NationStates

Free-Reorganized-States wrote:

Wallowis wrote:In the roleplays, yes. I understand your own private roleplays don't use MAD, but the forum rps take a more realistic approach.

Ah I see well guess I'll stick to firebombs then, hopefully they'll work better here then they did against Japan.

Wait actually can we even wage war against nations with WMDs then, or are they basically a sheet of paper with "I can do what I want" written on them?

New Roma Republic wrote:

Free-Reorganized-States wrote:
Ah I see well guess I'll stick to firebombs then, hopefully they'll work better here then they did against Japan.

Wait actually can we even wage war against nations with WMDs then, or are they basically a sheet of paper with "I can do what I want" written on them?

Firebombing civilian populations is a war crime, my guy

Free-Reorganized-States wrote:

New Roma Republic wrote:
Firebombing civilian populations is a war crime, my guy

Or whatever they did in IRAQ same thing functionally.

Wallowis wrote:

Free-Reorganized-States wrote:
Or whatever they did in IRAQ same thing functionally.

Yeah, that's also a war crime..


Saying "what about the time they did this which you're describing as a war crime" doesn't change our definitions

Free-Reorganized-States wrote:

Wallowis wrote:Yeah, that's also a war crime..


Saying "what about the time they did this which you're describing as a war crime" doesn't change our definitions

Are you legitimately saying we aren't allowed to carpet bomb, are we using the Geneva conventions or something?

Wallowis wrote:

Free-Reorganized-States wrote:
Are you legitimately saying we aren't allowed to carpet bomb, are we using the Geneva conventions or something?

Like I said, bringing civillians into a purely military matter or directly attacking civillians or their rights as defined in the WA Declaration on Human Rights is our definition.

Wallowis wrote:

Free-Reorganized-States wrote:
Are you legitimately saying we aren't allowed to carpet bomb, are we using the Geneva conventions or something?

Like I said, bringing civillians into a purely military matter or directly attacking civillians or their rights as defined in the WA Declaration on Human Rights is our definition.

The New Puerto transitional republic wrote:

Wallowis wrote:Like I said, bringing civillians into a purely military matter or directly attacking civillians or their rights as defined in the WA Declaration on Human Rights is our definition.

So UN declaration of human rights?

Wallowis wrote:

The New Puerto transitional republic wrote:So UN declaration of human rights?

yes

Wallowis wrote:

The New Puerto transitional republic wrote:So UN declaration of human rights?

yes

The New Puerto transitional republic wrote:

The Military State of the Galapagos wrote:Your the one to talk

You also. I’ve seen your discord message history. Especially with under age girls.

Charoskania wrote:Oceania has a very expensive system to run. Why hasn't it collapsed yet?

GreatOceania wrote:

Charoskania wrote:Oceania has a very expensive system to run. Why hasn't it collapsed yet?

Define expensive what system are you talking about and what aspect of it

Charoskania wrote:

GreatOceania wrote:
Define expensive what system are you talking about and what aspect of it

Oceania controls the territory of the British Empire, and they oppress anyone who does not succumb to their propaganda. With a territory that large, it would be very expensive to maintain.

GreatOceania wrote:

Charoskania wrote:Oceania controls the territory of the British Empire, and they oppress anyone who does not succumb to their propaganda. With a territory that large, it would be very expensive to maintain.

The territories consists of Britain, All of America and the Oceanic nations, not everyone is oppressed the Proles have no interest in politics and just work until they die the inner party lives a lavish lifestyle profiting off of the perpetual war and any other war we take part in and also for the Proles and Outer party they live in Russian-style apartments due to being easy and cheap to construct so living conditions for them aren’t great unlike those in the Inner Party. Yes propaganda is everywhere and constantly playing and those who go against the Party will suffer It’s simple just follow what the party says, don’t think and speak newspeak.

How we maintain our land is employing cheap housing and using replaceable items in construction also we heavily use synthetic materials in almost everything yes we have the technology, knowledge, and resources to make living conditions better but we chose not to and instead divert them to the war effort the only people who are allowed to use natural resources (albeit at a limited extent) is the OSDRT who design and produce almost everything military equipment we do this to prevent a resource war with the 2 other superpower nations.

Romanic Imperium wrote:So your basically the Soviet Union

GreatOceania wrote:

Romanic Imperium wrote:So your basically the Soviet Union

No, apparently you didn't read anything in my post

If I was the USSR the Inner party which is made up of wealthy rich people wouldn't exist, those who are against us are re-educated and if that fails they're executed and no longer exist in Oceania the USSR send people no matter who they are to gulags while we have work camps we only send Eurasian and Eastasian POWs

Romanic Imperium wrote:
So racist USSR

Romanic Imperium wrote:

GreatOceania wrote:
No, apparently you didn't read anything in my post

If I was the USSR the Inner party which is made up of wealthy rich people wouldn't exist, those who are against us are re-educated and if that fails they're executed and no longer exist in Oceania the USSR send people no matter who they are to gulags while we have work camps we only send Eurasian and Eastasian POWs

So racist USSR

Republica Federal de Catalunya wrote:Observer Application

Your nation's full title: República Federal de Catalunya

Head of state: MHP Carles Puigdemon i Casamajó

Head of the government: MH Quim Torra i Pla

Representative name: MH Gemma Solanes i Rovira

Is your nation known for any human-right-related crises? If yes then list: No. We are a human rights respecten country.

Do you have the interest to be an official member in the future?: may be

Do you wish to share any pieces of information about human-right offends with the ULIBOR?: Yes

Are you a puppet of anyone? If yes then tell us: no

Technology level: MT

Wallowis wrote:

The New Puerto transitional republic wrote:So UN declaration of human rights?

yes

East Stal Saillnerce wrote:

Wallowis wrote:yes

Yeah, we really need to fix this. Again, does a violation of the Declaration constitute a war crime? If it does, I'm pretty certain several members no longer qualify for membership in ULIBOR. If it's a case-by-case issue, I think we really need to define what is considered a war crime and what isn't before it shows up when we put a person on trial who probably shouldn't be there.

A war crime is a violation of the laws of war that gives rise to individual criminal responsibility for actions by the combatants, such as intentionally killing civilians or intentionally killing prisoners of war, torture, taking hostages, unnecessarily destroying civilian property, deception by perfidy, wartime sexual violence, pillaging, the conscription of children in the military, committing genocide or ethnic cleansing, the granting of no quarter despite surrender, and flouting the legal distinctions of proportionality and military necessity.

The formal concept of war crimes emerged from the codification of the customary international law that applied to warfare between sovereign states, such as the Lieber Code (1863) of the Union Army in the American Civil War and the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907 for international war. In the aftermath of the Second World War, the war-crime trials of the leaders of the Axis powers established the Nuremberg principles of law, such as the fact that international criminal law defines what is a war crime. In 1949, the Geneva Conventions legally defined new war crimes and established that states could exercise universal jurisdiction over war criminals. In the late 20th century and early 21st century, international courts extrapolated and defined additional categories of war crimes applicable to a civil war.