NationStates Jolt Archive

UN influence in armed conflict

A resolution to restrict political freedoms in the interest of law and order.


Category: Political Stability


Strength: Significant


Proposed by: The earths inhabitants

Description: The United Nations

Reaffirms its commitment to the purposes and principles of the charter of the United Nations.

Bearing in mind its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security

Deeply concerned by the high human cost of war

Recognizing that peace and security are beneficial to all

Re-affirming the need to adopt a broad strategy of conflict prevention which shall address the basic causes of armed conflict.

Recognizing the need to strengthen the role of the United Nations in the prevention of violent conflicts

1. Expresses its determination to enhance the effectiveness of the United nations in preventing armed conflicts
2. Affirms its determination to strengthen the United nations by
A) Continually assessing the developments in regions at risk of armed conflict
B) Supporting regional mediation initiatives in co-operation with regional organizations involved.
C) Requesting assistance and information from the economic and social council (ECOSOC)
D) Recognizing UNITED NATIONS RESOLUTION #57 and the need to reduce market arms sales.
E) Enhancing all organizations conducive to peace and security
F) Supporting efforts of individual nations to build and maintain independent judicial systems.

3. Stresses the importance of establishing effective strategies to curb illicit cross border activities
4. Reaffirms the critical importance of a regional approach to conflict prevention.
5. Urges the international community to strengthen cooperation and communication to prevent further armed conflict
6. Decides to remain seized of the issue.

Approvals: 12 (Hoegsholt, Khalistantinople, Punrovia, Gymnophobia, Skyscraper Island, New Hamilton, Richard2008, Sloopz, Square rootedness, New York Jet Fanatics, Kapellen, Da Empire Place)

Status: Lacking Support (requires 115 more approvals)

Voting Ends: Fri Nov 11 2005
===
I could not get the url to that propsal, sorry. I did not propose it, but it's a good idea. Aside from the card of house violation in 1D, I think it should be accepted, and I back it.

However, it should have some more meat, as in, some more support to help stop war. How about having a committe of UN members that take charge in helping to enforce the propsal as well as negogating for peace?

Reaffirms its commitment to the purposes and principles of the charter of the United Nations.

RL reference - thus I reject the proposal here.

Bearing in mind its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security

Deeply concerned by the high human cost of war

Recognizing that peace and security are beneficial to all

Re-affirming the need to adopt a broad strategy of conflict prevention which shall address the basic causes of armed conflict.

Recognizing the need to strengthen the role of the United Nations in the prevention of violent conflictsWhich is a shame really, because most of that was good.1. Expresses its determination to enhance the effectiveness of the United nations in preventing armed conflicts
2. Affirms its determination to strengthen the United nations by
A) Continually assessing the developments in regions at risk of armed conflict
B) Supporting regional mediation initiatives in co-operation with regional organizations involved.Nice idea, no meat.
C) Requesting assistance and information from the economic and social council (ECOSOC)pretty certain that's another RL reference.
D) Recognizing UNITED NATIONS RESOLUTION #57 and the need to reduce market arms sales.
E) Enhancing all organizations conducive to peace and security
F) Supporting efforts of individual nations to build and maintain independent judicial systems.Again, it's nice and pretty, but lacks bite.

3. Stresses the importance of establishing effective strategies to curb illicit cross border activities
4. Reaffirms the critical importance of a regional approach to conflict prevention.
5. Urges the international community to strengthen cooperation and communication to prevent further armed conflict
6. Decides to remain seized of the issue.Apart from those issues it is very well written though.

In summary, it has the makings of an excellent draft. I agree with SLI it lacks bite.

I'm considering a rewrite, taking most of the prospal, and adding in some meat. I hope it's legal.

I'm considering a rewrite, taking most of the prospal, and adding in some meat. I hope it's legal.

If you want some observations, feel free to post and I'll try and help :)

UN influence in armed conflict

A resolution to restrict political freedoms in the interest of law and order.


Category: Political Stability


Strength: Significant


Proposed by: The earths inhabitants

Description: The United Nations

Reaffirms its commitment to the purposes and principles of the charter of the United Nations.

Bearing in mind its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security

Deeply concerned by the high human cost of war

Recognizing that peace and security are beneficial to all

Re-affirming the need to adopt a broad strategy of conflict prevention which shall address the basic causes of armed conflict.

