I'm considering drafting a mutual defence resolution (sort of like Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty), but I'd like to know if it'd be legal first. I'm aware of the "no WA army" rule, but this wouldn't seem to violate that as it doesn't actually assign the WA a military force; it merely sets expectations for the use of national militaries.
If you see I've made a mistake in my wording or a factual detail, telegram me and I'll fix it. I'll even give you credit for pointing it out, if you'd like.
BLUE LIVES MURDER
[violet]: Maybe we could power our new search engine from the sexual tension between you two. Me, responding to a request to vote for a liberation: But... but that would blemish my near-perfect history of spitefully voting against anything the SC does! Farnhamia: That is not to be taken as license to start calling people "buttmunch."
It would be unreasonable, though, if not illegal. NationStates isn't shaped liked the real world, so WA members might even be lightyears away from each other. Not to mention that NATO is a voluntary treaty. This resolution would be binding for all members, even if they're enemies.
I can observe that some countries will have no military for reasons of neutrality and peace honoured ambassador. I think NATO in real life appears to be a form of a world army, even if a WA equivalent was formed, so therefore it would be illegal.
by Linux and the X » Sat Oct 10, 2009 8:53 am 