NationStates Jolt Archive

Category - International Security
Resolution - Need for a UN Standing Army

Description:

Resolved that UN should have a standing army to maintain Global Peace and Security under the direct control of the UN.

AFFIRMED THAT Members should make a contribution to a UN standing Army. to go into problem areas for the UN to promote peace and/or deter acts of aggression on other nations.

AUTHORIZES the UN to maintain Global Peace by stopping Aggresors and sending troops to areas with continual conflict.


URGES that all UN nations support the standing army in at least a small way. (Funding, Food, Military Personnel, Vehicles, Intelligence, Logistics, etc) Contribution will be upon the decision of the Nation, no Nation will be forced to contribute.

ADVANTAGES would be that each time the UN needs to send in a task force there would be one ready to go and would be capable to move within 48 hours. In previous peacekeeping missions it would take months to put a task force together, with a standing army there would be no need to continually recreate an army to suit the UN's needs.

KEEPING IN MIND that the army could be abused,the army would be controlled by a General appointed by a vote of the UN general assembly. The army would not be used to force other nations to do the bidding of the UN besides to stop acts of aggression and to keep the peace. Action by the army would be dictated by the general assembly. This would also require regular briefing by the army's generals.

Illegal. Read the FAQs.

This proposal is illegal under the rules for proposals. The NSUN cannot have its own armed force.

How so? Can I have a link to this rule? Besides, this is fictional anyway, in NS the nations won't have to do squat. Just vote yay or nay.

Yes, the UN needs more security (tongue in cheek) we need more Resolutions to increase our security measures, like :


INTERNATION SECURITY STANDARDIZATION

Catagory: International Security
Strength: Strong

In an effort to standardize the security proceedures in all UN member governmental buildings,
the United Nations hereby resolves to make the following security procedures standard among
all member nations.

I. All walls, ceilings and floors shall be color coded.

A) This coding scheme shall be standardized to the following colors

1)Red
2)Orange
3)Yellow
4)Blue
5)Green
6)Gold
7)Lavender
8)Brown

B) The color coding shall be seperate on each surface (wall, floor, and ceiling)
for the purpose of deliniating specific security requirements.

II. All personnel in said buildings will wear badges and/or armbands for the purpose of
indicating the areas they are allowed into, and the necessary escourt needed for their
presence.

A)The system shall be standardized to this model:

1) All areas delineated by white walls, floors and ceilings shall be open to the public.

2) Areas posessing white walls and ceilings, with blue floors shall be restricted to any
personnel with pink badges.
a)This shall not apply in cases where the said personnel are escourted by
personnel posessing gold badges with pinstriped armbands, or in cases where
they are in the presence of personnel with greenbadges and silver armbands.
3) No personnel with pink, blue or lavender badges may enter any area with yellow, red or
orange walls, regardless of ceiling and floor color unless:
a)They are escourted by personnel with green or gold badges, and red armbands.
b)The personnel possess gold or silver armbands.

4) Areas where the walls are yellow shall be restricted to personnel who possess gold badges
and green armbands.
a)Exception can be made in situations where they are under armed escourt by any
personnel with gold badges and green armbands, as long as they are provided with
armed guards with gold badges and red armbands.

5) Any area, regardless of color, that possess a blue stripe shall be accessible only to
personnel with green badges and brown or gold armbands.
a)Exception shall be made when the blue stripe is 64mm from the level of the floor,
in which case escourt can be provided by personnel with gold green badges and brown
or gold armbands.
b)However, in areas where the blue stripe is 66mm from the level of the floor, only
green badges and gold armbands.
c)In cases where the blue stripe is at any other distance from the level of the floor
no escourt is permissable.

6) Areas marked by Red on any surface are offlimits to ALL personnel, anyone caught in the area
is to be shot onsite.
a)Exception shall be made where personnel in this area are under the escourt of personnel
possessing gold badges, in which case the gold badge personnel only are to be shot
and all others are to be interrogated and beat profusly with large smelly mutant trout.

II. Remember, security is EVERYONE's problem.

What accomodations will we be able to make for blind or colorblind UN members?

What about those people who taste colours? Imagine walking into a yellow hallway, and feeling like your'e gonna chuck. Eeergh

I had forgotten about them...

Well, they'll just have more problems (See. Art. II).

Will our standing army ever get to sit or lay down? Standing all the time could cause fatigue, and sleep loss. Which could hinder their ability to perform assignments.

"This idea is entirely unacceptable; members of the United Nations may be pacifist nations, such as our own. We refuse to be a member of an organisation with a large-scale standing army. It's just as well that there are rules against such a resolution."

Ambassador Leyton
United Nations Representative of the Confederacy

How so? Can I have a link to this rule? Besides, this is fictional anyway, in NS the nations won't have to do squat. Just vote yay or nay.

Here's the snip you want,
Do not use these categories to establish a UN military force. These are resolutions to change the level of national government spending. The UN does not maintain its own standing military under any circumstances.


Here's the link you want,

"Before you make a proposal", the old-skool version linked to in the FAQ. (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=282176)

And I agree that it's hard to make an announcement in the forum, without overly zealous debate of it.

How so? Can I have a link to this rule? Besides, this is fictional anyway, in NS the nations won't have to do squat. Just vote yay or nay.Must ... not ...

( sigh )

The above posters are correct: Proposals to establish any sort of UN army are illegal and will be removed from the floor.

"Before you make a proposal", the old-skool version linked to in the FAQ. (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=282176)

Which reminds me, where's Sophista gone off to?

Assuming that the Bill is brought to a vote, all of you would vote against it?

How so? Can I have a link to this rule? Besides, this is fictional anyway, in NS the nations won't have to do squat. Just vote yay or nay.

It is the roleplaying aspect many of us here look at. Under this, we will have to do something there. This is a roleplaying game, after all.

Assuming that the Bill is brought to a vote, all of you would vote against it?

It won't. Assuming it isn't deleted before queue, it will either be deleted in queue or, if voted on, either voted down or deleted once passed. Pretty much a case of this will never be a passed resolution.

Which reminds me, where's Sophista gone off to?
'Quit remember. Cos of that Law of the Sea malarkey. Probably lost the Dodge Ball War. It's a funny old game.

This is fictional anyway, how am I messing with game mechanics if I propose this? I'm not messing with mechanics, so therefore it can't be illegal.

This is fictional anyway, how am I messing with game mechanics if I propose this? I'm not messing with mechanics, so therefore it can't be illegal.

How about reading the stickies at the top? They set the rules and specify that you cannot create a UN army. That is why it is against the rules.

I think there should be a un army just for like peace keeping operations i mean it cant hurt anything unless you elect a leader of the army and he is crazy and wants power

I remember those immortal words ...

" iWish iColud iLock "

Illegal. Read the FAQs.

It would allow too much scope for abuse. No way should this be allowed. I need go no further into this discussion than this. Count myself and my region OUT on this.

TO: Opponents of this 'notion', feel free to contact me if more weight needs must be brought to bear against the idea. It's pure foolishness, plain and simple.