NationStates Jolt Archive

Honorable United Nations Delegates;

The Grand Duchy of Luxumbra hath submitted a proposal that it feels can aid all member nations both in the realm of Global Disarmament as well as exploration.

The last time a similar proposal was submitted, the Grand Duchy did not spend the time to seek to come to the United Nations Delegates on this forum first, and our proposal suffered - barely achieving over a third of the required endorsements.

The Grand Duchy of Luxumbra seeks the support of 130 United Nations Delegates beyond its own, the Illuminating Darkness of Tsel. If a United Nations Delegate does not feel this proposal meets with their approval, Luxumbra humbly requests any suggestions for improvements to its proposal.

For those who wish to read it here, the text of the International Space Agency Proposal is listed below. Thank you, on behalf of the Grand Duchy of Luxumbra and its people, for your time.

-----

International Space Agency
A resolution to slash worldwide military spending.

Category: Global Disarmament
Strength: Significant
Proposed by: Luxumbra

Description: Insofar that the United Nations strives to be a body for the betterment of all its nations and the world at large, this Proposal calls for the creation of the ISA, the International Space Agency.

The ISA's mandate shall be to bring together the finest minds from every Nation to exponentially increase the results of Space Exploration programs currently restricted in scope because they are only administered by single- or small-groups of nations.

The ISA is bound to share equally all data and discoveries with fairness and equality among those nations who fund and support it.

The ISA shall be led by a body of delegates of UN Nations who ratify the ISA's creation, and they shall elect a board of directors to handle the day-to-day operations of the ISA.

The ISA shall receive funding from all member nations as is follows:

- UN Members who support the ISA with facilities and equipment shall devote 1% of their current Military Budget as a grant to the ISA.
- UN Members who support the ISA with manpower and/or security shall devote 1% of their current Military Budget as a grant to the ISA.
- UN Members who support the ISA through economic means only shall devote 2% of their current Military Budget as a grant to the ISA.

Bringing the International Space Agency into being will cost each UN Delegate Nation an extremely small portion of its funds, but the small percentages from many nations all at once shall give the ISA the means and the funds to finally press where no one has gone before.

Approvals: 8 (Tsel, Jey, Aquarian Arcadia, Bellaben, BrCru, Kooluk, Blue Buddhas, Liberialand)

Status: Lacking Support (requires 123 more approvals)

Voting Ends: Thu Sep 8 2005

-----

http://bak42.notworksafe.com/images/NationStates/UNCards/theredundancycard.jpg
UN Space Consortium (http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/page=UN_past_resolutions/start=49)

Bob Flibble
UN Representative

The Grand Duchy of Luxumbra thanks the Representative, Flibble, for responding to the title of the proposal, if not the rest of it.

The Grand Duchy of Luxumbra thanks the Representative, Flibble, for responding to the title of the proposal, if not the rest of it.
I did read the text and it's still redundant because a similar organization was formed by UN Resolution #50 UN Space Consortium.

Bob Flibble
UN Representative

Indeed it was formed then - I was a member at it's birth :)

My interest in the consortium has waned, but I'm still keen to protect it's role when I see replacements proposed.

I did read the text and it's still redundant because a similar organization was formed by UN Resolution #50 UN Space Consortium.

Bob Flibble
UN Representative

The Grand Duchy of Luxumbra asked several members of its Region, Monte Carlo Beach, to review the ISA Proposal and also UN Resolution #50.

Except for the grammar-school similarities that both are UN-related and both are Space-related, there's really nothing alike between them. The ISA is a body designed to divert military spending from all UN member nations to provide funding for a stand-alone deep-space-exploration program.

The UNSC's charter, and I quote, is "to establish a permanent Lunar Base capable of furthering the exploration of space for knowledge and resources."

There is nothing that would preclude the ISA from working with the UNSC, but they would be, in fact, two seperate entities.

Then it is actually creating a new organization who's purpose could be achieved by the UNSC - an already formed and funded committee which, as a long term goal, has the same objectives in mind.

Um, NO

Edit: I note the difference between "redundant" and "duplication". One is illegal, the other is just frustrating and unsupportable.

How exactly does this fit into the Global Disarmament category anyway?

Minister of UN Affairs
Edward Jones

To make my point clear

International Space Agency
A resolution to slash worldwide military spending.

And the funding for space is coming from....where? You see, Global disarmament doesn't mean the money gets moved around, it means the money goes back to the plebs. This is either a National Security or a Free Trade resolution - UNSC chose the latter (which, BTW, was TH's point)

Category: Global Disarmament
Strength: Significant
Proposed by: Luxumbra

Description: Insofar that the United Nations strives to be a body for the betterment of all its nations and the world at large, this Proposal calls for the creation of the ISA, the International Space Agency.

The ISA's mandate shall be to bring together the finest minds from every Nation to exponentially increase the results of Space Exploration programs currently restricted in scope because they are only administered by single- or small-groups of nations.

Which are already working on UNSC if they are interested in space. So basically, we're pitting two space agencies against each other.

The ISA is bound to share equally all data and discoveries with fairness and equality among those nations who fund and support it.

Wow, that sounds a LOT like UNSC:

Non-participating nations are free to pursue their own space objectives, but would not reap the rewards of the investors.

The ISA shall be led by a body of delegates of UN Nations who ratify the ISA's creation, and they shall elect a board of directors to handle the day-to-day operations of the ISA.

UN Delegates electing a board of directors: metagaming violation in committees. We can't be on the boards, we can't ELECT the boards, we can't have anything to do with the boards - except, perhaps, volunteer for them (though I think Hack would delete that too)

The ISA shall receive funding from all member nations as is follows:

- UN Members who support the ISA with facilities and equipment shall devote 1% of their current Military Budget as a grant to the ISA.
- UN Members who support the ISA with manpower and/or security shall devote 1% of their current Military Budget as a grant to the ISA.
- UN Members who support the ISA through economic means only shall devote 2% of their current Military Budget as a grant to the ISA.

