NationStates Jolt Archive

Whoops! Wrong place. glad somebody pointed it out before things got out of hand. Seriously, this is the real regional forum now. :rolleyes:

cool, so what do you want to debate about?

not sure. we could either debate about how to role-play more regional politics (if anyone's interested), or about a UN resolution you'd like me to submit, or anything else.

this has to do a bit with events that happened a few years ago, but i was wondering if we could propose a UN resolution increasing the amount and/or the ability of UN inspectors.

It's a possibility. Actually, that might work. There's alot of talk banning WMD and alot of repeals, as well. Maybe this is the kind of balance that needs to be struck. However, what can be enacted in this resolution to keep pre-emptive attacks like in 2003 from happening?

would haveing inspectors in every un nation be too expensive?

possibly. but my main concern is for world leaders to go from this :) to this :mp5: and use them without provocation or as an excuse to invade a nation.

we could make it so that if you wanted to own nuclear or biological weapons that you need to register and have your application reviewed by a council of nations and you must give an update on how many and what type you have every few months.

And if they want to use them they must go back to the council and explain the reasons why and how and await the council's aproval.

:) or :(

I don't know about you guys but that could be viewed as an invasion of the privacy of said nations and since this is nation states does anyone have nucular weapons? Does the game alow it? :confused: Personaly I think that we should concentrate on the oil companies and their destruction of pristine natural areas such as ANWR. :gundge: :mad:

First off, I would like to say that this forum is really cool. We know that the Indian Ocean has really gained status now that we have a regional forum. In regards to the issue currently being debated; are we talking about inspectors for WMDs in general, or just nuclear weapons? If this is WMDs in general, I would support the remark of Lady Shneider in that I don't believe that the UN has the right to say what nations can or cannot have chemical, or radiological weapons. That said, biological and nuclear weapons are a different story. These weapons, if used, could possibly destroy the planet and/ or kill massive ammounts of civilians. Thus, I would support weapons inspections for these. Annother related resolution could be the repeal of the chemical weapons ban. IF chemical weapons are discharged on the battlefield, I don't see what's wrong with them. If they are used on civilians, they are bad, but so is any other weapon if not limited to combatants.

I would say the inspections of nuclear and biological weapons.

O.K., if that's the case, I would say that each member of the UN be required to submit a certain number of inspectors for biological/ nuclear inspection. These inspectors will then go to each nation to inspect for these weapons. It a nation does not consent to such searches, that will be accepted, BUT economic sanctions will be imposed by the UN immediately and not lifted until the search is allowed to continue. The economic sanction should cover all imports and exports from said country. This would prevent pre-emptive action, and force a resolution to the inspector holdouts, because no country can survive without imports and exports in the modern world. Just an idea. :)

that sounds good to me.

Still though in a nation states game is this a feasable option for a un resolution :rolleyes: or am I just being stuborn :p

Actually, NationStates does allow nuclear and WMD in gameplay, as several resolutions have banned and un-banned them, such as resolutions 16 and 108, respectively. Other resolutions exist to preserve areas such as the ANWR, namely, resolutions 23, 11, and 15. Also, our region especially does not role-play much in the nation-to-nation aspect, much less war involving WMD.

Impressive research into past resolutions, Green Wik. Proposing a resolution of the nature of WMDs would serve two purposes for NationStates as a whole. First, it would provide an interesting issue for UN members to debate in the forum, and secondly it would effect those regions that do role play, as rol playing does extensively use WMDs, I believe. Even though the Indian Ocean does not at this time, other regions do and would be affected.

I looked it up, and UN resolution #110 permits and protects the use of nuclear arms by United Nations members. I do not believe that chemical or biological weapons are banned at the present time, although I do know that several resolutions mention them. Perhaps a resolution limiting their use and terms of use is in order?

I agree that we should address the issue fully and effectivly, I belive our region has a serious oportunity to distinguish ourselves by undertaking such an impressive endeavor. Thankyou also Wik for the information regarding past resolulutions which I have just finished reviewing. Even though I cant spell!! :D ANywAY, I belive we should bang out the details and get a proposal out after everyone tries to agree.

So what exactly are we going to include in this resolution? I believe we should definitely have set rules of conduct, namely, limiting the location nukes can be used and against whom (military targets).

yes, i would say that we should include when and why nuclear weapons can be used.

I'm thinking nukes should be limited in use either for non-civillian areas only (not sure how this will be enforced yet) or to be used only as irradiating and EM devices.

FYI: My country in Indian Ocean is Malinke Traders. I registered FS to post on the forums. (is it possible to use MT also, for only here?)

I refuse to use nuclear weapons against metropolitan areas. I believe they're imprecise filthy weapons that lack the necessary human guidance to distinguish between civilian and military populations.

Pathogen based weapons (bacteria,virus) must be banned if they are capable of spreading themselves, but I have no problem with use of concentrated botox for example. You'll look good when you die. Biotoxins are degradeable and cannot reproduce to spread themselves.

Chemical weapons are a problem from a tactical view because they are dependant on the weather. They'd just as easily attack my own troops as yours.

If you'd like another discussion later about incendiary weapons, I will discuss those.

Since we can all agree that nuclear weapons are a serious problem and their use should be restricted to some degree, the real problem becomes enforcement. We could allow all nations to keep nuclear weapons but just limit their use. However, if one nation violates this, they would be punished, but only after thousands of people die. I think that we need to limit posession and proliferation as opposed to strict useage. Although I don't think an all out ban would be practical, we could limit the numbers of warheads nations have or the ammount of enriched uranium traded between nations.

What would be a consequence so severe that only the most desperate would use nuclear weapons on civillians?

a complete embargo from all UN nations, not allowing them to trade or export goods to/ or from UN nations?

Not severe enough, and most nations don't RP trade of any sort. Perhaps something using force- maybe, a full-scale UN invasion against nuke users? I hate to use force, but perhaps it would be the best deterrent.

Current UN resolution is about outlawing discrimination against transexuals and goes on to list in what ways discrimination is not allowed and steps to be taken about the issue. As usual, telegraph your votes in, I will keep you updated every time new votes come in.

Not severe enough, and most nations don't RP trade of any sort. Perhaps something using force- maybe, a full-scale UN invasion against nuke users? I hate to use force, but perhaps it would be the best deterrent.

I would agree. Embargos should be used only on nations who aren't conforming to UN mandates regarding posession. Once the weapons are used, a full scale war is the only option left that is tough enough. Once a regime uses nuclear weapons on civilians, they have lost their right to exist. However, we need to make sure that we specify in the resolution that this only covers instances when civilians are targeted. If one civilian happens to be walking through an army camp when a nuclear missile explodes on the combatants, this resolution shouldn't apply, because militants were the target.

sounds good to me.

alrighty. So, so far we have:

UN resolution should explain and limit the use of nuclear warheads.

If a civillian population is deliberately targeted by nuclear weapons, that nation shall be subject to an invasion by UN forces. Nuclear weapons will be limited to military targets and radiation and EM device roles.

Sounds okay so far. Now, what about procedure for using nukes, to prevent nations from bombing a city and claiming it as an accident?

umm... common sense?

don't nukes now a days have guidence moduels on them?

if not make nukes with guidence moduels and/or little black boxes.

Missile technology is based off of space rockets. In that sense you can adjust the power of the rocket thrust and trajectory at take off. There is limited use of fins and motor to 1) aim through the atmosphere and 2) promote a stable flight path, but you dont want to fly your rocket around like a fighter plane. They're too thin skinned and go too fast to stand up to it.
The attempts (and possible success) at defeating anti missle systems is 1) overwhelming the defense by numbers. 2 ) warheads individually are built of sturdier stuff and can be spun and caused to spread out more than the rocket. You have to hit several targets at once in a spreading pattern, sort of like shooting every chunk of shot that comes out of a shot gun blast.

Ballistic vs Cruise missles (http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/weapons/q0223.shtml)

umm... common sense?

don't nukes now a days have guidence moduels on them?

if not make nukes with guidence moduels and/or little black boxes.

I meant more along the lines of Nation A nukes Nation B's biggest city, then A says it was a mistake. Maybe requiring that 1) nations have at least population center maps of their region, and 2) nukes have gps built in so they literally can't target those areas?

gps would work, we could do that or we could do a little black box idea like they use for planes and that way a person could look at the data and see if it was programed to hit the city or a differant place entirly.

I want to restrict equipment to tactical nukes and the "bunker buster" bombs we're hearing about.

For enforcement of not using megaton city obliterating nukes, what can you do besides 1) barring the nation from the role play or 2) declaring war and retaliation against the offender and oh well, come what may. I'd rather make it a region where we dont have obliteration bombs and just write a note erasing any such use.

Current UN resolution is about outlawing discrimination against transexuals and goes on to list in what ways discrimination is not allowed and steps to be taken about the issue. As usual, telegraph your votes in, I will keep you updated every time new votes come in.

Hmm.. perhaps Malinke Traders needs to be a UN Member. For my other nations, the UN is irrelevant/non existant. I oppose the resolution on the grounds that it is not necessary and only panders to a special interest.

I think that the idea of regulating guidance systems a fantstic breakthrough; may be we should also suggest a uniform guidance system also so as to make all balistic, cruise and other bombs and or missles uniform. Thus countries maybe able to re program them in case of an attack on their country launched by an aggresor or invading nation. :( I don't know about you guys but I sure would want to be able to change the target of a missle directed at my country or any of yours.

How about this- ALL missiles (cruise, conventional, nuclear, etc.) would have a tamper-free guidance system built in that transmitted where they were going to a UN control center. Any missile targeting a civillian area could then be either forcibly re-routed or detonated in mid-air.

How about this- ALL missiles (cruise, conventional, nuclear, etc.) would have a tamper-free guidance system built in that transmitted where they were going to a UN control center. Any missile targeting a civillian area could then be either forcibly re-routed or detonated in mid-air.

Sounds good. Maybe, we could add a requirement that all nations register each nuclear weapon with the UN so that the UN has a running total of which nations have what. In this registration, the guidance system you mentioned could be checked.

those both sound like awsome ideas.

I agree, Libre Arbitre. I'll work up a rough draft of the resolution if no one else has any more ideas. (we can still add those in, though.)

