NationStates Jolt Archive

Although it was somewhat exhausting and harrowing, I learned a lot from my last UN proposal and made some good friends. In an effort to further humanitarianism and because I believe it is needed (and because I'm obviously a bit of a masochist), I will be presenting the following proposal to the UN tomorrow:

Medical Protection in Combat
Category: Human Rights
Strength: Significant

Gratitude is extended to the Sultanate of Vastiva for invaluable assistance with this resolution.

RECALLING, APPLAUDING, AND AFFIRMING the progressive humanitarianism set forth in UN resolution 31, Wolfish Convention on POW's and UN resolution 33, No Embargoes on Medicine

RECOGNISING that in time of war or other armed conflict, there is a great need for medical treatment and access, both of combatants and civilians

CONCERNED about the potential assault of hospitals and/or medical transports during the fury and fog of war

URGES all nations to mark all medical facilities and medical evacuation transports with internationally agreed-upon, easily recognisable symbols or insignia, such as a red cross or blue caduceus

RESOLVES that no UN nation may knowingly attack a medical transport, infirmary, or hospital, be it military or civilian, and that all such transports and hospitals shall be recognised as neutral in any hostile engagement or war, declared or undeclared

FURTHER RESOLVES that misuse of medical insignia voids these prohibitions for the length of the conflict. This includes, but is not limited to, storing and/or transporting munitions and armament under such insignia, or moving active combat troops under such insignia.


I'm sure they'll be no lack of comments, suggestions, advice, rants, threats, et cetera. So, let's begin. As always, your helpful input is welcomed and appreciated.

This would be nice if non-UN nations would also adopt it. Otherwise, it's a potential military risk.

This would be nice if non-UN nations would also adopt it. Otherwise, it's a potential military risk.

Mmmm... not really. First hit on my hospitals, and we break out the big nasty things that go mushroom in the night.

Things spiral downward afterwards.

Perhaps we could convince the IRCO to do the surveying... and if they don't come back, invoke the last stanza, as IRCO workers are marked... :p

I volunteer people from the nations sitting the TPP for that. That way, they can't complain to us when we order a battlecruiser to use antimatter missiles on a medical ship.

Seconded!

I like it, but I have a problem with this:

FURTHER RESOLVES that misuse of medical insignia voids these prohibitions for the length of the conflict. This includes, but is not limited to, storing and/or transporting munitions and armament under such insignia, or moving active combat troops under such insignia.

It's extremely difficult to enforce. Radars may be able to pick up people in a truck, but how can it know that those people are medical workers and not soldiers? The army needs the right to inspect the truck to insure that it's carrying what it's supposed to.

FURTHER RESOLVES that misuse of medical insignia voids these prohibitions for the length of the conflict. This includes, but is not limited to, storing and/or transporting munitions and armament under such insignia, or moving active combat troops under such insignia.

Nice proposal. I'd have to agree with Rome W on that last point, though. But I'd take it a step further. Are medics serving in the military permitted to carry weapons? Are they allowed to open fire on the enemy? Does the recognition of neutrality in article 5 mean they have to minister to the fallen on both sides? I'd appreciate it if these questions were cleared up, but other than that you've got my support.

It's extremely difficult to enforce. Radars may be able to pick up people in a truck, but how can it know that those people are medical workers and not soldiers? The army needs the right to inspect the truck to insure that it's carrying what it's supposed to. I suppose most modern forces have an advanced IFF which allows greater detail to be transmitted. If an agreement could be made on a standard IFF response for medical personnel, then that might work?

But it's a pretty good proposal overall, and I'll be asking my delegate to endorse.

I believe that it is not the fault of the injured if a corrupt government chooses to mis-label it’s injured, therefore the resolutions should be against the attacking force striking obvious civilian or hospital targets, and against the defendants mis labelling their injured. Usual UN sanctions should follow against perpetrators of each.

Nice proposal. I'd have to agree with Rome W on that last point, though. But I'd take it a step further. Are medics serving in the military permitted to carry weapons? Are they allowed to open fire on the enemy? Does the recognition of neutrality in article 5 mean they have to minister to the fallen on both sides? I'd appreciate it if these questions were cleared up, but other than that you've got my support.
Thank you. I designed the proposal to specifically cover only medical facilities and transports, not personnel individually. This leaves open the possibility for "fighting medics". Such medics would be legitimate military targets as long as they are not inside a medical transport or facility. I guess what I'm saying is, if someone is firing at you, by all means, fire back, regardless of whether he has a red cross on his helmet.

I understand that many other nations do things differently, but in Saint Uriel, the term "medic" refers to specially trained, non-combatant military personnel. All soldiers, sailors, and airmen in our defense force receive first aid and field dressing training, so that the wounded may be treated in the field before being evacuated. That does not mean that all of our soldiers, sailors, or airmen qualify as medics, and indeed, moving these active troops under medical insignia would be false and a violation of the above proposal.

To answer your other question, no, declaring medical units as neutral would not mean they have to assist either side. It just means they are not legitimate military targets.

