NATION

PASSWORD

[DRAFT]Limitiations On Conscription

Where WA members debate how to improve the world, one resolution at a time.

Remove ads

User avatar
Fauxia
Senator
 
Posts: 3775
Founded: Dec 22, 2016
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Fauxia » Wed Jan 17, 2018 6:56 pm

Araraukar wrote:
Feztobania wrote:"Crime and Punishment? Excuse me but I do not follow. What do you mean Crime and Punishment?

"They're referring to a resolution by that name," Johan said. "There is a nice archive of them on the premises, with an easy-to-search filing system."
“Thank you, ambassador. Now, if you do not mind, what is your opinion on this?”
Not the similarly named Feux.
I have issues.
My views do not represent any government I serve in the unlikely event someone is insane enough to vote for me.
Reploid Productions wrote:Unfortunately, Max still won't buy the mods elite ninja assassin squads to use, so... no such luck.

User avatar
Araraukar
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11727
Founded: May 14, 2007
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Araraukar » Thu Jan 18, 2018 2:33 pm

Fauxia wrote:“Thank you, ambassador. Now, if you do not mind, what is your opinion on this?”

"I am actually not an ambassador, though I'm fulfilling the obligations of that role in miss Leveret's absence," Johan explained. "And the official stance of the Grand Nation of Araraukar is that war, and thus military-anything, is a barbaric remainder from the time when the primitive ancestors of the now-sapient species fought one another for territory, and as such is not something any sapient species should be involved in. My actual personal opinion is that limiting the time of a "tour of duty" for a conscripted person is stupid if the person is serving willingly. You should limit the term of service for all soldiers, rather than one subgroup. Most nations that conscript soldiers are doing so out of necessity rather than malice1, and it makes no sense to punish them for having to resort to it."

OOC: Clause 6 reads like a contradiction of CoCR; why should conscripted soldiers be paid potentially more (the "generous" part) than professional ones?

OOC note: 1Exactly why Finland does it; with such a small population we can't afford a "professional" army large enough to have any kind of impact, but if in essence half the population is capable of fighting, it may give us some chance. As it did in the past.
"I've come to appreciate boring bureaucracy much more after my official execution..." - Johan Milkus, acting ambassador in the absence of miss Leveret
Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.

User avatar
Wallenburg
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18451
Founded: Jan 30, 2015
New York Times Democracy

Postby Wallenburg » Fri Jan 19, 2018 1:57 pm

"This is not acceptable. The limitations of the Military Freedom Act are strong as it is. We do not need a de facto blanket ban on conscription for those nations who treat conscripts better than mere cannon fodder."
PROFESSIONAL CRITIC OF ALL THINGS GENSEC
There never has been, nor will there ever be, such thing as a wallenburger.
PRO: GOOD || ANTI: BAD

User avatar
The First German Order
Envoy
 
Posts: 307
Founded: Dec 08, 2016
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby The First German Order » Sat Jan 20, 2018 9:35 pm

OOC: Wouldn't a work around be a nation coming up with their own calendar (like N. Korea) and then saying that 1 year in their calendar is like 50 years?
”Nuclear strikes do not damage the phone network. The atom respects your right to a final call.” - Dumb Ideologies

User avatar
Fauxia
Senator
 
Posts: 3775
Founded: Dec 22, 2016
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Fauxia » Mon Jan 22, 2018 8:27 pm

Wallenburg wrote:"This is not acceptable. The limitations of the Military Freedom Act are strong as it is. We do not need a de facto blanket ban on conscription for those nations who treat conscripts better than mere cannon fodder."
“This is not even close to a blanket ban on conscription. Had this been at vote, you would have been in breach of Read the Resolution Act.”
Last edited by Fauxia on Mon Jan 22, 2018 8:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Not the similarly named Feux.
I have issues.
My views do not represent any government I serve in the unlikely event someone is insane enough to vote for me.
Reploid Productions wrote:Unfortunately, Max still won't buy the mods elite ninja assassin squads to use, so... no such luck.

User avatar
Wallenburg
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18451
Founded: Jan 30, 2015
New York Times Democracy

Postby Wallenburg » Mon Jan 22, 2018 11:10 pm

Fauxia wrote:
Wallenburg wrote:"This is not acceptable. The limitations of the Military Freedom Act are strong as it is. We do not need a de facto blanket ban on conscription for those nations who treat conscripts better than mere cannon fodder."

“This is not even close to a blanket ban on conscription. Had this been at vote, you would have been in breach of Read the Resolution Act.”

