NationStates Jolt Archive

There is a new proposal currently pending concerning global space defense. I suggest that all delegates check it out, as it pertains to the safety of nations of every region, against a threat we currently are not prepared to deal with.

Regards,
Roguebeckistan

Space Defense Proposition
A resolution to improve world security by boosting police and military budgets.

Category: International Security Strength: Significant Proposed by: Roguebeckistan
Description: Realizing that there is a possibility of intelligent lifeforms on other planets besides Earth, I propose that ALL U.N. members assist in the creation of a global defense network that will be used to identify possible interstellar threats, and if need be, defend the Earth from hostile races and or Dangerous objects. We currently have no infastructure to deal with such threats.

This resolution will require all U.N. Nations to:

1. Provide ground based radar and telescopes to identify possible threats to the Earth.
2. Provide space based satellites to monitor for possible threats to the Earth.
3. Provide funding for research and development for technologies that would assist in identifying hostile lifeforms or dangerous objects, weapons to be used for self-defense ONLY, and future power sources needed to power required weapons and or spacecraft that may be required.
4. Share all intelligence gathered regarding global and interstellar defense with all U.N. nations.

Technologies developed as by-products of this proposal such as alternate energy/fuel types and new propulsion systems would benefit all U.N. nations and aid in further space exploration by the various private or government-funded space programs world wide. This proposal would help secure our entire world against unknown threats such as hostile lifeforms or Near Earth Objects such as asteroids that we are not currently prepared to handle.


Approvals: 3 (Nireva, Taraguy, Flibbleites)

Status: Lacking Support (requires 134 more approvals)

Voting Ends: Sat Jul 24 2004

Paranoia? Expensive guns? The Fishlord strongly supports this proposal in its entirety. However, we wonder if there is a way it could involve offensive action as well?

In the future, it's best to provide a copy of the proposal you're referring to along with the statements you choose to open the debate with. Especially considering the amount of clicking it takes to get from the forums to the main NS interface, it's just plain polite.

As for the proposal itself, you should consider the fact that many of the nations involved in the NS universe aren't Earth-based at all. They range from small pirate nations to vast multi-planetary empires, and everything in between. With that in mind, it hardly seems appropriate for them to absorb the burden of paying for our defense. The funding requirements for this measure would be enourmous, and many of those non-Earthbound nations have their own space-based problems to worry about.

Furthermore, the government of Sophista is wary to support any proposal that encourages the militarization of space, including the development of weapons designed to attack objects in Earth orbit or beyond. No matter how well-intentioned such a proposal is, the limits of "for self defense only" are too vague and too easily manipulated to justify putting such a tremendous destructive force into operation. We have enough weapons on the planet already, thank you very much.

The People's Republic of Miko Mono cannot help but be saddened and angered that this asanine proposal has once again been introduced into the United Nations. We strognly reiterated our opposition to any form of space-based defense, which all countries understand as an attempt by imperialistic and militant nations to take over Space, which belongs to the good of all. In addition, we cannot but see any attempt to place spy satellites overhead as an infringement on our soverignty and as an attack on our people, and we will NOT fail to act accordingly.

The People's Republic of Miko Mono cannot help but be saddened and angered that this asanine proposal has once again been introduced into the United Nations.

I *think* this one is completely new.

And if memory serves, the author had created a previous resolution, to which this body made suggestions, and things like the telescopes and satelites are done in reference to the discussions this forum has been having on *all* space topics in the past 2 weeks.

You might not like the idea of space defense, and please feel free to speak out against it, but are you certain that the phrase "once again" applies?

I'm not. And I do recognize a sincere attempt for somebody to incorporate this forum's comments.

If these aliens' technology is advanced enough for them to be able to mount an effective offensive across interstellar space (assuming they're not martian) what makes you think even for a second that our technology could defend against their weaponry?

A far better approach would be SETI-style, and if we do make contact, work for diplomacy, peace, and sharing technology.

First of all, the suspicion of the posibility of an enemy is no logical reason to create a defense. I would find it interesting if it were indeed possible to be able to detect "threats" in distant space. We would either become trigger happy, or real threats would find a way to sneak in past our watchful eyes.

Secondly, if I recall the general literature on the matter in the sci fi press, attacking a planet is far easier than defending one. (It has to do with that gravity well every planet has.) In principle one could simply chuck asteroids at the planet from the asteroid cloud or comets from the ort cloud and wait for the defenses to occasionally miss a target. I refuse to turn the Earth into Metaluna.

I strongly discourage support for this motion as a general waste of money.

A far better approach would be SETI-style, and if we do make contact, work for diplomacy, peace, and sharing technology.

This does make more sense.

I'm inclined to agree with the more peace-oriented solution offered. A coordinated, multinational effort to comb the skies would spread the burden among many nations, while at the same time accomplishing this "early warning" our author is encouraging. Pumping a few billion gigawatts of radio energy into space is bound to come up with something, right?

I agree we need to develop something to protect us in the event of a threat arising. Space Defense Proposition
A resolution to improve world security by boosting police and military budgets.

