[PASSED] Liberate Nazi Europe

[Mad Jack]

I've always said that regions that break Rule 1 would burn by my hand, regardless of my 'wish' that raiding would be removed from NS.

My 'wish' is never going to come true, so why can't I then have fun burning Nazis?

Watch out we gotta badass over here.

Biggest bad ass in Nationstates, that's me.

[Corageland]

This is just as bad as Nazism though, just attacking them for being Nazi Europe is a completely immature and idiotic reason to engage in a "Liberation" of a region. Neo-Nazism is bad but do you even actually know what Nazism really is? not Germany WWII Nazism? National Socialism. National Socialism is not inherently evil, just one of the most well known mass murderers made it evil and poisoned a whole generation and later generations. I don't believe this to be a just Resolution, its more people throwing their political might about to get rid of something they dislike, which is in itself the same that the Nazism you all seem to hate preaches. Lowering yourself to your opponents level to win doesn't make you better it actually makes you worse when you won't accept you have become that low.

But do as you want i can't impact decisions in the grand scheme, i just started this new nation for a new start over my old one.

[Captain Woodhouse]

Watch out we gotta badass over here.

Biggest bad ass in Nationstates, that's me.

There's a difference between badass and petulant.

[Die Volkes Lebensraum]

The people who give the realm stick for their "fake" liberations of founderless regions are rhe ones who support this resolution.

How hypocritical.

Also the realm doesnt use liberation resolutions as a weapon, and you call us griefers, take a look in the mirror.

[Jamie Anumia]

I did originally promise myself not to post here, but I've decided I will. I voted against this proposal, first of all, as I did the previous times. I'm not going to lie, I don't like Nazi ideology, but there's many other ideologies I don't have a favourable view of as well. I do understand why people want to open NE for invasion, but I don't agree with the rationale. I don't believe in attacking a region purely based on ideology, since I see it as forcing a point of view. My other reason for voting against the proposal is my view in regards to natives of a region having the right do with a region as they wish - if NE wants to password their region, I see no reason why I should take that ability away from the region, regardless of the ideology the region may promote.

[Die Volkes Lebensraum]

^this

Except for the part about disliking national socialism.

[Cerian Quilor]

I just think the whole thing is absurd to begin with.

[Valentir]

I have changed my mine. I vote to Liberate Nazi Europe. Feux I have reread your Proposal I I support. Lets Liberate them and shut down this evil region...........

[Mad Jack]

Biggest bad ass in Nationstates, that's me.

There's a difference between badass and petulant.

Probably.

Either way, we're winning.

[Of the Free Socialist Territories]

I just think the whole thing is absurd to begin with.

Don't condemn. Revel in it. That and the irony of a former invader org and a Nazi org currently involved in an occupation of The Islamic Republic of Iran complaining about NE's sovereignty being kicked out of the window.

[The Two Jerseys]

Normally I don't bother voting on Security Council resolutions, as we prefer the "live and let live" approach.

However, I just so happened to read this proposal, and have come to the conclusion that this isn't a liberation, but rather a flat-out invasion.

Accordingly, we vote against.

[Feux]

I have changed my mine. I vote to Liberate Nazi Europe. Feux I have reread your Proposal I I support. Lets Liberate them and shut down this evil region...........

Hope to see you during the occupation.

[Of the Free Socialist Territories]

I have changed my mine. I vote to Liberate Nazi Europe. Feux I have reread your Proposal I I support. Lets Liberate them and shut down this evil region...........

Hope to see you during the occupation. party.

I think we both know that the outrage generated by this in combination with the general destruction is going to be...delicious.

Have there actually been any cogent arguments against the proposal aside from "Hey, SC, leave those kids Nazis alone"?

[Sciongrad]

This resolution is, frankly, pretty disgusting. Even if the inhabitants of the region actually do anything subversive or detrimental, I don't see why typical defending is insufficient. And if you claim it's because they're fascists, then you're no better. You're not clothed in some moral righteousness just because your hurting Nazis - it just proves that you have a loose grasp on reality, and even looser ethics. I said it when Cormac Stark first proposed tripe like this, and I'll say it now: the Security Council is best left as a place for people to congratulate themselves with shiny badges - there shouldn't be precedent that enables it to act as a medium through which entire regional communities can be destroyed.

Unfortunately, it looks as if this will pass. And that's unfortunate.

EDIT:

Have there actually been any cogent arguments against the proposal aside from "Hey, SC, leave those kids Nazis alone"?

Yes. The precedent of the SC being able to destroy regions with a simple majority vote. There, no Nazis and a cogent argument against using the SC as a weapon.

[Mad Jack]

Unfortunately, it looks as if this will pass. And that's unfortunate.

That's an odd spelling of GLORIOUS.

[Sciongrad]

Unfortunately, it looks as if this will pass. And that's unfortunate.

That's an odd spelling of GLORIOUS.

