NATION

PASSWORD

[PASSED] Protect War Correspondents

A carefully preserved record of the most notable World Assembly debates.

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Separatist Peoples
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 16989
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Separatist Peoples » Fri Sep 09, 2011 4:40 pm

Additionally: If a nation is incapable of maintaining a semblance of order, or sifting the facts from the lies, even in a line of work that depends entirely on such a skill, then I can't imagine that the WA writing rules on the chalkboard about how "None of us should lie" as if we are in Kindergarten is going to help.

Misinformation is a certifiably useful form of warfare, not only to the enemy in an intelligence or counterintelligence form, but also when it comes to garnering political support in other theaters of the world. There is nothing wrong with informing the masses of observers that your military is going to do one thing, then do another entirely, because that is simply how Military Intelligence factions work. This clause comes dangerously close to abolishing that, as well as making a class of international criminals out of soldiers who simply misspoke, were not properly informed, or even have a standing order to lie about anything a reporter asks them.

His Worshipfulness, the Most Unscrupulous, Plainly Deceitful, Dissembling, Strategicly Calculating Lord GA Secretariat, Authority on All Existence, Arbiter of Right, Toxic Globalist Dog, Dark Psychic Vampire, and Chief Populist Elitist!
Separatist Peoples should RESIGN!

User avatar
Separatist Peoples
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 16989
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Separatist Peoples » Fri Sep 09, 2011 4:45 pm

Connopolis wrote:
Ambassador, if your logic was true, then might I ask the point of removing the clause? If divulging false information would have no negative ramification on either party, I can hardly see why anyone would find it as a tactical necessity. If it was truly imperative that nations utilize these tactics, there would have to be an advantage gained, and if those advantages are non-existent as you claim, the clause serves as a repercussion. The clause either affect both parties negatively, or has no effect on either party, aside from being a safety net; in either scenario, your logic is flawed.

OOC: I'll insult biased news networks all I like. :roll:

Yours in further insulting biased news agencies,


Yes, why should we remove useless clauses from legislation? Clearly, if it has no purpose, it is more effort to simply remove them and wait for expensive issues later then it is to pay for all the issues such a practice would cause.

Misinformation is not useless, simply in the manner you argue for. Misinformation is a wonderful tool of Counterintelligence, but forcing all soldiers and militants to "tell the truth" in essence creates a class of international criminals that is just unnecessary.

Misinformation works wonders when you tell reporters that you have X amounts of troops in one area, when most of those troops are actually somewhere else, waiting to bite the enemy in the ass. Such tactics work on a daily basis. This is simply attempting to restrict one of the basic tenants of warfare: confuse and surprise the hell out of the other side.

OOC: If you dont like Fox, take it to General. This isn't the place for that kind of RL petty partisanship. Keep it to RP petty partisanship. Thats why I try to avoid General, I like my RP partisanship a lot better.

His Worshipfulness, the Most Unscrupulous, Plainly Deceitful, Dissembling, Strategicly Calculating Lord GA Secretariat, Authority on All Existence, Arbiter of Right, Toxic Globalist Dog, Dark Psychic Vampire, and Chief Populist Elitist!
Separatist Peoples should RESIGN!

User avatar
Antartica55
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 42
Founded: Sep 04, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Antartica55 » Fri Sep 09, 2011 4:49 pm

Separatist Peoples wrote:Additionally: If a nation is incapable of maintaining a semblance of order, or sifting the facts from the lies, even in a line of work that depends entirely on such a skill, then I can't imagine that the WA writing rules on the chalkboard about how "None of us should lie" as if we are in Kindergarten is going to help.

Misinformation is a certifiably useful form of warfare, not only to the enemy in an intelligence or counterintelligence form, but also when it comes to garnering political support in other theaters of the world. There is nothing wrong with informing the masses of observers that your military is going to do one thing, then do another entirely, because that is simply how Military Intelligence factions work. This clause comes dangerously close to abolishing that, as well as making a class of international criminals out of soldiers who simply misspoke, were not properly informed, or even have a standing order to lie about anything a reporter asks them.