Category: International Security Strength: Significant Proposed by: Roguebeckistan
Description: Realizing that there is a possibility of intelligent lifeforms on other planets besides Earth, I propose that ALL U.N. members assist in the creation of a global defense network that will be used to identify possible interstellar threats, and if need be, defend the Earth from hostile races and or Dangerous objects. We currently have no infastructure to deal with such threats.

This resolution will require all U.N. Nations to:

1. Provide ground based radar and telescopes to identify possible threats to the Earth.
2. Provide space based satellites to monitor for possible threats to the Earth.
3. Provide funding for research and development for technologies that would assist in identifying hostile lifeforms or dangerous objects, weapons to be used for self-defense ONLY, and future power sources needed to power required weapons and or spacecraft that may be required.
4. Share all intelligence gathered regarding global and interstellar defense with all U.N. nations.

Technologies developed as by-products of this proposal such as alternate energy/fuel types and new propulsion systems would benefit all U.N. nations and aid in further space exploration by the various private or government-funded space programs world wide. This proposal would help secure our entire world against unknown threats such as hostile lifeforms or Near Earth Objects such as asteroids that we are not currently prepared to handle.


Approvals: 3 (Nireva, Taraguy, Flibbleites)

Status: Lacking Support (requires 134 more approvals)

Voting Ends: Sat Jul 24 2004

The Republic of Aethersonia believes that we are not yet ready for this proposal. Myopia's idea is much better. However, we will one day need to have a defensive system around Earth, but that will not be for many, many years.

We do not support this proposal as it stands.

Oh, and as well as the SETI approach I suggested, the only realistic way to stop such a vastly superior enemy alien race from smashing Earth to pieces if they wanted to would be to trick them into believing we were stronger than them.

Does anyone remember that Asimov (?) short story, where humans make contact with Jovians, who turn out to be very aggressive and vastly numerically superior, and who plainly announce that once they work out how to escape their gravitational well they would wage war on the humans?

The humans send down some robot ambassadors to meet the Jovians, and the robots quite by accident never manage to get round to mentioning that they are not the humans that the Jovians have been communicating with. When the aliens see how strong and robust the robots are, they assume all the humans are like that, and suddenly decide not to have a war.

The humans send down some robot ambassadors to meet the Jovians, and the robots quite by accident never manage to get round to mentioning that they are not the humans that the Jovians have been communicating with. When the aliens see how strong and robust the robots are, they assume all the humans are like that, and suddenly decide not to have a war.

It is a nice idea for a resolution.

OOC: I'd be curious to hear which Asimov short story that is from. :) Chances are my dad, a huge SciFi nut, has it in one of his numerous collections. (It is funny, sometimes he has complained that he misplaced books, not realizing that when I visit my parents, that sometimes I just sneak off with one of his books. Tis OK though ... once I told him I was doing this, he started just handing me a few of his favourite books.)

Sorry, I think I read it at least 3 years ago in my school library (it was quite a gd idea actually, one english lesson a week was "go to the library and read a book"), so I can't remember which collection. I only remembered the story because I thought it was an interesting idea.

You can probably search google for an asimov fansite and dig through that for "Jovians". I seem to remember that the humans set up communications with the Jovians through a radio language that consisted of clicks, and that instead of seeing light the Jovians sensed mass, so you might want to search "click" and "mass" as well.

I followed my own suggestion, since I'm sitting here bored, and I think it's called Victory Unintentional, and can be found in the Asimov collection "The Rest of the Robots".

While I find the idea of building a trio of super-robots to challenge any alien ambassadors, I doubt the United Nations could agree on a particular state to safeguard and maintain said juggernauts until a time when they would be used. There are options, of course, such as spreading a few critical parts among a handful of nations, but that still falls into the trap of spending money on weapons.

Instead, why not devote those resources to building some kind of misinformation network that would give non-UN nations the impression that the invading aliens were actually newbs threatening to nook tH3m, thus leading non-UN crowd to unleash their full nuclear arsenal upon the approaching spacecraft?

While I find the idea of building a trio of super-robots to challenge any alien ambassadors, I doubt the United Nations could agree on a particular state to safeguard and maintain said juggernauts until a time when they would be used. There are options, of course, such as spreading a few critical parts among a handful of nations, but that still falls into the trap of spending money on weapons.

While I'd propose that we design a "Gort", and my nation would be happy to take care of "Gort" and would happily deploy him when necessary. He could travel between the three cities: Klatuu Barada Nikto, to further safe guard the planet. ;)

And we could program Gort with three basic laws. (Actually some time ago I thought about dropping in a proposal for the Fundamental Laws of Robotics ... I may still have it around. But I gave up on the idea, assuming that too few NS Players would realize what it was and would take offense.)

Somewhere, a very large nerd culture reference just went sailing over the heads of dozens, if not hundreds of unwary readers. Perhaps we should dig up a UN resolution to deal with that as well?

* The Rep of Komokom makes a note to see " I, Robot " soon as possible.

I saw that nerd culture referance coming. Thnak-fully, I can at least claim to know no specifics about it. Small mercy ... :D

The People's Republic of Miko Mono can only be outraged and offended by the hostile and beligerent tone of the imperialist Mikitivity nation. We suggest that such hostility shows the true intentions of those who would seek to place weapons in space....