Recognizing the need to strengthen the role of the United Nations in the prevention of violent conflicts

1. Expresses its determination to enhance the effectiveness of the United nations in preventing armed conflicts
2. Affirms its determination to strengthen the United nations by
A) Continually assessing the developments in regions at risk of armed conflict
B) Supporting regional mediation initiatives in co-operation with regional organizations involved.
C) Requesting assistance and information from the economic and social council (ECOSOC)
D) Recognizing UNITED NATIONS RESOLUTION #57 and the need to reduce market arms sales.
E) Enhancing all organizations conducive to peace and security
F) Supporting efforts of individual nations to build and maintain independent judicial systems.

3. Stresses the importance of establishing effective strategies to curb illicit cross border activities
4. Reaffirms the critical importance of a regional approach to conflict prevention.
5. Urges the international community to strengthen cooperation and communication to prevent further armed conflict
6. Decides to remain seized of the issue.

Approvals: 12 (Hoegsholt, Khalistantinople, Punrovia, Gymnophobia, Skyscraper Island, New Hamilton, Richard2008, Sloopz, Square rootedness, New York Jet Fanatics, Kapellen, Da Empire Place)

Status: Lacking Support (requires 115 more approvals)

Voting Ends: Fri Nov 11 2005
===
I could not get the url to that propsal, sorry. I did not propose it, but it's a good idea. Aside from the card of house violation in 1D, I think it should be accepted, and I back it.

However, it should have some more meat, as in, some more support to help stop war. How about having a committe of UN members that take charge in helping to enforce the propsal as well as negogating for peace?

As has been noted before, this would not be permited because of RL violations. As has also been noted, this is unfortunate as it is otherwise a highly worthy piece of legislation.

We would support any attempt to further the course of peace in the world and certainly we feel that, with the required alterations, this could be obtained through this resolution.

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

Leonard Otterby
Ambassador for the Republic of Compadria to the U.N.

Absolutely: this looks like something we'd support. When you have a redraft ready, we'll be more than willing to help with any suggestions/amendments.

What does having an independent judicial system have to do with preventing regional wars?

This looks like a sly attempt to enforce "checks and balances" democracy in the guise of a whole other proposal, and I (for one) find that unacceptable.

The rest seems fine - you can get round the house of cards issue by saying "previous resolutions" rather than naming them specifically, and preventing war is always a good thing.

But 2F is just sneaky, and something that would remove my support for the whole thing.

What does having an independent judicial system have to do with preventing regional wars?

This looks like a sly attempt to enforce "checks and balances" democracy in the guise of a whole other proposal, and I (for one) find that unacceptable.

The rest seems fine - you can get round the house of cards issue by saying "previous resolutions" rather than naming them specifically, and preventing war is always a good thing.

But 2F is just sneaky, and something that would remove my support for the whole thing.

You're right; I hadn't spotted that one. Yes, please strike 2F: it's irrelevant, and it will lose you our support too. Well spotted, Pallatium. :) (or, in Pallatian, :}).

Alright, here is the first draft for the proposal...

Bearing in mind its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security

Deeply concerned by the high human cost of war

Recognizing that peace and security are beneficial to all

Re-affirming the need to adopt a broad strategy of conflict prevention which shall address the basic causes of armed conflict.

Recognizing the need to strengthen the role of the United Nations in the prevention of violent conflicts

Expresses its determination to enhance the effectiveness of the United nations in preventing armed conflicts

A UN War Prevention Council will be formed with the stated objective of preventing and ending armed conflicts.
A) The Council shall continually assess the developments in regions at risk of armed conflict.
B) The Council shall support regional mediation initiatives in co-operation with regional organizations involved.
C) The Council shall reaffirm all UN resolutions and will help out in enforcing these resolutions.
D) In an event of an armed conflict occuring, the Council shall try to end the armed conflict in a peaceful and bloodless manner.
E) The Council shall make public reports from time to time. These reports are to discuss the Council's current efforts to prevent and end armed conflicts and how succesful these efforts are.

ENCOURGES all nations to help out in UN Peacekeeping Operations around the world to help end armed conflicts.

RECOMMEND the critical importance of a regional approach to conflict prevention.

Urges the international community to strengthen cooperation and communication to prevent further armed conflicts

ENCOURGE the importance of establishing effective strategies to help stop further armed conflicts and to help enforce UN resolutions.

Decides to remain seized of the issue.
===
What do you say? Most of the meat is inside of the Council, but there are other meat inside of it. I'm open to suggestions. After all, I want this thing to pass. I want peace, not war.

Note that I'm not a delegate. If anybody thinks the propsal is great, and is a UN delegate, they can propose it for me.

