Canceled

by **Germantica** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 11:01 am

Draft Cancelled

by **Grays Harbor** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 11:43 am

THEREFORE the stated above shall be henceforth implemented into Warfare doctrine, Relief effort function/reprisal, refugee sustainability/importance, and finally WA LAW!

Care to explain just what, exactly, you mean by "implemented into"? Or why you feel the need to use allcaps for some of this?

Oh, and while we're at it ... Category? Strength?

by **Germantica** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 11:50 am

The bold first worlds are used in most WA bills so that's why they are there(to add emphases, and awareness to bill) The implication is to add this to resolution #306 and to have it considered in bills that deal with Warfare doctrine, Relief effort function/reprisal, refugee sustainability/importance, and law.

by **Grays Harbor** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 11:53 am

Germantica wrote:The bold first worlds are used in most WA bills so that's why they are there(to add emphases, and awareness to bill) The implication is to add this to resolution #306 and to have it considered in bills that deal with Warfare doctrine, Relief effort function/reprisal, refugee sustainability/importance, and law.

Which then makes this illegal. No amendments allowed. At all.

And lose the "WA LAW" allcaps.

by **Germantica** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 12:04 pm

There it has been edited, wont be an amendment it shall be a law that coincides with another, doesn't change it, addition should be valid correct?

Human Rights, Significant possibly considering it saves people and condemns criminals

by **Outer Sparta** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 12:08 pm

Again, what's the category and strength?

by **Germantica** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 12:10 pm

Germantica wrote:Human Rights, Significant possibly considering it saves people and condemns criminals

by **Imperium Anglorum** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 12:13 pm

This is a violation of On Universal Jurisdiction, which prevents the creation of an international tribunal.

by **Germantica** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 12:16 pm

Imperium Anglorum wrote:This is a violation of On Universal Jurisdiction, which prevents the creation of an international tribunal.

Ok, fine the bill dosnt create such but is it evident that after a war, a war crime tribune would be set up automaticly?

by **Grays Harbor** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 12:16 pm

Germantica wrote:There it has been edited, wont be an amendment it shall be a law that coincides with another, doesn't change it, addition should be valid correct

No, because that just makes it a House of Cards violation. I would recommend you read this.

by **Germantica** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 12:21 pm

I have read that, how does it violate the structure of the resolutions and how can it not stand alone, bills have been made that coincide with others before it, yes?

by **Imperium Anglorum** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 12:25 pm

Germantica wrote:
Imperium Anglorum wrote:This is a violation of On Universal Jurisdiction, which prevents the creation of an international tribunal.

Ok, fine the bill dosnt create such but is it evident that after a war, a war crime tribune would be set up automaticly?

Doing so violates On Universal Jurisdiction.

by **Germantica** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 12:25 pm

Never mind, On Universal Jurisdiction has most of information already presented, they really need to make resolutions searchable my category. Don't worry Ill think of a better law to pase

by **Sierra Lyricalia** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 12:28 pm

If 306 is repealed, then this is "an EXTENSION" of jack squat. Therefore HoC, therefore illegal. If you want to prosecute alleged war criminals for alleged war crimes, you'll need to do some tricky shuffling indeed to avoid violating GAR 312, ~~which you should honestly read before doing any more work on this.~~

Edit: point received & explicitly taken. Positive step indeed.

Canceled

Canceled

Who is online