Alright, sounds like a good idea. When you finish, post it here so we can have a final look over, before we send it off to the UN. Most proposed resolutions take a while getting the required 6% approval of UN delegates, so the sooner we get it there, the better. Hopefully, it will be a popular resolution.

A resolution to limit the terms of use of nuclear warheads between nations.

The Indian Ocean recognizes that far too many civillians are killed in nuclear attacks.

Therefore, set regulations must be used in the use of nuclear arms.

1) No nation shall knowingly target a civillian population with a nuclear device. Nuclear arms shall be used only against military targets with a limited civillian population nearby (no more than 200 civillians).

2) Any nation that targets civillian populations will be subjected to a full scale invasion by UN forces.

3) To help combat the temptation to misuse nuclear warheads, all nuclear weapons will be registered with the United Nations as to which nation owns them and where they were acquired, as well as warhead yield.

4) All warheads will be equiped with a GPS tracking device to be constantly tracked at a UN facility. Warheads targeting civillian areas will be either remotely disarmed or destroyed in flight.

5) Nuclear arms may be used as EM and ground irradiation devices. Ground irradiation devices, like the conventional use of warheads, are not to be used on a significant civillian population.

It looks good to me.

Malinke Traders votes AYE. The representative also requests information about how many nations forbid the quartering of mobilized armed forces within population centers.

Malinke Traders votes AYE. The representative also requests information about how many nations forbid the quartering of mobilized armed forces within population centers.

I suppose we should add something in there about that. Nations can't use civillians as human shields against a nuclear attack either by putting a strong military force in a city for protection or relocating civillians en masse to military encampments.

that work?

A resolution to limit the terms of use of nuclear warheads between nations.

The Indian Ocean recognizes that far too many civillians are killed in nuclear attacks.

Therefore, set regulations must be used in the use of nuclear arms.

1) No nation shall knowingly target a civillian population with a nuclear device. Nuclear arms shall be used only against military targets with a limited civillian population nearby (no more than 200 civillians).

2) Any nation that targets civillian populations will be subjected to a full scale invasion by UN forces.

3) To help combat the temptation to misuse nuclear warheads, all nuclear weapons will be registered with the United Nations as to which nation owns them and where they were acquired, as well as warhead yield.

4) All warheads will be equiped with a GPS tracking device to be constantly tracked at a UN facility. Warheads targeting civillian areas will be either remotely disarmed or destroyed in flight.

5) Nuclear arms may be used as EM and ground irradiation devices. Ground irradiation devices, like the conventional use of warheads, are not to be used on a significant civillian population.

To help further the protection of civillians, nations may not use civillian populations as human shields for a nuclear attack, either by stationing a large military force inside a city or by placing a significant civillian population on a military encampment.

I was just wondering in number 2 where it states UN forces, what kind will it be, will it be like it is now with a cololition, seeing as the UN has no police unit of it's own?

I was just wondering in number 2 where it states UN forces, what kind will it be, will it be like it is now with a cololition, seeing as the UN has no police unit of it's own?

Yes, that is what is always implied when mentioning UN forces.

Is there something wrong with just requiring nations to give all WMDs to the UN? I mean, the UN as a whole could still choose to retaliate to the use of WMDs on individual UN members, but if a UN nation went rogue, it couldn't use WMDs on anyone.

Is there something wrong with just requiring nations to give all WMDs to the UN? I mean, the UN as a whole could still choose to retaliate to the use of WMDs on individual UN members, but if a UN nation went rogue, it couldn't use WMDs on anyone.

It doesn't say give them to the UN, it says register them with the UN.

I am completely uninterested in your UN proposal, and vehemantly oppose it. I'm simply raising asking why anyone actually needs to be able to make the decision to launch WMDs, as it would surely be far wiser to give the weapons to the UN, and require a UN decision to use them. This would prevent nations turning them on each other because they could, (as they would require the UN to give them the weapons first) and also have the advantage of allowing UN nations without the capacity to produce such weapons protection from non-UN neighbours with them, as the UN could retaliate on their behalf if they were attacked using them.

Having read Draft 2 thouroughly, I will say that it looks very good and I pledge to support it in any way possible. Secondly, in response to the concern raised by Great Punk, I feel it necessary to lay out the reasons for individual nations to retain nuclear weapons.

1) Saying that nations can only use nuclear weapons with UN approval would essentially force nations to join the UN, which is not a good idea. The UN was designed to be voluntary and not compulsory, also, many nations do not like the lack of soverignty that being part of the UN gives them. Second, a requisite UN resolution would subject the process to the intense UN bureaucratic process and thus alert the enemy that nuclear weapons will be used and remove any tactical advantage to using them.

2) In an opinion that I have layed out earlier on the forum, I believe that each nation has the right to use any military technique it desires in a war-time situation against enemy combatants. Forcing nations to rely on a UN resolution to use them would take away this right and essentially allow the UN to dictate international military policy.

3) Such an action by the UN would be contrary to its major pupose. It does not exist to control all aspects of relations between two countries. When two countries are at war, the UNs only goal should be to mediate the conflict, not decide how the war is waged.

Also, Great Punk, if you would kindly stop posting here, as this is a regional forum and I have not seen you in the region. Thank you.

As for the debate, I believe I may not have been clear enough in the resolution. This is not about surrendering nuclear missiles to the UN- the UN only registers and tracks their usage. Strict rules of conduct are also laid out. Nuclear warheads can still be used as a suprise tactic against military-only installations and as EM and radiation devices. The point of this resolution is to slow the rate of civillian casualties.

Actually, this is a forum usable by the whole of NationStates, and seeing as you're discussing a UN issue, I see no good reasons why I shouldn't comment. I also feel that WMDs in general should not be avalabile for use as the fallout can affect civilians many miles away from the impact area. Due to this, and the long-term effects of radiation upon a target site, nuclear weapons should NEVER be used if it can be helped. It isn't right to nuke someone and then say that it's alright because it's a military installation. And anyway, once someone nukes a city because they took out the GPS system, your resolution will have failed in its intent anyway. The only way to garuntee civilians won't get hurt in large numbers by WMDs is to ensure that no-one has them. Period.

I would also like to point out that UN resolutions only affect UN members. Also, there is no case for nuclear weapons to be used to a tactical advantage, as nuking a city gives you a tactical advantage, but is plainly unacceptable. Also, use of nuclear weapons causes fallout that can kill civilians many miles away, and steps should be taken to prevent this, especially in a UN bill to protect civilians.

As I have already pointed out, UN resolutions only affect members, and therefore a ban on nukes only affects UN members, who agreed to this when they joined the UN. You say that the UN should not dictate military policy, but the resolution discussed, (of which you are in favour) attempts to do this by preventing the use of nuclear weapons on civilians.

Finally, I would like to point out that preventing the use of nuclear weapons to kill civilians and preventing the use of nuclear weapons without a UN resolution is only a small difference, and if one amounts to deciding how war is waged rather than mediating the conflict, it is hard to see how the other doesn’t.

Also, would Green Wik be happier if I moved to the Indian Ocean and posted from there?

Great Punk, I'm not sure how many, if any, of the passed UN resolutions you've read, but nukes have been allowed, banned, allowed, banned, etc. This is the only way to strike a balance between allowing them and protecting innocents.

If there are no further additions I will submit the resolution to the United Nations. You have one day to get me any last concerns.

I know that nukes have been banned and unbanned plenty of times, but what makes you think this won't meet the same fate? It does ban the use of nuclear weapons on major population centres, and seeing as some nations are very densely populated and have military installations in their cities anyway, it's hard to see how you could effectively nuke one of these nations under the new proposal. And why do you want to allow people to irradiate settlements with them? That would also cause massive civilian casualties, almost as many as just nuking the settlement in some cases.

anyone else?

As I have said before, I support the entirety of the Resolution Green Wik has proposed, and I believe that all nations who count (those in the region) do so as well. I will post a message on the regional message board urging those nations who have not yet commented to do so soon before the resolution is sent to the UN.

it sounds good to me so far.

Again, if members spot anything in the resolution that needs clarification, bring it to my attention- this should be as specific as we can get it.

Greetings. I've finally joined the forum. Hopefully, I didn't miss too much. Evil computer made things difficult for me. :headbang:

As was noted in a telegram that I sent to Green Wik, I have a few questions and observations about the UN resolution. Now, I'll admit that it is a lot to say from such as small nation as myself and also from one that is not a UN member, but I figure that they have to be addressed somehow in order for this to be an effective resolution.

"...I'm wondering what your GPS thing entails about the details of national security for a nation’s military. Also, this resolution would only effect nations that joined the UN, would it not? Also, how will the population be confirmed before nuclear arms are used? And why so small? For a densely populated nation, that would practically make them impregnable. And, as Luke said, what sort of UN force would be invading? Lastly, perhaps a limit on either the number of nuclear arms allowed to nations or the size of the weapon or both could be addressed. I know I've got a lot to say for being a small nation and also one that's not in the UN, but I think that would complete the resolution a bit more."

Does anyone else find these to be valid points?

As was noted in a telegram that I sent to Green Wik, I have a few questions and observations about the UN resolution. Now, I'll admit that it is a lot to say from such as small nation as myself and also from one that is not a UN member, but I figure that they have to be addressed somehow in order for this to be an effective resolution.

"...I'm wondering what your GPS thing entails about the details of national security for a nation’s military. Also, this resolution would only effect nations that joined the UN, would it not? Also, how will the population be confirmed before nuclear arms are used? And why so small? For a densely populated nation, that would practically make them impregnable. And, as Luke said, what sort of UN force would be invading? Lastly, perhaps a limit on either the number of nuclear arms allowed to nations or the size of the weapon or both could be addressed. I know I've got a lot to say for being a small nation and also one that's not in the UN, but I think that would complete the resolution a bit more."

Does anyone else find these to be valid points?

I am well aware that UN resolutions only affect UN members. Along those same lines, we could only have regional UN members vote. but that's beside the point. The resolution aims to at least make more peaceful UN member states. also, let us not forget that NUCLEAR WEAPONS HAVE MORE THAN ONE USE!!! Nuclear missiles can be used simply for their radiation and fallout to make a region uninhabitable OR can be detonated in the upper atmosphere above a target, thus rendering electronic equipment unusable.