There are many things in life that are glorious. Arnold Palmer Iced Tea is glorious. Orange Starbursts are glorious. The Oxford Comma is glorious. This, however, is not glorious. This is scary, and twisted, and discriminatory, and is going to be a blemish to this body's annals of law

[Cormac Stark]

This is just as bad as Nazism though

If I never saw this argument again, it would be too soon.

[Shen Xin Lan]

...

Have there actually been any cogent arguments against the proposal...

*Delegate Vincent replies with a cough.*

Umm, yes. In fact, if you go back to my own argument...

The precedent already exists. Nazi Europe tried to liberate Haven to open it up to raids.

*Delegate Vincent addresses the Ambassador from Mad Jack.*

The fact that he tried and failed means there is no precedent. The entire idea of a precedent is that:

a precedent or authority is a principle or rule established in a previous legal case that is either binding on or persuasive for a court or other tribunal when deciding subsequent cases with similar issues or facts.

So, how does this make any sense as "following a precedent?" This is not a similar issue. The facts are not the same, nor are they close enough to even be considered logically connected. Also, the "previous legal case" met with failure, so nothing was established.

If this passes, this will create the precedent that you are citing. Circular logic is most often employed by religious literalists and people with no common sense. Which category do you fall into?

...you will see that I do not mention the Nazi party once, and give a solid argument against a major reason behind the drafting of this proposal.

Are you actually listening to these arguments, or do your ears filter out all logic and replace it with static? Honestly, it seems that all the arguments made by the "for" side are all "I'm doing this for fun! Hahaha! I hate Nazis!"

[Sciongrad]

This is just as bad as Nazism though

If I never saw this argument again, it would be too soon.

I can imagine. I wouldn't want to see a conflicting argument that virtually debunked my opinion either.

[Virreinato de Nueva Espana]

I swear everyone supporting this proposal has to be 12y.r.s old...

[Cormac Stark]

If I never saw this argument again, it would be too soon.

I can imagine. I wouldn't want to see a conflicting argument that virtually debunked my opinion either.

No, what I object to seeing is the argument that trying to remove a password from a region in a browser game = admiration of a man who murdered millions along with advocacy of ethnic cleansing and genocide. No, this is not just as bad as Nazism. This isn't even on the scale with Nazism.

[Rupture Farms co]

I can imagine. I wouldn't want to see a conflicting argument that virtually debunked my opinion either.

No, what I object to seeing is the argument that trying to remove a password from a region in a browser game = admiration of a man who murdered millions along with advocacy of ethnic cleansing and genocide. No, this is not just as bad as Nazism. This isn't even on the scale with Nazism.

Most folk in the region RP Stark and you can't seem to understand that. I think your still butthurt your shit proposal did not pass but this even shittier one will.

[Cormac Stark]

Most folk in the region RP Stark and you can't seem to understand that. I think your still butthurt your shit proposal did not pass but this even shittier one will.

I understand it. What you don't seem to understand is that I'm not anymore all right with people acting out their fantasies of being Nazis than I am with them actually being Nazis, and since I can't tell which of you are the former and which of you are the latter I enjoy banjecting you equally. In regard to the proposal: On the contrary, I'd be fine with a proposal written in text message abbreviations passing as long as it would open your despicable region to the thorough griefing it deserves.

[Sciongrad]

I can imagine. I wouldn't want to see a conflicting argument that virtually debunked my opinion either.

No, what I object to seeing is the argument that trying to remove a password from a region in a browser game = admiration of a man who murdered millions along with advocacy of ethnic cleansing and genocide. No, this is not just as bad as Nazism. This isn't even on the scale with Nazism.

If we're going to debate, let's keep the straw men to a minimum, please. Philosophically, you believe that Nazis don't have the right to exist in an organized region together - that's all anyone's pointed out. Now before I ask, note that I haven't, nor do I plan, on comparing you to Hitler. I don't think anyone has compared you to Hitler yet. But anyways - do you believe that segregating or murdering people based on ideology isn't the hallmark of some of history's most totalitarian governments? If you plan on answering no, because this is an internet browser, and that you're not starving millions of people to death or performing political assassinations, or some other silly refrain, then I laugh at you. If you answer yes, then I'm glad we see eye to eye.

[Cormac Stark]

If we're going to debate, let's keep the straw men to a minimum, please. Philosophically, you believe that Nazis don't have the right to exist in an organized region together - that's all anyone's pointed out. Now before I ask, note that I haven't, nor do I plan, on comparing you to Hitler. I don't think anyone has compared you to Hitler yet. But anyways - do you believe that segregating or murdering people based on ideology isn't the hallmark of some of history's most totalitarian governments? If you plan on answering no, because this is an internet browser, and that you're not starving millions of people to death or performing political assassinations, or some other silly refrain, then I laugh at you. If you answer yes, then I'm glad we see eye to eye.

You can laugh all you want, but I'm not going to get into a debate about RL totalitarianism with you when it has nothing whatsoever to do with this situation. This is a browser game, it's for people's enjoyment, and the vast majority of us don't enjoy having to share this space with people who adore Hitler and advocate hatred and murder. Period. I'm not getting into any deeper philosophical debate than that because there isn't any deep philosophy involved here.