[DEFEATED] World Assembly Peace Prize

by **Socialist Amogus** » Mon Aug 09, 2021 10:10 pm

hello

by **Tinhampton** » Mon Aug 09, 2021 10:12 pm

Socialist Amogus wrote:hello

Thanks for your support, pity it's only worth four votes

by **Pre-Christian Persecuted People** » Mon Aug 09, 2021 10:57 pm

We vote against as we invest a lot on military to fend off aggression by monsters and help persecuted people following old religions.

by **Separatist Peoples** » Tue Aug 10, 2021 1:41 am

"We are opposed. This proposal is wasteful fluff for which the World Assembly has no need. If it passes due to the resounding ignorance of the voters, I will happily bankroll any repeal effort."

by **Cappedore** » Tue Aug 10, 2021 6:10 am

THE COUNTY OF CAPPEDORE

is FOR this resolution.

This resolution takes an international stand for the promotion of worldwide peace, and therefore it has gained our support.

by **Doge Land** » Tue Aug 10, 2021 9:24 am

What was the thought process that went into this resolution? I mean this sounds so much like a request for a game feature I have no clue how it passed through GenSec...

also why is this not in the sc like what

by **Cappedore** » Tue Aug 10, 2021 10:12 am

Doge Land wrote:What was the thought process that went into this resolution? I mean this sounds so much like a request for a game feature I have no clue how it passed through GenSec...

also why is this not in the sc like what

It's a roleplay resolution, which is allowed. Plus, the reason why it's not in the Security Council is because it's legislation.

by **Wallenburg** » Tue Aug 10, 2021 10:34 am

Cappedore wrote:
Doge Land wrote:What was the thought process that went into this resolution? I mean this sounds so much like a request for a game feature I have no clue how it passed through GenSec...

also why is this not in the sc like what

It's a roleplay resolution, which is allowed. Plus, the reason why it's not in the Security Council is because it's legislation.

I maintain that this would have worked better as a Security Council Declaration.

by **Cappedore** » Tue Aug 10, 2021 10:36 am

Wallenburg wrote:
Cappedore wrote:It's a roleplay resolution, which is allowed. Plus, the reason why it's not in the Security Council is because it's legislation.

I maintain that this would have worked better as a Security Council Declaration.

I disagree; this reads more as legislation, and as such wouldn't mean anything if it were listed as a Security Council declaration.

by **Imperium Anglorum** » Tue Aug 10, 2021 10:52 am

Lmao you know nobody is getting any WA peace prizes for anything they do, with or without this resolution, right?

by **Pekares** » Tue Aug 10, 2021 11:52 am

Will just lead to increased spending by the WA. Unnecessary spending.

by **Bears Armed** » Tue Aug 10, 2021 12:54 pm

Imperium Anglorum wrote:Lmao you know nobody is getting any WA peace prizes for anything they do, with or without this resolution, right?

OOC: Or, at least, if they do then we'll never know that they did.

by **The Free Humans** » Tue Aug 10, 2021 4:11 pm

"We're not so happy about having to grant medals to nations in order to avoid violence- but if that's what it takes to reign in some of these barbarians then we'll grant our approval. But I hope we can prioritize peace- regardless of it we're going to be granted a medal for it or not." -Zuhairuh Amara

by **Wallenburg** » Tue Aug 10, 2021 4:57 pm

Pekares wrote:Will just lead to increased spending by the WA. Unnecessary spending.

Seeing as the full expenditures involved are a handful of small medals each year and maybe half a dozen office workers to handle nominations and select award winners, this may be the least expensive resolution of the year.

by **Kurogasa** » Tue Aug 10, 2021 5:24 pm

Wallenburg wrote:
Pekares wrote:Will just lead to increased spending by the WA. Unnecessary spending.

Seeing as the full expenditures involved are a handful of small medals each year and maybe half a dozen office workers to handle nominations and select award winners, this may be the least expensive resolution of the year.

Being cheap doesn't change the fact that it's pointless.

by **URA World Assembly Affairs** » Tue Aug 10, 2021 7:16 pm

The United Regions Alliance recommends that nations vote for this resolution. https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1579663

by **UHMERIKUHH** » Tue Aug 10, 2021 8:45 pm

this dumb, me vote no

by **Fachumonn** » Wed Aug 11, 2021 4:27 am

Tinhampton wrote:
Socialist Amogus wrote:hello

Thanks for your support, pity it's only worth four votes

I supported, worth 17 votes.

by **Eastern Elystadt** » Wed Aug 11, 2021 3:41 pm

While it might sound like a good idea at first, it's not an ideal solution regarding armed conflicts. For us specifically, it's hard to do so regarding hostile nations around our borders. The nation needs protection, and if the nations around us won't slash their spending and continue, neither will we.

OPPOSED.

- Prime Minister of Eastern Elystadt.

by **Sylh Alanor** » Wed Aug 11, 2021 5:32 pm

Eastern Elystadt wrote:While it might sound like a good idea at first, it's not an ideal solution regarding armed conflicts. For us specifically, it's hard to do so regarding hostile nations around our borders. The nation needs protection, and if the nations around us won't slash their spending and continue, neither will we.

OPPOSED.

- Prime Minister of Eastern Elystadt.

Why is it that, when you are surrounded by hostile forces, you wouldn't hope for potential avenues toward seeding peace in your region? That seems nonsensical, unless you are generally the aggressor in those conflicts. Furthermore, the resolution has no requirements to lower military spending.

by **Separatist Peoples** » Wed Aug 11, 2021 5:55 pm

Sylh Alanor wrote:
Eastern Elystadt wrote:While it might sound like a good idea at first, it's not an ideal solution regarding armed conflicts. For us specifically, it's hard to do so regarding hostile nations around our borders. The nation needs protection, and if the nations around us won't slash their spending and continue, neither will we.

OPPOSED.

- Prime Minister of Eastern Elystadt.

Why is it that, when you are surrounded by hostile forces, you wouldn't hope for potential avenues toward seeding peace in your region? That seems nonsensical, unless you are generally the aggressor in those conflicts. Furthermore, the resolution has no requirements to lower military spending.

Ooc: the category reduces military spending.

by **Sylh Alanor** » Wed Aug 11, 2021 6:02 pm

Separatist Peoples wrote:
Sylh Alanor wrote:Why is it that, when you are surrounded by hostile forces, you wouldn't hope for potential avenues toward seeding peace in your region? That seems nonsensical, unless you are generally the aggressor in those conflicts. Furthermore, the resolution has no requirements to lower military spending.

Ooc: the category reduces military spending.

OOC: Oops, lol, I totally missed that.

by **Waldenes** » Thu Aug 12, 2021 9:44 pm

“Ambassadors I find the vote to be very disappointing thus far. This may seem frivolous at first but any incentive to encourage peace is just fine by us. Glorify peace over war. I think it is a good trend.”

by **Druznia** » Thu Aug 12, 2021 11:26 pm

We are voting FOR because we see a new opportunity to recognize the nations well known for their efforts for peacekeeping. Glory to our King.

by **Amorosa-Coonarra Coasts** » Fri Aug 13, 2021 4:25 am

This is shaking up to be a very divisive resolution.
The current For/Against margin is just 876 votes.
I'm on the edge of my seat.

[DEFEATED] World Assembly Peace Prize

The Free Humans hesitantly grants their support

We, The Peoples of Eastern Elystadt, Oppose This Resolution.

Who is online