"I said de facto, ambassador. Pay attention to my statements if you intend to criticize them."
PROFESSIONAL CRITIC OF ALL THINGS GENSEC
There never has been, nor will there ever be, such thing as a wallenburger.
PRO: GOOD || ANTI: BAD

User avatar
Fauxia
Senator
 
Posts: 3775
Founded: Dec 22, 2016
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Fauxia » Tue Jan 23, 2018 4:46 am

Wallenburg wrote:
Fauxia wrote:“This is not even close to a blanket ban on conscription. Had this been at vote, you would have been in breach of Read the Resolution Act.”

"I said de facto, ambassador. Pay attention to my statements if you intend to criticize them."
“I saw that, and it’s still ridiculous.”
Not the similarly named Feux.
I have issues.
My views do not represent any government I serve in the unlikely event someone is insane enough to vote for me.
Reploid Productions wrote:Unfortunately, Max still won't buy the mods elite ninja assassin squads to use, so... no such luck.

User avatar
Silverlight
Civil Servant
 
Posts: 7
Founded: Jan 22, 2018
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Silverlight » Tue Jan 23, 2018 2:54 pm

Statement from The Quartered Beast, King of Silverlight

"We feel the proposal, as it now stands, is redundant and unnecessary. Our nation already enforces compulsory military service for a maximum of one year, after which the individual is free to go back to their civilian life or to re-enlist; We find re-enlistment does not suffer from this policy, and most of Our citizens are proud to serve in rebuilding Our nation, feeling it is their duty to aid in Our efforts. For those nations that do not enforce conscription, this proposal is unnecessary. For nations that enforce conscription for more than one year, We feel it is not Our duty to intervene in their affairs, as they may very well have a good reason to do so. Overall, it would seem the proposal is nothing more than a practice in futility at this point in time, and as such We must vote against. But We must applaud the effort all the same, as well as the goodwill behind its intent. We are not without compassion and mercy, after all, and encourage the author of the proposal to continue to revise and refine the draft. Should it gain relevance, We shall revisit it at a later date."

User avatar
Wallenburg
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18451
Founded: Jan 30, 2015
New York Times Democracy

Postby Wallenburg » Tue Jan 23, 2018 6:37 pm

Fauxia wrote:
Wallenburg wrote:"I said de facto, ambassador. Pay attention to my statements if you intend to criticize them."

“I saw that, and it’s still ridiculous.”

"You...saw my speech? Oh right, the transcript. If you still consider my statement ridiculous, I don't really know how to elaborate in simpler words."
PROFESSIONAL CRITIC OF ALL THINGS GENSEC
There never has been, nor will there ever be, such thing as a wallenburger.
PRO: GOOD || ANTI: BAD

User avatar
Fauxia
Senator
 
Posts: 3775
Founded: Dec 22, 2016
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Fauxia » Tue Jan 23, 2018 6:43 pm

Wallenburg wrote:
Fauxia wrote:“I saw that, and it’s still ridiculous.”

"You...saw my speech? Oh right, the transcript. If you still consider my statement ridiculous, I don't really know how to elaborate in simpler words."
“Elaborate or don’t elaborate, you’re still wrong. This does not come close to banning conscription. It doesn’t de facto outlaw conscription. It places a few reasonable restrictions on it.”
Not the similarly named Feux.
I have issues.
My views do not represent any government I serve in the unlikely event someone is insane enough to vote for me.
Reploid Productions wrote:Unfortunately, Max still won't buy the mods elite ninja assassin squads to use, so... no such luck.

User avatar
Wallenburg
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18451
Founded: Jan 30, 2015
New York Times Democracy

Postby Wallenburg » Tue Jan 23, 2018 8:38 pm

Fauxia wrote:
Wallenburg wrote:"You...saw my speech? Oh right, the transcript. If you still consider my statement ridiculous, I don't really know how to elaborate in simpler words."
“Elaborate or don’t elaborate, you’re still wrong. This does not come close to banning conscription. It doesn’t de facto outlaw conscription. It places a few reasonable restrictions on it.”

"It restricts conscription to the extent that member states cannot give conscripts suitable training for combat and also put them to effective use. It most certainly makes impossible the use of conscripts to fulfill specialist roles that require extensive training. It basically legislates the use of conscripts purely as meat shields for the soldiers with real training."
Last edited by Wallenburg on Tue Jan 23, 2018 9:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
PROFESSIONAL CRITIC OF ALL THINGS GENSEC
There never has been, nor will there ever be, such thing as a wallenburger.
PRO: GOOD || ANTI: BAD

User avatar
Araraukar
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11727
Founded: May 14, 2007
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Araraukar » Wed Jan 24, 2018 4:46 am

OOC: Heh, just realized that your definitions create a huge loophole that allows any nation that wants to use conscription to use conscription freely and ignore everything in this... :lol:
"I've come to appreciate boring bureaucracy much more after my official execution..." - Johan Milkus, acting ambassador in the absence of miss Leveret
Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.

