NationStates Jolt Archive

My 1st proposal [1st post!] - Repeal "Fight the Axis of

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!
17-12-2003, 02:15
I absolutely agree with you. If large spending in military, then it does create an easy feeling in neibouring countries. If there is no threat to peace then why do it. The only problem with that is if there is a sudden threat to peace, we will be unprepared to deal with it. There will be much confusion and it will be unproperly organized. There has to be some middle ground we can agree on. I'm just not sure what. If you find one please message me.
Oppressed Possums
17-12-2003, 02:41
Nope, you can't repel anything. It's been discussed and it cannot be done.
States of Stephenson
17-12-2003, 02:45
Nope, you can't repel anything. It's been discussed and it cannot be done.

This is why the UN member nations must remain on the watch to make sure this does not happen again.
17-12-2003, 02:57
Military spending fuels the economy. A threat of war also provides job security for those producing weapons. As long as Joe the missle maker knows that he'll have a job for the next several years, he'll invest in a new BMW.
Also, if the UN demiltarizes itself, what happens when non UN members decide to take over the soft and defenseless UN members?
How will the UN enforce such a law if it were passed? With a poorly funded UN military?
A better question to ask is, would you be willing to go to war with a UN member country (that is not hostile toward you in any way) so that said country will decrase military spending?
A large military capability is a deturrent for war. Would you launch a missle at me if you knew that I had as many nuclear missles as you did houses in your country?
Oppressed Possums
17-12-2003, 03:00
Besides, we can add the people that want it repealed to the "evil" list.