[DEFEATED] Condemn the Invaders

by **Eostitorie** » Sun Oct 16, 2016 11:18 am

Description: The Security Council,

Recognizing The Invaders as a large and infamous raiding organization that enjoys bringing their reign of terror to innocent regions,

Horrified that The Invaders have raided many native communities with the intention of destroying them including:

-Social Liberal Union

-California

-Russia

-Zentari

-Sweden

-Warzone Airspace

-Singapore

-The North American Union

-Ireland

Dismayed that The Invaders go beyond conventional raiding and have infiltrated this august body itself in order to promote its destructive ways,

Appalled that The Invaders are part of an organization known as The Invader Network, which means that the ideology of The Invaders is spreading across the world at a very fast pace,

Resolving that the World Assembly should condemn the form of raiding The Invaders perpetuate,

Hereby condemns The Invaders.

This has been submitted to the SC and has reach quorum. Put it here for discussion because, to me, it looks like a self condemnation at its best. A brand spanking new nation writing a condemnation that perfectly makes site rules without any drafting? I don't think so.

by **Roavin** » Sun Oct 16, 2016 2:07 pm

Yes, absolutely smells like a selfie, therefore against.

by **We Are Not the NSA** » Sun Oct 16, 2016 5:02 pm

Description: The Security Council,

Recognizing The Invaders as a large and infamous raiding organization that enjoys bringing their reign of terror to innocent regions,

Horrified that The Invaders have raided many native communities with the intention of destroying them including:

According to the logic of this clause, we should just condemn TI because they wanted to destroy regions, in spite of the list it then gives showing that they are O for 9 when it comes to actually doing this. To clarify, it is specifically the wording of this clause that is stupid. The typical "they were mean to the natives in" or whatever would have sufficed.

-Social Liberal Union

-California

-Russia

-Zentari

-Sweden

-Warzone Airspace

Edit: Almost forgot: Warzones were specifically created so they could be raided, therefore raiding a Warzone is not a condemnable action. It's like saying being sent to the Rejected Realms is grounds for a DEAT.

-Singapore

-The North American Union

-Ireland

9 out of the 15 times the Enter Key was pushed when writing this proposal, it was just for this stupid list. If there was some additional information to go along with each of these it would be a little less annoying.

Dismayed that The Invaders go beyond conventional raiding and have infiltrated this august body itself in order to promote its destructive ways,

But... they were unsuccessful... they also did a bad job.

Appalled that The Invaders are part of an organization known as The Invader Network, which means that the ideology of The Invaders is spreading across the world at a very fast pace,

TIN has grown by like... 1 region in the few months that it has existed (correct me if I'm wrong on that). And then that same region pulled out of TIN a few days ago.

Even assuming that TIN was growing rapidly, this clause makes 0 sense. How does TI being in TIN mean that their ideology is spreading? That just straight up doesn't make sense, speaking solely in regards to cause and effect. There is no link between the supposed cause and the supposed effect.

Resolving that the World Assembly should condemn the form of raiding The Invaders perpetuate,

What form? Occupations? It is never actually explained what this clause means.

Hereby condemns The Invaders.

"Condemns" should be capitalized.

Overall, this lacks in substance and in merit. There are actually a few rather silly logical fallacies scattered throughout as well.

by **Bhang Bhang Duc** » Mon Oct 17, 2016 1:24 am

This looks like TI trying to game the SC once again with a self-condemnation. Took this copy of the author's history when I saw this in the queue.

2 days 18 hours ago: 800 was admitted to the World Assembly.
2 days 18 hours ago: 800 applied to join the World Assembly.
2 days 18 hours ago: Following new legislation in 800, chickens roam the streets freely.
2 days 18 hours ago: Following new legislation in 800, the government is reining in public spending.
2 days 18 hours ago: Following new legislation in 800, the tenet of free speech is held dear.
2 days 18 hours ago: Following new legislation in 800, voting is voluntary.
2 days 18 hours ago: 800 was founded in The East Pacific.

So a new nation tarts, gets enough endos to submit a resolution and then submits a legal one - not suspicious at all.