Here is the only real upgrade in mandate from UNSC: actual numbers. However, those are some obscene numbers. You're probably looking at a wonderful multi-quadrillion budget for the ISA.

BTW - how big is the US military budget (not including Iraq bonus spending)

Bringing the International Space Agency into being will cost each UN Delegate Nation an extremely small portion of its funds,

BS. This is the largest portion of individual nations' budgets that has ever been asked for from any UN resolution.

but the small percentages from many nations all at once shall give the ISA the means and the funds to finally press where no one has gone before.

Approvals: 8 (Tsel, Jey, Aquarian Arcadia, Bellaben, BrCru, Kooluk, Blue Buddhas, Liberialand)

Status: Lacking Support (requires 123 more approvals)

Voting Ends: Thu Sep 8 2005

-----

So yeah, my statement stands: DENIED!

Or people can be a$$holes about their little fantasy world whilst sitting in their basements (or offices, since it sounds like there are way too many shark...er...lawyers doing this).

The USSEA supports this as it could enhance scientific research and help people's lives.

Prime Minister of USSEA

OOC:

While the ideals of an international space agency can be meritoriously debated, it behooves all UN delegates to avoid lowering the tone of discourse; that includes OOC comments.

The rules violations are not insignificant matters.

Remember the UN cannot collect taxes from member states as per UN Resolution #4 (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7029575&postcount=5), which this could be construed as.

The duplication of scope or purpose with the UNSC, which currently languishes, cannot be swept aside. Even if this is just a percieved similarity or true difference.

In the ideal, Listeneisse would be quite keen in supporting international space exploration. However, the content of this proposal has been called into question.

We suggest you first rally some supporters and take to heart suggestions to re-draft the proposal. Hopefully use the UNSC's forums (http://s3.invisionfree.com/UN_Organizations/index.php?c=5), and try to garner like-minded states to your cause.

Here are some things you might consider:

1. Try to rephrase the proposal as a resolution for "International Space Exploration," since that is your true goal.

2. Remember that it will affect all UN members when the Compliance Ministry puts it into effect. There is no 'opt in' possibility.

3. Also know that the Compliance Ministry will set the specific percentage of budget it will need to support your proposal, and where it will take the rest of the money from, based on your selected category and strength of effect. If this is listed as 'Global Disarmament,' then militaries will be slashed. But it will not necessarily add to, say, public transit.

4. In my limited experience, there is no Category I've read about that directly assists 'public transit' -- no international aviation administration, nor way to directly promote space travel or rail or seafaring or trucking or commuting or bicycling. You'd have to submit that as a feature request change to the mods -outside- of a UN Resolution. And then wait to see if they'd allow it or not. You'd also have to figure what it was going to take away from. It does not necessarily follow that all +public transport is a -defense spending. The argument could be, though, that if your factories are building civilian rail cars or commercial jetliners or ships, they are not building tanks or combat aircraft or attack subs.

Remember the UN cannot collect taxes from member states as per UN Resolution #4, which this could be construed as.

Read it again. Citizens of said member state cannot be taxed directky.

Or people can be a$$holes about their little fantasy world whilst sitting in their basements (or offices, since it sounds like there are way too many shark...er...lawyers doing this).

Who's being an a-hole? Harda**, sure, but a-hole, no. You challenged our comments, and we explained in a reasonable manner what the failings of this resolution is, why it is redundant, and why it is illegal - and therefore, why it is quite simply, unsupportable.

Who's being an a-hole? Harda**, sure, but a-hole, no. You challenged our comments, and we explained in a reasonable manner what the failings of this resolution is, why it is redundant, and why it is illegal - and therefore, why it is quite simply, unsupportable.I wouldn't worry about it - this nation is clearly throwing a temper tantrum because their ickle proposal got shot to a million pieces.

It's the same as talking to a two year old - no point trying to be reasonable.

I wouldn't worry about it - this nation is clearly throwing a temper tantrum because their ickle proposal got shot to a million pieces.

It's the same as talking to a two year old - no point trying to be reasonable.

Well, if we're going to go along with that data, I should note that like 99% of proposals that pass mod sweeps and probably 95-98% of proposals posted on these forums get panned.

oh I know, but I doubt most of the authors throw sissy fits when it happens :)

United Nations Space Consortium is illegal in any case, as it infringes on the lunar nations' rights too much.

United Nations Space Consortium is illegal in any case, as it infringes on the lunar nations' rights too much.

Illegality of passed resolutions is irrelevant, and they infringe upon the rights of the nations in question regardless whether they legally are allowed to or not. Regardless, UNSC's legality status is irrelevant to whether or not this proposal is a duplication. I see this proposal as an excellent replacement of UNSC, but a repeal needs to be levied first.

International Space Agency
A resolution to slash worldwide military spending.

The ISA shall receive funding from all member nations as is follows:

- UN Members who support the ISA with facilities and equipment shall devote 1% of their current Military Budget as a grant to the ISA.
- UN Members who support the ISA with manpower and/or security shall devote 1% of their current Military Budget as a grant to the ISA.
- UN Members who support the ISA through economic means only shall devote 2% of their current Military Budget as a grant to the ISA.


This may well SLASH worldwide military spending but then again to maintain a safe military level that 1% or 2% will have to be made up for some nations to keep a balance in their region as 1% to 2% could mean a great deal to some small nations military budget. Thus reducing their defense against any nation that might prove hostile toward them at a lower military lever. So what are you cutting here. Some nations throat... To go off and place in space when they real threat is next door to them in one of the 2 or 3 nations not UN members...