But the anti-n00b nukes wouldn't work - this is what I'm saying. If you were going to invade a planet you knew had radio transmission technology and therefore a fairly advanced civilisation, you would probably expect them to defend with nukes. Thus, whatever did invade us would be able to counter the nukes.

As to the three laws, I have been comprehensively persauded by somone on this forum that forcing a sentient being with the intelligence of the robots in Asimov's stories to follow the second law (obeying humans) at the most basic level of its subconscious (i.e. its hardwired rathter than software) is utterly immoral.

I've written a possible proposal text which would establish UNSETI, promote a friendly attitude towards anything we make contact, and making the general type of deception used in that story (though not necessarily with robots, perhaps we could distort their radar signals or something so we appeared to have a massive spacefleet) the official strategy of the earthbound UN nations' defence of the planet against significantly superior attackers. I'll post it today, but I won't be doing anything about it until mid-August because I'm going away in a couple of days.

OOC: I, Robot appears to bear no resemblance to anything Asimov wrote. Ahem, enough with the geekery.

IC:

Most of our objections have already been stated with clarity by other members. However, we wish to draw attention to the following:

"This resolution will require all U.N. Nations to..."

May I point out that not all nations are sailing the bright seas of economic bliss? Ecopoeia is by no means what may be described as a 'first world' nation. We are developing but have a long way to go before we can contemplate adhering to enforced funding of, in my view, unnecessary military programmes. Many nations are even less capable than us of fulfilling such an obligation.

Your intentions may be good but your awareness of the diversity of UN member states' economic facility is alarming.

Varia Yefremova
Speaker to the UN

I concur with many of the objections here and my government would certainly lend their support to a proposal that would seek a more diplomatic and peaceful approach as discussed. In any event I have never been able to understand the fear that drives so many nations to militarization at the very thought of the existence of alien life. It has always been my belief that any alien species that have the technology to cross the vastness of space would have to be an advanced civilisation not only terms of technology but also society. Otherwise they would probably never have reached that level of technology without blowing themselves to oblivion.

The real challenge I feel that faces us in this arena is one of psychology. The way we view the universe might be completely different to the way other species view it and the irony is we could never really prepare for this eventuality until it actually happened because we have no point of reference on which to base any assumptions. It is simply an event beyond our experience. Spending money therefore to prepare for something such as this, especially militarization, is fatally flawed.

I believe the most we can actually do is have a global agreement on what our planet will do as a response and some basic procedures and guidelines on contact from our own perspective, which in any case could prove to be useless once our understanding grows upon actual contact.

Respectfully
Lydia Cornwall, UN Ambassador
Office of UN Relations
HM Government of Telidia

Take a look at the thread UNSETI, where I've posted my draft proposal.

The People's Republic of Miko Mono can only be outraged and offended by the hostile and beligerent tone of the imperialist Mikitivity nation. We suggest that such hostility shows the true intentions of those who would seek to place weapons in space....

Keyword search:
"The Day the Earth Stood Still"

Gort isn't to be placed in space. :)

OOC: I, Robot appears to bear no resemblance to anything Asimov wrote. Ahem, enough with the geekery.

Yes, well, geeking, robots ... you can see how it all reminded me not to neglect my social life. And actually catch a good movie before it hits DVD.

;)

We would never agree with this proposal due to the fact that it is un important and a huge waste of monetary funds. All this will do is bloat the tax rate in my nation so we can protect ourselves from...well.. nothing. It at best is paranoia of something we cannot prove exists or not so why is this even a worthy proposal?

The United Socialist states of Voroziniya does NOT agree with this proposal. What we need to understand is that these are MADE-UP IRRATIONAL STORIES TAKEN TOO SERIOUSLY OVER THE AGES! When the government actually believes these stories is when the UN becomes a big joke. There is no evidence of such creatures, and dozens of rational explanations have surfaced for each and every paranormal encounter reported. Such an operation would be dramatically expensive, and i think i speak for all communist countries when i say our primary goal is for the rights of the working class, and working on building a weapon, and entire system, for space defense is definitely overworking the workers. I think even the capitalists, even with their corrupt economy, would agree.

The United Socialist States of Voroziniya

I'm sorry but this is just silly.

The odds of us being able to defeat such a enemy are almost 0 no mater what we do.

The odds of us being able to trick them into thinking we can, are again almost 0.

Is this really what the UN wastes it's time and money on?

Ok, assuming there are extraterrestrials out there, which is less likely than finding the fountain of youth or permanently ending world hunger, what makes you think we aren't prepared? If the government is going to be as foolish as to believe the made-up stories of hyperimaginative civilians, you dont have to believe that their technology is necissarily more powerful than ours. It is just commonly told that way, because it makes a great movie! This is just something some governments want to believe. We have a stockpile of eapons left over from the Cold War, and just because some '60's movie producer gives aliens special technology doesn't mean they really have it.

Let alone that aliens exist at all....

And quite frankly I pity many people who actually support this idea. I'm seeing a lot of nations here who i once believed were intelligent and respectable.

The Miko Mono Politburo is encouraged and heartened by some many countries' speaking out against this iditiotic proposal, which would only serve to bankrupt smaller countries to aid larger ones in establishing weapons in space that would only, ultimately, be used against us. We reiterated our oppoistion to this proposal and hope to see additional support in the future.

