Should the Condemnation be struck down in the voting phase, I will obviously abandon this proposal. Formatting was borrowed (haha stole sorry ._.) from the Condemn Bitely thread OP.
Repeal "Condemn Bitely"
A resolution to repeal previously passed legislation.
Category: Repeal| Resolution: SC#183* | Proposed by: The LBP Union
Description: The Security Council,
Acknowledging that SC#183* refers to Bitely's actions as "mistakes."
Noting the resolution referral to Bitely's behavior towards other members of this Assembly as "insulting" and mentions Bitely built a region based on a proposal.
Affirming that all regions have the right to sovereignty unless they violate another region's sovereignty.
Hence Believing that there is absolutely nothing wrong with the region of World Space Administration existing, no matter how business is conducted within it.
Also Noting that the nation of Bitely's behavior towards other World Assembly members that is described as "insulting" came after the discussion of the condemnation.
Considering that the arguments for SC#183* were aggressive, it is reasonable to argue that Bitely was provoked by the aggressive attitudes of SC#183.*
Understanding that supporters of SC#183 used Bitely's rash actions against the country and used this as a smear campaign, further provoking Bitely to continue his uncalled for actions.
Dismayed by Bitely's actions which violated World Assembly membership laws, which inevitably led to their ejection from the WA.
Reminding this Security Council that this happens all the time and is not a major problem, as even if the nation was able to pass a proposal using illegal WA membership tactics, such a proposal can easily be repealed.
Noting SC#183's* description ofGA#336as "objectively awful legislation," which is an improper description, and should be changed to "subjectively awful legislation" since the adjective "awful" is an opinion.
Recalling that Bitely skipped the drafting stage for his proposal and used telegram campaigning to support#336 World Space Administration.
Confused as to why this is a condemnable act, as drafting is a choice by the author to refine their chances of success and the effectiveness of their proposal, and telegram campaigning is a common practice by many WA members trying to pass proposals.
Referring to SC#183's* section onGA#336,
"Recalling that the resolution in question, "World Space Administration", hereafter referred to as GA#336, is such a complete trainwreck of a resolution that it enacts meaningless bureaucracy on WA nations, to the benefit of practically no one, and that it harms space-capable nations, nations who are developing space-flight, and nations who do not wish to develop space flight alike, thereby failing completely in its presumed goal;"
Reminding this Council thatGA#336has been repealed by a huge voting margin.
Questioning why the initial passage ofGA#336is a lasting negative effect on the world if it was repealed within the first few weeks.
Recalling the previous discussion in this repeal of how Bitely is being provoked by the condemnation.
Reasoning that a large number of World Assembly members campaigning to condemn a nation is not good motivation for a Bitely to change its ways.
Concluding that by pursuing SC#183,* Bitely's actions are therefore a partial fault of this Security Council and is similar to bullying.
Recognizing SC#183's* note of Bitely's future plans to pass a replacement for theGA#336and a new proposal called the "Irritable Bowel Syndrome Act" and how the author SC#336* believes that the WSA replacement is "even worse than the original."
Pointing out that if one dislikes a proposal they don't have to vote for it.
Further reminding that if they still manage to pass they can always be repealed.
Appalled that SC#183* believes that campaigning against a repeal is a condemnable act, even if Bitely may have lied about the WSA to protect it, he ultimately failed.
Further disappointed that SC#183* refers to the region of World Space Administration's telegram campaign to lure nations into the region as violating an "unspoken rule of only recruiting nations from Pacific regions."
Emphasizing that "unspoken rules" are not actual laws and nations who left their regions to join the World Space Administration did so by choice.
Acknowledging that nations in the World Space Administration region act as if they are making regulations for the agency.
However, this region obviously has no power over other regions and they can act however they want within their own region as they have sovereignty.
Impatient with the fact that none of the points listed so far have had a major and/or lasting affect on inter-regional peace, security and politics.
Feeling that Bitely's remarks, proposals, ejection from the WA and region are not significant causes for a condemnation.
Recalling this repeal's first liner, where SC#183* refers to Bitely's actions as "mistakes."
Believing that everyone makes mistakes in their lives and they should attempt to correct them.
Encourages this World Assembly to treat Bitely with respect, and if the nation refuses to correct its ways, not to harass or bully it by any method, including by using this Security Council.
Without Further Ado,
Repeals Security Council Resolution #183* "Condemn Bitely"
EDIT: Yes, I am aware that the Condemnation proposal is using this preemptive repeal and all its edits to augment its strength and get better. Because I strongly believe and understand that Bitely is not worthy of a condemnation, I will still continue to edit this proposal, (even though it would be much more successful to just hide it and let the Condemnation pass (or fail) and then propose one that counters all its flaws which cannot be defended against easily.) The reason I continue to edit this proposal is to exhaust the condemnation effort of good points by destroying each one.
But if "World Space Administration" passed, wouldn't that be evidence that the majority of the WA agrees with Bitely and his resolution, and thus that Bitely doesn't deserve his condemnation?