NationStates

Hi. I'm the World Assembly Delegate of The Arab League, which was occupied by Elite Region of Global Command and Nazi Europa. We were liberated and defenders swooped in to assist. I've come to the conclusion that the region continuing to be liberated is only creating more threats for the region. The text of the liberation is below. I'd really appreciate constructive feedback on this. Thank you.




Applauding the Security Council for liberating The Arab League from another anti-Muslim occupation;

Grateful to the Arab community and to various concerned regions for helping to stabilize TAL by supporting the region’s native government;

Knowing The Arab League’s government is dedicated to preserving TAL and will never abandon the region, as did the former TAL administration following the passage of SC#200;

Observing the influx of unknown nations to The Arab League;

Fearing SC#213 will enable determined anti-Muslim forces to topple the native government and destabilize The Arab League;

Believing that returning full control of The Arab League to its rightful government will further stabilize the region by allowing it to be password-protected against inevitable future invasions;

Hereby Repeals Security Council Resolution #213, "Liberate the Arab League."

Again, I'd really like to get some constructive feedback. Thanks!

Try to avoid abbreviations..

This is purely an aesthetic comment - although password is a legal term, I think a phrase like "reinstating border controls" reads better. Can't see anything illegal in the draft and I also agree with LollerLand's comment.

Okay. I made the requested edits.

Applauding the Security Council for liberating The Arab League from another anti-Muslim occupation;

Grateful to the Arab community and to various concerned regions for helping to stabilize The Arab League by supporting the region’s native government;

Knowing The Arab League’s government is dedicated to preserving the region and will never abandon it, as did the former administration following the passage of SC#200;

Observing the influx of unknown nations to The Arab League;

Fearing SC#213 will enable determined anti-Muslim forces to topple the native government and destabilize The Arab League;

Believing that reinstating border controls will allow The Arab League 's rightful government to safeguard against inevitable future invasions;

Hereby Repeals Security Council Resolution #213, "Liberate the Arab League."


Look better?

Looks good to me

Decently written, but personally against. You wanted it, you have to live with it for longer.

Cerian Quilor wrote:Decently written, but personally against. You wanted it, you have to live with it for longer.

Why? The liberation was successful. TAL shouldn't be punished for getting invaded and needing a liberation.

Shah-Armen wrote:Okay. I made the requested edits.

Applauding the Security Council for liberating The Arab League from another anti-Muslim occupation;

Grateful to the Arab community and to various concerned regions for helping to stabilize The Arab League by supporting the region’s native government;

Knowing The Arab League’s government is dedicated to preserving the region and will never abandon it, as did the former administration following the passage of SC#200;

Observing the influx of unknown nations to The Arab League;

Fearing SC#213 will enable determined anti-Muslim forces to topple the native government and destabilize The Arab League;

Believing that reinstating border controls will allow The Arab League 's rightful government to safeguard against inevitable future invasions;

Hereby Repeals Security Council Resolution #213, "Liberate the Arab League."


Look better?

Yeah, reads fine to me.

Neo Danzig wrote:

Cerian Quilor wrote:Decently written, but personally against. You wanted it, you have to live with it for longer.

Why? The liberation was successful. TAL shouldn't be punished for getting invaded and needing a liberation.

They should be punished until people stop abusing the liberation resolution. It is used far too often and too much.

You have our support, though, not being familiar with the Arab Leagues politics I must ask what assurance we have that the current government is the rightful one? Did you have an election, or is Shah-Armen the pre-invasion delegate?

Cerian Quilor wrote:

Neo Danzig wrote:Why? The liberation was successful. TAL shouldn't be punished for getting invaded and needing a liberation.

They should be punished until people stop abusing the liberation resolution. It is used far too often and too much.

I must admit I do agree with you on this CQ.

Cerian Quilor wrote:

Neo Danzig wrote:Why? The liberation was successful. TAL shouldn't be punished for getting invaded and needing a liberation.

They should be punished until people stop abusing the liberation resolution. It is used far too often and too much.

So we arbitarily pick on TAL, one of the smaller ones and less likely to be able to defend itself in the first place, because others (including KGB's piler force, The Invaders) have abused the system?