Alright, this new resolution is pretty straight forward, it's like seven lines, and I am feeling waaaaaaaaaay too lazy to summarize it right now. If anyone needs a summary ask me in a day or so. Otherwise, read it and vote, you know the drill. By the way, this resolution is one I helped support before it became a resolution.

With this current resolution i was just wondering what kind of information would be presented to the students and if they would be able to debate certian parts of it?

With this current resolution i was just wondering what kind of information would be presented to the students and if they would be able to debate certian parts of it?

For the type of information, i believe it would be simply like the sexual education part of health class. and presumably, debate would be up, but i honestly don't know what there is to debate about.

If there's nothing else to add I will submit the proposal at 4 pm US central time.

In relation to Kelwar's remarks, I would say that he makes valid points. Any UN resolution only effects UN members, that is the sad truth. However, at last count, there were 32,000 UN members compared to 113,000 total nations. Although this is a minority, the fact remains that if this nuclear resolution passes, it will govern the actions of a significant sector of NationStates, and thus will be significant in its effects, although by no means all-inclusive. As Kelwar correctly points out, densely populated nations might pose a problem. However, lets remember some things about nuclear weapons. They have a HUGE blast radius, but are very expensive to build and drop. Therefore, a nation would only use one if it would give them a large advantage. If a nation has a large population, surgical hits with regular missiles is going to be more effective anyway, and there would be no reason to use a nuclear missile unless you are attacking a military target the size of Area 51, in which instance it would be relatively free of civilians.

Can we assume for a moment that I haven't disagreed with you on anything, haven't argued about anything and haven't been ridiculously stupid in my previous posts. I wish to apologise for being a stupid prat. However, I do feel that there are some issues with the resolution I would like addressed.

Firstly, as this resolution only affects the UN, I feel that it would impose a significant disadvantage on UN nations attempting to fight other non-UN nations using nuclear weapons, as they could only nuke military installations, whilst their enemy could nuke them anywhere and everywhere.

Secondly, I do not feel that the GPS monitoring system is very secure, as it could simply be removed, allowing the missile to be fired wherever the nation pleases, including major cities.

Finally, I feel that nuclear weapons should only be used if there is no alternative, as radiation form their detonation can be lethal to civilians many miles away from the impact, even in neighbouring countries.

I feel that there should be some sort of system requiring nations to have UN approval before launching nuclear weapons, perhaps only being given part of their firing code or something.

Can we assume for a moment that I haven't disagreed with you on anything, haven't argued about anything and haven't been ridiculously stupid in my previous posts. I wish to apologise for being a stupid prat. However, I do feel that there are some issues with the resolution I would like addressed.

Firstly, as this resolution only affects the UN, I feel that it would impose a significant disadvantage on UN nations attempting to fight other non-UN nations using nuclear weapons, as they could only nuke military installations, whilst their enemy could nuke them anywhere and everywhere.

Secondly, I do not feel that the GPS monitoring system is very secure, as it could simply be removed, allowing the missile to be fired wherever the nation pleases, including major cities.

Finally, I feel that nuclear weapons should only be used if there is no alternative, as radiation form their detonation can be lethal to civilians many miles away from the impact, even in neighbouring countries.

I feel that there should be some sort of system requiring nations to have UN approval before launching nuclear weapons, perhaps only being given part of their firing code or something.

You do raise valid concerns, especially the second and third. Let's add this, then:

the GPS system will contain vital parts of the detonator. Hence, tampering with the GPS module will deactivate the warhead. This also would allow UN monitoring stations to deactivate a warhead en route.

as for the third concern, like now, we can only hope on the decency of NationStates leaders not to use nuclear weapons.

While this resolution would allow the use of nuclear weapons, there is still very much a prevalent social stigma against the use of such weapons. Thus, I would assume that most nations who pursue a reasonable foreign policy are not really a threat in the case of discharging nuclear weapons on mass population centers. The fact remains, however, that there are some nations, however much in the minority they may be, that frankly behave in an idiotic manner when it comes to international relations. These are the nations we have to fear. Naturally, most of these are not members of the UN, although some are. Regardless of what the UN does or does not do in regards to nuclear weapons, these nations will still try to acquire nuclear and other WMDs so they can kill the greatest number of civilians possible. All we can do is create an environment that is extremely hostile to the misuse of nuclear weapons and SEVERELY punishes those nations that abuse the technology. This resolution, nor any resolution, dealing with the topic can be perfect in preventing the misuse of nuclear weapons. But the goal here is to reduce the misuse to a very small fraction of the previous number.

A resolution to limit the terms of use of nuclear warheads between nations.

The Indian Ocean recognizes that far too many civillians are killed in nuclear attacks.

Therefore, set regulations must be used in the use of nuclear arms.

1) No nation shall knowingly target a civillian population with a nuclear device. Nuclear arms shall be used only against military targets with a limited civillian population nearby (no more than 200 civillians).

2) Any nation that targets civillian populations will be subjected to a full scale invasion by UN forces.

3) To help combat the temptation to misuse nuclear warheads, all nuclear weapons will be registered with the United Nations as to which nation owns them and where they were acquired, as well as warhead yield.

4) All warheads will be equiped with a GPS tracking device to be constantly tracked at a UN facility. Warheads targeting civillian areas will be either remotely disarmed or destroyed in flight. This GPS module will incorporate vital elements of the detonation device of the warhead. Tampering with or the removal of the GPS will reduce the warhead to a dud.

5) Nuclear arms may be used as EM and ground irradiation devices. Ground irradiation devices, like the conventional use of warheads, are not to be used on a significant civillian population.

To help further the protection of civillians, nations may not use civillian populations as human shields for a nuclear attack, either by stationing a large military force inside a city or by placing a significant civillian population on a military encampment.

We also recognize that while UN resolutions only affect UN members, any step towards reducing deaths by nuclear war is a step in the right direction.

Looks good. Should we give everyone else a few hours before it goes to the UN?

that's what i'm planning on doing.

In relation to Kelwar's remarks, I would say that he makes valid points. Any UN resolution only effects UN members, that is the sad truth. However, at last count, there were 32,000 UN members compared to 113,000 total nations. Although this is a minority, the fact remains that if this nuclear resolution passes, it will govern the actions of a significant sector of NationStates, and thus will be significant in its effects, although by no means all-inclusive. As Kelwar correctly points out, densely populated nations might pose a problem. However, lets remember some things about nuclear weapons. They have a HUGE blast radius, but are very expensive to build and drop. Therefore, a nation would only use one if it would give them a large advantage. If a nation has a large population, surgical hits with regular missiles is going to be more effective anyway, and there would be no reason to use a nuclear missile unless you are attacking a military target the size of Area 51, in which instance it would be relatively free of civilians.

Thankyou, Libre. That was more or less the insight I was looking for. Also, as you noted, this would only affect UN members, but that's still near 1/4 of the NationStates globe. And I agree that any step to minimze the damaging effects of radiation in terms of the death toll, resulting genetic deformities, and the environmental impact even after the the initial blast is a step in the right direction. It might not be a very large step, but it's a step in the right direction and for now it's the best we've got. I'm satisfied with the resolution as it stands.

The resolution has been submitted under the name of "nuclear safeguards". voting ends tuesday.

The resolution has been submitted under the name of "nuclear safeguards". voting ends tuesday.

Tuesday, are you sure that we will have enough endorsements by then?

all of the proposals are given a set voting end. I can only hope we'll have enough. If it is an exact time though, voting should end late tuesday.

I see. I was not aware of that. However, seeing that we have 8 endorsements already, we might make the deadline. I would anticipate that a good number more will come tonight when more people are online. We can only hope I guess.

I think the fact that we've gotten 8 endorsements already should be considered a victory in itself. We're a rather small region and we've had little involvement in the UN before. The fact that we're rather unknown in the grand scheme of things and we managed to get endorsements from people not from this region, at least in my book, is a triumph.

The fact that we have even those 8 is a victory considering the very rough early reception it got in the forums. However, there is some support.

Well, we're up to nine. Things are looking a bit better. Oh, do you think we should have it be "nucular", sorta like the president says it? :headbang:

As kelwar expertly pointed out, these smileys are rather aggressive.
:headbang:
:gundge:
:sniper:
:mp5:
:upyours:

trippy!

seriously though. Hopefully, as resolutions get eliminated and ours moves up, it will get more votes (i'm not sure many delegates dig through all 10 pages.)

They don't. It just isn't worth doing.

i think that if it does get to the floor that it will pass.

:headbang: :mp5: :gundge:

We now have 13 endoresements! 13! When I went to bed last night, we only had 9, and now we're up to 13. I think we have moved up to page 6 now. :) :) :) :) :)

Thst is good. The only problem I can see is if people don't vote for it because it would stop them randomly nuking each other.

That's true. I never actually knew you could do that, as NationStates never really stressed the warfare part. Still, I think there'd be enough nations concerned either environmentally or militarily or both that would want to support it.

Nuking is purely Role-Playing. A lot of RPers would like to be able to do what they want without flouting UN regulations though.

Yeah, to be perfectly honest, I'm suprised that some of the arms limitations resolutions that have come through the UN to date have past because RPers generally do oppose them.

We've made it up to 14, last I checked. I'm having doubts on this passing the proposal stage, as I'm sure you all are. Should we think about retooling this current resolution at this time or would we be better off finding a new resolution to propose and constructing that?

this thing's taking more flak than i thought, but at least we learned how this stuff works.

What sort of flak is this thing taking?

What sort of flak is this thing taking?

the bad kind. a lot of people seem to think it's just plain a bad idea, while others support it. I'm trying to fight for it in the forum.

After weeks of work, the government of Green Wik has managed to successfully un-do its sudden plunge into a civil nightmare like that of George Orwell's 1984 and back into it's original, intended society of civil and political freedoms. The once exiled Prime Minister has been reinstated as the nation's political leader and hopes to continue the social reforms that have swept the nation since the creation of South Green Wik.

The government of Kelwar seems to be fairing nicely. There's a small board of lesser lords that are currently ruling while the ruling lord is a bit under the weather and does not wish to be disturbed. The board currently is ruling to the satisfaction of the populace and the ruling lord, but they will soon be dispanded and sent back to their states to govern there once he recuperates. All should be proceding as before.