The Miko Mono Politburo is encouraged and heartened by some many countries' speaking out against this iditiotic proposal, which would only serve to bankrupt smaller countries to aid larger ones in establishing weapons in space that would only, ultimately, be used against us. We reiterated our oppoistion to this proposal and hope to see additional support in the future.

Untrue, an idiot would be an individual who forms an opinion on something without a clue of what they are talking and typically restorts to screaming "Imperialist" or "It costs too much" before looking at what it is they are crying about.

In this case, take a look at existing SETI programs:

http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/

Come back after you've looked through this page and try and trutly explain how something like this is going to "bankrupt" the world?

The Miko Mono Politburo warns some countries to tred carefully when tossing around needless insults and/or allegations. We can only hope other countries' will see such behaviour as the intimdation attempts they really are and act accordingly. As for the People's Republic of Miko Mono, our memory is long ...

Mikitivity,
All this proposal will do is increase my nations tax rate which I do not want. Also there is no solid evidence to support that this resolution would be protecting us from anything. We need to focus on issues on our globe before we can arm "space marines" to defend us from ..well...from what?

Mikitivity,
All this proposal will do is increase my nations tax rate which I do not want. Also there is no solid evidence to support that this resolution would be protecting us from anything. We need to focus on issues on our globe before we can arm "space marines" to defend us from ..well...from what?

My government's analysis is that the present resolution is, to quote Douglas Adams, "Most Harmless".

It is vague, and to my eyes really says, "We should pump resources into science and share our results."

I'm not convinced that this *will* increase my nation's taxes. That said, my government still supports the SETI programs and can see benefits from "forecast" and "searching" exercises. Though the time scales are different, how many of our nations have national weather programs?

*hand raised*

My government does. In fact, the weather forecasts taken by my government are also regularly distributed to our neighbors in an effort to establish good will ... and to account for the fact that my neighbors and my government have several mutual assistance treaties.

did it ever dawn on you that pumping resources into science that will PROVE HELPFUL is better than pumping it into science that is MOST LIKELY USELESS?

It may be easy for Ultra-Conservative, conglomerate-dominated capitalist nations such as yours, Mikitivity, but not for the ones who have weaker economies.

And yes, the funds are coming out of tax money, and our nations do need to keep up with the already teetering demands for social welfare, education, military, social equality, etc. So where does the money come from? The money for a most-likely failing project to satisfy the obviously out-of-hand curiosity of some scientists who are blind to the many other issues going on in the world comes from the hard-working taxpaying WORKING CLASS.

This seems to be developing into another capitalist scheme to once again attempt to empower the ruling class over the prolitariat, workers, and eventually the government.

The United Socialist States of Voroziniya

It may be easy for Ultra-Conservative, conglomerate-dominated capitalist nations such as yours, Mikitivity, but not for the ones who have weaker economies.


Check your intelligence again: my nation's civil rights are extremely high, though my nation's political freedoms are just so-so right now.

My country does allow small private buisnesses. Many of them in fact, but let's let my UN record speak for itself:

- co-author of the Ballast Water resolution
- author of the Tracking Near Earth Objects resolution
- author of the Needle Sharing Prevention resolution

Currently supporting the Women's Rights proposal, abd opposed to the Rights to Bear Arms proposal.

In most socities these are either moderate or liberal positions. There are few nations here that would stand up for social justice causes like achieving recognition and care for HIV infected drug users. It is also common knowledge that I'd be happy to see this body bring some legislation about HIV/AIDS prevention programs now targeted towards sexual transmission.

I think your statements are rather insulting and way-off the mark. Perhaps what you meant to say is that my nation is a bunch of manipulative pinko communists set out to rule the world. Though again untrue, I'd have a harder time denying the fact that my government tax rate hovers around 80% and is known for its large administration. Any true capitalist state would find my government repulsive ... though of course I think they would be mistaken.

The Miko Mono Politburo wishes to issue its gratitude and utmost support to our socialist brother Voroziniya for its aid in the stuggle against the growing sense of imperialism being seen in the one august United Nations.

We believe the Mikitivity government has, through its self-proclaimed record of attempting to work through the UN to advance its own imperialist, militarist and decadent agena, given other states ample reason to doubt, and oppose, any proposals supported by it.

The Miko Mono Politburo worked tirelessly to defeat the Near-Earth Object Tracking Resolution for much of the same reasons why we object to this proposal -- the placement of weapons and radars in space that can be used by imperialist nations against smaller ones, the unconcionable drain of resources from smaller, peace-loving nations to fund such a scheme, the growing movement towards a elimination of national soverignty within the UN. Let there be no doubt that we will do all we can to block this proposal as well!

We believe the Mikitivity government has, through its self-proclaimed record of attempting to work through the UN to advance its own imperialist, militarist and decadent agena, given other states ample reason to doubt, and oppose, any proposals supported by it.

OOC: I'm a little tired of your childish insults and allegations ... there is nothing remotely imperalist about me, so cut the rhetoric out.


By playing just to oppose any proposal I support you are griefing *me*. Read the FAQ, because if I see this again, I'm going to save your posts and forward them to the mods.