Radars may be able to pick up people in a truck, but how can it know that those people are medical workers and not soldiers? The army needs the right to inspect the truck to insure that it's carrying what it's supposed to. Good point, but I'm not sure the right of inspection will work. It would be time consuming and logistically difficult to search every transport before you decide to blow it up. I would hope that, in an MT scenario, recon would notice the insignia on the truck before they called in an airstrike or launched a ground assault. Therefore, they would have to leave the truck alone, unless they see that those are anti-aircraft guns in there and not wounded soldiers.

I don't know much about FT, since Saint Uriel is MT, but I would imagine some kind of radio frequency "tagging" of medical vessels and facilities would be possible to identify them as such from a long distance, even in space.

Nothing against this proposal, but perhaps we could go further and look at the structure of war all together.

War being the absence of peace it is not possible to ban war, but how about limiting it down to a team activity. The larger a population, the more prospective people to choose from, and the higher standards of living the better equiped this team wouldl be. A team of say eleven from the two opposing countries enter no-mans land with the best their respective countries can give them by way of training and gear... and the country with members left wins.

This is a very nice proposal...Assuming the universe follows it. However, if UN nations are fighting Non Un nations, those crosses become great big target symbols, i.e. easy targets. It would be very easy to bring a war to an end if you blew up the enemy's ability to repair its wounded.

If you are smart about it, it won't matter. My hospitals have limited ground access. Indeed most have been built underground, do to that problem. With only a story or two above ground, it is considerably easier to ensure survivability in various war scenarios, and with high security in them, it is very difficult to get anything odd into a hospital, at least in my country.

Some suggestions:

Allowing one side to attack hospitals if the other side "cheats" is counter-productive. If one rogue unit violated orders and tried to use the red cross to stage an attack early in the conflict, that would give the "offended party" free reign to devastate all of the other side's hospital units for the duration of the conflict, which might take years. And valid informatation being somewhat hard to come by in the middle of a conflict, the "offending party" might not know of the rogue unit or believe the "offended party's" proof of the violation...in which case, the "offending party" would regard the "offended party's" attacks on its own hospital units as a violation and start doing likewise. "An eye for an eye and soon everybody is blind", and all that.

No, the right way to deal with violations is to just let TPP handle them once the conflict is over. Mistakes do happen in war, so the standard should be to condemn willful and deliberate attacks on known hospital units. If one side adopts a policy of cheating by mislabling combat units as hospital units, then it runs the risk of having it's legitimate hospital units attacked by mistake because the other side has trouble telling the difference. TPP should take that into consideration if the "non-cheating" side is later accused of attacking hospital units.

Also, it is pretty much a given that all units are allowed to defend themselves, so that medical personnel may carry weapons and use them if attacked. The prospect of medical personnel conducting attacks is a rare and limited occurance. Phony medical units have been addressed in the previous paragraph, and any army that is so desperate that they are willing to sacrifice precious skilled medical units in frontal assaults is either very close to victory or very close to defeat (or foolish in the extreme).

If we don't already have rules regarding the treatment of POWs, we should have some. I would expect that to include minimum standards of care for the injured and sick. It is up to the party who has taken prisoners to determine how that care is to be delivered; so that if equivalent care can be delivered elsewhere, precisely how it is given can be decided by the captors. Note that this effectively means that hospital units likely WILL be treating POWs, since they are usually closest to the locations that prisoners are taken. But medical units do belong to the country that fields them, so that any enemy combatant seeking treatment at the opposing army's field hospital is effectively surrendering to that army (and will be expected to surrender his/her/its weapons in exchange for treatment).

Of course, the proposal should be modified to cover these points, in Wang Chun's opinion.

A good idea, although a few idea's (bold bits my additions):


RESOLVES that no UN nation may knowingly attack a medical transport, infirmary, or hospital of another UN nation, be it military or civilian, and that all such transports and hospitals shall be recognised as neutral in any hostile engagement or war, declared or undeclared

URGES all nations to mark all medical facilities and medical evacuation transports with internationally agreed-upon, easily recognisable symbols or insignia, such as a red cross or blue caduceus; and that the location of permanent hospitals be made public to all UN nations

And I'd add the following two articles

DEFINES Defines 'Medical Transport' as any vehicle that is unarmed, both in terms of armaments fixed to the vehicles and any movible armaments that may be carried by fighting personel

EMPHASISES that any vehicle or structure bearing the internationally recognised symbol may only be searched in order to acertain if the structure or vehicle is indeed a medical facility, and that such a search should not endanger the lives of medical personel and/or injured members of the military or civilian population

Just my thoughts...

I like it. Any of my concerns have already been addressed by others. Obviously it can be abused by those masquerading as medical services, but that can't be helped, and you have made guidelines for when that situation arises. Good work.

Excellent. If the suggestions already proposed by other nations find their way into the wording, Fatus Maximus will support it.

Excellent. If the suggestions already proposed by other nations find their way into the wording, Fatus Maximus will support it.

As will Missytoe18

FURTHER RESOLVES that misuse of medical insignia voids these prohibitions for the length of the conflict. This includes, but is not limited to, storing and/or transporting munitions and armament under such insignia, or moving active combat troops under such insignia.

Ignoring that it would be time consuming and almost impossible to enforce; what punishments would be involved?