As for the current proposed resolution, 28 approval votes is far more than what I would have predicted it. Wik must be doing something right in the forum, I guess. It's still far short of what we need to get it to the floor, but it's not bad for a first attempt at one of these things. :eek:

If we wre to go back to the resolution for a second, may I suggest a massive (and biased) advertising campaign might be a brilliant solution to all our problems. Or you could TG all delegates and tell them to vote for your resolution.

If we wre to go back to the resolution for a second, may I suggest a massive (and biased) advertising campaign might be a brilliant solution to all our problems. Or you could TG all delegates and tell them to vote for your resolution.

too late, we lost already. Time to work it over and put it in a few days later (the forum was actually kind of helpful).

While we have a brief break in the action, I would like to preface the upcoming UN resolution, Repeal of Protection of Dolphins with a few remarks. I would urge all nations to support this resolution. The passage of the Protection of Dolphins represents an infraction of national soverignty of the worst kind immaginable. Each nation should be able to choose its own environmental policy to a point. The protection of Dolphins resolution presents no comprehensive legislation, since it only protects one species and is outside of the goal of the UN. The UN was founded as a means by which to control international politics and maintain peace. The dolphin resolution does none of this, and I would urge its repeal.

Wik, since you said the forum was helpful, what sort of things did you take away from it? That all might be useful to the rest of us in aiding the reconstruction of the proposal. Anyone have any insights about the performance this time or any modifications we should make at this time?

As for the dolphin resolution, Libre, I think that could just be left alone and remain as is.

While I agree the protect dolphins act should be repealed, i only supports it repealing if a more widespread protection act is put in its place. open waters (not closed lakes) are like the atmosphere, or, like a smoking and non-smoking section in the same room. the problems and pollution can spread easily to one part and another.

And Kelwar, here's your thread:

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=439063

I was hoping you could sum it up for me...

I can summarize UN proposals and regulations, but no way i can sum up a thread with that many arguments.

Next time, I think we should have a more piecemeal resolution. Some of the opposition to the Nuclear Armaments Resolution centered on the sweeping changes that it proposed.

I agree with Libre Arbitre. A lot of what I noticed was the concern for national security with the GPS system, what was meant by "near", how the 200 person limit made some nations impossible to nuke, and what we meant by UN forces. I also noted that many thought that we wanted to ban nuclear weapons all together and that a few nations said that they'd support banning nuclear weapons from being a first strike option. As such, here are my suggestions based on what I observed. Feel free to torch them as you please.

1) Remove the GPS System clause completely, as it's a concern to national security. This will solve a good number of our problems.

2) Either define what is meant by "near", or eliminate that clause. I find eliminating that clause to be the better option.

3) Expand the 200 person limit significantly or eliminate that clause. Once again, I find that this would be better if it was eliminated.

4) Define "UN Forces". Perhaps it should be something like "a coalition of member states that will be given UN authority to launch a counter-offensive" or maybe something more specific. Or, if not that, then maybe give the right for nations to place economic sanctions against a nation that violates the resolution.

5) Limit the registration to the developement of new weapons, and only have it be just a database of how many new weapons are in a given nation. and whatsize of a warhead they carry, if any registration is to be suggested. All exhisting weapons will be exempt from this. This is purely designed to decrease the arms build up.

6) Propose eliminating the use of nuclear weapons as a first strike option when detonated on the ground, but leave the option of using one as an EM device or irradiation device open. Also, specifically mention that this does not ban the use of nuclear weapons, but is designed to limit their use slightly. Lastly, leave open the option of using a nuclear device in retaliation of a nuclear attack, even if it would be a first strike weapon.

There are also some minor editing tips that were given that I did not include. The suggestions I proposed will ultimately decrease the strength of what we wanted for the resolution significantly, but I believe that it may end up gathering a bit more support than before. It's a gurantee that there will be disatisified nations, but perhaps we can limit the amount of them this time while still taking a step towards limiting the use of nuclear devices. Also, with some advertising, perhaps we can bring awareness to this proposal, especially to the smaller regions that probably are not quite as active. Anyway, these are just suggestions based upon what I read. Comment on them as you wish.

that's more or less how i'd sum up the thread.

1) Remove the GPS System clause completely, as it's a concern to national security. This will solve a good number of our problems.
Agreed. Implementation of this clause was always going to be a problem anyway.

2) Either define what is meant by "near", or eliminate that clause. I find eliminating that clause to be the better option.
This clause can be rendered completely superfluous if we extend and clarify the 200 person clause.

3) Expand the 200 person limit significantly or eliminate that clause. Once again, I find that this would be better if it was eliminated.
I would favor a drastic revision of this clause to read something like: "No nuclear weapon shall be detonated in an area where the immediate blast radius is over 30% urban or with the clear intention of killing civilians as opposed to non-civilian forces.

4) Define "UN Forces". Perhaps it should be something like "a coalition of member states that will be given UN authority to launch a counter-offensive" or maybe something more specific. Or, if not that, then maybe give the right for nations to place economic sanctions against a nation that violates the resolution.
This is a sticking point that I really have no answer for at present. According to the UN offices, no resolution can be passed that calls for a UN invasion force because it does not have one. If we could leave it as is, that would be the prefered option, but it doesn't appear as though we can, so I guess tough economic sanctions are the next best thing.

5) Limit the registration to the developement of new weapons, and only have it be just a database of how many new weapons are in a given nation. and whatsize of a warhead they carry, if any registration is to be suggested. All exhisting weapons will be exempt from this. This is purely designed to decrease the arms build up.
I wouldn't change this clause, because I don't think it will be much of a sticking point if the GPS clause is removed. The only request here is for registration, which does not necessarily lead to action.

6) Propose eliminating the use of nuclear weapons as a first strike option when detonated on the ground, but leave the option of using one as an EM device or irradiation device open. Also, specifically mention that this does not ban the use of nuclear weapons, but is designed to limit their use slightly. Lastly, leave open the option of using a nuclear device in retaliation of a nuclear attack, even if it would be a first strike weapon.

We can urge this, but we do not have the means to force nations to do this. It may also be helpful to define nuclear weapon to begin with, and also EM device and irradiation device so the resolution does not appear fuzzy.

Those are my thoughts on the matter right now, but if someone eventually proposes concrete changes, I may have something to add.

I see your point on a lot of these. What I envisioned the registration doing was to limit the arms race as others would know how many weapons you had and what they were in terms of size. As for the "UN Forces", it could just state that member nations could launch an attack on behalf of the attacked nation with UN backing. I realize that there really is no UN force of any sort. Economic sanctions is still probably the better option. The size of the target as far as being a percentage of urban area seems like a good way to look at it. That may be a little more lenient. Defining what "irradiation" and "EM" devices are would be a good idea, one that I overlooked and I'm glad someone caught. Lastly, we could urge eliminating nuclear weapons as a first strike device. Isn't that what this really is, though? Just a big suggestion? It's rather easy to defy the UN, and those RPers that wanted to could. And they're the ones we fear the most as far as voting goes. The precedent has been set in real life before, so why not do the same in the virtual world? Overall, I think we seem to be on the right track with this thing right now and this may be a bit easier to push through. In the long run, if we get a larger support basis the second time around I'd still call that a victory on our part even if this doesn't make the floor. We'd at least know we're doing something right.

For what it's worth, UN Forces is in fact the used term. We never hear of 'a coalition of troops under UN control doing peacekeeping work'. its' always, 'UN peacekeeping forces'. If anyone can legeitemately prove this wrong i'll step down.

It's not that I'm saying you're wrong, it's that "UN Forces" got attacked a few times by people, so I figured that a different expression could be used.

I think in order to continue this we need to have a revised draft of the resolution.

I think we should give it a rest for a bit, and see if any of the other nuclear arms regulation proposals make it through.

I agree. We should at least observe the fate of a proposal known as the WMD Treaty (or something like that. It's currently on page 11, I believe). It's remarkabley close to what we seem to be aiming for. Perhaps it can show us if there's anything else that we need to be covering.

The Holy Empire of Kelwar has erupted into civil war. A split that occured in the council that had been leading Kelwar while the Emperor was ill has now lead to violence when a disgruntled lord had his army march on a neighboring town. The rebels are converging their troops near the Western Border in preparation for an attack on the capital. A legion of Imperial troops have been ordered to march out and meet them half way. The remainder prepare for the capital to be put under siege.

News of the recent turmoil has sent the Green Wikian armed forces to a state of high alert, in the event that violence spills across the border. Green Wik officials are prepared to uphold their reputation for compassion as they ready border refugee camps. The Prime Minister has declined comment on the situation.

The recent news of the civil war has spurred God007's economy and military and the military is preparing to help Kelwar and Wik in anyway possible. This is all the Lord had to say on this matter at the moment.

Can I send in paratroopers to assassinate the rebel leader for you?

um....is anyone else having problems logging in?

yea, i think everyone's having that problem. :headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang:

The Imperial government of Kelwar has refused the offers of foreign aid in this conflict. "This conflict is our own," said an unnamed spokesperson for the Emperor," and we shall solve it on our own. Kelwar has never called for foreign aid. All we ask is that the conflict is resolved quickly and very little blood is spilled." For the time being, that is how things are going. The bulk of rebel forces and Imperial forces have encamped somewhere that's about halfway between the Western Border and the capital, although other reports say that the Imperial troops have gone two-thirds of the way with little or no resistence. There has been some minor conflict by small patrols, but as of yet there are no reports of any dead or wounded. As the harsh Kelwarian winter approaches, neither army seems to be willing to take immediate action. While many in the Imperial army say they are satisfied and supplied enough to just wait out the approaching winter and starve the rebels into submission, rebel troops may just have the resolve to keep on fighting. "We won't surrender till the last of us our dead." said a rebel messenger after refusing to give his name. "They underestimate us, both in our will to fight and in our means to do so. When this is through, Kelwar will be reformed. Either the government will change, or we will change it. And if we change it, it shall be through their blood." For now, though, both armies seem content to sit and wait for either an oppurtune time or for the other to make concessions.

