16-12-2003, 17:10
I'll just cut and paste it, and then you lot can talk about it.
The original motion "Fight Axis of Evil" states:
"As the world becomes a more dangerous place, UN member nations must act swiftly in the interests of peace. This means, of course, building lots of new weapons. Only by massively increasing military budgets world-wide will we be able to restore peace and global security."
I however strongly disagree with it. Large military spending by nations will only make other nations, who may be at odds politically, nervous at possible attack and will force them to react with building up their own military. As the situation between Russia and the US during the Cold War showed, this just creates paranoia at a dangerous level.
The fact it was passed 2 votes to 1 [due to the fact it was the first motion passed] also proves how unrepresentative of current UN members it is.
Further I wish to add needless military spending, where there are no threats to 'freedom', as the resolution claims [esp. since we can't actually go to war], defers funding from essential public services such as health and education.
Finally, if member states are truly interested in peace I wish to propose a mass scaling down of the militaries of member countries, so that it is proportionate to population in a way so that should the need come to defend a country from attack, member states could do so.
One last thing, I hope you all use you're right to 'Freedom of Humour' when discussing this! The purple hippos of my state demand it!
The original motion "Fight Axis of Evil" states:
"As the world becomes a more dangerous place, UN member nations must act swiftly in the interests of peace. This means, of course, building lots of new weapons. Only by massively increasing military budgets world-wide will we be able to restore peace and global security."
I however strongly disagree with it. Large military spending by nations will only make other nations, who may be at odds politically, nervous at possible attack and will force them to react with building up their own military. As the situation between Russia and the US during the Cold War showed, this just creates paranoia at a dangerous level.
The fact it was passed 2 votes to 1 [due to the fact it was the first motion passed] also proves how unrepresentative of current UN members it is.
Further I wish to add needless military spending, where there are no threats to 'freedom', as the resolution claims [esp. since we can't actually go to war], defers funding from essential public services such as health and education.
Finally, if member states are truly interested in peace I wish to propose a mass scaling down of the militaries of member countries, so that it is proportionate to population in a way so that should the need come to defend a country from attack, member states could do so.
One last thing, I hope you all use you're right to 'Freedom of Humour' when discussing this! The purple hippos of my state demand it!