The reason I do this, is because while I think it is extremely petty of you to hold some grudge against me, the minute that you start voting and campaigning against other players proposals because I've said I like them, you are spoiling other people's enjoyment of the game just for some childish score to settle with me.

As you may have noticed, I don't get along with Tuesday Heights, based on stuff related to region crashing from the Moderators forum, but *neither* of us is letting our dislike spill into the UN. You should probably consider growing up and doing the same, because I honestly have no freakn' clue what your issue is, other than you might think your some Khrushev and need some big bad boogie man in order to play, but frankly I'm not interested.

From the FAQ:


Also prohibited is the practice of "griefing." Griefing is playing with the primary aim of annoying or upsetting other people. If you do this, the game moderators may take action against you.


Above you've basically told the entire forum that you *are* playing to annoy *me*. Not just my resolutions, but anything I support. I'd say that your primary aim is to annoy and upset. And it is just sad that you'll spite other players just to piss me off.

EDIT: I really would like you to clarify your position here to make sure that this is some "roleplaying" thing and not something personal. It would be a really strange and unwelcomed roleplaying issue, but I *could* live with that. I certain do not plan on calling this to the attention of the mods yet, but I honestly ask that you'll consider that by advocating against any proposal / idea I support that you really are going to have a negative impact on others, and is something I think you seriously need to reconsider.

The Miko Mono Politburo can only be saddened at seeing the depths to which debate has sunk in this once acclaimed body, which was created in the estemmed hopes of using dialouge and debate to settle conflicts and disputes among nations rather than military force.

First, so there is no doubt that we object to this proposal NOT because of those who may or may not support it (and we express that all nations all entitled to their views as we and our allies are), here is our positions on space-based weapons and radars.

1. We oppose such systems because while we wish we could have faith in their proper and oft-stated intended use of defending the Earth against threats from outer space, we sadly realize that such systems could be used by imperialist countries to dominate smaller nations on Earth by having weapons literlly overhead.

2. We object to radars for much of the same reason -- namelt, the potential for abuse by nations seeking to conduct espionage.

3. We will always oppose proposals in the United Nations thar seek to place an unfair economic burden on smaller countries. We should not, and indeed WILL not, pay for the defense of others who are more than capable of doing so.

4. The Miko Mono Politburo holds that national soverignity is paramount, and we will oppose any infringement thereof.

As of the allegations by some countries that they have been singeled out for "personal reasons," we wish it to be known that we only REITERATED the proposals that Mikitivity has made in the past because we have objected to them for much of the same reasons as we have stated above and feel that it is a rightful subject for debate that there may be a pattern of intent. If this is not the case, and we can only hope for ourselves and other countries, that it is not, then this too is a matter for debate and discussion.

The People's Republic of Miko Mono is a peaceful nation that seeks only to get along and prosper with its neghibours. However, we are noticing a dangerous trend within the United Nations for proposals that take away our right to guide and shape our country as we see fit. We would not wish to do so on others, and it is only fair that we have the right to speak out, and to call for debate, when we see such infringments occur.

The Miko Mono Politburo can only be saddened at seeing the depths to which debate has sunk in this once acclaimed body, which was created in the estemmed hopes of using dialouge and debate to settle conflicts and disputes among nations rather than military force.


Here are four reasons that the UN debate has "sunk":

- Your misuse of the concept of sovereignty
- Your misuse (overuse) of labels like "Imperialism"
- Your inability to recongnize that UN resolutions are suggestions
- Your refusal to provide facts to back up your opinions


First, the UN is about dealing with *international* problems. It always has been. Even the Rights and Duties resolution, which admits that there are some domestic issues, acknowledges this.

To reuse an old argument, if you don't like the fact that sometimes resolutions are going to be pass, leave the UN.

To be certain, I've yet to see your nation submit any constructive advice. Not a word. Have you written a resolution? Have you even tried? Have you even simply said something so easy as, "Gee, there are global problems, and we'd like to address them!"

In order to understand the system, and even critize it, you need to test it out once.

Sovereignty is not some magic shield used to turn the UN off. It means that sometimes their are rights which are purely domestic. But as a great man once wrote: "Your right to swing your fist, ends where my nose begins." In other words, there are international issues too!

Sovereignty is often abused by nations in order to justify actions that are harmful to the international community.

Be certain of this:

My (co)-resolution "Ballast Water" was written because invasive species do *not* respect borders and are a clear international danger to human health.

My resolution "Tracking Near Earth Objects" was written because NEOs pose an equal threat to all nations. The search for them is currently underway, and it is simple that in order to reduce the duplication of efforts coordination *SAVES* money. It was perhaps one of the best researched resolutions submitted to this body, and it had the *highest* endorsement count (ask the mods) of a resolution. The reason was clear ... it had clear international standing.

Just because you might cry that something isn't international, if you go back and read the resolution *and* look at the support it got, I think a strong case can be made to show that your opinion is frankly ignorant.

Will it hurt your economy is your next common complaint. Look at the resolution: it was "MILD" strength (which is rare for NationStates UN resolutions) and the resolution was a SUGGESTION. Please look the word up .. heck look over the resolution, I'm certainly tired of holding your hand.