What's with this whole 'demand to remain seized of this issue'? That's a given in NSUN legislation. Waste of space.

Anyway, you can't really refer to Peacekeeping Ops when there is no such thing within NSUN law.

What's with this whole 'demand to remain seized of this issue'? That's a given in NSUN legislation. Waste of space.

I've seen it in many resolutions and I somewhat like it. However, we don't want to waste char space. The demand has been struck out.

Anyway, you can't really refer to Peacekeeping Ops when there is no such thing within NSUN law.

I did it in an attempt to help get the Peacekeeping Operations more popluarity. However, you are right that I cannot refer to that, plus there is fear that NatSov people will say: "HEY! He's trying to make a UN Army."

"ENCOURGES all nations to help out in UN Peacekeeping Operations around the world to help end armed conflicts." has been struck out.

Anybody interested in sponsering this proposal?

as one of those 'natsov' people my government is already involved in Kilani in a peace brokering role.

our own constitution forbids us from sending troops outside our region so we couldn't send peace keepers if we wanted to.

the current MOA system is acceptable to us but anything that resembles a 'NSUN army' will not go down well with us or my region. (OOC: does it violate games mechanics?)

otherwise i like what i see. with more work we could make this a solid proposal.

with most Nationstates wars being 'region invading' how would a war prevention council prevent or deal with this?

I'd back this up if it was cleaned up a bit. Also, shouldn't it state that the UN force can only be used in conflicts between member nations? I just don't see why the UN should use its resources in resolving conflict between non-members.

I'd back this up if it was cleaned up a bit. Also, shouldn't it state that the UN force can only be used in conflicts between member nations? I just don't see why the UN should use its resources in resolving conflict between non-members.

He's not advocating the creation of a 'UN force'. However, you have a point in the second regard.

He's not advocating the creation of a 'UN force'. However, you have a point in the second regard.
By "UN force" I meant its diplomatic strength and influence, just to clarify that. Besides that, glad we agree.

D) Recognizing UNITED NATIONS RESOLUTION #57 and the need to reduce market arms sales.
Possible house of cards violation or does that require references to several resolutions?

Possible house of cards violation or does that require references to several resolutions?

I believe even one reference is frowned upon. Nonetheless, he had actually removed that line from the redraft.

i am unsure if the UN needs to influence armed conflict. on one point, member vs member, each side is going to have allies anyway and trying to enforce an UN influence resolution is going to get sticky. on the other hand, member vs non-member, it wouldnt affect it anyway, cos non-members are not covered by the resolution. also, there is the question of forces, as answered before, but when it comes to armed conflict, just talking is not going to help.

with most Nationstates wars being 'region invading' how would a war prevention council prevent or deal with this?

I don't think the War Prevention Council would care about 'region invading'. After all, nobody dies in the paper politics of who gets to be UN delegate. The UN should worry about the real wars, when people do die. (However, if region invading is a problem, and people think we should stop it, then this resolution should discuss about it)

I just don't see why the UN should use its resources in resolving conflict between non-members.

True, but wars happen everywhere, even between non-members. If we assist in brokering treaties with non-members, we can increase the UN's popluarity with the world and may encoruge more members and support. Though, chances are, those non-members may not want us to interfere, so I think your point is vaild.

i am unsure if the UN needs to influence armed conflict. on one point, member vs member, each side is going to have allies anyway and trying to enforce an UN influence resolution is going to get sticky. on the other hand, member vs non-member, it wouldnt affect it anyway, cos non-members are not covered by the resolution. also, there is the question of forces, as answered before, but when it comes to armed conflict, just talking is not going to help.

Unlike debates on what type of DVD we should watch, this issue is important. Wars occur in NS a lot, and we should try to stop it. It occurs far too often...do we want people to live in fear of being murdered in their sleep, or waking up to hear their nation has been invaded? No.

Plus, UN Peacekeeping Operations can enter into armed conflicts when it starts, and can end it. These Peacekeeping Operations, while not offical, has already seen experience in ZP and Kilani. If more people support these Operations, we can see a decrease in wars, or if a war does occur, the less damage done during those wars.

i am unsure if the UN needs to influence armed conflict. on one point, member vs member, each side is going to have allies anyway and trying to enforce an UN influence resolution is going to get sticky. on the other hand, member vs non-member, it wouldnt affect it anyway, cos non-members are not covered by the resolution. also, there is the question of forces, as answered before, but when it comes to armed conflict, just talking is not going to help.