Well nobody ever said that a soldier HAS to awnser or even talk to a reporter a simple "I cannot awnser that question." would be enough 8)
From the Desk of:
President Jannett Renwick
Founding Member Antarctic Alliance
Author: GENERAL ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION # 170

Answer?
Survey

User avatar
Connopolis
Minister
 
Posts: 2371
Founded: May 01, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Connopolis » Fri Sep 09, 2011 4:52 pm

Separatist Peoples wrote:
Connopolis wrote:
Ambassador, if your logic was true, then might I ask the point of removing the clause? If divulging false information would have no negative ramification on either party, I can hardly see why anyone would find it as a tactical necessity. If it was truly imperative that nations utilize these tactics, there would have to be an advantage gained, and if those advantages are non-existent as you claim, the clause serves as a repercussion. The clause either affect both parties negatively, or has no effect on either party, aside from being a safety net; in either scenario, your logic is flawed.

OOC: I'll insult biased news networks all I like. :roll:

Yours in further insulting biased news agencies,


Yes, why should we remove useless clauses from legislation? Clearly, if it has no purpose, it is more effort to simply remove them and wait for expensive issues later then it is to pay for all the issues such a practice would cause.

Misinformation is not useless, simply in the manner you argue for. Misinformation is a wonderful tool of Counterintelligence, but forcing all soldiers and militants to "tell the truth" in essence creates a class of international criminals that is just unnecessary.

Misinformation works wonders when you tell reporters that you have X amounts of troops in one area, when most of those troops are actually somewhere else, waiting to bite the enemy in the ass. Such tactics work on a daily basis. This is simply attempting to restrict one of the basic tenants of warfare: confuse and surprise the hell out of the other side.

OOC: If you dont like Fox, take it to General. This isn't the place for that kind of RL petty partisanship. Keep it to RP petty partisanship. Thats why I try to avoid General, I like my RP partisanship a lot better.


To a point, I understand your concern. How does this sound:

1) Militants are prohibited from interacting with war correspondents with the intent of stymieing their actions, inclusive of:

  • Divulging false information with the purpose of having the individual returning to their host nation,
  • Wounding the individual,
  • Executing them without adequate reasoning. Should a militant fail to comply, both the individual, and the host member-state of the individual shall be held accountable.
Last edited by Connopolis on Fri Sep 09, 2011 4:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
From the office of,
Mrs. Pamela Howell
GA Ambassador of the Connopolian Ministry of Foreign Affairs


User avatar
Separatist Peoples
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 16989
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Separatist Peoples » Fri Sep 09, 2011 4:53 pm

Antartica55 wrote:Well nobody ever said that a soldier HAS to awnser or even talk to a reporter a simple "I cannot awnser that question." would be enough 8)


There is no reason that he shouldn't be able to lie to the reporter. In fact, sometimes denying such an answer is just as incriminating to trained Intelligence personnel as giving it straight out. Being able to refer to a story that a standing order has placed is going to be a lot better for both the strategic command as well as the soldier himself.

There is an awful lot of concern as to how Antarcrica55 and Connopolis run their G-2 sectors if they insist on telling the truth to every inquisitive Tom, Jane, and Dick with a Correspondent helmet...

His Worshipfulness, the Most Unscrupulous, Plainly Deceitful, Dissembling, Strategicly Calculating Lord GA Secretariat, Authority on All Existence, Arbiter of Right, Toxic Globalist Dog, Dark Psychic Vampire, and Chief Populist Elitist!
Separatist Peoples should RESIGN!

User avatar
Separatist Peoples
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 16989
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Separatist Peoples » Fri Sep 09, 2011 4:54 pm

Connopolis wrote:To a point, I understand your concern. How does this sound:

1) Militants are prohibited from interacting with war correspondents with the intent of stymieing their actions, inclusive of divulging false information with the purpose of having the individual returning to their host nation, wounding the individual, or executing them without adequate reasoning. Should a militant fail to comply, both the individual, and the host member-state of the individual shall be held accountable.


How exactly does the military have any clue if that individual is going to return to their nation of origin with such information? This still stifles the concept of misinformation and counterintelligence. So long as you mandate what the military can and cannot say to reporters, you have a serious security concern.

His Worshipfulness, the Most Unscrupulous, Plainly Deceitful, Dissembling, Strategicly Calculating Lord GA Secretariat, Authority on All Existence, Arbiter of Right, Toxic Globalist Dog, Dark Psychic Vampire, and Chief Populist Elitist!
Separatist Peoples should RESIGN!

User avatar
Connopolis
Minister
 
Posts: 2371
Founded: May 01, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Connopolis » Fri Sep 09, 2011 4:56 pm

Separatist Peoples wrote:
Connopolis wrote:To a point, I understand your concern. How does this sound:

1) Militants are prohibited from interacting with war correspondents with the intent of stymieing their actions, inclusive of divulging false information with the purpose of having the individual returning to their host nation, wounding the individual, or executing them without adequate reasoning. Should a militant fail to comply, both the individual, and the host member-state of the individual shall be held accountable.