The Green Wik Prime Minister issued a statement today denouncing the recent violence in Kelwar. "This is the sort of incident that needs to be stopped from escalating at all costs. Violence will never solve anything, especially in a possible civil war." Green Wik has offered to moderate peace talks between the warring factions.

To those who had problems logging in yesterday: The problems were the result of a massive system failure by the NationStates main server. All changes to nations that occured 20 hours before the crash has been undone, and if things in your nation don't seem quite right, this is why. However, everything is back to normal now.

News of the apparent civil war in Kelwar has reached the capital city of Libre Arbitre where most of the members of governmnet have come back from a recent holiday these past few days. The Free Land Party, which has the majority in the nation, has released a memo urging an end to the violence. However, for the first time in the nation's history, a new party has arrisen which promises to unseat the Free Land Party in the upcomming Parliamentary elections. This, the Minarchy Party, has called the violence "neccessary to unseat the meddlesome government". Leading political analysts see this support of the Kelwar militants as a possible precursor to a Libre Arbitre revolution in which the Minarchy Party could possibly unseat the Free Land Party which has been in power for three months.

"I wish to combat the notion that any violence has yet broken out. There are no reports of any casualties whatsoever. Following in great tradition, as have so many before us, we are giving the rebels ample time to give us their terms of surrender. During this time, as other nations might not know, it is customary to send messengers back and forth to taunt the opposing army and to try to end the conflict with as little bloodshed as possible. We would also like to recognize the compassion of Green Wik with open arms as they prepare to aid any refugees that may flee to their border. We will be prepared to rehouse any refugees that fled to Green Wik during the conflict once it is finally resolved. Lastly, we would also like to recognize the request made by the government of Libre Arbitre, but unfortunately a resolve is not near in sight. But we will try to end this as quickly as we can. The government of Kelwar would also like to pledge their aid to help end hostilities should any conflict arise in Libre Arbitre as it has here."

You can fly refugees out to Infidels and Punks and The Great Punk if you like.

:mp5: :sniper: :)

The refugees also have the option to flee to God007 if they wish, seeing as before the civil war that our two nations were of the same mind, according to the un anyway.

A formal invitation for a peace talk goes out to the faction leaders in Kelwar. Green Wik will do our best to moderate the talks. Other regional nations are welcome as observers.

I would like to come, and i'll bring some cookies too!

We accept Green Wiks offer to mediate peace talks at this time.

I could provide tea and biscuits. (possibly some chocolate cake too, if you ask nicely) The presence of luxuries might persuade the rebels that they want to eat rather than fight.

:mp5: :sniper:
:gundge: :gundge:

Sorry about that, it's just that we like posting those things just to see them.

The minority party, Minarchy, has demanded a parliamentary election this week, say key government insiders. It is not yet clear what the party will aim to accomplish yet during this election, but as party heads from the Free Land Party return from a brief vacation, they express skepticism that they will loose any spots in parliament.

Due to a typhoon approaching Green Wik fast, the peace talks will begin as soon as both Kelwar delegates are ready. All observers will please refrain from making comments until the talks are over. Violaters will be removed by force.

The peace talks that were to be underway shortly have come to a close before they even began when a bomb, designed to assassinate the Emperor of Kelwar, was detonated killing 4 people and leaving 7 wounded. The Emperor remains unhurt, but has now taken a more stern resolve on the conflict. He has refused to comment at this time, but things now appear more grim than they have before. Also, small and isolated pockets of violence have erupted in various cities when members of a radical political group openly attacked police officers and other government workers. No one was killed, although a few government workers were wounded and two of the agressors recieved broken hands from punching police officers and a car windshield. All attackers were, for the most part, subdued quickly before any real damage could be done.

Following news of the Kelwar bombing, security surrounding the conference center has been heightened significantly. Despite the security concerns, Green Wik's borders remain open to the refugees coming across the border. The Prime minister has remarked that especially in times of crisis, someone must remain open for those who no longer have homes. The peace talks are expected to start as planned.

The peace talks between the insurgents in Kelwar and the Imperial government are now underway. With the restructuring of society and government back into its original feudalistic hierarchy, Kelwar has begun to return to its original state of Iron Fist Consumerism. Some minor concessions on the part of the Imperial government, mainly a tax break of about 3% and reinstating some key members of the rebellion back into government positions and also granting them the title of nobility along with a small estate, has ultimately brought an end to the conflict. The members of the ruling council that governed while the Emperor was ill and were ultimately responsible for the rebellion have been imprisoned and are now facing charges of treason. Already, three of those responsible have been found guilty and executed, their estates burned, and their families exiled. These three were determined to be the ring-leaders, and therefore the most dangerous.

That's nice. (the executions, I mean)

such an un-dramatic end. oh well, such is that.

Those prisoners that were held on charges of treason have been pardoned and their estates and titles have been restored. One of them, it is rumored, has been made either a general in the army or put in charge of the nation's treasury.

Following today's successful peace talks in Ice Lake, it appears peace has fallen over the nation of Kelwar. However, Green Wik's Prime Minister issued a statement today warning that such a sudden and drastic peace, not to mention the overly publicized executions and even the promoting of a rebel leader, should not be taken lightly. Green Wik remains on alert and has no plans to release refugees in the near future, believing Kelwar to still be an unsafe area.

Green Wik, you insult my nation. Under Kelwar law, the penalty for treason is death. Thusly, all those that partook in the rebellion should have been executed. It was a great display of mercy that so many were allowed to live and only those that were found to have been the original spark executed. As for this "rebel leader", he is a very clever and resourceful man whose only wrong was honoring an alliance between families that was forged many years ago. Yes, he owed his allegiance to the state, but he was also bound by blood to this other. Now that his ally is slain, he should have no reason to abandon his post or his estate that he has been granted. Perhaps some day the family of this leader, and maybe even the others, will be allowed to return to Kelwar and will be pardoned of the dishonor that they brought unto their houses. As for the refugees, keep them at your discretion. Should you decide to allow them back into Kelwar, we shall be ready to assist them in returning to their homes.

Yesterday's parliamentary elections in Libre Arbitre appear to have stirred revolutionary movement. As voters went to the polls, they were disrupted by a massive march on the capital directed by the minority party, Minarchy. Some of the nation's major highways were completely blocked with people. Through the tummult, voters showed their solidarity in opposition to the dominant Free Land party by electing 75 members of the Minarchy party to positions on the nation's 100 member parliament. With the Free Land party registering huge losses, the new Minarchy party will take office this morning. The angry marches of yesterday have turned triumphant as new Minarchy politicians march through the streets on the way to a massive Oath of Office ceremony. The Minarchy Party spokesman helped to define the party's main goal this morning in a press release. "Voters have shown that they believe in minimal governmnet and the freedom to live free of taxation and governmnetal interferance. The Minarchy party will affirm this and vows to slash the size of the federal government in half..."

Green Wik continues to be on the guard for any near-by trouble following the Kelwar incidents and now Libre Arbitre's own civil unrest. The Green Wik prime minister has traded assurances with the Council members from the autonomous province of South Green Wik.

The Minarchy of Libre Arbitre stresses, as a matter of diplomacy, that yesterday's "revolution" was bloodless and conducted in the spirit of democracy. Although protesters continue to line the street, trade with the nation has resumed and the transition between parties has been for the most part swift. Police have not made any arrests in connection to the political revolution, but continue to be vigilant.

Green Wik's Prime Minister stated in a press release today that no insult was meant towards neighboring nations by previous remarks. All statements regarding the nations of Kelwar and Libre Arbitre were merely observatory in nature and were made as comments of regional status.

Green Wik air forces have scrambled early this morning. The Wikian government, while usually open to the press, has refused to comment on the situation.

The Lord has issued a statment to the press conserning the military.

"As of now, with all the unrest in the region, citing the upheval in Kelwar and Libre, the military shall be on standby incase anyone in the region needs military support and help. The aid shelters shall also be open in case any of the nations need help with supporting refugees. That is all at this time, thank you for listening and have a great day!"

The Green Wik prime minister has elaborated more on the incident over Green Wik, but not by much. He has been quoted as saying that 'a potentially grave danger threatens the entire region, not just our individual nations.' As this is a matter of security, coded messages have been sent to local leaders.

The Minarchy Party commented today that will consent to involvement in negotiations regarding this "regional problem" when the Government of Green Wik becomes more specific regarding the threat.

Due to security issues, the government of Green Wik has talked personally to prominent regional leaders. Word has been leaked, however, that this is believed to be an opening salvo in an invasion. Wikian air forces scrambled to intercept a force of fighter/bomber aircraft of unknown origin.

Green Wik has reported no further incursions into its airspace, although the nation is still on high alert for the time being. The government has rejected Kelwar's advice as 'barbaric'.

In Green Wik, an assassination attempt has left the Prime Minister slightly wounded, and he will be unavailable for commenting for some time. The gunman was immediately shot himself by nearby guards.

A peaceful revolution has occured in Kelwar when, by mandate of the Emperor, tradition was broken and women became the "breadwinners" and men stayed home to be "house husbands". Provisions have been made to allow the Emperor to remain in power until a suitable Empress has been found to govern the matriarchal feudalistic lands of Kelwar, at which point the Emperor will merely play second-fiddle Until then, the Emperor still maintains control of the various fiefdoms and provinces that constitute the Empire, thus leading to little or no tumult from such a drastic change of society. More news regarding this situation, specifically the progress of finding someone to reign as Empress, is expected to come.

mmkay then. does anyone know about the "average" size for a nuclear warhead? maybe we can make a proposal that would limit them in size but not use.

A peaceful revolution has occured in Kelwar when, by mandate of the Emperor, tradition was broken and women became the "breadwinners" and men stayed home to be "house husbands". Provisions have been made to allow the Emperor to remain in power until a suitable Empress has been found to govern the matriarchal feudalistic lands of Kelwar, at which point the Emperor will merely play second-fiddle Until then, the Emperor still maintains control of the various fiefdoms and provinces that constitute the Empire, thus leading to little or no tumult from such a drastic change of society. More news regarding this situation, specifically the progress of finding someone to reign as Empress, is expected to come.