My resolution "Needle Sharing Prevention" is a social justice resolution. It is hardly a cause for traditional capitalist societies, but had its basis in "Social Contract" theories dating back to the writtens of Rousseau. And like my previous resolution it was "MILD" in strength and was a SUGGESTION.

The most potent part of the resolution was a human rights clause snuck into the resolution that said "AFFIRMS the right of ...".

All UN resolutions are nothing more than suggestions. Why is this so? Because if you don't like a UN resolution, you can leave the UN.

There are no Imperial Ghosts hiding around with guns to your head forcing you to do anything. And yet you scream and scream about them, and generate confusion in an attempt to steer traffic away from solving problems. I'd call that classic trolling.

Third, Imperialism is


the policy, practice, or advocacy of extending the power and domination of a nation especially by direct territorial acquisitions or by gaining indirect control over the political or economic life of other areas

Let me ask you this. How many of us have the ability to write your national laws? How many of us are holding a gun to your head and keeping you in the UN? How many of us are FORCING you to choose your daily issues?

The answer is NONE.

So instead of constantly complaining (which don't even do a creative job of) why don't you *try* just once to pick one international problem and do something about it.

I don't freakin care *what* issue you choose to make a proposal, collect endorsements for, and then advocate for it. I think you'll be less the troll and gain some understanding once you've tried to actually do something other than trolling other people's hard work.


As for the "Economic" burden you talk about ... prove it. I've provided reports and run standard economic calculations to support most of the proposals / resolutions I've authored.

is easy to fling mud. You've taught us that. But can you rise above that?

10kMichael

ouch, you guys really are going at it hammer and tongs aren't you. I notice that everyone's stopped posting just to watch you two.

To be honest, i dont support the proposal, as it wont be much use against an interstellar civilisation but i do support a listening option, like using the SETI program that Mikitivity was on about. I've got that running now.

To be honest, i dont support the proposal, as it wont be much use against an interstellar civilisation but i do support a listening option, like using the SETI program that Mikitivity was on about. I've got that running now.

Actually I agree. Since there are two competing proposals out and about, I'd much rather see the SETI proposal get the attention right now.

As for the other issue, it is a pet pevee of mine when people come in and scream, "It will bankrupt us!" without having squat to support that opinion. It is uneducated and really tears down the ability of the UN to work on compromise.

[:ooc:]

I'm going to attempt to walk a fine line here.

While I can understand, and for the most part sympathize with, Mikitivity's claim that this Miko Miko fellow is going out of his way to make his UN life miserable, I'm not sure the entire thing has to head in the direction that it's currently headed.

I've always advocated more role play in the United Nations, and on some level I'd like to say it's worked. We see more nations posting in-character instead of this quasi-state of forum hopping, and legislation that actually begins as discourse. Nations and their representatives are developing personalities, and there appears to be actual debate going on, with sets of nations walking the "party line" so to speak, by way of belief.

To that end, I think that this face-off can become something entertaining and not something infuriating. Rather than continue to hurl insults and such, keep moving in the direction that I think you're heading in: play it out as two nations with wildly different political perspectives.

Miko, that means stop yelling about imperialism and blah blah and start making actual arguments. Throwing around empty rhetoric is one thing, bringing up statistics and making valid logical claims is quite another. Bring up proposals and discussion that defends the concepts you seem to be so fond of. Mikitivity has already taken the first, very small, step.

[:/ooc:]

I am for-ever in awe of Sophista's silver tongue.

I would have just said, " Now children, play nice ! " ;)

* Now running Auto_dodge_thrown_objects.exe :)

But Sophista has made an excellent point. I would also like to add with two conflicting proposals running about on these " look-up V.S. shoot-up " issues, it would be nice to see them link up and unify in some way, and possibly include to some degree some past U.N. law. Space Consortium and all that ...

The People's Republic of Miko Mono is heartened to see the support of other U.N. members who believe, as we believe, that is body is intended for the discussion and debate of various proposals -- proposals that if implemented would affect us all.

In our past comminques, we have attempted to outline why we oppose proposal such as those calling for some type of "space defense." We asked, and hoped, for vigrous debate on our position with the hope of either being convinced of the merits of such proposals or of convincing other U.N. members to our point of view. We are encouraged by the dispatches issued by many honorable U.N. ambassadors that seem to suggest a similar way of thinking. We hope to continue to further develop and expand our relations with such countries.

The People's Republic, in response to the recent dispatches by some U.N. ambassadors, feels sadly that it must again reiterated its rationales for its strong and principled opposition.

1. We feel that in all such proposals, there has been little if any discussion of who would control weapons and radar systems placed in orbit, and how they would do so. Not only do we feel that this would be an infringment on our national soverignity, which we hold paramount, but, as evident from the rising level of agression within the United Nations, we cannot help but be suspect that such systems would not be taken over by a few countries and used against the rest of us. Nothing has been done, except for mere "pledges" and promises, to alleivate such suspicions.

2. We feel that there has been little, if no, valid support given to the vague "fears" expressed by some countries that have prompted the so-called need for such systems. Again, without solid evidence, we cannot help but be suspicious and concerns that other possible motivations may be in play.