How exactly does the military have any clue if that individual is going to return to their nation of origin with such information? This still stifles the concept of misinformation and counterintelligence. So long as you mandate what the military can and cannot say to reporters, you have a serious security concern.


The wording is awkward; my apologies. The misinformation would regard the war correspondents personal safety; I'll make not of that, and revise the clause accordingly.

Yours,
From the office of,
Mrs. Pamela Howell
GA Ambassador of the Connopolian Ministry of Foreign Affairs


User avatar
Separatist Peoples
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 16989
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Separatist Peoples » Fri Sep 09, 2011 4:58 pm

Connopolis wrote:
Separatist Peoples wrote:
How exactly does the military have any clue if that individual is going to return to their nation of origin with such information? This still stifles the concept of misinformation and counterintelligence. So long as you mandate what the military can and cannot say to reporters, you have a serious security concern.


The wording is awkward; my apologies. The misinformation would regard the war correspondents personal safety; I'll make not of that, and revise the clause accordingly.

Yours,


If it is in regard to the personal safety of the correspondent, then that isn't an issue. I suppose soldiers sending annoying reporters into minefields would be a problem...

Having said that, we still maintain that reporters deserve no more protection then soldiers do, and that is very little in an active war zone.

His Worshipfulness, the Most Unscrupulous, Plainly Deceitful, Dissembling, Strategicly Calculating Lord GA Secretariat, Authority on All Existence, Arbiter of Right, Toxic Globalist Dog, Dark Psychic Vampire, and Chief Populist Elitist!
Separatist Peoples should RESIGN!

User avatar
Antartica55
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 42
Founded: Sep 04, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Antartica55 » Fri Sep 09, 2011 4:59 pm

Separatist Peoples wrote:
Antartica55 wrote:Well nobody ever said that a soldier HAS to awnser or even talk to a reporter a simple "I cannot awnser that question." would be enough 8)


There is no reason that he shouldn't be able to lie to the reporter. In fact, sometimes denying such an answer is just as incriminating to trained Intelligence personnel as giving it straight out. Being able to refer to a story that a standing order has placed is going to be a lot better for both the strategic command as well as the soldier himself.

There is an awful lot of concern as to how Antarcrica55 and Connopolis run their G-2 sectors if they insist on telling the truth to every inquisitive Tom, Jane, and Dick with a Correspondent helmet...



"I can not awnser that question" does not imply the awnser to the reporters question it can mean that the soldier does not know the awnser to the question.
From the Desk of:
President Jannett Renwick
Founding Member Antarctic Alliance
Author: GENERAL ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION # 170

Answer?
Survey

User avatar
Connopolis
Minister
 
Posts: 2371
Founded: May 01, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Connopolis » Fri Sep 09, 2011 5:01 pm

Separatist Peoples wrote:
Connopolis wrote:
The wording is awkward; my apologies. The misinformation would regard the war correspondents personal safety; I'll make not of that, and revise the clause accordingly.

Yours,


If it is in regard to the personal safety of the correspondent, then that isn't an issue. I suppose soldiers sending annoying reporters into minefields would be a problem...

Having said that, we still maintain that reporters deserve no more protection then soldiers do, and that is very little in an active war zone.


We will unfortunately have to disagree here. We prefer our citizens alive when they return home. You must bear in mind that their service is beneficial to the host nation.

Yours,
From the office of,
Mrs. Pamela Howell
GA Ambassador of the Connopolian Ministry of Foreign Affairs


User avatar
Separatist Peoples
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 16989
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Separatist Peoples » Fri Sep 09, 2011 5:04 pm

Connopolis wrote:
Separatist Peoples wrote:
If it is in regard to the personal safety of the correspondent, then that isn't an issue. I suppose soldiers sending annoying reporters into minefields would be a problem...

Having said that, we still maintain that reporters deserve no more protection then soldiers do, and that is very little in an active war zone.


We will unfortunately have to disagree here. We prefer our citizens alive when they return home. You must bear in mind that their service is beneficial to the host nation.

Yours,


That their service is useful is debatable. Many soldiers find them to be little more then a nuisance.

Out of curiosity, how does this proposal affect military officials denying correspondants access to operational territory? What is stopping the military from giving the boot to all correspondents that come too close to their vehicles/soldiers/ bases?