OOC: heh, he's the empress' biatch. ^_^ i kid.

mmkay then. does anyone know about the "average" size for a nuclear warhead? maybe we can make a proposal that would limit them in size but not use.

Off hand, I do not but that would be a good idea if we could find out what the average might be and get a consensus on what should be legal. If we are going to bring this proposal up agian, I think simplicity is going to be the key. Also, we shouldn't impose overly restrictive limits because the trend seems to be that resolutions banning various weapons are opposed. I noted the fact that "Ban Chemical Weapons" was recently repealed and several proposals to re-ban them were defeated soundly before they reached the floor.

Fellow members of the Indian Ocean:

I have noted recently that there are many passed UN resolutions which are in need of repeal for one or more of the following reasons:
1) Their basic construction is archaic and as such no longer are effective
2) They are overly vague and therefore can be interpreted in multiple ways
3) They infringe on national soverignty and the rights of governments
4) Their actions are generally bad for the NS world

Because of this, I have embarked upon a crusade to begin to push for repeals of certain resolutions. I have begun my quest with the earliest, most of which are simply archaic or too vague to be of any use and will work up the list. My current list of resolutions to be repealed is as follows:

#2- Scientific Freedom
#13- Mandatory Recycling
#21- Fair Trial
#23- Replanting Trees
#24- Metric System
I have only analysed up to Resolution #25 so far, but this list will get longer. In the meantime, I would ask fellow regional members to review these resolutions and let me know their feelings on repealing them. I will also be happy to provide my justification for any who ask.

Off hand, I do not but that would be a good idea if we could find out what the average might be and get a consensus on what should be legal. If we are going to bring this proposal up agian, I think simplicity is going to be the key. Also, we shouldn't impose overly restrictive limits because the trend seems to be that resolutions banning various weapons are opposed. I noted the fact that "Ban Chemical Weapons" was recently repealed and several proposals to re-ban them were defeated soundly before they reached the floor.

I'm trying to make it simpler, namely, this would just limit size, not use in any way. i figure that's doable.

Also, can you let us know which resolutions you're trying to clear up? it'd be nice for everyone to do this collectively.

I am going to concentrate on repeal of older resolutions first. At present, I will concentrate on the five that I posted in my first post. I should have rough drafts of the repeals to offer up for debate soon.

Dearly beloved, we are gathered here today to lay to rest the New Indian Ocean Regional forum, which, after a vibrant youth, faded out of favor and finds itself in disuse at the ripe age of 165 posts.

*plays bagpipes and taps* :( :(

Dearly beloved, we are gathered here today to lay to rest the New Indian Ocean Regional forum, which, after a vibrant youth, faded out of favor and finds itself in disuse at the ripe age of 165 posts.

What does that mean?

Dearly beloved, we are gathered here today to lay to rest the New Indian Ocean Regional forum, which, after a vibrant youth, faded out of favor and finds itself in disuse at the ripe age of 165 posts.

Yeah, what is that supposed to mean? The forum's not dead, it's just that we really haven't had anything newsworthy recently. Libre Arbitre is still working on the resolution drafts, I'm assuming. If they're not done, I doubt anything else really will be posted. Also, we don't have any proposal that we're trying to push through. If you really want news, I went and bought 6 used books from the library yesturday for about $2.36 (5 paperbacks and 1 hardcover). Is that news enough? As for my nation specifically, things are running smoothly. I'm fairly strong economically, so that's all fine and dandy.

...you still won't get satanic messages. i was just being sarcastic that it hadn't been used in several weeks. carry on.

The first proposal to ever come forth from Kelwar, and quite possibly the region's second, has finally been submitted. "Mandatory Warning Labels", a proposal designed to further the trend started with "Mandatory Food Labels", has been submitted to the UN floor and currently lies on page 14 of the proposals. Any criticisms or insights regarding this proposal are welcomed.

Recently, there have been a significant number of proposed repeals that have accumulated within the UN proposal forum. Because of this, I have waited to submit my proposals so they wouldn't get lost among the clutter. Also, I have been watching the sucess of various repeals closely, specifically "The Metric System", which is currently in need of support. However, following is a rough proposal for a repeal of Scientific Freedom.

"Repeal Scientific Freedom" Draft One:

Observing that the resolution "Scientific Freedom" employs numerous examples of language that is so overly vague that it has lost meaning such as "peaceful and respectable scientists", and fruther

Observing that the resolution's claims of "technology will move forward and trade will increase" are completely unsubstantiated by the present resolution, and

Observing that no specific definition is given of what constitutes "Scientific Freedom" is given by the authors of the resolution,

It can be concluded that this resolution serves no purpose at present, may that resolution be hereby repealed.

This is not a UN proposal, but merely one I thought up that might make the region a bit better. Perhaps we should convene and maintain a formal regional counsel- I know that we already bounce ideas off of each other, but maybe we should each have a specific role. This could go along the lines of: UN Delegate, UN advisor (would help with beurocratic (sp?) matters and UN proposals), Domestic Advisor (deal with regional problems, settle disputes between nations), and maybe other posts as well. I think electing these offices would be a bit time consuming, perhaps they should be hand-picked by the UN delegate, maybe every 20 days or so?

Sounds interesting. As of yet, I'm not sure if all that is neccessary. I think we can function rather efficiently in the same manner that we have. That way, people can also maintain their own political agendas (except for the delegate. Some concessions are made for leading a region) while still partaking in regional politics. Plus, before we do any of that, we should probably resolve the issue of when we are having elections and how we're doing that. I've started a vote. And one last thought. Perhaps the delegate can chose to have a cabinet, and if so then hand pick who is on it. To keep from creating an environment where those loyal are rewarded, perhaps other nations should nominate people for the positions offered by the delegate who then chooses for that spot. Should that occur, they won't be allowed to say "none of the above" if they don't like the candidates as they're working for the good of the region and still have to answer to the people there.

hmm, i like that. alright, then. so whoever the new delegate is gets the option to pick a cabinet?

Precisely. They have the option of whether they have a cabinet or not. If they want one, they can decide how it's constructed. So as to expediate the voting process and get our region politically active again, perhaps instead of having other regions nominate the positions, the delegate can nominate people for the positions. Once the nomination is given, the nation can choose to accept or decline. If they accept and two nations vote against their taking of office within a set time table, the nomination is revoked. This will also avoid loyalty issues in which those that help the delegate get positions of power (this has been done before. Read in your history book the parts about Andrew Jackson and his cabinet).

In an interesting turn of events today, the Emperor of Kelwar has decided to step down, converting the magnificent Empire into a Holy Republic. He has not withdrawn from politics completely. The government has been reconstructed into a Holy Republic in which the former Emperor now sits as head of the Senate and fashions himself as the Supreme Chancellor. Some political unrest has resulted from this shift, but the lands should once again become stable with time.

The Green Wik Government has granted all of its provinces and regions full rights of self-government to be assembled into a federation. A new constitution and flag are being worked on currently. It is unclear whether or not the change in structure will affect the Federation's policies as it transitions from a republic.

ELECTION UPDATE

Rules for the debate will be posted on the 6th as soon as I get a chance to post them. Here is what I have so far:

Day 1- Candidates will telegram thier platforms to Green Wik, and both will be posted at the same time.
Candidates will be debating on the following issues:
- Platforms
- Views on social issues, such as welfare and human rights
- Any policy changes

Odds are these issues will be brought on one a day to give candidates ample time to chose thier remarks.

Thank you Wik for the update. Do you have a topic to be "debated" on the fourth day, or is that just going to be a sort of "candidates choice"?

Most likely. So here we go:

Debate topics will be posted the day before the topic takes place (because i don't know when/if i can get on in time every day).

So, seeing as how the debates will start tomorrow, will the delegates please send me your platform statements, which will be reposted sometime tomorrow.

As the official election process is about to get underway, I would like to wish God007 good luck.

Now, I'm not saying we'll have any trouble, but just to be safe, I'll spell out some etiquette for the candidates for the debates.

1) stick to the topic as much as possible! You have four days, so no need to get off-topic.

2) Candidates will refrain from personal attacks on your opponent- no one cares what you did to their mother.

3) Have all debating comments finished by the time the next topic is announced, tomorrow around 10 PM U.S. central time.

4) Have fun, and best wishes to both of the candidates.

Lost post, deal with it. Candidates will be free for the next day to answer questions about and clarify their platforms.

Kelwar’s Platform:

The platform of Kelwar focuses primarily on the political activity of the nations in the region, and then on the Indian Ocean region amongst all others within the UN. Of primary concern when entering office will be voter participation, especially in the votes as to what view the delegate shall be taking. As delegate, I hope to increase voter participation and foster a more politically active region. Of almost equal importance, and as a means to increase political activity, is the production of proposals. Within the 60 day term of Green Wik, only two proposals were ever submitted, both of which were defeated. I would like to see this number increase significantly. In order to accomplish this, I will be setting up a cabinet that is designed to aid in the proposal writing process and in the editing process for all nations (should they choose to use it) and also to aid in the publicizing of proposals. This is necessary as the two previous proposals will most likely be submitted again, and, as may be common knowledge, Libre Arbitre is crafting a set of various repeals that will be sent through and any aid in that realm will be a great asset. Lastly, I shall have the aid of my cabinet to assist me in looking over the UN proposals (as well as any regions that find a proposal of particular interest). If any proposals are found to be of particular interest, I shall bring it to the attention of the region and then I shall act accordingly. Also, through the regular examining of proposals I hope to increase contact with other regions and possibly our population as well. During Green Wik’s term as delegate, I have contacted several regions during the time period when proposals were being submitted and I have forged an alliance with the Whissssssscat Islands region. Since then they have aided in the crafting of some proposals, have alerted me of others, and have also essentially guaranteed me their vote on the proposals we submit. As delegate, I look to cement other such allegiances within the Nation States world.

God007:

I would like to be UN delegate for the Indian Ocean Region, because, I feel that I have experience. I attended a week long “camp” sponsored by the Wisconsin American Legion where me and close to 800 others created the 51st state. I was a senator, so I know how the US government system works and runs, and since the UN is based upon the same system, I feel that I would be a good choice.

I would run things in a democratic nature and post in the region board when a new UN resolution comes up for debate, It would contain a list of what the UN is debating, and an overview of what it states. I would then ask you to vote and I would then vote how the majority rules.