I would respectfully disagree with The Lynx Alliance's points here. Wars involve allies and enemies for all participants and either the allies could be persuaded into acting as mediators or a U.N. task force, specially designed for this purpose could be created.

Talking can affect armed conflicts, so long as an adaquate back up exists for the words. To put it bluntly, empty threats are not conduisve to fulfilling this resolution. We should be prepared to back up any promises and entreaties we make, during these negotiations.

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

Leonard Otterby
Ambassador for the Republic of Compadria to the U.N.

as region crashing is a major part of the game i would feel its important.

i was recently on a mission for the GSP in Lazarus. it turned out that two invading regions happened to be there at the same time and now an invader is the delegate.

the GSP also stablised the situation in the north pacific while a new delegate was chosen. in both of these the regions involved invited us in.

there are regions and organisations which specialise in defending regions just as their are invader regions. whatever an invaders motive there'll always be UN members trapped when they succeed.

although i'm not sure how much a war prevention group could do i suppose this is as good a time to knock a few ideas around and see if these could be incorporated into a proposal.

We could make a clause that supports both the GSP (and Defender Regions in general) and the UN Peacekeeping Forces, and encourges people to support both.

I remember that Listentine, one of the members in the UN Peacekeeping Forces, is also part of Warzones of the Defenders, a defender region.

i really doubt that the GSP (Gatesville Sovereign Protectorate or simply the gatesville militia) would be interested. they only aid regions they have treaties with or are allies with.

i'm sure the other defender regions would like the help and publicity.

if you amended the following :
ENCOURGES all nations to help out in UN Peacekeeping Operations around the world to help end armed conflicts.

to :

ENCOURAGES all nations to help out in UN Peacekeeping Operations around the world to help end armed conflicts including civil wars, terrorist actions, an invasion of a UN member state and attempts by invader regions to take a regions political freedom from them.

i'm not sure if mentioning this in a proposal would be a games mechanics violation but i'm sure that someone will soon tell us.

ENCOURAGES all nations to help out in UN Peacekeeping Operations around the world to help end armed conflicts including civil wars, terrorist actions, an invasion of a UN member state and attempts by invader regions to take a regions political freedom from them.

I'd think it would be more likely to be legal if it was just ...nations to help out in Peacekeeping Operations... otherwise there maybe a problem as to what counts as a UN Peacekeeping Operation (i.e. it suggests it needs to be sanctioned by the UN General Assembly; which would be a vary complicated thing to set up) if you understand me

i really doubt that the GSP (Gatesville Sovereign Protectorate or simply the gatesville militia) would be interested. they only aid regions they have treaties with or are allies with.

i'm sure the other defender regions would like the help and publicity.

Hence, the reason why I think it should be in the propsal. It deals with regional wars, sastifying many people.

if you amended the following :
ENCOURGES all nations to help out in UN Peacekeeping Operations around the world to help end armed conflicts.

to :

ENCOURAGES all nations to help out in Peacekeeping Operations around the world to help end armed conflicts including civil wars, terrorist actions, invasions of UN member states and attempts by invader regions to take other regions' political freedom from them.


Done. I edited it a little, making it gramatically correct. (hopefully) Everything is there. I just hope that it does not violate game mechiancs. I don't think so, since it does not make a UN Army, it just states the facts.

EDIT: I took out UN from UN Peacekeeping Operations, just in case.

So, if this is it, I'll post it as the final draft and hope somebody sponsers it on the UN Floor.

Woah, no. Drop the region crashing thing. The UN has invader, defender, and many, many couldn't-give-a-shit-about-gameplay members. Even mentioning region crashing verges on game mechanics...I really would leave any mention out at all. Limit yourself to RP war: region crashing is something no resolution can affect, so don't mention it.

I'm confused. On one side, region invasion is bad, but on the other side, it violate game mechanics.

I think Gruneberg is right, and I withdraw the part about region crashing.

OOC: Sorry if I act like a Kerry-style flip flopper. This is my first propsal and I want it to pass.