His Worshipfulness, the Most Unscrupulous, Plainly Deceitful, Dissembling, Strategicly Calculating Lord GA Secretariat, Authority on All Existence, Arbiter of Right, Toxic Globalist Dog, Dark Psychic Vampire, and Chief Populist Elitist!
Separatist Peoples should RESIGN!

User avatar
Sanctaria
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7922
Founded: Sep 12, 2008
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Sanctaria » Fri Sep 09, 2011 5:05 pm

The basic problem I have with this proposal is why should new reporters be put before our soldiers, diplomats, aid agency workers etc. Why do they deserve protection via international law?

I understand they provide an invaluable service, but so do our diplomats and our aid agency workers that we send abroad. That's not to mention that there may be expatriates or holidaymakers stranded in a conflict that pops out of nowhere.
Divine Federation of Sanctaria

Ideological Bulwark #258

Dr. Bethany Greer CMD, Sanctarian Ambassador to the World Assembly
Author of:
GA#109 GA#133 GA#176 GA#201 GA#222 GA#297
GA#590 (Co)
Frisbeeteria wrote:Do people not realize that moderators can tell when someone is wanking?

Luna Amore wrote:Sanc is always watching. Ever vigilant.

Auralia wrote:Your condescending attitude is remarkably annoying.

User avatar
Antartica55
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 42
Founded: Sep 04, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Antartica55 » Fri Sep 09, 2011 5:11 pm

Sanctaria wrote:The basic problem I have with this proposal is why should new reporters be put before our soldiers, diplomats, aid agency workers etc. Why do they deserve protection via international law?

I understand they provide an invaluable service, but so do our diplomats and our aid agency workers that we send abroad. That's not to mention that there may be expatriates or holidaymakers stranded in a conflict that pops out of nowhere.



Very true but Diplomats are usally protected by the sending nations and Aid workers are already protected under On Humanitarian Aid. As for holidaymakers it is the assumed reponsibility of thier home nation to evacuate them (nothing says they have to.) News reporters on the other hand are not sent in by thier home nations but by News Agencys
From the Desk of:
President Jannett Renwick
Founding Member Antarctic Alliance
Author: GENERAL ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION # 170

Answer?
Survey

User avatar
Connopolis
Minister
 
Posts: 2371
Founded: May 01, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Connopolis » Fri Sep 09, 2011 5:15 pm

Sanctaria wrote:The basic problem I have with this proposal is why should new reporters be put before our soldiers, diplomats, aid agency workers etc. Why do they deserve protection via international law?

I understand they provide an invaluable service, but so do our diplomats and our aid agency workers that we send abroad. That's not to mention that there may be expatriates or holidaymakers stranded in a conflict that pops out of nowhere.


Ironically, aid agency workers do have protection. I actually authored the legislation that protected them. Diplomats are also protected, if I recall correctly.

Yours,
From the office of,
Mrs. Pamela Howell
GA Ambassador of the Connopolian Ministry of Foreign Affairs


User avatar
Connopolis
Minister
 
Posts: 2371
Founded: May 01, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Connopolis » Fri Sep 09, 2011 5:18 pm

Separatist Peoples wrote:
Connopolis wrote:
We will unfortunately have to disagree here. We prefer our citizens alive when they return home. You must bear in mind that their service is beneficial to the host nation.

Yours,


That their service is useful is debatable. Many soldiers find them to be little more then a nuisance.

Out of curiosity, how does this proposal affect military officials denying correspondants access to operational territory? What is stopping the military from giving the boot to all correspondents that come too close to their vehicles/soldiers/ bases?


Ambassador, the proposal is written to allow individual member-states to decide whether or not war correspondents are permitted in their nation. If you don't want news reporters in your nation, so be it. If they come anyways, their protection is nullified. The point of this is to protect them from volatile situations in which they're legally permitted to relay information.

Yours,
From the office of,
Mrs. Pamela Howell
GA Ambassador of the Connopolian Ministry of Foreign Affairs


User avatar
Sanctaria
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7922
Founded: Sep 12, 2008
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Sanctaria » Fri Sep 09, 2011 5:19 pm

Antartica55 wrote:
Sanctaria wrote:The basic problem I have with this proposal is why should new reporters be put before our soldiers, diplomats, aid agency workers etc. Why do they deserve protection via international law?

I understand they provide an invaluable service, but so do our diplomats and our aid agency workers that we send abroad. That's not to mention that there may be expatriates or holidaymakers stranded in a conflict that pops out of nowhere.