Cwruland approves of this.

I'm not sure how I feel about this one, seeing as nations that are not UN members will not have to adhere to it, and will have a much easier time hitting our hospitals if they're marked, and also considering that sometimes assault on military medical facilities is a necessary tactic, but I will try to help you guys out a little bit, anyway.

URGES all nations to mark all medical facilities and medical evacuation transports with internationally agreed-upon, easily recognisable symbols or insignia, such as a red cross or blue caduceus
For one, do you mean mark with massive emblems on their walls, or on maps, or on vehicle roofs, or what? Or all three? I think you should specify which, even if you are just urging it.

RESOLVES that no UN nation may knowingly attack a medical transport, infirmary, or hospital, be it military or civilian, and that all such transports and hospitals shall be recognised as neutral in any hostile engagement or war, declared or undeclared
This is where I have a problem with the fact that this both inhibits my range of military strategy and doesn't affect non-UN nations, so they will still be able to demolish our hospitals with relatively improved accuracy. I would support something that said non-military hospitals would be marked and could not be attacked.

FURTHER RESOLVES that misuse of medical insignia voids these prohibitions for the length of the conflict. This includes, but is not limited to, storing and/or transporting munitions and armament under such insignia, or moving active combat troops under such insignia.

Nice one, glad you covered that.

I would also say that, from the moment this resolution is passed, soldiers that received medical treatment in military hospitals could not return to active duty for the length of the conflict. It does not strike me as fair that a nation can cure their soldiers and send them back into the war, but we cannot finish them off by killing said soldiers while they're down. It will only bring more death to my people at their sake.

I like the idea, but it does need a few of the additions addressed throughout this discussion.

1) When taken for medical treatment by one side, soldiers of the other side must be treated as POWs. Yes there must be standards of treatment (determined by a neutral body), but release/armament has to be left at the holding nation's discretion. Also, in a long war swamping the hospitals with troops, could a neutral group be established? I.E. could a group of nations assign medical units to the UN to be used to treat the wounded on either side, keeping hospitals avaliable for civilian use and for grave cases from battle.

2) For non-UN nations. This is a tricky situation. A UN nation can lose hospitals and not strike at their opponents. One solution is to have the resolution apply only to conflicts between two UN nations, or to allow a retaliatory strike in the event of an obviously deliberate and malicious attack by a non-UN state.

3) In the event of a UN nation breaking the resolution, one solution could be the suspension of the ban on medicine embargoes. Only in special circumstances, but in effect a nation that attacks an opponent's medical facilities is punished by losing imported supplies for its own.

I want to extend sincere gratitude for all the excellent feedback on this proposal. Some fine points have been raised. In the interest of brevity, I won't address each of you individually, but let me offer some responses to the distinguished group of delegates as a whole.

First, I don't really want to go into POW's in this resolution, mainly because we already have resolution 31 which deals exclusively with POW's and I don't want to be seen as attempting to ammend or alter it.

I also don't want to spell out any punishments for violating the proposal, as we should always treat a UN proposal as mandatory, rather than voluntary. Also, it was my understanding that TPP could only be used for cases of suspected genocide, not non-genocidal war crimes. I could very well be mistaken on this, so please correct me if I'm wrong.

Many of you brought up the excellent point that the proposal could be quite unfair as it is unenforcable on non-UN member nations. Thank you for this. Due to that very valid argument, I will amend the proposal using several of Cobdenia's suggestions. Since I will be borrowing so heavily from the Cobdenian delegate, I will formally credit Cobdenia in the proposal. I also encourage Cobdenia and Vastiva to credit themselves as co-authors if this proposal passes (assuming they're not ashamed of it, of course) ;)

Incorporating a number of your suggestions, this is how the revised proposal now looks (changes are in bold):

Medical Protection in Combat
Category: Human Rights
Strength: Significant

Gratitude is extended to the Sultanate of Vastiva and Dominion of Cobdenia for invaluable assistance with this resolution.

RECALLING, APPLAUDING, AND AFFIRMING the progressive humanitarianism set forth in UN resolution 31, Wolfish Convention on POW's and UN resolution 33, No Embargoes on Medicine

RECOGNISING that in time of war or other armed conflict, there is a great need for medical treatment and access, both of combatants and civilians

CONCERNED about the potential assault of hospitals and/or medical transports during the fury and fog of war

URGES all nations to clearly mark all medical facilities and medical evacuation transports with internationally agreed-upon, easily recognisable symbols or insignia, such as a red cross or blue caduceus; and that the location of permanent hospitals be made public to all UN nations

RESOLVES that no UN nation may knowingly attack a medical transport, infirmary, or hospital of another UN nation, be it military or civilian, and that all such transports and hospitals shall be recognised as neutral in any hostile engagement or war, declared or undeclared

FURTHER RESOLVES that misuse of medical insignia or falsely identifying a structure as a hospital voids these prohibitions for the length of the conflict. This includes, but is not limited to, storing and/or transporting munitions and armament under such insignia, or moving active combat troops under such insignia.


I will wait until tomorrow evening to formally submit this, so as to give you all time to comment upon the revised version and me time to glean your feedback. Again, thank you.