Final, final draft, before I submit it on behalf of SLI Sector:

NSUN Influence in Armed Conflict
Category: International Security
Strength: Significant

BELIEVING that a responsibility of the NSUN should be the maintenance of international peace and security,

DEEPLY CONCERNED by the high numbers of lives lost as a result of war,

RECOGNISING that peace and security are beneficial to all,

REAFFIRMING the need to adopt a broad strategy of conflict prevention which shall address the basic causes of armed conflict,

RECOGNISING the need to strengthen the role of the NSUN in the prevention of violent conflicts:

1. EXPRESSES its determination to enhance the effectiveness of the NSUN in preventing armed conflicts;

2. CREATES an NSUN War Prevention Council with the stated objective of preventing and ending armed conflicts;
(a) the Council shall continually assess the developments in regions at risk of armed conflict;
(b) the Council shall support regional mediation initiatives in co-operation with regional organizations involved;
c) the Council shall reaffirm all UN resolutions and will help out in enforcing these resolutions;
d) in the event of an armed conflict developing, the Council shall try to end the armed conflict in a peaceful and bloodless manner;
e) the Council shall make regular public reports to discuss the progress of the Council's current efforts to prevent and end armed conflicts.


Submitted on behalf of SLI Sector.

looks good to me

bump, please gruenberg, sponser this. If you do, please post the link.

Final, final draft, before I submit it on behalf of SLI Sector:
Could you let me know when its submitted? By telegram if it isnt too much of a big deal. I tend to forget about looking for proposals, ad a telegram reminds me to do it.

http://www.nationstates.net/page=UN_proposal1/match=influence <-- Linky linky clicky clicky

Approvals: 25 (Of Cascadia, Punrovia, Richard2008, Kirisubo, Listeneisse, Britian New Zealand, WZ Forums, Habardia, Fountainbleau, Scandinavian Duchies, Darpatia, Macska, Deadcross, Cows--With--Guns, Fake Plutonium, Keepingthepeace, New Hamilton, Kevin Islands, Nick52B, Chibbaa, Zocane, Ge-be-on-e-quet, Goat Lovers Inc, Metallonia, Trinidad n Tobago)

Status: Lacking Support (requires 104 more approvals)

Voting Ends: Thu Nov 17 2005

Not bad, for a first time. Anybody willing to do a TG campagin to help out the idea?

Approvals: 37 (Of Cascadia, Punrovia, Richard2008, Kirisubo, Listeneisse, WZ Forums, Habardia, Fountainbleau, Scandinavian Duchies, Darpatia, Macska, Deadcross, Cows--With--Guns, Fake Plutonium, Keepingthepeace, New Hamilton, Kevin Islands, Nick52B, Chibbaa, Zocane, Ge-be-on-e-quet, Goat Lovers Inc, Metallonia, Trinidad n Tobago, Treffinia, Sandra Sistkova, Hogey, Myrden, Yade, STATEPROPERTY, Mustrilasia, Land Of Serenity, Lunar Destiny, Hosepipes, The 1st Kemdoph Army, Derekfarnam, Love and esterel)

Status: Lacking Support (requires 92 more approvals)

Voting Ends: Thu Nov 17 2005

It looks like it will end soon. I hope the people that supported this prospal before will support it again, and will help do a TG campagin to get this to quorom.

When you repost it send me another telegram, please. If you send me the link I'm willing to send it to all nations in my region and dossier. Oh, and what about the Court one, did the mods deem it legal?

The Mods didnt rule on the Court yet, but I believe it will be ruled illegal. They mentioned it seems rather close to "meta-gaming".

Man. I was looking forward to the RP. Well I tried that Coalition thing, it fell through miserably...

Which one? That Pro-UN Colation?

A miserable failure. Those fools want to slaughter themselves like there is no end. It's horrible.

bump.

EDIT: We're going to resubmit this propsal on saturday, so I hope that on saturday, all here will support this prospal. For peace!

Here we go! We resubmitted!

http://nationstates.net/page=UN_proposal1/match=influence

Approve today!

Bump!

Please approve! An approval a day keeps war away!

EDIT: Or, if anybody can help me in a TG campagin, that's great. I'm TGing right now, trying to get supporters for the bill, but it's not working! I need more people!

Approvals: 58 (Kirisubo, Greater Tiki, Goat Lovers Inc, Neolitholibria, Habardia, Scary pierced dykes, Fonzoland, WZ Forums, Scandinavian Duchies, Bohii, Yucania, Kaetoria, New Hamilton, Dukeship of Warsaw, Stikko, SecuriCor, Cows--With--Guns, Kaymap, Keepingthepeace, Land Of Serenity, Warsong Clans, Adam Langley, Khalistantinople, Spexica, Skoda Drivers, Treffinia, Zhongnanhai, The Running Potato, Punrovia, The GLA for scuds, Nouvelle Macedoine, Meghanstan, Paulmanistan, Jey, Jkhdsf, Doubledeedinahsaur, Yeldan UN Mission, Alkinodia, No poverty, Horizontally wide, The Campbell dynasty, Pel, Sangreland, Bopnar, Potamos, Cataduanes, Troll-la-la, Zocane, Reasonable Prudence, Athens and Midlands, Richard2008, The Sthans, Somewhere near denmark, Mainiac, Otha Gunga, Zanziik, Fireexit, Unknown Peoples)

58 Approvals. This is good. Almost double the last time. But we still need people to approve. Is anybody here can do a TG campagin, please do so! I need TGers! Thank you! Approve this propsal...for a safer world!