Very true but Diplomats are usally protected by the sending nations and Aid workers are already protected under On Humanitarian Aid. As for holidaymakers it is the assumed reponsibility of thier home nation to evacuate them (nothing says they have to.) News reporters on the other hand are not sent in by thier home nations but by News Agencys


Connopolis wrote:
Sanctaria wrote:The basic problem I have with this proposal is why should new reporters be put before our soldiers, diplomats, aid agency workers etc. Why do they deserve protection via international law?

I understand they provide an invaluable service, but so do our diplomats and our aid agency workers that we send abroad. That's not to mention that there may be expatriates or holidaymakers stranded in a conflict that pops out of nowhere.


Ironically, aid agency workers do have protection. I actually authored the legislation that protected them. Diplomats are also protected, if I recall correctly.

Yours,


There was an "etc." there if I recall correctly. My point was why should be giving protections for individual occupations.
Divine Federation of Sanctaria

Ideological Bulwark #258

Dr. Bethany Greer CMD, Sanctarian Ambassador to the World Assembly
Author of:
GA#109 GA#133 GA#176 GA#201 GA#222 GA#297
GA#590 (Co)
Frisbeeteria wrote:Do people not realize that moderators can tell when someone is wanking?

Luna Amore wrote:Sanc is always watching. Ever vigilant.

Auralia wrote:Your condescending attitude is remarkably annoying.

User avatar
Connopolis
Minister
 
Posts: 2371
Founded: May 01, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Connopolis » Fri Sep 09, 2011 5:22 pm

Sanctaria wrote:
Antartica55 wrote:

Very true but Diplomats are usally protected by the sending nations and Aid workers are already protected under On Humanitarian Aid. As for holidaymakers it is the assumed reponsibility of thier home nation to evacuate them (nothing says they have to.) News reporters on the other hand are not sent in by thier home nations but by News Agencys


Connopolis wrote:
Ironically, aid agency workers do have protection. I actually authored the legislation that protected them. Diplomats are also protected, if I recall correctly.

Yours,


There was an "etc." there if I recall correctly. My point was why should be giving protections for individual occupations.


Simply because of the importance of their occupation. If Bob the handyman was walking in between two tanks, then obviously he wouldn't be exempt from standard conflict laws. If a well known war correspondent enters a conflict zone with the intention of informing those who aren't capable of obtaining the information themselves, then it's integral that they're not senselessly slaughtered.

Yours,
From the office of,
Mrs. Pamela Howell
GA Ambassador of the Connopolian Ministry of Foreign Affairs


User avatar
Dizyntk
Minister
 
Posts: 2699
Founded: Aug 05, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Dizyntk » Fri Sep 09, 2011 5:42 pm

OOC: I'll insult biased news networks all I like.


OOC: Then I suggest insulting ALL of the networks because they are all biased one way or the other. Sad but true.
Dizyntk WA Ambassador Princess Feyalisa Zerleen Profile
What is a Dizyntk you ask? Dizyntk Info
Cyanka is the Dizyntk year and is equal to 18 earth months. Do your own math.

User avatar
Dizyntk
Minister
 
Posts: 2699
Founded: Aug 05, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Dizyntk » Fri Sep 09, 2011 5:46 pm

Ironically, aid agency workers do have protection


"Not if they are in an active war zone, Dr. Forshaw, which this proposal seems to assume the reporters in question are in."
Dizyntk WA Ambassador Princess Feyalisa Zerleen Profile
What is a Dizyntk you ask? Dizyntk Info
Cyanka is the Dizyntk year and is equal to 18 earth months. Do your own math.

User avatar
Connopolis
Minister
 
Posts: 2371
Founded: May 01, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Connopolis » Fri Sep 09, 2011 5:50 pm

Dizyntk wrote:
Ironically, aid agency workers do have protection


"Not if they are in an active war zone, Dr. Forshaw, which this proposal seems to assume the reporters in question are in."


Your excellency, surely you remember On Humanitarian Aid? This resolution would be fairly similar in the sense that war correspondents are given similar protection, under similar circumstances.

Yours,
From the office of,
Mrs. Pamela Howell
GA Ambassador of the Connopolian Ministry of Foreign Affairs


User avatar
Dizyntk
Minister
 
Posts: 2699
Founded: Aug 05, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Dizyntk » Fri Sep 09, 2011 5:56 pm

"I remember the resolution clearly, Dr. Forshaw. One of it's actionable clauses states,
FURTHER PROHIBITS humanitarian aid workers from intentionally entering conflict zones,

"Nowhere in this proposal does it state that correspondents must stay out of active conflict zones. Therefore it assumes that they are, in fact, in said zones. This only makes sense given the nature of their jobs. That being the case, they deserve no more protections than any other person in that situation."
Dizyntk WA Ambassador Princess Feyalisa Zerleen Profile
What is a Dizyntk you ask? Dizyntk Info
Cyanka is the Dizyntk year and is equal to 18 earth months. Do your own math.