Respectfully,
The Saint Urielian UN delegation

Ummm... one more edit... I'm going to change the name of the proposal to "The Urielian Accord". The reason for this is threefold:

1. The current title is kinda awkward -50%
2. It would be nice to leave a lasting legacy in the UN with this title - 25%
3. Ego - 25%

Thanks :)

We noticed the TPP was mentioned as being the ones to be left to deal with the other side. So you want us to sit idly by for years while our medics are slaughtered by an enemy while some committee tries to decide whether or not they will do anything about it? Especially a committee that has demonstrated on one occasion to the entire universe that it is limited in power and which has proven, through its own actions, that the resolutions which established it and expanded its powers are illegal? I'm sorry, but we cannot risk innocent lives on the decision of a committee that currently has no legal right to exist under UN rules. We will not risk our soldiers for a union that we do not recognize as a legal entity.

Let this be a warning: If this passes and our medical units are attacked, we will not only retaliate on the other side's medical units, but we will use our most powerful missiles to do so in order to make absolute the idea of total extermination. Nor will we recognize any action of the TPP, and an invasion will result in Gahrogahreesahn being unleashed on Earth with full orders to exterminate all attacking nations. We are not normally a violent people, but we are a people who see the idea of not retaliating against our medics being slaughtered with an equivolent approach as madness.

To the delegate from the DLE - Don't worry. We have no intentions of allowing TPP anything to do with this proposal.

URGES all nations to clearly mark all medical facilities and medical evacuation transports with internationally agreed-upon, easily recognisable symbols or insignia, such as a red cross or blue caduceus; and that the location of permanent hospitals be made public to all UN nations
Whoa, that's much worse. Now it's even easier for non-UN nations to locate the exact position of our hospitals and rape them. Not cool. Let said locations be released to the leaders of all entangled or warring nations, instead, and let it be illegal to release said information to any outside party during or after said conflict.

Whoa, that's much worse. Now it's even easier for non-UN nations to locate the exact position of our hospitals and rape them. Not cool. Let said locations be released to the leaders of all entangled or warring nations, instead, and let it be illegal to release said information to any outside party during or after said conflict.

:headbang: What, you hide your hospitals? Afraid the wounded might find them?

Finding anyone's hospitals takes very little intelligence work - buying roadmaps will show most of them. And the hospitals are not priority targets.

Good point, but I'm not sure the right of inspection will work. It would be time consuming and logistically difficult to search every transport before you decide to blow it up. I would hope that, in an MT scenario, recon would notice the insignia on the truck before they called in an airstrike or launched a ground assault. Therefore, they would have to leave the truck alone, unless they see that those are anti-aircraft guns in there and not wounded soldiers.

I think you've read too much into what I said- it simply gives armies the *right* to inspect trucks and does not actually tell them that they have to (for example, I have the right to not get any sleep at all- doesn't mean that I'll do it). Obviously, in the heat of a battle no one's going to have time for inspections, but considering that most likely a medic will NOT drive into the middle of a battlefield and most likely on a road with a checkpoint, it would be possible to have inspections (and, from my understanding, checkpoints usually *do* have inspections). Perhaps if we stated that medics had to drive through checkpoints in order to get to and from the battlefield in order to be inspected (if the armies so choose to) then it would work.

For one, do you mean mark with massive emblems on their walls, or on maps, or on vehicle roofs, or what? Or all three? I think you should specify which, even if you are just urging it.
This really doesn't need to be specified in the resolution. You either mark stuff well enough that the other side can figure out that they shouldn't attack it, or your don't. Nobody is going to convict anyone of a war crime if they order an airstrike on a convoy where they only marking is a single 3mm by 3mm red cross on the driver's door on the lead transport. On the other hand, it's hard to say "oops, it was just a mistake" if you order a similar airstrike on a complex of buildings that all have 10 meter by 10 meter red crosses on the roofs.

This is where I have a problem with the fact that this both inhibits my range of military strategy and doesn't affect non-UN nations, so they will still be able to demolish our hospitals with relatively improved accuracy. I would support something that said non-military hospitals would be marked and could not be attacked.
I think that as amended, the resolution now allows you to freely attack the hospitals of any of those outlaw regimes that have not yet joined the UN.

I would also say that, from the moment this resolution is passed, soldiers that received medical treatment in military hospitals could not return to active duty for the length of the conflict. It does not strike me as fair that a nation can cure their soldiers and send them back into the war, but we cannot finish them off by killing said soldiers while they're down. It will only bring more death to my people at their sake.
You might want to consider that if it is policy and law that injured troops cannot return to battle once healed, loyal troops will avoid reporting all but the most severe injuries in order to continue the fight. Not all armies are composed of conscripts ordered into battle against their will.

:headbang: What, you hide your hospitals? Afraid the wounded might find them?

Finding anyone's hospitals takes very little intelligence work - buying roadmaps will show most of them. And the hospitals are not priority targets.

Hell, no, I don't have military medical facilities out in the open. The doctors know exactly where they are, anyone above private rank or that can get a map off a dead colonel knows where they are, so I have no reason to make them public and let the enemy know where they are. I'm not going to risk them being a whore with highly sadistic strategies at the expense of my men.