Where was this mindset when The Invaders (who back then were actual invaders) were obviously and deliberately shitting on the sanctity of the Security Council with proposal after proposal submitted for purposes of recruitment and publicity?

(I don't mean you personally, CQ, I know you weren't around)

Cerian Quilor wrote:

Neo Danzig wrote:Why? The liberation was successful. TAL shouldn't be punished for getting invaded and needing a liberation.

They should be punished until people stop abusing the liberation resolution. It is used far too often and too much.

If we're going to punish people for abusing the liberation resolution we should start with the most clearcut case of abuse, offensive liberations.

Roavin wrote:

Cerian Quilor wrote:They should be punished until people stop abusing the liberation resolution. It is used far too often and too much.

So we arbitarily pick on TAL, one of the smaller ones and less likely to be able to defend itself in the first place, because others (including KGB's piler force, The Invaders) have abused the system?

Where was this mindset when The Invaders (who back then were actual invaders) were obviously and deliberately shitting on the sanctity of the Security Council with proposal after proposal submitted for purposes of recruitment and publicity?

(I don't mean you personally, CQ, I know you weren't around)

I was always vehemently opposed to the crap the Invaders dumped on the SC and said so in these forums.

Edit. I should have been more explicit in my agreement with CQ. I agree with the second sentence of his statement, not the first.

Roavin wrote:

Cerian Quilor wrote:They should be punished until people stop abusing the liberation resolution. It is used far too often and too much.

So we arbitarily pick on TAL, one of the smaller ones and less likely to be able to defend itself in the first place, because others (including KGB's piler force, The Invaders) have abused the system?

Where was this mindset when The Invaders (who back then were actual invaders) were obviously and deliberately shitting on the sanctity of the Security Council with proposal after proposal submitted for purposes of recruitment and publicity?

(I don't mean you personally, CQ, I know you weren't around)

I don't know the particulars of that incident, but I would have been against that sort of thing. Though I don't think the Security Council has any sanctity. It's a many-headed cat, most of those heads corrupt or with an agenda.

Aclion wrote:

Cerian Quilor wrote:They should be punished until people stop abusing the liberation resolution. It is used far too often and too much.

If we're going to punish people for abusing the liberation resolution we should start with the most clearcut case of abuse, offensive liberations.

I was one of the few Independent-Imperialist voices against that (once) most famous of offensive libs, Liberate Nazi Europe. So yeah, I was against that too.

We did a sleeper operation in The Arab League --our forte , actually. There is no guarantee against that not happening in the days to come in TAL , Liberation or no Liberation. What do you say, Shah Armen ? <Wink>

Looks like there was a hiccup, this should've gone to vote at the last major but didn't.

Kaboomlandia wrote:Looks like there was a hiccup, this should've gone to vote at the last major but didn't.

It's actually missed three updates as far as I can see - has been raised in Technical.

Bhang Bhang Duc wrote:

Kaboomlandia wrote:Looks like there was a hiccup, this should've gone to vote at the last major but didn't.

It's actually missed three updates as far as I can see - has been raised in Technical.

I only saw it yesterday after noon, so I've only seen 2.

Kaboomlandia wrote:Looks like there was a hiccup, this should've gone to vote at the last major but didn't.

Hope this gets fixed soon.

Shah-Armen wrote:

Kaboomlandia wrote:Looks like there was a hiccup, this should've gone to vote at the last major but didn't.

Hope this gets fixed soon.

According to [v] it is fixed and going to vote at this major.

Full support, of course.

Cerian Quilor wrote:Decently written, but personally against. You wanted it, you have to live with it for longer.

I agree with this guy. The Arab League should be occupied always, not to protect the region from invasions, but to protect other regions from invasion by this region. Control the amount of nations allowed in the Arab League.

Konstantinovka wrote:

Cerian Quilor wrote:Decently written, but personally against. You wanted it, you have to live with it for longer.

I agree with this guy. The Arab League should be occupied always, not to protect the region from invasions, but to protect other regions from invasion by this region. Control the amount of nations allowed in the Arab League.

What? TAL aren't invaders.