Oh and has a fairly extensive knowledge of TI's raids. Of course it's a TI puppet.

by **Navaronia** » Tue Oct 18, 2016 2:47 pm

[REDACTED]

Anyways, this proposal lines up too much with the previous failed SC proposal. Putting these claims together, I can tell that I will be against this.

by **Tinhampton** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 9:08 am

This is now at vote. Tinhampton shall vote AGAINST the proposal.

by **The Saint James Islands** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 9:18 am

As a member state of the Social Liberal Union, I am categorically opposed to giving the Invaders more publicity, even if this didn't smell like a self-condemnation. Against.

by **Ainland** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 10:30 am

It makes no difference to me whether the Invaders would like to be condemned or not. The question is simply, should the Security Council condemn them? I think so.

by **The Puddle Jumping Wads of Wrapper** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 11:03 am

Eostitorie wrote:Horrified that The Invaders have raided many native communities with the intention of destroying them including:

[...]

-Warzone Airspace

Wait, someone raided a warzone? Why, I'm absolutely horrified!

Or not.

Voted against.

by **Belmaria** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 11:05 am

Ainland wrote:It makes no difference to me whether the Invaders would like to be condemned or not. The question is simply, should the Security Council condemn them? I think so.

I agree completely. They can wear their condemnation as a badge of pride if they wish, but the rest of the community will know what it means when they see it on The Invaders' region.

by **Crowndonia** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 11:07 am

This vote has "Selfie" and "Ridiculous" written all over it.

Per most of the posts on here, and I'm voting against.

by **Tinhampton** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 11:10 am

The Puddle Jumping Wads of Wrapper wrote:
Eostitorie wrote:Horrified that The Invaders have raided many native communities with the intention of destroying them including:

[...]

-Warzone Airspace

Wait, someone raided a warzone? Why, I'm absolutely horrified!

Or not.

Voted against.

Delegate-Ambassador Smith: "And this, my friends, is why I have voted against this resolution. Why should a region receive a condemnation for raiding a Warzone? That would be like vaporising a nation just because it's in the 10,000 Islands!"

by **Galiagolach** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 11:57 am

Wow, the Invaders are really pulling out all the stops to make themselves famous.

I'm not even joking, you could literally take the text from this proposal and paste it into their WFE and it would not be out of place in the slightest. It's almost an advertisement at this point.

by **Imperium Anglorum** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 12:07 pm

This is honestly just a badly written proposal.

by **Malphe** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 12:35 pm

Imperium Anglorum wrote:This is honestly just a badly written proposal.

I'm surprised it reached Quota, frankly.

by **Swindenland** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 12:38 pm

I voted against, because I'm neutral & the bill isn't well done, plus there's no chance for anyone to invade my Region.

by **Belvia** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 2:55 pm

Yeah i'm against this. Selfie all over it.

by **T E Lawrence** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 3:21 pm

Amongst The Invaders residents, voting is currently 0-26 (100% Against).

At least write us a good one.

-- Lawrence.

by **Eostitorie** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 3:35 pm

T E Lawrence wrote:
Amongst The Invaders residents, voting is currently 0-26 (100% Against).

At least write us a good one.

-- Lawrence.

Of course you guys would vote against it. Can't be too suspicious and the newbies in TI don't know what a condemnation means.

by **Syolore** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 3:46 pm

We of Syolore will be voting against this as well. If this is really a selfie, then by condemning the TI we'd just be giving them what we want. Which misses the entire point of a condemnation.

by **Mexiklyn** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 4:12 pm

The Grand Nation Of Mexiklyn Is Against this Decision! Say Nay to This Unfair Justice!

by **T E Lawrence** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 4:31 pm

Galiagolach wrote:Wow, the Invaders are really pulling out all the stops to make themselves famous.

Any and all praise for The Invaders can go in our public complaint thread, located here.

-- Lawrence.

by **Frapen Folisia** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 4:57 pm

Galiagolach wrote:Wow, the Invaders are really pulling out all the stops to make themselves famous.

I'm not even joking, you could literally take the text from this proposal and paste it into their WFE and it would not be out of place in the slightest. It's almost an advertisement at this point.

Cool takeda logo

by **Horsean** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 5:24 pm

This resolution is useful! But it might be just their way to gain publicity......withdrawing my vote now until the regional delegate decides.

by **Targovia** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 5:27 pm

Against, this proposal reeks of self interest.

[DEFEATED] Condemn the Invaders

[DEFEATED] Condemn the Invaders

Freedom

[AT VOTE] Condemn the Invaders

Who is online