You might want to consider that if it is policy and law that injured troops cannot return to battle once healed, loyal troops will avoid reporting all but the most severe injuries in order to continue the fight. Not all armies are composed of conscripts ordered into battle against their will.
I believe I said that this only applies to soldiers who receive medical aid in military hospitals. You don't go to a military hospital for a cut on the arm, you let the field doctor handle it. Loyal troops would be able to keep fighting all they want. If a loyal soldier gets shot in the arm and is too stupid to report it, I really don't feel sorry for them being removed from combat against their will. Besides, that's the price they should pay for receiving protection while in the hospital... they wouldn't be able to go back out and fight if we wasted the entire compound, either, now would they?

The rest of what you quoted me on, I said before the edit. That stuff's fine now.

Hell, no, I don't have military medical facilities out in the open. The doctors know exactly where they are, anyone above private rank or that can get a map off a dead colonel knows where they are, so I have no reason to make them public and let the enemy know where they are. I'm not going to risk them being a whore with highly sadistic strategies at the expense of my men.
Things must be very different in Rogue Newbie, so I can't really speak to that. In Saint Uriel, for example, permament military hospitals are out in the open. Kind of like in the RL US and Canada....
Now, mobile military field hospitals, that's a different matter. The URGES paragraph of the proposal specifically refers only to permament hospitals, since there really would be a giving away of strategic information if one publicly listed the location of all mobile hospitals on the battle front. Besides, as everyone already knows, the URGES section is not mandatory, only a suggestion.

I like this proposal a great deal - well thought out and researched.

W.

Things must be very different in Rogue Newbie, so I can't really speak to that. In Saint Uriel, for example, permament military hospitals are out in the open. Kind of like in the RL US and Canada....
Now, mobile military field hospitals, that's a different matter. The URGES paragraph of the proposal specifically refers only to permament hospitals, since there really would be a giving away of strategic information if one publicly listed the location of all mobile hospitals on the battle front. Besides, as everyone already knows, the URGES section is not mandatory, only a suggestion.
Okay, we've got permanent regular hospitals, which are marked on road maps, and on the internet, completely public, etc. Then we've got permanent military hospitals, whose locations are undisclosed to the public, and are given to all ranking people in our military if they are going to be operating nearby. Then we have mobile military field hospitals, which deal with lesser things like shrapnel wounds, concussions, mild to moderate nonlethal diseases, etc.

I like this proposal a great deal - well thought out and researched.

W.
Thank you and thanks for that POW resolution. It inspired a lot of this one.

Fatus Maximus supports the new draft of the proposal.

Yelda will support this when submitted.

Thanks to everyone. This proposal has now been submitted. Please feel free to endorse away, or ask your UN delegate to endorse. Thank you.

I've approved it but I have one problem with it, the first sentence Gratitude is extended to the Sultanate of Vastiva and the Dominion of Cobdenia for invaluable assistance with this resolution.
violates the new rule about branding on proposals which state Branding

Limited branding is allowed. "Limited" means that you may list one co-author by nation name only. Example:

"Co-authored by The Most Glorious Hack"

Further branding will result in the Proposal being deleted. Don't list everyone who posted in the thread for your draft, don't list yourself, don't list your Minister Of Making Proposals, and don't post the 'pre-title' of the co-author (ie: "The Republic Of...").

Hell, no, I don't have military medical facilities out in the open. The doctors know exactly where they are, anyone above private rank or that can get a map off a dead colonel knows where they are, so I have no reason to make them public and let the enemy know where they are. I'm not going to risk them being a whore with highly sadistic strategies at the expense of my men.

First, it says "Hospitals". You know, where sick people go? Ambulances usually travel to them dozens of times a day? Babies are born there often?

Hiding these is pointless.

Equally so with hiding a permanent military hospital. Have a look at an aerial survey map, you can find the hospital - not very hard. Hiding these is also pointless.


Okay, we've got permanent regular hospitals, which are marked on road maps, and on the internet, completely public, etc. Then we've got permanent military hospitals, whose locations are undisclosed to the public, and are given to all ranking people in our military if they are going to be operating nearby. Then we have mobile military field hospitals, which deal with lesser things like shrapnel wounds, concussions, mild to moderate nonlethal diseases, etc.

MASH ... as in Mobile Army Surgical Hospitals... the ones that you can move around? Mapping them is pointless.

And trust me - any "permanent military hospital" can be found, easily. A very minor intelligence operation would reveal them.

This assumes you haven't gone overboard in the paranoia department and put them deep underground, or some other nauseatingly unreachable spot - which will make them stand out like Godzilla's hangnail for that intel op.

MASH ... as in Mobile Army Surgical Hospitals... the ones that you can move around? Mapping them is pointless.
Greetings.

We of Roathin note that it is not pointless to map any movement of support units or supply units. It very often helps locate the major axis of troop movement, or at least is one of the factors one takes into account when assessing intelligence. That said, field hospitals might be called 'mobile' but in practice seldom are. From our experience, moving the field hospital is a pain; either right behind, or left behind.

The military knowing where your MASH are is one thing. However, attempting to keep secret "that huge building over there where all the sick people go is a hospital" is an exercise in futility.