The goals that I would like to see accomplished in my term in office is higher regional activity, a greater turn out of nations on election days, a higher number of nations joining the region, both UN and rouge nations, and an overall increase in the friendliness of the nations towards one another in the region.

This is a run down of what I will do if I am appointed your UN delegate, as you can see I am very well qualified and I would appreciate your votes.

Not that this is a personal attack on God007, but you have some grammar issues to adjust before anyone elects you for delegate.

1) “Me” is not a subject.
...where me and close to 800 others created the 51st state.
It should read “…where close to 800 senators and I created the 51st state.”

2) Commas are not periods. They do not join independent clauses without the proper conjunctions.
...up for debate, It would contain a list of what the ...This is a run down of what I will do if I am appointed your UN delegate, as you can see I am very well qualified and I would appreciate your votes...
Try using a semi-colon, a coordinate conjunction with a comma, a semi-colon with a conjunctive adverb and then a comma, or a period there.

3) "Is" is not plural.
[my]...goals...is higher regional activity, a greater turn out of nations on election days, a higher number of nations joining the region, both UN and rouge nations, and an overall increase in the friendliness of the nations towards one another in the region
That should be "are higher". You've got more than one goal. If you want to check, try saying it to yourself. Which sounds better: “My goals is…” or “My goals are…”?

4) Subordinate clauses need to be set off from the sentence with a comma if they come at the beginning of a sentence.
This is a run down of what I will do if I am appointed your UN delegate, as you can see I am very well qualified and I would appreciate your votes.
"As you can see" needs to have a comma following it. Also, as I said before, that phrase marks the beginning of a new dependant clause and needs to be set off from the other sentence.

5) Use parenthesis to set off other bits of side information.
...a higher number of nations joining the region, both UN and rouge nations,...
Try "...a higher number of nations joining the region (both UN and rogue)." You also don't need to state "nations" twice, as we already know what you're talking about. That's just redundant.

If anything, God007, at least proof read your posts or, more importantly, your proposals that you wish to submit to the UN. You could take things a step further and try placing your proposal in a word processor to catch your mistakes as well. Taking that extra step to make sure your spelling is decent makes the piece look all the more professional.

As for anyone participating in the election, bare in mind that there have been resolutions that have been repealed and proposals that did not make it to the floor just because they were poorly worded or, as one nation put it, their grammar was so atrocious it was a "slap in the face" of the UN. Please keep that in mind when choosing a candidate.

Lastly, in regards to defending my own platform, I am not a novice with the functioning of the UN or the American government, or of several other forms of government for that matter. I, too, have had the opportunity to attend seminars about the functions of the UN in world affairs and the functioning of the government of the United States as well as visiting various government establishments at the state level both locally in Wisconsin and across the United States. In fact, I had to decline a trip to the United Nations which would have included interviewing various delegates as I will be going to Germany as an exchange student. Most recently, I was in Philadelphia and toured the original capital of the United States and was informed of the politics of the time as well as how the state of Pennsylvania governs itself now.

I do proof read my posts, and the article was in a word document. All of us are humans and have different ways of posting and talking, you don't have to get on my case about it.

Even if i do make mistakes again that's why we have the council, which I will also implement also if i do win the election, to proof read and ensure that all of the i's are dotted and all the t's are crossed.

True. I realize that some people have a somewhat different method of talking. But, if we want to be more active in the UN as you and I both seem to want to be, we need to have our region putting forth concise and coherent proposals with as few mistakes as possible.

That's why we're going to have the council, to proof read and make sure they sound good.

Kelwar, and God007, please refrain from nitpicking. As long as the basic idea is conveyed in the forum all posts are okay. Proposals can and will be nitpicked, however, this is not the time.

Debate, Day Two

Will the candidates please share your feelings and policies on the following regional issues (you do not have to answer all, but be prepared to):

- Civil Rights
- Nation Inactivity
- Social Welfare
- Regional Democracy
- The Indian Ocean and International Diplomacy
- And other hot-button topics that I may have missed.

Please keep your posts on topic, and have fun. Tune in tomorrow night for Day Three's update.

This was submitted to the moderator and has henceforth been reposted in original form.

- Civil Rights
- Nation Inactivity
- Social Welfare
- Regional Democracy
- The Indian Ocean and International Diplomacy
- And other hot-button topics that I may have missed.

As to the issue of Civil Rights, I would allow most of them, it would just all depend on if they infringe on anyone else's civil rights in the process.

Conserning nation inactivity, I believe in giveing people a second chance and will be lenient in my rulings. The only thing I would ask is that if you will be gone for 4 or more days, to telegram the delegate and/or post it in the regional message board, the reason for you inactivity, such as: "I'm sorry, but i will be inactive from x to y." That way we know you will be coming back and have some reasoning as to why you did it.

Adressing the issue of Social welfare, I think that the goverment should help out IF, and only if, the person or persons, involved have exhausted every other option avaliable to them.

As to regional democracy, I am all for it, mainly because it will give everyone in the region a say and a voice, instead of it just being an oligarchy or a dictatorship.

Conserning the Indian Ocean and international activity, I agree with what we are doing so far in setting up a council and having them proof read the proposels before they are sent. I also think that we should have a bit of an increase in the amount, I think that one option avalible to us would be to send some ideas that we are thinking of and sending them off to Kelwar and Libre to have them look over and see if they can type up a rough draft of it (if that's ok with them).

The issues posed by Wik for this debate are rather important ones. I must admit that I am rather lukewarm about the issues of social welfare and civil rights. I feel that I can not take an actual stance, but must instead leave those up to the individual nations to decide. The leaders of the nations typically have the best perspective relating to their people. A difference of custom or of upbringing or of some other factor may make things seem harsh to an outsider. And, as an outsider, I would not want to push my beliefs onto any one else and thus infringe upon their customs or religion or whatever else it is that dictates their views on civil rights and social welfare. I a regional level, though, I hope to further the idea of aiding regions that may require help or, only if asked, intervening where necessary.
As for nation inactivity, I hope to inspire existing nations to become more active and involved in regional politics. It is not good conduct to expel someone for inactivity (I have heard talk of this), and if they should choose to be inactive then so be it. I also look to bring in fresh blood to the region so as to increase the population and the activity level in that manner.
The view I have on regional democracy is that the status quo seems to work best. As has been noted, all regions regardless of UN status are allowed to vote on issues and proposals. I hope to increase the number of nations in the UN, but it is not necessary as that making it so would infringe upon the rights of the individual nations and that is a step best determined by one's self. I also look to have the nominees for my cabinet approved by a majority vote of the region, should the nominee accept, thus furthering the democratic selection of officers to the second tier of regional government.
Lastly, through the construction of the cabinet and increasing UN activity, I wish to make the Indian Ocean region a more potent force within the United Nations. I hope to make us a beacon in global affairs. I also look to cement new alliances, much like the one I fostered for us with the Whisssssscat Islands, with the aid of my cabinet, thus increasing our region's prestige and possibly aiding in the submission of proposals.

I have really no problem with typing up a rough draft or editing a draft. You can sort of call me the unofficial regional secretary. Should I lose, I wouldn't mind being an official secretary. As for the creation of a rough draft, if you wish to send me one please make sure that the issue at hand, your reasoning behind your proposal, and what effects your proposal will make are stated clearly. I'll try to get on those as quickly as I can, but I much prefer editing an existing proposal and I make no gurantees that those will be done in a timely fashion. After all, I do have other things on my NS political agenda and a job and a life at that. Now, should I be elected as delegate, I will still be able to work around my job and the rest of my life. I also have designs for a cabinet that will be able to function on my behalf should I be gone. As I have talked about before with some nations, I plan on having a regional UN advisor whose primary purpose will be to aid in adverstising proposals, the synthesizing of new ones, and also in examining existing proposals. They will also function as delegate if I were to be gone for an extended period of time. The second in command would be the regional secretary. They would aid in the advertising and creation of proposals as well, but would primarily focus on the editing of them. They would also be in charge of tallying the votes when they occur if the delegate were gone. Lastly, the secretary would be the third in command and would act as delegate if I and my advisor were to be gone.

Would the candidates please post any changes to regional policy they would like to make/avoid?

Voting will now begin. Voting will be made public, either by posting your votes in the forum and message board or telegraming them to me. Telegrammed votes will be posted daily.

I know that the debating period is over, but I was gone on the weekend, and the question that I asked Wik to post on Friday was not posted, so I wish to ask one final question of both candidates. Upon the anwswer of both candidates, I will place my vote.

Q: During the term of Green Wik, the United Nations as a whole passed many pieces of legislation regarding a variety of subjects. Please summarize your reaction to the legislation that has gone through the UN lately and provide a statement regarding your basic stance on the direction the UN is going.

Due to conflicts that have arisen, I no longer feel that I can adequetely represent this region as delegate and hereby revoke my candidacy. The best of luck to you, God007, and your new term as delegate.

Kelwar has dropped from the race and God007 is the new delegate. Please transfer your endorsements from me to him.

I feel it essential that we continue with the schedualed democratic elections as planned, ending on the 13 of the month. To abandon procedure now, simply because Kelwar has withdrawn would be to set a terribly un-democratic prescedent that could have dangerous ramifications at a later time. I think that each nation needs to be able to vote. Even though they really don't have much of a choice as to who to vote for, they still need to vote. After all, write-ins are still allowed at this point. Thus, I would suggest that God vote for himself as soon as possible, and other nations vote either for him or a write-in, depending upon your desire so that this election can procede. I would like to see the winner in office by the end of the week. If you wish, you may begin to withdraw your endorsement from Wik at this time, but I think declaring God the winner would be premature.

I would agree with you on that Libre, the voting must continue on as schedualed. Now in response to what you posted before:

I know that the debating period is over, but I was gone on the weekend, and the question that I asked Wik to post on Friday was not posted, so I wish to ask one final question of both candidates. Upon the anwswer of both candidates, I will place my vote.

Q: During the term of Green Wik, the United Nations as a whole passed many pieces of legislation regarding a variety of subjects. Please summarize your reaction to the legislation that has gone through the UN lately and provide a statement regarding your basic stance on the direction the UN is going.


