather enviromental aware, we found that these particals, even though in minute proportions come from small spoils that slipt through your cleaning system. However with the current resolution you give us no other option. Improve the world, start somewhere. Unless you make sure absolutely nothing will enter the water anymore, one week after this resolution passes we will declare war on the Commonwealth of Giedi, because we feel forced to declare war on the Commonwealth of Giedi to shut down its uranium mining. We are secretly working in the intrest of other uranium mining nations to increase there monopoly by the way. They however feel secure enough that there army can withstand the UN. We are very sad to do this, but absoluty no toxic materials, means absolutily no toxic materials.

This ultimatium will never be followed through. However it is our last, maybe final attempt to stop the horror you unleashed on the world due to bad formulating. We are an enviromental conscious nation, but your initiative gives us enviromentally aware people a bad name. At this stage it will also not take the resolution anymore of the table, but at least I want to show the writer of the resolution what a horrible legal error he made. We hope that this awareness will result in more awareness in the future, and maybe an update of this resolution.

Neo-Communists, for a better world, but not with a sledgehammer.

ps. We are also very sad that the deligates failed to see this crusial error and managed to correct this.