I've approved it but I have one problem with it, the first sentence
Damn. I had read the new rules, but apparently I misread them. I could have sworn that 2 names were allowed. Crud. Well, I'll let the mods know before they delete it and warn me.

First, it says "Hospitals". You know, where sick people go? Ambulances usually travel to them dozens of times a day? Babies are born there often?

Hiding these is pointless.

Equally so with hiding a permanent military hospital. Have a look at an aerial survey map, you can find the hospital - not very hard. Hiding these is also pointless.
Okay, first off, there is a difference between how we manage basic hospitals where sick people go and where babies are born. I thought that was clear, apparently I overestimated you. Second, you will not find our permanent military hospitals on aeriel survey maps. I guarantee it.

MASH ... as in Mobile Army Surgical Hospitals... the ones that you can move around? Mapping them is pointless.

When did I ever suggest mapping mobile military hospitals? Or are you just pulling stuff out of your ass?

And trust me - any "permanent military hospital" can be found, easily. A very minor intelligence operation would reveal them.

And trust me - you don't know anything about military medical procedure and setup in the Democratic Republic of Rogue Newbie, you moron. That statement makes that quite obvious.

And trust me - you don't know anything about military medical procedure and setup in the Democratic Republic of Rogue Newbie, you moron. That statement makes that quite obvious.
Well, Vastiva has a point. Of all the things to perform intelligence upon, a permanent military hospital is probably one of the easiest. Typically, anyway. Permanent military hopsitals tend to be more conspicuous transparent among military facilities because it has to allow military forces to actually access them.

I really don't see what the problem is with insisting the location of permanent hospitals be shewn on maps. I can't see any logical reason why you wouldn't; if you don't, and a UN nation accidentally attacks a military hospital because it assumes that big grey building which you are trying to hide is a bit more sinister than it really is, then the country in question isn't in violation (you have to knowingly attack a hospital)

Well, Vastiva has a point. Of all the things to perform intelligence upon, a permanent military hospital is probably one of the easiest. Typically, anyway. Permanent military hopsitals tend to be more conspicuous transparent among military facilities because it has to allow military forces to actually access them.

I don't keep my military hospitals extremely well hidden because I don't want my men to find them - I keep them highly informed. I keep them well hidden because I don't want them to become targets of war strategy.

I really don't see what the problem is with insisting the location of permanent hospitals be shewn on maps. I can't see any logical reason why you wouldn't; if you don't, and a UN nation accidentally attacks a military hospital because it assumes that big grey building which you are trying to hide is a bit more sinister than it really is, then the country in question isn't in violation (you have to knowingly attack a hospital)

You're missing my point... I have no problem releasing the location of my hospitals to other UN governments that will not be allowed to attack them (so long as it's expressly stated that said governments cannot release said locations to outside parties). I have a problem with making their locations completely public and therefore making them easy targets for military strikes. Maybe wanting to keep your soldiers and hospital personel as safe as possible is paranoid, but that's how I deal with things.

I don't keep my military hospitals extremely well hidden because I don't want my men to find them - I keep them highly informed. I keep them well hidden because I don't want them to become targets of war strategy.

A good bomber pilot following the wounded and with the right equipment can solve that problem.

You're missing my point... I have no problem releasing the location of my hospitals to other UN governments that will not be allowed to attack them (so long as it's expressly stated that said governments cannot release said locations to outside parties). I have a problem with making their locations completely public and therefore making them easy targets for military strikes. Maybe wanting to keep your soldiers and hospital personel as safe as possible is paranoid, but that's how I deal with things.

You're in a world where the enemy could be using guns on the ground, but have ships armed with plasma cannons in space and entire legions of people able to use magic walking up behind you while under the cover of invisibility and silence spells. Paranoia is a survival trait.

I have a problem with making their locations completely public and therefore making them easy targets for military strikes. Maybe wanting to keep your soldiers and hospital personel as safe as possible is paranoid, but that's how I deal with things.

The Resolution states:
and that the location of permanent hospitals be made public to all UN nations

You only need to make them to other UN nations.

Eisen-Hammer supports the new draft of the proposal.

[shameless plug] Just in case any nation is wondering, "Oh where can we get reliable, efficient medical transports at an affordable price?" - look no further. Saint Uriel just HAPPENS to have an excellent medevac helo design for sale. You may see it in this thread:

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=420650

It comes with all the nice medical markings in the URGES paragraph.

Just thought you might want to know ;) [/shameless plug]

A good bomber pilot following the wounded and with the right equipment can solve that problem.

Sure, and a good surface to air missile or a school of fighter jets deployed in strategic defensive positions can rape a bomber pilot. What's your point?

You're in a world where the enemy could be using guns on the ground, but have ships armed with plasma cannons in space and entire legions of people able to use magic walking up behind you while under the cover of invisibility and silence spells. Paranoia is a survival trait.

That's what I thought I was getting at...

Okay, first off, there is a difference between how we manage basic hospitals where sick people go and where babies are born. I thought that was clear, apparently I overestimated you. Second, you will not find our permanent military hospitals on aeriel survey maps. I guarantee it.