User avatar
Connopolis
Minister
 
Posts: 2371
Founded: May 01, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Connopolis » Fri Sep 09, 2011 6:02 pm

Dizyntk wrote:"I remember the resolution clearly, Dr. Forshaw. One of it's actionable clauses states,
FURTHER PROHIBITS humanitarian aid workers from intentionally entering conflict zones,

"Nowhere in this proposal does it state that correspondents must stay out of active conflict zones. Therefore it assumes that they are, in fact, in said zones. This only makes sense given the nature of their jobs. That being the case, they deserve no more protections than any other person in that situation."


Their job would be redundant if they couldn't enter conflict zones. The whole point of this resolution is to ensure their safety while in the conflict zone.
Bear in mind the benefits of their occupation, especially in taking into consideration the fact that civilians could not attain this information without their assistance, and it doesn't necessary help when they're being killed off.

Yours,
From the office of,
Mrs. Pamela Howell
GA Ambassador of the Connopolian Ministry of Foreign Affairs


User avatar
Antartica55
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 42
Founded: Sep 04, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Antartica55 » Fri Sep 09, 2011 6:06 pm

Dizyntk wrote:"I remember the resolution clearly, Dr. Forshaw. One of it's actionable clauses states,
FURTHER PROHIBITS humanitarian aid workers from intentionally entering conflict zones,

"Nowhere in this proposal does it state that correspondents must stay out of active conflict zones. Therefore it assumes that they are, in fact, in said zones. This only makes sense given the nature of their jobs. That being the case, they deserve no more protections than any other person in that situation."



Keep in mind that correspondants are not military trained and are incapable of providing the same protection and saftey for themselves as a trained soldier could
From the Desk of:
President Jannett Renwick
Founding Member Antarctic Alliance
Author: GENERAL ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION # 170

Answer?
Survey

User avatar
Dizyntk
Minister
 
Posts: 2699
Founded: Aug 05, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Dizyntk » Fri Sep 09, 2011 6:07 pm

Connopolis wrote:Their job would be redundant if they couldn't enter conflict zones. The whole point of this resolution is to ensure their safety while in the conflict zone.
Bear in mind the benefits of their occupation, especially in taking into consideration the fact that civilians could not attain this information without their assistance, and it doesn't necessary help when they're being killed off.

Yours,

"While they may, perhaps, be beneficial, they are not deserving of any special protection. Their job, like that of the soldiers themselves, is a perilous one. If they do not know this, perhaps they need a new occupation."
Dizyntk WA Ambassador Princess Feyalisa Zerleen Profile
What is a Dizyntk you ask? Dizyntk Info
Cyanka is the Dizyntk year and is equal to 18 earth months. Do your own math.

User avatar
Sanctaria
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7922
Founded: Sep 12, 2008
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Sanctaria » Fri Sep 09, 2011 6:08 pm

Connopolis wrote:
Dizyntk wrote:"I remember the resolution clearly, Dr. Forshaw. One of it's actionable clauses states,
"Nowhere in this proposal does it state that correspondents must stay out of active conflict zones. Therefore it assumes that they are, in fact, in said zones. This only makes sense given the nature of their jobs. That being the case, they deserve no more protections than any other person in that situation."


Their job would be redundant if they couldn't enter conflict zones. The whole point of this resolution is to ensure their safety while in the conflict zone.
Bear in mind the benefits of their occupation, especially in taking into consideration the fact that civilians could not attain this information without their assistance, and it doesn't necessary help when they're being killed off.

Yours,


Your proposal's definition of War Correspondent could mean any civilian giving information. You are aware of this, yes?
Divine Federation of Sanctaria

Ideological Bulwark #258

Dr. Bethany Greer CMD, Sanctarian Ambassador to the World Assembly
Author of:
GA#109 GA#133 GA#176 GA#201 GA#222 GA#297
GA#590 (Co)
Frisbeeteria wrote:Do people not realize that moderators can tell when someone is wanking?

Luna Amore wrote:Sanc is always watching. Ever vigilant.

Auralia wrote:Your condescending attitude is remarkably annoying.

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to WA Archives

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Advertisement

Remove ads