Resolution for Peaceful Coexistence (Tabled)

[Senator Cris]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: Senator Kalwejt

[Classic Conservative]

I have one question for Senator Kalwejit, how can you prevent citizens from doing something, may I ask.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Given the toxicity that currently pervades relations with South America/Mock Parliament, this seems to me like a good idea. Whether or not we decide to establish diplomatic relations with our southern neighbors, it's clearly in the interest of all involved to keep communications civil.

I have one question for Senator Kalwejit, how can you prevent citizens from doing something, may I ask.

By prosecuting them and, if necessary, revoking their citizenship.

[Classic Conservative]

Given the toxicity that currently pervades relations with South America/Mock Parliament, this seems to me like a good idea. Whether or not we decide to establish diplomatic relations with our southern neighbors, it's clearly in the interest of all involved to keep communications civil.

I have one question for Senator Kalwejit, how can you prevent citizens from doing something, may I ask.

By prosecuting them and, if necessary, revoking their citizenship.

Revoking their citizenship beacuse of their views, that's kinda of totalitarian.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Given the toxicity that currently pervades relations with South America/Mock Parliament, this seems to me like a good idea. Whether or not we decide to establish diplomatic relations with our southern neighbors, it's clearly in the interest of all involved to keep communications civil.

I have one question for Senator Kalwejit, how can you prevent citizens from doing something, may I ask.

By prosecuting them and, if necessary, revoking their citizenship.

Revoking their citizenship beacuse of their views, that's kinda of totalitarian.

Correction: revoking their citizenship because they deliberately sabotaged another country's government. If they want to think the South Americans are scumbags, they're free to do so; becoming vigilantes and actively subverting Mock Parliament is another matter.

[Classic Conservative]

Given the toxicity that currently pervades relations with South America/Mock Parliament, this seems to me like a good idea. Whether or not we decide to establish diplomatic relations with our southern neighbors, it's clearly in the interest of all involved to keep communications civil.

I have one question for Senator Kalwejit, how can you prevent citizens from doing something, may I ask.

By prosecuting them and, if necessary, revoking their citizenship.

Revoking their citizenship beacuse of their views, that's kinda of totalitarian.

Correction: revoking their citizenship because they deliberately sabotaged another country's government. If they want to think the South Americans are scumbags, they're free to do so; becoming vigilantes and actively subverting Mock Parliament is another matter.

Ok if it was otherwise I think we would have a problem thank you for the correction.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I agree with Truman. Whether we'll have official relations with the Mock Parliament or not, we still coextist on the same forum and no side would benefit from a stupid feuding.

[Cincinnatus]

What kind of punishment are we actually thinking here?  Just wondering?

[Adam Griffin]

Personally I don't think we should take anything off the table with respect to engaging the other side. They've already proven to be an organically-hostile force toward us.

[Cincinnatus]

Personally I don't think we should take anything off the table with respect to engaging the other side. They've already proven to be an organically-hostile force toward us.

I agree that this resolution indicates a willingness to eliminate future policy options despite my complete support for coexistence. And again, is punishment being left to interpretation and court procedure?

[Associate Justice PiT]

     I'd rather not punish people for exercising their own agency with regards to our neighbors.

[Lumine]

Personally, I'm not sure we want to limit foreign policy options in such a way when the existence of "South America" is not acknowledged within the game reality of Atlasia.

I don't mind a resolution on our resolve to have pacific coexistence because both games fighting each other is a bad idea (and I firmly oppose some of the provocations we have seen for some time now), but as it currently stands it both limits and doesn't address the consecuences (and disgusting as sabotaging a game is, I find it ludicrous from the legal point of view to impose such harsh consecuences for actions which are left to interpretation regarding a nation which we don't currently recognize).

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Regretfully, I must concur with concerns raised and I withdraw myself as a sponsor.

[Oakvale]

The aggressive actions and behaviour of the isolationist lobby is disappointing to me as someone who's been an - often proud - citizen of Atlasia for the greater part of a decade.

[Senator Cris]

Senators have 24 hours to assume sponsorship.
If not, this resolution will be tabled.

[Prince of Salem]

I'd definitely not want anyone to try and sabotage South America, but how would we properly enforce this?

[Associate Justice PiT]

I'd definitely not want anyone to try and sabotage South America, but how would we properly enforce this?

     I think that's a valid point. What we're dealing with here is sufficiently complicated that it would require a whole other bill to hammer out. Supposing such a bill could not be agreed upon, we'd be back to a toothless resolution.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

So, this has been tabled?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Aside from the concern about enforcement difficulties there is also the concern that it is basically an empty pledge not to do something that the other side has at points and may very well continue to do so, with or without this.

If peaceful coexistance is the desired object that that would be best handled through a treaty negotiated by the relevant officials for both parties and then submitted to the Senate for ratification. Of course that resolves the point about reciprocity, but not the enforcement problem.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Aside from the concern about enforcement difficulties there is also the concern that it is basically an empty pledge not to do something that the other side has at points and may very well continue to do so, with or without this.

If peaceful coexistance is the desired object that that would be best handled through a treaty negotiated by the relevant officials for both parties and then submitted to the Senate for ratification. Of course that resolves the point about reciprocity, but not the enforcement problem.

Yes, that would require amending the crime bill. Although in the future we may think of something like the RL Logan Act.

[Senator Cris]

Yes, it's tabled.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Aside from the concern about enforcement difficulties there is also the concern that it is basically an empty pledge not to do something that the other side has at points and may very well continue to do so, with or without this.

If peaceful coexistance is the desired object that that would be best handled through a treaty negotiated by the relevant officials for both parties and then submitted to the Senate for ratification. Of course that resolves the point about reciprocity, but not the enforcement problem.

Yes, that would require amending the crime bill. Although in the future we may think of something like the RL Logan Act.

"I don't know what that is" - Pakistani President in Charlie Wilson's War.

First thing that came to mind, sorry.

What punishments does the Logan act include, I only have a cursory knowledge of it, thanks to the aforemention movie and desire to find out what it was but never went much beyond that. At most we could do is ban people from voting/office.