Let's see.... they have to be accessible to the military on short notice (people get sick often, wounds happen)... they have to have good supply lines... they have to have navigable roads...

I think they're going to show up one way or another.



And trust me - you don't know anything about military medical procedure and setup in the Democratic Republic of Rogue Newbie, you moron. That statement makes that quite obvious.

Ignoring your flame.

Try this on for size - give a soldier a cold and a minor wound infection and a tag. Now, where he goes, I follow. Where he spends time is marked. One of those locations is your hospital.

Hiding your hospitals is pointless.

Although it was somewhat exhausting and harrowing, I learned a lot from my last UN proposal and made some good friends. In an effort to further humanitarianism and because I believe it is needed (and because I'm obviously a bit of a masochist), I will be presenting the following proposal to the UN tomorrow:

Medical Protection in Combat
Category: Human Rights
Strength: Significant

Gratitude is extended to the Sultanate of Vastiva for invaluable assistance with this resolution.

RECALLING, APPLAUDING, AND AFFIRMING the progressive humanitarianism set forth in UN resolution 31, Wolfish Convention on POW's and UN resolution 33, No Embargoes on Medicine

RECOGNISING that in time of war or other armed conflict, there is a great need for medical treatment and access, both of combatants and civilians

CONCERNED about the potential assault of hospitals and/or medical transports during the fury and fog of war

URGES all nations to mark all medical facilities and medical evacuation transports with internationally agreed-upon, easily recognisable symbols or insignia, such as a red cross or blue caduceus

RESOLVES that no UN nation may knowingly attack a medical transport, infirmary, or hospital, be it military or civilian, and that all such transports and hospitals shall be recognised as neutral in any hostile engagement or war, declared or undeclared

FURTHER RESOLVES that misuse of medical insignia voids these prohibitions for the length of the conflict. This includes, but is not limited to, storing and/or transporting munitions and armament under such insignia, or moving active combat troops under such insignia.


I'm sure they'll be no lack of comments, suggestions, advice, rants, threats, et cetera. So, let's begin. As always, your helpful input is welcomed and appreciated.

OOC: Oops! I just found this thread after sending you a TG. Looks like I'm a bit late.

IC:

As Minister Jones predicted, the only concern we have about this proposal is the protection of national sovereignty.

Deputy Minister of UN Affairs
Thomas Smith

Let's see....
Let's.

they have to be accessible to the military on short notice (people get sick often, wounds happen)...
They are, but sick people don't go to permanent hospitals, they go to mobiles.

they have to have good supply lines...
Nope.

they have to have navigable roads...

Nope.

I think they're going to show up one way or another.
Nope.

Try this on for size - give a soldier a cold and a minor wound infection and a tag. Now, where he goes, I follow. Where he spends time is marked. One of those locations is your hospital.
Oh, wow. You're brilliant! I had never thought of that! *sarcasm* Gee, you followed him straight to a mobile, good job.

Hiding your hospitals is pointless.
Obviously not, you can't seem to find much to do about it.

By the way, do not bother replying to this. You obviously do not understand my medical systems, you probably never will, and that's a good thing as far as I'm concerned. I'm done arguing about this bill, the only problem I have with it is something it doesn't mandate, and so I'll give it my support and pursue a different method than that which was "urged."

they have to be accessible to the military on short notice (people get sick often, wounds happen)...
They are, but sick people don't go to permanent hospitals, they go to mobiles.And what if they are closer to a permanant one than any mobile one?
they have to have good supply lines...
Nope.You mean that your hospitals don't need things like food, medical supplies, etc.?
they have to have navigable roads...Nope.Then how is anyone going to get there?
I think they're going to show up one way or another.Nope.If you hide your hospitals this well, I fail to see how they can be of any use even to your own people.
Try this on for size - give a soldier a cold and a minor wound infection and a tag. Now, where he goes, I follow. Where he spends time is marked. One of those locations is your hospital.Oh, wow. You're brilliant! I had never thought of that! *sarcasm* Gee, you followed him straight to a mobile, good job.See my first comment.

And what if they are closer to a permanant one than any mobile one?
Well, aside from the fact that that would never be the case, a person with a less than serious wound can wait.

You mean that your hospitals don't need things like food, medical supplies, etc.?
Then how is anyone going to get there?
If you hide your hospitals this well, I fail to see how they can be of any use even to your own people.
See my first comment.
The people that need to know about them, know about them. I'm not going to unveil my entire military medical system to you. I'm done talking about this, I support the bill, I just don't like what it urges. I'll give it my support. I'm not speaking of this again until it comes to an official vote, so replying will be like talking to a wall - perhaps you enjoy that, I really don't know. Good day.

Sure, and a good surface to air missile or a school of fighter jets deployed in strategic defensive positions can rape a bomber pilot. What's your point?

Hmm. Need to add a few more guns to my bomber designs...

That's what I thought I was getting at...

You see me disagreeing with that?

Well, aside from the fact that that would never be the case, a person with a less than serious wound can wait.


You mean that your hospitals don't need things like food, medical supplies, etc.?
Then how is anyone going to get there?
If you hide your hospitals this well, I fail to see how they can be of any use even to your own people.
See my first comment.


