NationStates Jolt Archive

Soon you all will vote on having or not having a UN Peace Prize. I urge you tovote against it for the following reasons:

First off to get this out of the way, all Peace Prizes and similiar awards are crap. There is always a better person who should recieve the prize but doesn't and some moron gets chosen instead.

Now a more legitimate reason is that the UN should not spend money on this. This won't make countries want to be peaceful. The real threats in the world will not be so easily bribed out of thier violent ways with such a weak award. The UN has little enough money as it is since they cannot tax us. The money needs to go to more serious causes such as the SmallPox resolution.

If you agree with me pass this message on to the nations in your region.

Does argueing even matter? This will pass.

Couldn't you wait until it's actually hits the floor? :rolleyes:

I want to get the message out and have it spread before the voting begins.

This should be fun.

Soon you all will vote on having or not having a UN Peace Prize. I urge you tovote against it for the following reasons:

First off to get this out of the way, all Peace Prizes and similiar awards are crap. There is always a better person who should recieve the prize but doesn't and some moron gets chosen instead.

Which prizes would those be? All the non-existent UN ones?

Now a more legitimate reason is that the UN should not spend money on this. This won't make countries want to be peaceful. The real threats in the world will not be so easily bribed out of thier violent ways with such a weak award. The UN has little enough money as it is since they cannot tax us. The money needs to go to more serious causes such as the SmallPox resolution.

Technically, the UN has no money at all. And the prize is meant to encourage peaceful actions by individuals that will ultimately influence the international arena. While I doubt that my actions will warrant such an award, I would expect that several Kriovalian citizens would be eligible, and their reception of the prize would assist in furthering their causes. The cost is negligible, but the potential benefit is apparent to me.

~ Commander Raijin Dekker

Perhaps you've misunderstood me, the money spent isn't in the prize, its in the people working to produce this. The people who are hired to select a winner and those who present it have to be paid right?

Perhaps you've misunderstood me, the money spent isn't in the prize, its in the people working to produce this. The people who are hired to select a winner and those who present it have to be paid right?

Realistically, how much do you think that this is going to cost? Divide by slightly over 30,000.

Cost negligable as it may be ... is there a point to the whole prize anyways?

Zonsay does bring up a good point, the award isn't going to make people more peaceful and there -is- no way to bribe violent nations to stop being violent. It seems the award is more of a pat on the back for being good than some sort of peace inspiring action.

Just my 2c

There is always a better person who should recieve the prize but doesn't and some moron gets chosen instead.A question must be asked: Who is the appropriate agent to decide that?

This prize would be a fine method of encouraging global disarmament; However, given the human nature and the lack of an appointed judge that everyone would subjugate to, I realize that there is no way such a prize can be given without some political or bureaucratic mess.

Daniel Mandelboimsteinholz, Big Brother of Jewakistan, votes 'no'.

OOC: I made another discussion thread before I saw this one. I'll copy/paste what I said in the other thread I created.

IC:
I object to the fact that this rewards the reduction of standing armies. Peace can be achieved through superior firepower, even though you don't necessarily have to use it, and to encourage nations to eliminate or reduce standing armies is to encourage them to invite plotting enemies to open fire.

This is one of the more naive proposals I have seen. Noble peacemakers have in the past counted on armies to ensure justice and peace, and they are as worthy of a peace prize as the breadgivers.

I submit my opinion to the floor, and hope this floor recognizes the importance of standing armies to the peace process and votes NO on this proposal.

--Welsh, Ambassador to the UN from the Holy Empire of Sidestreamer, and UN Delegate for the Militaristic Legions and Plans

OOC: This might help when discussing this, by the way.

UN Peace prize
A resolution to slash worldwide military spending.


Category: Global Disarmament
Strength: Mild
Proposed by: Republic of Freedonia

Description: In order to promote the fraternity between the nations, the General Assembly shall istitute the United Nations Peace prize.

Statute:

1. The UN Peace prize shall be donated to the person or an organisation who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses. The prize will be decided by a Committee. In awarding the prize no consideration whatever shall be given to the nationality of the candidates, but that the most worthy shall receive the prize.

2. The Committee shall be formed by 10 persons of high morality and renowned for humanitarian diligence,elected by the most important international humanitarian organisations, recognized by the UN, every 7 years.

3. If a work that is being rewarded has been produced by 2 or 3 persons, the prize shall be awarded to them jointly.

4. To be considered eligible for the award, it is necessary to be nominated in writing by a person competent to make such a nomination. Each year the prize adjudication shall embrace such nominations as have been submitted during the preceding twelve months up to February 1.

5. Nominations should be explained and accompanied by the publications and other documents cited in support of them.

6. On the Festival Day of the UN Peace Prize Foundation, December 27, the Committee shall present to each prizewinner the diploma and the gold medal bearing the image of a group of three men forming a fraternal bond and the inscription "Pro pace et fraternitate gentium". It shall be incumbent on a prizewinner, whenever this is possible, to give a lecture on a subject relevant to the work for which the prize has been awarded.

7. No appeals may be made against the decision of the Committee with regard to the award of a prize. Proposals received for the award of a prize, and investigations and opinions concerning the award of a prize, may not be divulged before 10 years.

Votes For: 64

Votes Against: 25

[Delegate Votes]

Voting Ends: Thu Apr 7 2005

This implies that not having peace is "bad". War is often important. We shall go far struggling against evil.

Use the official thread, please. Sorry if this one came first, but use the other one anyway.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=409904