User avatar
Liagolas
Envoy
 
Posts: 342
Founded: Dec 18, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Liagolas » Wed Jan 24, 2018 9:51 am

Araraukar wrote:OOC: Heh, just realized that your definitions create a huge loophole that allows any nation that wants to use conscription to use conscription freely and ignore everything in this... :lol:

OOC: Care to share with the class?

IC:

"It is the observation of the Dominion that a quirk in phrasing may have created a weakness within the draft, Ambassador." The Mouth pulls out its copy of the draft, pointing to it in reference.

1. Defines combat role and all variants thereof, for the purposes of this resolution, as the active participation in open warfare against an enemy,

2. Defines conscription and all variants thereof, for the purposes of this resolution, as the mandatory enlistment of a person into the armed forces,

3. Mandates that no nation, during times of peace, may conscript any person for combat roles for periods of time that exceed one year,

4. Prohibits member nations from conscripting any person under the age of majority for combat roles,


"The first clause 'defines combat role' as 'the active participation in open warfare against an enemy,' and the third clause mandates that 'no nation, during times of peace, may conscript any person for combat roles for periods of time that exceed one year.'

"It is the belief of the Dominion that the first clause necessarily guts the second. After all, what 'time of peace' will involve 'participation in open warfare against an enemy'? That hardly seems peaceful at all.

"Therefore, in a time of peace, a nation may freely conscript denizens for as long as it likes, as no one is in 'open warfare against an enemy.' In a time of war, the third clause's mandate does not apply, so again, conscription can be as indefinite as the nation likes.

"The first clause furthermore creates problems for the fourth, as member nations are only prohibited from conscripting minors in 'combat roles,' which are roles that involve 'active participation in open warfare against an enemy,' which would similarly not be happening in peacetime. Thus, a nation could conscript minors as grunt soldiers so long as it is not actively at war or involved in martial conflict.

"The first clause would be better phrased as follows:

1. Defines combat role and all variants thereof, for the purposes of this resolution, as the a role which would involve active participation in open warfare against an enemy during a time of war or other martial conflict,


"It is the grant of the Dominion that this is a bit clunky, but to the Dominion it seems more or less serviceable. Thus, in a time of peace, a nation is prohibited from conscripting combat soldiery. In a time of war, it is free to.

"It is the acknowledgment of the Dominion that it is in staunch disagreement with policy that restricts conscription (if only because the Dominion relies upon forced labor for... nearly everything). But, it is the supposition of the Dominion that so long as it is not actually a member of this albeit august body, it might as well point out such flaws in the draft."
Last edited by Liagolas on Wed Jan 24, 2018 1:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Official Factbook (Mostly okay now)
Unofficial Guide to Liagolas (Coming like never!)
Leader: The Liagolas of the Dominion
Goodwill Ambassador: The Mouth of the Dominion
Aide: The First Hand for the Mouth of the Dominion ("Sam"?)
Official Tourist: The Inquiry of the Dominion
~MT. The proud wannabe hivemind with a representative all too aware of the nation's myriad shortcomings.
(Main nation of Baizou)

User avatar
Araraukar
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11727
Founded: May 14, 2007
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Araraukar » Wed Jan 24, 2018 11:15 am

Liagolas wrote:OOC: Care to share with the class?

OOC: Nah, I'll get yelled at just for pointing it out. Now they can yell at you instead... :P
"I've come to appreciate boring bureaucracy much more after my official execution..." - Johan Milkus, acting ambassador in the absence of miss Leveret
Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.

User avatar
Fauxia
Senator
 
Posts: 3775
Founded: Dec 22, 2016
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Fauxia » Wed Jan 24, 2018 4:31 pm

Wallenburg wrote:
Fauxia wrote: “Elaborate or don’t elaborate, you’re still wrong. This does not come close to banning conscription. It doesn’t de facto outlaw conscription. It places a few reasonable restrictions on it.”

