[Draft] Repeal: Condemn The Black Hawks

[Sil Dorsett]

The Noble Thatcherites is asking for feedback to ensure that this resolution doesn't get auto-stomped by us. Please give it some attention:

Repeal: Condemn The Black Hawks
Category: Repeal | Target: SC #52
Proposed by: The Noble Thatcherites | Onsite Topic​

---

Security Council Resolution # 52 “Condemn The Black Hawks” shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

The Security Council,

APPRECIATING the noble intentions of SC#52 to condemn the actions of the Black Hawks;

NOTING that SC#52 stated that the Black Hawks attempted to conspire against the Security Council by attempting “to commend their own nation by drafting the text”, an action which does not particularly meet standards for Security Council attention;

FURTHER NOTING that while SC#52 stated that “a vote in favor of this resolution will make World Assembly delegates and their regions targets of The Black Hawks, as has been reported following previous proposal attempts.” while the contrary was actually true, with a majority of World Assembly votes cast from regions that haven't had their original founder nation levelled and destroyed, feeder and sinker regions, raider allies, or regions already under raider control, thus making them invulnerable to raids;

REMEMBERING that Individual World Assembly voters can vote however they choose on an issue and are not required to vote in line with their regions delegate, thus making a raid useless in threatening the members of this body;

OBSERVING that SC#52 used extremely vague language such as stating that targeting can cause a ‘cooling effect on free speech' and a 'cooling effect on democracy', and that such phrases can be interpreted in many different ways thus making them meaningless in the context of the original proposal;

RECOGNIZING that a properly sufficient condemnation has already been ratified by this body, SC#217 detailed the many crimes of the Black Hawks, including toppling at least 5 of the top WA Delegate records, the brutal occupation of at least 14 regions, the infiltration of Osiris, and many other heinous acts;

RECALLING that SC#52 made no mention of the Black Hawks’ many indecent acts against the regions of the World;

COGNIZANT that raiders view condemnation resolutions as badges of honor or awards by the Security Council;

Hereby repeals Security Council Resolution #52.

 

[The South Falls]

The Noble Thatcherites is asking for feedback to ensure that this resolution doesn't get auto-stomped by us. Please give it some attention:

To clarify the announcement about the TNP forum downtime, it does not apply to the WALL. Please post your feedback if you have any, regardless of when you decide to post it.

---

Repeal: Condemn The Black Hawks
Category: Repeal | Target: SC #52
Proposed by: The Noble Thatcherites | Onsite Topic​

---

Security Council Resolution # 52 “Condemn The Black Hawks” shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

The Security Council,

APPRECIATING the noble intentions of SC#52 to condemn the actions of the Black Hawks;

NOTING that SC#52 stated that the Black Hawks attempted to conspire against the Security Council by attempting “to commend their own nation by drafting the text”, an action which does not particularly meet standards for Security Council attention;

FURTHER NOTING that while SC#52 stated that “a vote in favor of this resolution will make World Assembly delegates and their regions targets of The Black Hawks, as has been reported following previous proposal attempts.” while the contrary was actually true, with a majority of World Assembly votes cast from regions that haven't had their original founder nation levelled and destroyed, feeder and sinker regions, raider allies, or regions already under raider control, thus making them invulnerable to raids;

REMEMBERING that Individual World Assembly voters can vote however they choose on an issue and are not required to vote in line with their regions delegate, thus making a raid useless in threatening the members of this body;

OBSERVING that SC#52 used extremely vague language such as stating that targeting can cause a ‘cooling effect on free speech' and a 'cooling effect on democracy', and that such phrases can be interpreted in many different ways thus making them meaningless in the context of the original proposal;

RECOGNIZING that a properly sufficient condemnation has already been ratified by this body, SC#217 detailed the many crimes of the Black Hawks, including toppling at least 5 of the top WA Delegate records, the brutal occupation of at least 14 regions, the infiltration of Osiris, and many other heinous acts;

RECALLING that SC#52 made no mention of the Black Hawks’ many indecent acts against the regions of the World;

COGNIZANT that raiders view condemnation resolutions as badges of honor or awards by the Security Council;

Hereby repeals Security Council Resolution #52.

---

---

I believe it is a good resolution. I would vote for it.

 

[Drasnia]

Unfortunately for Thatcher, I'm against on principle. I wouldn't vote for a repeal right now (or probably ever) no matter how well-written it is.

 

[Mystery Player]

I'm also against on principle. Also:

COGNIZANT that raiders view condemnation resolutions as badges of honor or awards by the Security Council

I hate this line, because this logic opens the door for people simply claiming that they want to be condemned, in order to avoid condemnation (I do realize that many people use this logic, and I oppose it every time it's brought up.)

 

[The Noble Thatcherites]

I'm also against on principle. Also:

COGNIZANT that raiders view condemnation resolutions as badges of honor or awards by the Security Council

I hate this line, because this logic opens the door for people simply claiming that they want to be condemned, in order to avoid condemnation (I do realize that many people use this logic, and I oppose it every time it's brought up.)

This line isn't unique to my proposal. It's been used many times before and was used in SCR 232, a resolution that, if I'm not mistaken, the North Pacific voted in favor of.

Either way, this line shouldn't detract from the rest of the argument made in my proposal.

 

[The Noble Thatcherites]

Unfortunately for Thatcher, I'm against on principle. I wouldn't vote for a repeal right now (or probably ever) no matter how well-written it is.

Thats terrible to hear. I understand and respect your decision though.

 

[Mall]

I'm also against on principle. Also:

COGNIZANT that raiders view condemnation resolutions as badges of honor or awards by the Security Council

I hate this line, because this logic opens the door for people simply claiming that they want to be condemned, in order to avoid condemnation (I do realize that many people use this logic, and I oppose it every time it's brought up.)

This line isn't unique to my proposal. It's been used many times before and was used in SCR 232, a resolution that, if I'm not mistaken, the North Pacific voted in favor of.

Either way, this line shouldn't detract from the rest of the argument made in my proposal.

Everyone voted for that because TBR was cheating. A blind sloth could have passed that proposal with whatever language it hammered out.

 

[The Noble Thatcherites]

I'm also against on principle. Also:

COGNIZANT that raiders view condemnation resolutions as badges of honor or awards by the Security Council

I hate this line, because this logic opens the door for people simply claiming that they want to be condemned, in order to avoid condemnation (I do realize that many people use this logic, and I oppose it every time it's brought up.)

This line isn't unique to my proposal. It's been used many times before and was used in SCR 232, a resolution that, if I'm not mistaken, the North Pacific voted in favor of.

Either way, this line shouldn't detract from the rest of the argument made in my proposal.

Everyone voted for that because TBR was cheating. A blind sloth could have passed that proposal with whatever language it hammered out.

Regardless, there is a precedent that that line is fine to use. I'll remove it if it means The North Pacific's vote.

 

[Yuno]

I think it's the fact that you're trying to repeal a condemn of a raider region. Most natives dislike that. Raiders don't like it either, but natives don't like seeing a condemn repealed from a raider region, honor badge or not.

Btw, TNP votes based on TNP's WA citizens' vote.