3. We have never said that the development of such systems would bankrupt our mighty workers' state. On the contrary, through the guiding spirit of Marxist-Leninism, the People's Republic of Miko Mono has a flourishing and strong economy that works to the benefit of all citizens. What we have objected to, and what we will CONTINUE to object to, is being forced through the machinations of the United Nations to fund the development of systems we do not support and that we RIGHTLY worry could be used against small, peaceful nations such as ourselves. If some countries choose to demonstrate their imperialistic nature by placing weapons in space, sadly, that is there right, though we would do all we could to prevent it. Asking us, however, to help fund such efforts, is insane.

3. Some countries have taken offense at our continued proclamation of the importance of national soverignity. We today wish to warn our fellow UN members to be wary of such countries, for we believe such protests are a dangerous sign of possible future activities. The People's Republic of Miko Mono looks to the glorious examples of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea and other workers' states as to the benefits of national soverignity, and the need for which to defend it at all costs. We have no desire to impose our beliefs, our systems and our philopshies on others (though we will ALWAYS encourage and support the rising tide of the proletariat in all countries). It only stands to reason that we do not wish to have others impose their will on us.

The Miko Mono Politburo wishes to end with this point -- We are deeply troubled and concerned by the rising levels of aggression being demonstrated within the United Nations. We are deeply concerned that attempts to encourage debate, attempts to express deeply held beliefs and attempts to express valid and worthy concerns and suspicions are met with threats of retaliation and blacklisting. We will NOT be insulted and we will NOT be bullied.

We call on all UN members to work to reduce tensions within this honorable body, and we shall do the same. Let it be known, though, the People's Army has been placed on full alert, and we have no doubt in its ability to defend our Motherland against ALL aggression....

I am for-ever in awe of Sophista's silver tongue.

Psh. You big flatterer you. Does this mean I have to buy you a drink?

And on to more serious discussion. I agree that the existance of two similar (yet vastly different) proposals has caused a bit of confusion, and no doubt clouded what is usually a relatively clean process. That would explain why Miko Miko appears to be fighting against everything that other nations have supported. His most recent posts extrapolate on the reasoning for this opposition. It just so happens that some of us support the whole "look for space tourists" thing, while his nation is much more of the "eh, no globally-funded, ambiguously-controlled potential weapons for us, thanks" persuasion.

Now that there are legitimate reasons and (what I believe to be) a strong philosophical base for those actions, we've taken a step down from name-calling and found ourselves squared off at a political stalemate. I'm starting to believe that there was nothing personal about Miko Miko's aggression; more so that Mikitivity just happened to be the one yelling loudest when he decided to start yelling back. That's my perception, I could be wrong.

With the issue a little less cloudy, perhaps now is a good time to return our efforts towards constructive debate. I've been here for just over six months, and I must say, the sum total of the cognative gears that are spinning in this forum are capable of amazing results. It was remarked that the world would be a different place if the real-world UN had more people like us in it. I'm inclined to agree, only in a more positive direction.

There's work to do, ladies and gentlement.

3. We have never said that the development of such systems would bankrupt our mighty workers' state.

But a few days earlier in this very thread you said:


The Miko Mono Politburo is encouraged and heartened by some many countries' speaking out against this iditiotic proposal, which would only serve to bankrupt smaller countries to aid larger ones in establishing weapons in space that would only, ultimately, be used against us.

My objection is your attempt to scare nations away from the idea of this (and many other resolutions) by using words like bankrupt, when I don't feel you've provided any evidence to support such strong language.


While I find the SETI proposal much better, and I'm pretty sure it is the one many of us like, I am still disturbed by how easily your nation resorts to making these types of strong statements without defending its position. I'd call it grand standing, and this is exactly the type of behavior that I feel creates a hostile United Nations.

First, the Miko Mono Politburo wishes to issue a statement of gratitude to Sophista for its show of support. We are not an aggressive nation, we OBJECT to being labeled one as an attempt to discredit us, and we rejoice to see others' seeing the situation for what is truly is.

As for Miktivity (and we hope the esteemed nation will not see this as a "personal attack," of which it so dearly loves to claim to be the victim of), as a proud workers' state, which seeks to combat the forces of colonialism, imperialism and decadent capitalism, we feel a need to stand up in defense of our smaller brothers and sisters. WE WILL NOT BACK DOWN FROM THIS STANCE!

Is the Miktivity ambassdor saying in his reply that developing massive and technologically advanced weapons and radars to track, locate, possibly communicate and ultimately attack nebulous intergalatic threats would be EASY to accomplish? That it would require little to no expenditures?? If this is the case, the Miko Mono Politburo sees no need for this issue to even be before the United Nations -- any intereted country should be more than willing and able to develop such systems on their own.

We, of course, doubt that these systems could be accomplished with the ease and the low cost that Miktivity seems to be implying. We believe that a good question to be put forth in this body is why our attempts to point this out to smaller countries that may be affected were resolutions on this topic to pass seem to result in such aggressive and vitrolic responses?

As for Miktivity (and we hope the esteemed nation will not see this as a "personal attack," of which it so dearly loves to claim to be the victim of), as a proud workers' state, which seeks to combat the forces of colonialism, imperialism and decadent capitalism, we feel a need to stand up in defense of our smaller brothers and sisters. WE WILL NOT BACK DOWN FROM THIS STANCE!