I think that the UN is taking a leftist bias in all the resolutions that have been passed recently, while I still think that some of them are good(Such as the one trying to outlaw outdated fossile fuels), but some are also infringing on national soverenty(such as the one limiting the amount of time you can spend on researching the fossile fuel alternatives and the posting of a timeline for said researching.)

So overall i'd say that while some of the resolutions are good, they are poorly executed and need to be better thought out in terms of national soverenty(sp?).

has everyone who wants to voted yet?

This is a Final Draft of my proposal to repeal Resolution #2, Scientific Freedoms. If no one has a problem with it, I will send it to the UN on Monday moring. I would like to especially thank Kelwar for his help in revising this resolution and providing council.

Repeal Scientific Freedom:

OBSERVING that the resolution "Scientific Freedom" employs numerous examples of language that is so overly vague that it has lost meaning such as "peaceful and respectable scientists", and fruther

REALIZING that the resolution's claims of "technology will move forward and trade will increase" are completely unsubstantiated by the present resolution.

NOTING that no specific definition has been given as to what constitutes "Scientific Freedom" as given by the authors of the resolution,

It can therefore be concluded that this resolution no longer serves a purpose at present and can hereby be repealed.

Green Wik has announced that a small arms manufacturing industry has sprung up and is looking for business.

The Green Wik governing council has ordered the member state of Ice Lake to stand down after reportedly sending militia troops across the Kelwar border. So far, no member states have responded to the Federation's call for militia troops to surpress the uprising.

In an urgent news break, the Lord of God007 pledged to help repress the uprising in anyway possible.

The Green Wik Federation's council has declined outside help in the matter amid reports of small arms fire and a large explosion in a border town.

Several small cars were destroyed today in the small border town of Tralya, a region known particularly for its exquisite resorts and the booming sheep herding industry. A few insurgents, possibly from an unidentified resistence group fired an RPG into a crowded square, killing seven and sending one of the cars through the window of a diner, wounding twelve more. The violence subsided due to the intervention of the police force, though the shooter(s) managed to escape.

News from the Capital:
The Supreme Chancellor of Kelwar has ordered the mobilization of several supply and infantry battallions of the Grand Army of the Republic which are now headed to the border. Two missile cruisers that were patrolling the Indian Ocean have been ordered back to Kelwar waters, and all other war ships and air craft have been put on high alert.

A mechanized infantry batallion has been reported mobilized in the state of Ice Lake. The Green Wik governing council has repeatedly ordered Ice Lake forces to stand down, but to no avail.

It has been reported today that during the night several volleys were exchanged between soldiers of the Grand Army of the Republic and a group on unknown insurgents. Some small arms fire and rocket fire was exchanged. No one was confirmed injured or killed on either side.

Several militia bases and armories were found empty and abandoned in Redwood Grove and Orange Falls, neighbors of the troubled Ice Lake region. Weapons, ammunition, and many helicopters and armored vehicles were reported missing.

Rebel leaders announced today that a small Kelwar village was sacked and burned today. The Governing Council still does not have the necessary firepower to put down the uprising.

The town of Tralya once again erupted into flames. The small agarian village that was the earlier site of an attack by insurgents has once again gone under fire. The small garrison of forces from the Grand Army that were in charge of aiding in the reconstruction of the town could not hold off the advancing troops, which have been identified as Wikian troops from the Ice Lake region. The mechanized infantry battallion swept down upon the small village of Tralya and all occupants were slaughtered and the buildings razed. Kelwar's Chancellor was quoted today during a fiery speech given to the Senate saying "We will not tolerate incursions within our borders, especially those that result in the massacring of innocent peoples. These rogues must not be allowed to take the lives of any more civilians. The whole of the Grand Army of the Republic is being mobilized and we will declare total war until this Wikian Threat is neutralized, even if full scale invasion is neccessary!" An ambassador has been sent to the capital of Wik in attempt to find a way to curtail violence and withdraw the Wikian troops from the region.

Unidentified aircraft were shot down as they approached the Council Hall today. Leaders from Green Wik have agreed to place all available troops under Kelwar command in facing the rebellion.

A full invasion of the Ice Lake region is being orchestrated by the governments of Green Wik and Kelwar. Due to incursions within Kelwar borders and the recent assault on the Wikian capital, the whole of the Grand Army of the Republic, numbering several hundred thousand troops if not over one million, is being mobilized to retake the region of Ice Lake in conjunction with the loyalist forces in Green Wik. The reserve troops of Kelwar, constituting a force of over 500,000, have all been placed on active duty and are garrisoning critical cities and patrolling major road and waterways, especially near the senate building and throughout the capital city.

Odelay God007!

I’m writing you today on behalf of a coalition of nations seeking the repeal of the Fossil Fuel Reduction Act, a resolution we feel was well-intentioned, but flawed. It puts in a place a system for reducing fossil-fuel consumption that sounds good, but in practice actually does serious harm especially to small and developing nations’ economies. The argument we have submitted should clearly lay out the reasons for repeal: Please take a moment of your time to review our proposal, and if you agree, kindly add your approval:

www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/page=UN_proposal1/match=fossil%20fuel

Thanks again!
Omigodtheykilledkenny

I got this, i think that we should go for it, what do you all think?

Hey Indian Ocean!
May I propose a TP-agreement? TP stands for Tourism Promotion. What you do is "link" the word -Alta Vista- on your world factbook entry. Before joining or creating their own region, many nations wander about first and I believe this could possibly help show which regions are active and desirable. Thank you!

Ps. I didn't see any founder..

I don't think that's necessary. If anyone really wants to come to our region and stay, they'll do so on their own free will. I don't think we need to link some random thing on our factbook page.

agreed. we should let nations filter in as they find their way here. I like this as a small(er) region, and the last thing we need right now is the influx of new nations.

I think if we get linked or whatever it is, we'll have a problem with nations just stopping by and not staying for very long. We've had a few do that already. I'd just like to keep it at a "few". Also, I'd like to try to keep this as a smaller region so everyone gets a voice (the East Pacific has 6,000+ nations. That's too big). We just got an influx of nations as well (3 new ones in the past 24 hours). I can almost gurantee that 2 of them will be highly active. If anything, I'd like to try to keep the region between 25 and 30 with about half of them in the UN, although 3/4 would be better. Right now, we've got I believe 12 in the UN with 2 on the way. Anyway, whatever it is we're doing right now seems to be working and I'd prefer to keep it that way.

I must add my voice to the majority opinion. While I value continuing to develop and promote our region, this may not be the way. Before I apporoved it, I would have to have much more information than the simple description provided. Also, as many of you know, there are some unsavory nations wandering about out there. Many of you have been here long enough to remember the days when we were on the brink of being invaded. The status quo is working right now and I see no reason to abandon it with some vaguely defined venture.

That's another observation worth noting. As God007 said, the founder is unknown. Why should they conceal their identity? Do they have some alterior motive (i.e. regional invasion)? Also, could not doing this kick open the door to other regions to do that? I am for building our reputation in the Nation States world and also for increasing regional size (to a point) and the activity of nations within the region, but we need to be cautious in how we do things. Certainly as delegate and your stay in the region, God007, you remember the threat of invasion that we had. I joined the region right at the tail end of it. We've become more active and more potent since then, but I still do not think that, should we be invaded, we could hold off a party that was well organized and set on acquiring the delegacy and removing dissenters. Paranoid? Perhaps. Cautious? Definately. And, at least in the past, it has paid off. Lastly, while we seem to have increased activity on the forum, does anyone have a proposal that they wish to design and push for or any that we wish to resubmit? If we're using the forum again, I see no reason why we should not continue the trend.

The founder thing was in his message, stating that he couldn't find a founder for us. I did ask him to send more details and this is what he sent back.

****

The Kingdom of Lingtropica
Received: 5 hours ago all it does is advertize the region for passerbyers. The relation does not imply anything political, military or tactical.

Still, I oppose the idea. Also, do we not have a founder listed because this was one of the original regions of the game? Just curious.

my reasons still stand in opposition to this.

Kelwar is correct. We do not have a founder because we existed when the game was created. I guess you could say our founder was Max Berry himself. Still, I don't see what this has to do with anything, least of all the proposal at hand. What should it matter if we have a founder? I would still urge caution in this issue as the ramifications could be large.

I am thinking of drafting a proposal to repeal the "Manditory Use of Metric System". I was just wondering if I could get anyone's thoughts on this matter. I feel that the document is abusive and well outside of the scope of the UN. I know that it helps science and other activities internationally, but the language is ambiguous and it really does infringe on national soverignty.

So I take it that basically nothing is happening with our resolutions anymore? There was a ton of talk about it, but it seems interest in the UN as a whole is down lately in NS.

Basically, I intend to expand democracy in the region through popular voting on resolutions, and increase UN participation, which has become stagnant in the last two months. I will continue my trend of approving resolutions which both make sense, and which are popularly supported in the Indian Ocean. I believe myself to be qualified to due my regular checking in on happenings (several times daily) and past experience with my term as the region's first UN Delegate.

Libre's platform:

The Minarchy of Libre Arbitre

I am dedicated to ensuring the continued growth of the Indian Ocean as a region and inted to do this through some regional advertising and expanding alliances with other regions. It is important that we maintain the overall attitude of peace that has prevailed in this region for so long and the cooperation that has allowed us to fight off invaders and coordinate UN resolutions in the past. Expanding alliances will allow us to get more done with proposals in the UN and give us a defense network should it ever be necessary. I intend to support the drafting of more UN resolutions by the region, and feel that compromise is the only way that this can be achieved. We must not hopelessly cling to stubborn idealism when it comes to the UN, as this preclueds the possibility that we get resolutions sucessfully passed. Additionally, I support a strict standard for the kinds of resolutions that get through the UN as I feel that many that make it to the floor are hopelessly inept. I think that there are a wide range of resolutions that have been implimented in the past that should be repealed. I have opposed these publicly in the past and will continue to do so. However, I believe that the most important part of being UN delegate is accurately reflecting the consensus opinion of the region and will do this to the best of my ability at all times if elected. I would encorage participation by all nations as often as possible and would encourage collaboration in matters of the UN whenever possible. Please let me know if there are any questions.