[DRAFT] Liberate The Internationale

[West Leas Oros]

Alright folks lets focus on the silly proposal, not WW2 era communist politics

Fine.

anarchist.

[Carcerum]

Since the Council supports moralistic interventionism and has now passed TWO motions about it, I see no reason not to support this. Maybe people will think twice about setting bad precedents. I did warn the Members several times about precisely this sort of thing occurring.

I guarantee this will not be the only moralistic counter-liberation coming out of the Kaiserraich decision.

#NaziGate amirite?

[Socastia]

Full support.

[Kavagrad]

Since the Council supports moralistic interventionism and has now passed TWO motions about it, I see no reason not to support this. Maybe people will think twice about setting bad precedents. I did warn the Members several times about precisely this sort of thing occurring.

I guarantee this will not be the only moralistic counter-liberation coming out of the Kaiserraich decision.

#NaziGate amirite?

Difference is, this simply isn't going to pass, even if UM were to submit it (and since he's retracted his own support for this proposal, that's super unlikely as it is).

[Carcerum]

Since the Council supports moralistic interventionism and has now passed TWO motions about it, I see no reason not to support this. Maybe people will think twice about setting bad precedents. I did warn the Members several times about precisely this sort of thing occurring.

I guarantee this will not be the only moralistic counter-liberation coming out of the Kaiserraich decision.

#NaziGate amirite?

Difference is, this simply isn't going to pass, even if UM were to submit it (and since he's retracted his own support for this proposal, that's super unlikely as it is).

Even if it doesn't pass, it still gets filed away in the "jurisprudence" (so to speak) of the Council and can be referred to later.

This motion would be a death trap for the pinko-commie partisans. Either they vote in favor of taking out one of their own precious "comrades", or they effectively strike down their own precedent and make themselves out to be fools. God, I love it!

[Kavagrad]

Difference is, this simply isn't going to pass, even if UM were to submit it (and since he's retracted his own support for this proposal, that's super unlikely as it is).

Even if it doesn't pass, it still gets filed away in the "jurisprudence" (so to speak) of the Council and can be referred to later.

This motion would be a death trap for the pinko-commie partisans. Either they vote in favor of taking out one of their own precious "comrades", or they effectively strike down their own precedent and make themselves out to be fools. God, I love it!

Hardly. The way I see it, if extreme-right regions are liberated, that will set a precedent for liberating extreme-right regions. If a radical leftist region's liberation attempt is shot down, that sets a precedent of not liberating those regions. These two precedents can, and likely will, co-exist.

And again, as if I can't make this clear enough, it's extremely unlikely that this will even get submitted. That doesn't stop others from proposing other proposals for other leftist regions, but I doubt you'll even see them hit quorum.

[Blood Wine]

#NaziGate amirite?

Just, no - people need to stop using - gate for scandals, watergate is not a scandal about water ffs

[Forestavia]

I stand in this chamber today in opposition of this so-called "liberation". There is a terrible trend happening in our world today and we need to stand against it. You'll get no argument from me that communism is a terrible oppressive ideology. But we cannot slip down this road where the Security Council is misused to threaten native nations on their own homeland. I have already stood in defense of KAISERREICH, The Red Fleet, and Nazi Europa and today I stand in defense of The Internationale, where Proletaire is founder and where a community of over 500 nations reside.

I'm sure many are already aware of my position on this issue. Call me broken record. These are not your traditional liberations. They are warzone creations. Yes, I am aware that the author of this particular resolution wrote this to prove a point. Nonetheless, if this resolution is submitted it will actually be voted on as a real resolution and if it passes it will have real gameplay consequences.

We must stand firm against this dangerous trend of sticking our nose where it doesn't belong. We are "liberating" these people from themselves against their will. Now let's play this out. If The Internationale is actually "liberated" and if Proletaire ceases to exist the officers and natives of that land will not have the option of protecting their region with a password. They deserve a chance to govern themselves their own way without any interference from the World Assembly.

