- TNP Nation
- Angel of Wine
Please discuss and clearly state your vote by Saturday, June 23rd, 2007.
Repeal "Protect Historical Sites"
- Thread starter Dalimbar
- Start date
Palaiologos
TNPer
We hope that the repeal of this resolution will not remain unaccompanied by a new resolution with clearer definitions of sites and measures. Under that premise we would be for the repeal.
Unfortunately we have received negative information about the possibility of a new replacing resolution. We would like to quote Alexei Gramiko from Zyrwick:
Actually we would oppose a replacement. While we do like the Idea of protecting historical sites. We believe that only nations can successfully determine what is and is not a historical site worthy of preservation.
Not everything that gets repealed needs a replacement. We fully support repealing bad laws simply because they are bad laws.
Alexei Gramiko
Zyrwickian UN Ambassador.
In this case we would be against the resolution. While the arguments of Mr. Gramiko are understandable they are also slightly short sighted. Many nations do need supervision and assistance in the protection of their historical sites and, as we have had to experience ourselves within our borders and under former governments, there are times where historical sites and the heritage of a nation are plundered to satisfy the hunger of private pockets. A historical site of one sovereign nation is, any way we would like to think of it, still part of a global heritage that we all share as civilized human beings. Thus we should all help preserve such international treasures.
Unfortunately we have received negative information about the possibility of a new replacing resolution. We would like to quote Alexei Gramiko from Zyrwick:
Actually we would oppose a replacement. While we do like the Idea of protecting historical sites. We believe that only nations can successfully determine what is and is not a historical site worthy of preservation.
Not everything that gets repealed needs a replacement. We fully support repealing bad laws simply because they are bad laws.
Alexei Gramiko
Zyrwickian UN Ambassador.
In this case we would be against the resolution. While the arguments of Mr. Gramiko are understandable they are also slightly short sighted. Many nations do need supervision and assistance in the protection of their historical sites and, as we have had to experience ourselves within our borders and under former governments, there are times where historical sites and the heritage of a nation are plundered to satisfy the hunger of private pockets. A historical site of one sovereign nation is, any way we would like to think of it, still part of a global heritage that we all share as civilized human beings. Thus we should all help preserve such international treasures.
- TNP Nation
- Angel of Wine
Thank you for that information. I believe nations will have a more informed decision to make in regards to this resolution.
Palaiologos
TNPer
The United States of Philimbesi has made it public that they are working on a new resolution concerning historical sites. And we quote the delegate of the US of Philimbesi:
I rise (yet again) to inform the general assembly that should this repeal pass the Delegation from the United States of Philimbesi is prepared to offer a new resolution.
We have and continue to confer with the esteemed delegate from Jay and are drafting the proposal now. If anyone is interested in viewing that replacement I will post it after the outcome of this resolution.
The US of Philimbesi are of course an esteemed member of the North Pacific, yet we are struggling to decide whether or not we would vote for the repeal before a new resolution has been formed and especially knowing that it was never the intention of the author of the repeal to provide with a replacing resolution. We hope that the North Pacific discussion will provide with good arguments for or against it.
Appendix: After the behavior of Mr. Gramiko and his insistence to work against a replacement to UN Resolution #15, we cannot and will not support this repeal. We would like to quote the following:
I want to know why every time we have a repeal the argument that we need a predrafted replacement resolution is needed. The fact is that it is not. I support the repeal and would oppose a replacement.
However, for those who want to whine about there not being a replacement.
WRITE A REPLACEMENT YOURSELF!
I'm also tired of n00bs wanting to amend resolutions. That is impossible under the NSUN rules. Get used to it.
Alexei Gramiko
The Very Annoyed Zyrwickian UN Ambassador
A comment by a Dr. Jules Hodz, following the statement of Mr. Gramiko, was too insulting to be included in this appendix.
Thus, we say nay
Respectfully
HM Demetrios Palaiologos
I rise (yet again) to inform the general assembly that should this repeal pass the Delegation from the United States of Philimbesi is prepared to offer a new resolution.
We have and continue to confer with the esteemed delegate from Jay and are drafting the proposal now. If anyone is interested in viewing that replacement I will post it after the outcome of this resolution.
The US of Philimbesi are of course an esteemed member of the North Pacific, yet we are struggling to decide whether or not we would vote for the repeal before a new resolution has been formed and especially knowing that it was never the intention of the author of the repeal to provide with a replacing resolution. We hope that the North Pacific discussion will provide with good arguments for or against it.
Appendix: After the behavior of Mr. Gramiko and his insistence to work against a replacement to UN Resolution #15, we cannot and will not support this repeal. We would like to quote the following:
I want to know why every time we have a repeal the argument that we need a predrafted replacement resolution is needed. The fact is that it is not. I support the repeal and would oppose a replacement.
However, for those who want to whine about there not being a replacement.
WRITE A REPLACEMENT YOURSELF!
I'm also tired of n00bs wanting to amend resolutions. That is impossible under the NSUN rules. Get used to it.
Alexei Gramiko
The Very Annoyed Zyrwickian UN Ambassador
A comment by a Dr. Jules Hodz, following the statement of Mr. Gramiko, was too insulting to be included in this appendix.
Thus, we say nay
Respectfully
HM Demetrios Palaiologos
- TNP Nation
- Angel of Wine
With the current vote standing at 2 Against and 1 For, I will be voting AGAINST the resolution.