[PROPOSAL] Condemnation Of The World Assembly

[Unibot III]

New SC Proposal just dropped. Tell everybody.

(I am not the author.)

Security Council Proposal
ID: nociav_1659549844

Condemnation Of The World Assembly

A resolution to express a position on international affairs and obligations.

Category: Declaration
Type: Declare
Proposed by: Nociav
NOTING the World Assembly being an incomprehensible conglomeration of distantly related patch works of resolutions with no logical coherency tying everything together.

LAMPOONING the multiple resolutions passed by the General Assembly which suffocate developing economies with stringent regulations that exist for no reason other than to pat the backs of developed economies.

CRITICISING multiple resolutions passed by the General Assembly which, assuming a strictly uniform system present in different fields such as the judiciary, has caused tangible harm to member states.

BLASTING the moral lectures present in multiple resolutions as being little more than broad condemnations and generalisations of opposition views.

LAUGHING at the bureaucratic farce the General Assembly has created with committees and organisations being established on the most minute of subjects.

AMUSED by the persistent unintentional violations of General Assembly resolutions decisively proving the General Assembly to be a confusing mess.

OBSERVING the tribalism present in both Councils of the World Assembly whereby several member states stand in unreasonable support of one council and unreasonable opposition to the other.

FIRMLY BELIEVING a response is necessary.

HEREBY DECLARES the Council's position against the World Assembly.

Approvals: 5 (Tinhampton, Kaironi, Hustlertwo, Dasteria, The Order of Makai)

Status: LEGAL
Legal (1): Sedgistan

3 hours ago: Sedgistan: Legal

[West Barack and East Obama]

This only has 5 approvals...

[The Orwell Society]

This is interesting.

[Free Algerstonia]

This only has 5 approvals...

how many approvals does your proposal have right now?

[Istastioner]

I have so many questions right now ...

[West Barack and East Obama]

This only has 5 approvals...

how many approvals does your proposal have right now?

same as urs

[Free Algerstonia]

how many approvals does your proposal have right now?

same as urs

oh shit

[New order of Equus]

"In favour! the bureucracy of the World assembly has caused damages to their members with their legal restrictions on it's members." -Military council

[Polomon Islands]

“I am in favor of this declaration as the GC has further sought to develop my nation but only has ruined it through pointless laws that create a worse world for such nations.” - David Kurtsfield

[Pikachu Peoples]

"This proposed resolution will polarize the whole World Assembly."

-Pikachu Peoples WA spokesperson

[Nevertopia]

In favor of this movement. *Infernal psychic screeching.*
- thargoid overmind.

[Bhang Bhang Duc]

Reads like one giant whinge.

[The Orwell Society]

This is just pure subjective criticism of a body. A declaration is supposed to promote or take down a particular ideology in logical and reasonable way, and this done do that. The noting clause doesn't make much sense, as most resolutions are tied together with others in a dense network or words and actions. The criticizing clause in incorrect - nearly all resolutions that cause direct harm to member states have been repealed or have a repeal planned. The amused clause is just restating (with more witty emphasis) what was said in the noting clause. The observing clause is just flat-out untrue - several member states, including me, support both councils. I hope this is a joke...

[Unibot III]

Reads like one giant whinge.

I thought it was hilarious.

[Hustlertwo]

This is just pure subjective criticism of a body. A declaration is supposed to promote or take down a particular ideology in logical and reasonable way, and this done do that. The noting clause doesn't make much sense, as most resolutions are tied together with others in a dense network or words and actions. The criticizing clause in incorrect - nearly all resolutions that cause direct harm to member states have been repealed or have a repeal planned. The amused clause is just restating (with more witty emphasis) what was said in the noting clause. The observing clause is just flat-out untrue - several member states, including me, support both councils. I hope this is a joke...

"Nearly all" isn't all. So not sure how that'd be incorrect.

I'd rather see the repeal of the Recognition of the WA, but since that one's in turnaround, this'll do. I like the more irreverent ones anyhow.

[Malicious NPU]

This is just pure subjective criticism of a body. A declaration is supposed to promote or take down a particular ideology in logical and reasonable way, and this done do that. The noting clause doesn't make much sense, as most resolutions are tied together with others in a dense network or words and actions. The criticizing clause in incorrect - nearly all resolutions that cause direct harm to member states have been repealed or have a repeal planned. The amused clause is just restating (with more witty emphasis) what was said in the noting clause. The observing clause is just flat-out untrue - several member states, including me, support both councils. I hope this is a joke...

Still waiting on that repeal of "Rights And Duties Of WA States". Its only been 14 years, I'm sure they're going to get to it soon!

[Nepleslia]

Full, unabashed support.

[Vavlar]

Time to get working on Liberate the World assembly.

[Bhang Bhang Duc]

Reads like one giant whinge.

I thought it was hilarious.

To be honest it reminds me of the old Australian joke.

How do you know when a plane load of Poms arrives at Sydney Airport? The engines stop, but the whining continues.

Time to get working on Liberate the World assembly.

No need to trumpet your ignorance of the SC rules, it’s not something to be proud of.

[The Liberal States of North America]

This is just pure subjective criticism of a body. A declaration is supposed to promote or take down a particular ideology in logical and reasonable way, and this done do that. The noting clause doesn't make much sense, as most resolutions are tied together with others in a dense network or words and actions. The criticizing clause in incorrect - nearly all resolutions that cause direct harm to member states have been repealed or have a repeal planned. The amused clause is just restating (with more witty emphasis) what was said in the noting clause. The observing clause is just flat-out untrue - several member states, including me, support both councils. I hope this is a joke...

Not surprising coming from a
Psychotic dictatorship
I hope it isn’t a joke. Loved it
- The Ministry of Ambiguity’s Assistant Spokeswoman

[Anne of Cleves in TNP]

“Well, at least it’s not called ‘Dissolve the WA’, because if so and it passes, I’d lose my job . At worst, the title and function of the current proposal would cause civil war in the WA if passed. I will remain neutral on this proposal for now.”
-Ms. Charlotte Schafer, WA Ambassador for the Clevesian Empire

[Tiber and Rione]

Isn't the Security Council a component of the World Assembly? Why should it condemn itself and how does that make any sense?

[Cappedore]

"In favour. Not much more to say."

[Nociav]

Love that my proposal got as much attention as it did.

[Excidium Planetis]

Out of curiosity, was this proposal actually legal, or was Sedge trolling?