Put yourself in their shoes. How would you feel if it was YOUR region that was targeted in this militaristic way? We are supposed to use the Security Council for the purposes of peace and harmony and this thing called the "liberation" is supposed to be used to assist natives on their own lands. It was never intended to be used to harass natives on their own soil. The Security Council has just under 1,000 nations on its radar. About half of those nations reside within TI which makes this vote particularly important. If this is submitted please vote against it.

You do realize this liberation is meant to show how ridiculous it is to ideologically "liberate" regions.

Yep. Second paragraph.

[Forestavia]

These are not your traditional liberations. They are warzone creations.

Thats not how this works, like at all - educate yourself on how the game works

It's exactly how the game works. When these founders start dying off, these "liberated" regions will be left defenseless, without a password. Soon enough they will be invaded and the natives will eventually get banned from their own region. They will only be able to return if the ban list is cleared. Defenders may or may not show up at some later update. This is how things will be until the WA decides to remove the "liberation" from the region.

My point is we are taking the war to them. We are basically saying to every raider in the world, "Looky, looky over here! Raid these people when their founder ceases to exist, they'll be defenseless because we took away their ability to password their region."

[Cedoria]

Thats not how this works, like at all - educate yourself on how the game works

It's exactly how the game works. When these founders start dying off, these "liberated" regions will be left defenseless, without a password. Soon enough they will be invaded and the natives will eventually get banned from their own region. They will only be able to return if the ban list is cleared. Defenders may or may not show up at some later update. This is how things will be until the WA decides to remove the "liberation" from the region.

My point is we are taking the war to them. We are basically saying to every raider in the world, "Looky, looky over here! Raid these people when their founder ceases to exist, they'll be defenseless because we took away their ability to password their region."

Defenders and Raiders in the past have both collaborated in attacks on hard-right wing regions.

Difference is, this simply isn't going to pass, even if UM were to submit it (and since he's retracted his own support for this proposal, that's super unlikely as it is).

Even if it doesn't pass, it still gets filed away in the "jurisprudence" (so to speak) of the Council and can be referred to later.

This motion would be a death trap for the pinko-commie partisans. Either they vote in favor of taking out one of their own precious "comrades", or they effectively strike down their own precedent and make themselves out to be fools. God, I love it!

You shouldn't. Because the assumption relies on saying that KR (Or Nazi Europa) are morally equivalent to The Internationale and the ideology it expresses. Since you're not a fool, I'm going to assume you won't make the mistake of assuming they are.

[Kokoku]

The statements have been made, and our protest has concluded.

We will now withdraw our support, and work towards making the SC an ethical body.

[Asturies-Llion]

Difference is, this simply isn't going to pass, even if UM were to submit it (and since he's retracted his own support for this proposal, that's super unlikely as it is).

Even if it doesn't pass, it still gets filed away in the "jurisprudence" (so to speak) of the Council and can be referred to later.

This motion would be a death trap for the pinko-commie partisans. Either they vote in favor of taking out one of their own precious "comrades", or they effectively strike down their own precedent and make themselves out to be fools. God, I love it!

I already said we were opposed. I think that this is not the role of the SC, if a military wants to raid a region it should be by their own means, not with the help of the SC, since it is supposed to be a neutral body and created in order to promote peace, not in order to help invasions. And the thing many people are calling 'the liberation wars' are proposals making invasions easier, not liberations, because a liberation takes place when a region has been invaded and natives are controlled from out of their own region, and another force helps in the task of expelling invaders.

[Jar Wattinree]

Even if it doesn't pass, it still gets filed away in the "jurisprudence" (so to speak) of the Council and can be referred to later.

This motion would be a death trap for the pinko-commie partisans. Either they vote in favor of taking out one of their own precious "comrades", or they effectively strike down their own precedent and make themselves out to be fools. God, I love it!

I already said we were opposed. I think that this is not the role of the SC, if a military wants to raid a region it should be by their own means, not with the help of the SC, since it is supposed to be a neutral body and created in order to promote peace, not in order to help invasions. And the thing many people are calling 'the liberation wars' are proposals making invasions easier, not liberations, because a liberation takes place when a region has been invaded and natives are controlled from out of their own region.

