The February 2008 Clark

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

Thank you for that clarification. I think my confusion was understandable, since even in the above quote, S:reu MC, you"staunchly agree". My definition of "staunchly agreeing" must be somewhat different, since I had not imagined it would include abstaining from a vote on the pertinent matter. After all, I addressed those very items within that thread, and you then said you would "do anything [you] could to make the dream of U.N. membership come true". If the U.N. had declared they would not support us if we did not relinquish our claim on Cezembre, your vote would make sense. But in the wake of raising this issue, having it addressed and pledging your support, and before we have even contacted the U.N... well, I was just confused.

Of course, now I guess I will never know what to expect when you pledge that you "staunchly agree" with something, S:reu MC, but I guess that's my fault.

EDIT: Clarity.

[Vit Caçeir]

While I recognize that my opinions on this bill were quite different prior to fully understanding the Antarctic Treaty and other legal precedents set forth by the United Nations, I would not think that it would lead you to assume that my opinions are automatically not susceptible to change.

Additionally, I find it interesting that you say that you "addressed" those items in the thread. Unless I missed one of your posts (do forgive me if I did, and correct me now), your solution was quite literally to "cross that bridge when we come to it".

You stated in that thread that "there is little we can do to prepare". Personally, I disagree.

My hesitation on this bill lies purely in current U.N. policies, and my concerns for the international reputation of Talossa. If we rush into this without any idea of what we're doing, we could mistakenly make our nation into an international pariah. I hate to even suggest that such a thing might occur, but being prepared for the worst is the best defence against the worst, in my opinion.

EDIT: Addition of final paragraph.

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

Yes, my solution is to cross that bridge when we come to it. The first step is usually to contact the organization one wants to join, not assume joining will be impossible and not even try. If they have demands, we will address them. I see nothing in the bill demanding a "rush." It asks for the consent of the Ziu to take reasonable steps to join the UN. Hardly headlong haste.

As to changing your mind... I think it is not unreasonable to assume that when you pledge to support a bill, you will support that bill. I appear to have been mistaken.

EDIT: To reply to MC's edit.

[Vit Caçeir]

agbdavis said:

Yes, my solution is to cross that bridge when we come to it. The first step is usually to contact the organization one wants to join, not assume joining will be impossible and not even try.

Yes, but I still feel it's good to have at least a basic plan of action before we agree to anything. Picture this scenario:

Ban Ki-Moon: Congratulations, we're interested in allowing you to join the United Nations!
Talossan Representative: Cool!
Ban Ki-Moon: Now, because I'm sure you've researched the United Nations, taken examples from Taiwan, Tibet, and other states that have attempted to join the U.N., and have a good plan of action, I'm assuming you know the procedure from here?
Talossan Representative: I dunno... I never really thought I'd get this far.

....Yeah, not a good first impression. I feel there are things we can do before we make a petition, quite a few things actually, to join the United Nations.

agbdavis said:

As to changing your mind... I think it is not unreasonable to assume that when you pledge to support a bill, you will support that bill. I appear to have been mistaken.

I understand your disdain at me for this, I formally apologize.

I had not expected to find so many.... dare I say, "nitpicky" details in United Nations regulations between the time of my original stance and now. Seeing as this will likely happen again sometime or another, I'll be more hesitant with making such strong initial declarations in the future.

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

edwardwadas said:

I understand your disdain at me for this, I formally apologize.

You should probably not apologize to me, but rather to those individuals who might have voted for the LRT based on your party's support for this bill... only to see that abandoned once the election is done.

[Vit Caçeir]

agbdavis said:

You should probably not apologize to me, but rather to those individuals who might have voted for the LRT based on your party's support for this bill... only to see that abandoned once the election is done.

If I receive a complaint from such an individual, of course an apology will naturally be in order, but... until such an occurrence takes place, I am under the impression that you are the only one who has any significant amount of anger at my change in position.

EDIT: Grammar mistake.

[Capt. Sir Mick Preston]

Yet again, can I ask that debate of the Bills not be carried on here?

If you wish to debate the merits of an Act already Clarked, please start a discussion elsewhere in the Chambers of the Ziu.

I would like this area to be reserved for voting, to ease both those who wish to vote, and so it is less complicated for your poor, old , dear SoS to keep track of said votes.

Thanks.

[Owen Edwards]

PER
PER
Uc

[Cjara B]

38RZ1 ~ PËR
38RZ2 ~ PËR
ÜC

[Sir X. Pol Briga]

I agree with the statements posted at unfortaiwan.org/ and though it may be possible that having Talossan representation in the United Nations could somehow influence the later recognition of Taiwan, I vote CONTRÂ on 38RZ1 as the UN would likely give in to similar bullying of the USA and France regarding Talossan admission. Instead, I think we should form a new League of Nations with Taiwan and others who are unjustly denied entry to the UN!

Taiwan is an independent and sovereign nation that happens to be one of the worlds most vibrant democracies. The people of Taiwan enjoy full human rights, civil liberties, and press freedom and live in a modern society just like the United State and many first world nations. Yet Taiwan is not allowed inside the United Nations due to China's bullying. China insists that Taiwan must be a part of China because ancestrally, many Taiwanese come from China. This would be like Britian demanding the annexation of the United States because many Americans and the descendants of the British. Although the current government of China has never owned or governed a single piece of Taiwan, and historically has never even governered most of Taiwan, the government insists All of Taiwan belongs to them.

I vote PËR on 38RZ2 with the assumption there is strict observance in written form of the provision "Such application shall be made to the Secretary of State and shall affirm that any non-Talossan parent or legal guardian of the minor child (according to and under any jurisdiction of the world) accedes to said citizenship"

My vote of confidence is ÜC

[Deleted]

"China insists that Taiwan must be a part of China because ancestrally,"

*cough cough cough SUDETENLAND cough cough cough"

[Owen Edwards]

"Taiwan insists that China must be a part of Republican China because ancestrally" surely? lol

[Dréu Gavárþic'h]

Woah MC Briga... my eyes are burning... turn down the light!

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

mick said:

Yet again, can I ask that debate of the Bills not be carried on here?

If you wish to debate the merits of an Act already Clarked, please start a discussion elsewhere in the Chambers of the Ziu.

I would like this area to be reserved for voting, to ease both those who wish to vote, and so it is less complicated for your poor, old , dear SoS to keep track of said votes.

Thanks.

[Aspra Roseta Laira]

38RZ1 -- AUS
38RZ2 -- PËR
VOC -- ÜC