"It restricts conscription to the extent that member states cannot give conscripts suitable training for combat and also put them to effective use. It most certainly makes impossible the use of conscripts to fulfill specialist roles that require extensive training. It basically legislates the use of conscripts purely as meat shields for the soldiers with real training."
“You shouldn’t be using conscripts for specialist roles. What next, are you going to force people to become rocket scientists?”
Not the similarly named Feux.
I have issues.
My views do not represent any government I serve in the unlikely event someone is insane enough to vote for me.
Reploid Productions wrote:Unfortunately, Max still won't buy the mods elite ninja assassin squads to use, so... no such luck.

User avatar
The First German Order
Envoy
 
Posts: 307
Founded: Dec 08, 2016
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby The First German Order » Thu Jan 25, 2018 8:05 am

Fauxia wrote:
Wallenburg wrote:"It restricts conscription to the extent that member states cannot give conscripts suitable training for combat and also put them to effective use. It most certainly makes impossible the use of conscripts to fulfill specialist roles that require extensive training. It basically legislates the use of conscripts purely as meat shields for the soldiers with real training."
“You shouldn’t be using conscripts for specialist roles. What next, are you going to force people to become rocket scientists?”

OOC: I mean, why wouldn't we force people to become rocket scientists?
All it does make sense to use conscripts for specialist roles. Militaries need some specialists, not just grunts.
”Nuclear strikes do not damage the phone network. The atom respects your right to a final call.” - Dumb Ideologies

User avatar
Araraukar
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11727
Founded: May 14, 2007
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Araraukar » Thu Jan 25, 2018 10:10 am

Fauxia wrote:“You shouldn’t be using conscripts for specialist roles.”

OOC: Even if the conscript is halfway there due to their civilian training and education?

Also, rocket scientists at least in RL tend to not be military peeps originally, anymore.
"I've come to appreciate boring bureaucracy much more after my official execution..." - Johan Milkus, acting ambassador in the absence of miss Leveret
Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.

User avatar
Wallenburg
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18451
Founded: Jan 30, 2015
New York Times Democracy

Postby Wallenburg » Thu Jan 25, 2018 10:41 am

Fauxia wrote:
Wallenburg wrote:"It restricts conscription to the extent that member states cannot give conscripts suitable training for combat and also put them to effective use. It most certainly makes impossible the use of conscripts to fulfill specialist roles that require extensive training. It basically legislates the use of conscripts purely as meat shields for the soldiers with real training."

“You shouldn’t be using conscripts for specialist roles. What next, are you going to force people to become rocket scientists?”

"Military specialists and rocket scientists are not even remotely comparable."
PROFESSIONAL CRITIC OF ALL THINGS GENSEC
There never has been, nor will there ever be, such thing as a wallenburger.
PRO: GOOD || ANTI: BAD

User avatar
Fauxia
Senator
 
Posts: 3775
Founded: Dec 22, 2016
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Fauxia » Thu Jan 25, 2018 2:37 pm

Araraukar wrote:
Fauxia wrote:“You shouldn’t be using conscripts for specialist roles.”

OOC: Even if the conscript is halfway there due to their civilian training and education?

Also, rocket scientists at least in RL tend to not be military peeps originally, anymore.
OOC: They aren't really all that close if you have to keep training them for more than a year. If you can finish the training within the year, that's great, but if you can't, you're taking too much from the person.

Wallenburg wrote:
Fauxia wrote:“You shouldn’t be using conscripts for specialist roles. What next, are you going to force people to become rocket scientists?”

"Military specialists and rocket scientists are not even remotely comparable."
"The idea is that you shouldn't be forcing people to train for things that will take longer than a reasonable timeframe."

The First German Order wrote:
Fauxia wrote: “You shouldn’t be using conscripts for specialist roles. What next, are you going to force people to become rocket scientists?”

OOC: I mean, why wouldn't we force people to become rocket scientists?
All it does make sense to use conscripts for specialist roles. Militaries need some specialists, not just grunts.
OOC: Nothing stops those people from joining voluntarily, or from you giving incentives to have them join.
Not the similarly named Feux.
I have issues.
My views do not represent any government I serve in the unlikely event someone is insane enough to vote for me.
Reploid Productions wrote:Unfortunately, Max still won't buy the mods elite ninja assassin squads to use, so... no such luck.

User avatar
The First German Order
Envoy
 
Posts: 307
Founded: Dec 08, 2016
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby The First German Order » Thu Jan 25, 2018 4:12 pm

Fauxia wrote:
Araraukar wrote:OOC: Even if the conscript is halfway there due to their civilian training and education?

Also, rocket scientists at least in RL tend to not be military peeps originally, anymore.
OOC: They aren't really all that close if you have to keep training them for more than a year. If you can finish the training within the year, that's great, but if you can't, you're taking too much from the person.