As far as I can recall, Liberations were a mechanic introduced to level the R/D playing field in favor of Defenders. Once the Raiders had locked a region behind a password, it was game over.

[West Leas Oros]

I already said we were opposed. I think that this is not the role of the SC, if a military wants to raid a region it should be by their own means, not with the help of the SC, since it is supposed to be a neutral body and created in order to promote peace, not in order to help invasions. And the thing many people are calling 'the liberation wars' are proposals making invasions easier, not liberations, because a liberation takes place when a region has been invaded and natives are controlled from out of their own region.

As far as I can recall, Liberations were a mechanic introduced to level the R/D playing field in favor of Defenders. Once the Raiders had locked a region behind a password, it was game over.

that's what they were supposed to be used for, but liberate KR has shown that it doesn't mean jack.

[Lenlyvit]

As far as I can recall, Liberations were a mechanic introduced to level the R/D playing field in favor of Defenders. Once the Raiders had locked a region behind a password, it was game over.

that's what they were supposed to be used for, but liberate KR has shown that it doesn't mean jack.

Liberations still mean exactly what they were meant for, they just have an added on connotation now.

[West Leas Oros]

that's what they were supposed to be used for, but liberate KR has shown that it doesn't mean jack.

Liberations still mean exactly what they were meant for, they just have an added on connotation now.

"Liberating" is such a vague term, it can mean whatever you want!

[Lenlyvit]

Liberations still mean exactly what they were meant for, they just have an added on connotation now.

"Liberating" is such a vague term, it can mean whatever you want!

Uh, no. Allow me to pull up Meriam Webster's Dictionary: "Definition of liberate
liberated; liberating
transitive verb
1 : to set at liberty : free; specifically : to free (something, such as a country) from domination by a foreign power
2 : to free from combination liberate the gas by adding acid
3 : to take or take over illegally or unjustly
material liberated from a nearby construction site —Thorne Dreyer"

[Blood Wine]

I already said we were opposed. I think that this is not the role of the SC, if a military wants to raid a region it should be by their own means, not with the help of the SC, since it is supposed to be a neutral body and created in order to promote peace, not in order to help invasions. And the thing many people are calling 'the liberation wars' are proposals making invasions easier, not liberations, because a liberation takes place when a region has been invaded and natives are controlled from out of their own region.

As far as I can recall, Liberations were a mechanic introduced to level the R/D playing field in favor of Defenders. Once the Raiders had locked a region behind a password, it was game over.

Yes, and this IS in the favor of defenders - all of the GP community unites against fascism

[Asturies-Llion]

I already said we were opposed. I think that this is not the role of the SC, if a military wants to raid a region it should be by their own means, not with the help of the SC, since it is supposed to be a neutral body and created in order to promote peace, not in order to help invasions. And the thing many people are calling 'the liberation wars' are proposals making invasions easier, not liberations, because a liberation takes place when a region has been invaded and natives are controlled from out of their own region.

As far as I can recall, Liberations were a mechanic introduced to level the R/D playing field in favor of Defenders. Once the Raiders had locked a region behind a password, it was game over.

That is what I meant

[West Leas Oros]

As far as I can recall, Liberations were a mechanic introduced to level the R/D playing field in favor of Defenders. Once the Raiders had locked a region behind a password, it was game over.

Yes, and this IS in the favor of defenders - all of the GP community unites against fascism

Quite the large claim you made. I hope you are able to provide evidence to any doubters.

[West Leas Oros]

"Liberating" is such a vague term, it can mean whatever you want!

Uh, no. Allow me to pull up Meriam Webster's Dictionary: "Definition of liberate
liberated; liberating
transitive verb
1 : to set at liberty : free; specifically : to free (something, such as a country) from domination by a foreign power
2 : to free from combination liberate the gas by adding acid
3 : to take or take over illegally or unjustly
material liberated from a nearby construction site —Thorne Dreyer"

What do you make of this?