Is the Miktivity ambassdor saying in his reply that developing massive and technologically advanced weapons and radars to track, locate, possibly communicate and ultimately attack nebulous intergalatic threats would be EASY to accomplish? That it would require little to no expenditures?? If this is the case, the Miko Mono Politburo sees no need for this issue to even be before the United Nations -- any intereted country should be more than willing and able to develop such systems on their own.


Two points:

#1.
Did you not say that you oppose all proposals supported by my government? That was a personal and needless attack. Bear in mind, that I can point to the exact quote.

#2.
You have constantly argued that anything you don't like will bankrupt nations, yet provided no proof.

A well written resolution will often use a "Mild" strength, because the impacts themselves will be "mild". I've done that twice, and I'm confident that other authors will do the same.

Furthermore, a well written resolution will shift the burden of its programs to the nations most able to accept those burdens.

My economy is doing extremely well right now. My government is more than willing to use its high tax rates to fund well thought out programs that will safe guard our people, as well as help out our neighbors and allies. And by allies I'm talking about other friendly UN nations.

As for the topics of building any large-scale project, budgets and costs can be easily safe guarded by building these projects over longer time frames. Nothing in most of these proposals reads: "All nations will pay the same flat fee and we need to make planetary defense systems over night!"

Bear with me for a minute ... when I proposed that nations consider adopting NEPs (Needle Exchange Programs), I did so in a way that allowed nations to do so in a way that fit with their social and cultural needs. And I set up my resolution such that the programs would be voluntary.

Not a single nation said, "These programs will bankrupt smaller nations." The reason why is it is commonly understand that UN resolutions take time to implement.

Now I do believe that as a body we need to *think* about and ask how these various UN programs will be implemented. But I also think spelling out every detail in a proposal is impractical.

I've written *among* the longest resolutions out there (there are others), and met stiff resistance based on the tired arguments, "This is too long, I'm voting against it."

Elsewhere I talked about the political reality that sometimes nations / legislatures / law makers / diplomats / and even the United Nations, needs to practice the fine art of compromise.

My issue with your earlier attacks on me (and I still view them as such, because to date you've offered no formal apologies) and your general arguments against many UN proposals show no sign of compromise. The spirit of compromise and cooperation is what the UN is about. And being realistic, firing up a few satellites each year or establishing a few more health clinics or sending inspectors into countries to search for illegal logging isn't going to bankrupt any single nation. The risks are shared, the costs are shared ... and if you really care about smaller nations, instead of speaking for them, you'll just share your nation's "share" of the burden.

Did you not say that you oppose all proposals supported by my government? That was a personal and needless attack. Bear in mind, that I can point to the exact quote.

The People's Republic of Miko Mono has opposed many, if not all, of the proposals put forth by Miktivity. This is correct, we do not hide it. We feel, and are ENTITLED to feel, that our worldview, based on a peaceful and socialistic mindset, is opposed to that exposed by Mikitivity. We also feel, and believe it is an appropriate subject for debate, that many of the proposals introduced in the United Nations are not intended to "fix" some vague world problems, but are instead intended by some countries to impose THEIR views, THEIR systems and ultimately THEIR control on others. We will always oppose this!



My issue with your earlier attacks on me (and I still view them as such, because to date you've offered no formal apologies) and your general arguments against many UN proposals show no sign of compromise. The spirit of compromise and cooperation is what the UN is about.


First, we will offer and we will NEVER offer "apologizes" for standing up for ourselves and others. It is our right, it is our duty -- one we will never abandon!

Second, we too agree in the need for compromise and cooperation in our world, which sadly is becoming subsumed in a rising sea of aggression. On proposals we feel would not only work to the detriment of us, but of all, there can be NO compromise. Calls have been made to us as why we do not submit modifications of our own for this proposal. The reason why we do not is simple -- we oppose it in its ENITREITY. Therefore, no compromises are needed, none will be offered.

Last, we wish to point to our contribution, meager though it may have been, in working to defeat the Near-Earth Object Tracking Resolution, which was merely an attempt to establish a means for espionage and spying. We will work no less to see that this resolution, and all of its ilk, meet a similar fate.

[OOC: Now others can see why I clalim this player is doing nothing but classic griefing ...

The Tracking Near Earth Objects resolution has said *nothing* about spying, and yet he claims it does. He offers no defense, just blanket accusations. I challenge this person to show us where the resolutions I've written are about spy systems or promoting military objectives.

Furthermore, he has clearly singled me out.

He ignores any discussion and debate and has clearly stated that there is no such thing as compromise.

Personally MM, I have zero respect for what you are attempting to pass off as roleplaying. I've always felt your arguments were weak, but this is taking it to new levels.

It is nothing but classic griefing and has absolutely no basis in any fact. You can't defend your positions, so instead you make up outrageous lies ... spy systems? Where?

Frankly, I'm tired of this, and I'll just take this issue up with the Moderation forum to find out *exactly* at what point when a player (not nation) is practicing griefing via some sort of personal vendetta.

To be honest, do you even know which *resolutions* I've passed and written? Because I've never ONCE advocated anything that is not peaceful. I honestly think you don't have a clue.