Wallenburg wrote:"Military specialists and rocket scientists are not even remotely comparable."
"The idea is that you shouldn't be forcing people to train for things that will take longer than a reasonable timeframe."

The First German Order wrote:OOC: I mean, why wouldn't we force people to become rocket scientists?
All it does make sense to use conscripts for specialist roles. Militaries need some specialists, not just grunts.
OOC: Nothing stops those people from joining voluntarily, or from you giving incentives to have them join.

OOC: So we can threaten to execute them if they don't join? That's an incentive, right?
”Nuclear strikes do not damage the phone network. The atom respects your right to a final call.” - Dumb Ideologies

User avatar
Wallenburg
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18451
Founded: Jan 30, 2015
New York Times Democracy

Postby Wallenburg » Thu Jan 25, 2018 4:30 pm

Fauxia wrote:
Araraukar wrote:"Military specialists and rocket scientists are not even remotely comparable."

"The idea is that you shouldn't be forcing people to train for things that will take longer than a reasonable timeframe."

"The only unreasonable timeframe here is the one this proposal sets on conscription."
PROFESSIONAL CRITIC OF ALL THINGS GENSEC
There never has been, nor will there ever be, such thing as a wallenburger.
PRO: GOOD || ANTI: BAD

User avatar
Fauxia
Senator
 
Posts: 3775
Founded: Dec 22, 2016
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Fauxia » Thu Jan 25, 2018 4:47 pm

The First German Order wrote:
Fauxia wrote:OOC: They aren't really all that close if you have to keep training them for more than a year. If you can finish the training within the year, that's great, but if you can't, you're taking too much from the person.

"The idea is that you shouldn't be forcing people to train for things that will take longer than a reasonable timeframe."

OOC: Nothing stops those people from joining voluntarily, or from you giving incentives to have them join.

OOC: So we can threaten to execute them if they don't join? That's an incentive, right?
OOC: Positive incentive. I didn’t want to have to clarify that but of course I did.

Wallenburg wrote:
Fauxia wrote:"The idea is that you shouldn't be forcing people to train for things that will take longer than a reasonable timeframe."

"The only unreasonable timeframe here is the one this proposal sets on conscription."
"It is abhorrent that you do not believe that people have the right to vhoose their own jobs.”
Not the similarly named Feux.
I have issues.
My views do not represent any government I serve in the unlikely event someone is insane enough to vote for me.
Reploid Productions wrote:Unfortunately, Max still won't buy the mods elite ninja assassin squads to use, so... no such luck.

User avatar
Wallenburg
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18451
Founded: Jan 30, 2015
New York Times Democracy

Postby Wallenburg » Thu Jan 25, 2018 5:19 pm

Fauxia wrote:
Wallenburg wrote:"The only unreasonable timeframe here is the one this proposal sets on conscription."

"It is abhorrent that you do not believe that people have the right to vhoose their own jobs.”

"You know what's more abhorrent? Foreign occupation by a dictatorial power."
PROFESSIONAL CRITIC OF ALL THINGS GENSEC
There never has been, nor will there ever be, such thing as a wallenburger.
PRO: GOOD || ANTI: BAD

User avatar
Fauxia
Senator
 
Posts: 3775
Founded: Dec 22, 2016
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Fauxia » Thu Jan 25, 2018 6:16 pm

Wallenburg wrote:
Fauxia wrote:"It is abhorrent that you do not believe that people have the right to vhoose their own jobs.”

"You know what's more abhorrent? Foreign occupation by a dictatorial power."
"There's a reason these limitations go away during wartime."
Not the similarly named Feux.
I have issues.
My views do not represent any government I serve in the unlikely event someone is insane enough to vote for me.
Reploid Productions wrote:Unfortunately, Max still won't buy the mods elite ninja assassin squads to use, so... no such luck.

User avatar
Wallenburg
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18451
Founded: Jan 30, 2015
New York Times Democracy

Postby Wallenburg » Thu Jan 25, 2018 10:19 pm

Fauxia wrote:
Wallenburg wrote:"You know what's more abhorrent? Foreign occupation by a dictatorial power."

"There's a reason these limitations go away during wartime."

"They don't."
PROFESSIONAL CRITIC OF ALL THINGS GENSEC
There never has been, nor will there ever be, such thing as a wallenburger.
PRO: GOOD || ANTI: BAD

PreviousNext

Remove ads

Return to General Assembly

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: August, New Min

Remove ads