The people that need to know about them, know about them. I'm not going to unveil my entire military medical system to you. I'm done talking about this, I support the bill, I just don't like what it urges. I'll give it my support. I'm not speaking of this again until it comes to an official vote, so replying will be like talking to a wall - perhaps you enjoy that, I really don't know. Good day.

Hey, Flibbleites, I wasn't aware we are the same person...

It's rather obvious RN wants to commit to long term care in mobile hospitals - which has so many logistical problems we won't need to go into all of them. He has special, underground hospitals no one uses. Alright, fine, whatever.

Next player please.

Hey, Flibbleites, I wasn't aware we are the same person...That was news to me too.:D

Well, the time allowed to reach quorum ends very shortly and here's where we stand:
Approvals: 93 (Antrium, Jonathalia, Yelda, Not So Bad, Free Radicals of Mu-Mu, Hegartydom, Domzalski, Flibbleites, Sinsvyka, United democratic, The Philosophes, Nevscrow, Declasse, Vastiva, Rolling Stone, Seattletonia, Funkdunk, Silanne, Darkreigner, Juna Esperantisto, Gaiah, Kilobugya, Bernardi, Falconus Peregrinus, Illyrie, Of Cascadia, Red Rachel Revised, Chazzistan, Ficticious Proportions, Wegason, The Derrak Quadrant, Krioval, Richard2008, Tinis, Desidiosus, Batons de Colle, Windsor-Bainbridge, His Majesty, Real Paradise, City-State, Zouloukistan, New Modern Egypt, Blaming, Celstiere, Neo Mata Nui, ETopps, Swishland, Republic of Freedonia, Krigerania, Oleria, Leo I, Smythedom, Ophainia, Aryavartha, Equalland of Freedom, Geeks With Guns, Julio Trigman, Big Rigs, Shikyrie, Clintoned, Antidepressant Users, Ancients Tomatoes, Othelma, Groot Gouda, Ateelatay, Brausi-mausi, Eve the First, Arcanity, Vrone, Tactical PIE, Alberta Patriots, Oilsjt, Alean, The Fro Royal Family, KualaLumpar, Greater Tiki, Windleheim, Larat, Heddiw, Dark Little Thoughts, The Arn, Dizziness, The Island of Eire, The Shadow-Kai, Ness Snorlaxia, Republic of Peoples, Utopian Id, Deutsche Helvetia, Mattathias784, USCT, Melmond, Nomikia, The Land of Sinai)

Status: Lacking Support (requires 57 more approvals)

Voting Ends: Sun Jun 5 2005

About 2/3 of the way there, but I'm starting to lose hope it will reach quorum.

If it doesn't try again. I like this :).

Wish I could help but my regions delegate is away at the moment.

This proposal written with good intention does nothing. There are no punishments! So whether or not a nation actually destroys a hospital, or pretends that a building other than a hospital is a hospital, they won't be punished. Whats the point?

If this is brought to a vote, than my region will most definatly vote no.

This proposal written with good intention does nothing. There are no punishments! So whether or not a nation actually destroys a hospital, or pretends that a building other than a hospital is a hospital, they won't be punished. Whats the point?

If this is brought to a vote, than my region will most definatly vote no.

All UN Nations are bound by it and cannot break it - non-UN Nations can ignore it, as always. What punishment do you need, continued membership in the UN?

This proposal written with good intention does nothing. There are no punishments!
There don't need to be punishments. UN resolutions are mandatory, so it is physically impossible to break them

Yeah, I don't see why everybody wants a fine, sanctions, or a committee o' punishment in every proposal... oh well.

I see the dolphin proposal reached quroum. Yay... I hate dolphins.

And thanks for the encouragement, Cobdenia. I'll resubmit it in a couple of weeks.

The second time's the charm. You can telegram the delegates who already voted for the proposal to ask them to vote again, and then you're over half way already. I'd reccommend resubmitting immediately however, especially if you have already started a TG campaig because it means any of those you TGed but were late in responding will still have the chance to now. It would cut down on your workload to have the proposal permanently up for endorsement.

I don't keep my military hospitals extremely well hidden because I don't want my men to find them - I keep them highly informed. I keep them well hidden because I don't want them to become targets of war strategy.


Generally, hospitals are more easily found out by intelligence. Even in your system it'd be easier to uncover the well-dispersed information regarding your hospitals' locations (since your so many troops are so well informed), than, say, the secret codes to your missiles (which information is likely centralized--probably known by only one or two people).

To use oversimplistic math, the percentage chance of someone discovering a secret is equal to the the number of people who know about it minus one, squared.

Considering your whole army knows where the hospitals are, it is a feslugger waste of time to hide them.

Generally, hospitals are more easily found out by intelligence. Even in your system it'd be easier to uncover the well-dispersed information regarding your hospitals' locations (since your so many troops are so well informed), than, say, the secret codes to your missiles (which information is likely centralized--probably known by only one or two people).

~Coughs and hands the top-secret missile launch codes of Gallae and Rogue Newbie back to the functionary, wondering why the Maintainers have yet to find out where the hospitals are in both nations~

Damn incompetent Maintainer Disciples