Approvals: 87 (Kirisubo, Greater Tiki, Goat Lovers Inc, Neolitholibria, Habardia, Scary pierced dykes, Fonzoland, WZ Forums, Scandinavian Duchies, Bohii, Yucania, Kaetoria, New Hamilton, Dukeship of Warsaw, Stikko, SecuriCor, Cows--With--Guns, Kaymap, Keepingthepeace, Land Of Serenity, Warsong Clans, Adam Langley, Khalistantinople, Spexica, Skoda Drivers, Treffinia, Zhongnanhai, The Running Potato, Punrovia, The GLA for scuds, Nouvelle Macedoine, Meghanstan, Paulmanistan, Jey, Jkhdsf, Doubledeedinahsaur, Yeldan UN Mission, Alkinodia, No poverty, Horizontally wide, The Campbell dynasty, Pel, Sangreland, Bopnar, Potamos, Cataduanes, Troll-la-la, Zocane, Reasonable Prudence, Athens and Midlands, Richard2008, The Sthans, Somewhere near denmark, Mainiac, Otha Gunga, Zanziik, Fireexit, Unknown Peoples, Sock Sockly, Voronezj, Actherion, Mudrekh, Space Hippies, The Waxing Sun, Lord Walker, Rolling Stone, Agramerland, Viscosia, Tri Optimum, Bogdan Mariesan, Omni-Palonie, VampireMountain, Be-To, Dizziness, Ge-be-on-e-quet, Gaiah, Charlesh, Moooselands, Intellect and the Arts, Ustria, Garage-land, Brunelian BG advocates, Sligeach, Trinidad n Tobago, Small Pox, Jresnada, Trogdor-Con 1997)

We need only 41 more approvals, but it seems that it may end and may leave the floor in a few hours. A last push my friend, just approve all you can, so this propsal can get to quorom.

But if it doesn't make it, we'll resubmit it soon, and hopefully, it will make it to quorom! Yeah!

It failed to reach quorom.

I won't resubmit for a while, but when I do, it will possibly reach quorom!

Thanks all for joining.

Gruen, when you get on, if you can, I was wondering how to counter the arguments against the propsal, once it reach resolution stages. Some of it is legit, others are not. However, we must prepare for the arguments and name-calling that will occur once/if it goes onto vote. I'll post the arugments here:

The Socialist Republic does not believe that the UN influence in armed conflict proposal will establish a worthwhile institution if passed. If the United Nations is to assume a peacemaking role, it will require more than a designated council to do so. The Lanalphini are split upon the larger issue, but I feel that there is no need for an international diplomatic corps on top of the thousands of national organizations that already exist if the UN is not entrusted with more clout by its membership in the form of a military force or the power of binding arbitration. We reject approval by a 0-1-2 vote, with Lanalphin Lawrence opposed and Lanalphin Omsai and myself abstaining.

Eko Oeşe
Second Lanalphin of the Socialist Republic of Xanthal

dear nation of sli sector: i am not sure if u were expecting a reply but im sry to say i must disagree with u, in certain areas. i do agree that wars should b handled in a formal matter, but i must say look around u. in a perfect world that would b a great idea, that was the original idea of th un. the only problem is everyone has a problem with every decision so nothing can b decided until years later. there are certain things that can not b handled by mere discussion, just look at the Saddam hussein case; we cant follow with a true trial because his lawyers continue to b murdered. we try to civilize it and it plainly does not work out. i commend you to continue thinking of new ideas for peace but i must disagree with this policy.
the mysterious shadow they call: evil jay

war can not be called off just like that someimes it must just happen,but thanks

hey guess what...there are not any wars in this "game". its all make-believe!

The last two points are not really useful points to address, and will be discounted as n00bish. I'm more worried of the first two, which are: (1) the organization would be a waste of time and (2) wars are more complex. Okay, so I admit: I'm going to push this propsal through the UN nevertheless. Still, any ways to counter those arguments...once it reaches the fourm?