Users browsing this thread:

Punchwood · 09-02-2014, 01:20 PM

The thing I am saying is that we must a least offer help. If we do not offer help we aren't being a very good ally are we ?

Europeian Ambassador to The South Pacific
Former Local Council Member
Former Minister of Regional Affairs
Former High Court Justice

TAC Saxton · 09-02-2014, 01:25 PM

Have you not read up as to the cause of the war? There were no acts of hostility, only bad manners and shattered egos. This is hardly a reason for TSP to get involved, especially considering the consequences of choosing sides. The only real solution is to remain neutral in the matter. Otherwise, it is guaranteed we lose either Lazarus or Europeia as well as make enemies of there allies.

I am a Super Villain

Apad · 09-02-2014, 01:36 PM

I agree with TAC. As things currently stand TSP has nothing to gain at the moment by involving ourselves in this conflict. If we stick our diplomatic necks out at the moment and offer assistance in a meaningless conflict that might not escalate beyond words and accusations by both parties, we risk making more enemies than we would strengthen ties with Lazarus. Maybe i am over simplifying but i have yet to read a compelling reason for us to get involved.

Apad
King of Haldilwe

southern bellz · 09-02-2014, 01:41 PM

I actually think we should do something a little different. I think a statement saying that we believe peace among GRCs is vitally important and that we encourage Osiris and Laz to end this war before any acts of aggression that cannot be undone transpire.

This way we are not bound to our words in the cae we do need to be involved in the conflict as it develops.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

The 16th Delegate of The South Pacific

***Kris Kringle*** · 09-02-2014, 01:45 PM

(09-02-2014, 01:41 PM)southern bellz Wrote: I actually think we should do something a little different. I think a statement saying that we believe peace among GRCs is vitally important and that we encourage Osiris and Laz to end this war before any acts of aggression that cannot be undone transpire.

This way we are not bound to our words in the cae we do need to be involved in the conflict as it develops.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

That seems quite sensible and flexible. I would support such a resolution.

Former Delegate of the South Pacific
Posts outside High Court venues should be taken as those of any other legislator.
I do not participate in the regional server, but I am happy to talk through instant messaging or on the forum.

Legal Resources:
THE MATT-DUCK Law Archive | Mavenu Diplomatic Archive | Rules of the High Court | Case Submission System | Online Rulings Consultation System

Apad · 09-02-2014, 01:46 PM

I would agree that a well worded statement regarding our neutrality and stance on the conflict would be helpful but I think it should not be a choice between one or the other. We should do both, put out a statement as you suggest and pass an assembly resolution as suggested in this thread. I think it would send a strong statement from the cabinet thru the public statement and the assembly affirms our neutrality thru a resolution.

Apad
King of Haldilwe

(This post was last modified: 09-02-2014, 01:47 PM by Archerinia.)

**Belschaft** · 09-02-2014, 01:49 PM

Better SB?

Quote:
Assembly Resolution on the Osiris-Lazarus War

The Assembly of The Coalition of The South Pacific, cognizant of the Osiran Fraternal Order's August 28th Declaration of War against the Peoples Republic of Lazarus, hereby resolves that both parties have engaged in mutually antagonistic and hostile behavior and as such proclaims strict neutrality in this conflict.

Further to this, The Assembly of The Coalition of The South Pacific believes that peace and goodwill between Game Created Regions is of vital importance to all, and that this conflict - driven by mutual dislike and personal feuds - is damaging to the security of all Game Created Regions. Whilst the differences between the Osiran Fraternal Order and the Peoples Republic of Lazarus are most likely irreconcilable, we encourage both parties to end this conflict and adopt an attitude of mutual respect and toleration before acts of aggression render this impossible.

_{Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making}
^{Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator}

PREVIOUS ROLES

Gustave Berr · 09-02-2014, 02:01 PM

What about removing the first statement? I don't think we are proclaiming strict neutrality as a region. As Lazarus is one of our allies, we could be called to assist them if our Cabinet and their leaders decide there is a serious threat, correct?

I think we should avoid "picking a side" or pointing fingers with this resolution, and make the focus entirely about toleration and a peaceful end of conflict.

United States of Kalukmangala

Former High Court Justice

(This post was last modified: 09-02-2014, 02:02 PM by nlevels.)

**Belschaft** · 09-02-2014, 02:07 PM

Lazarus can request aid, the Cabinet would then have a choice of whether or not to provide it unless there is a Assembly directive otherwise - either compelling or prohibiting involvement.

My opinion, and I think it's the opinion of the majority of the Assembly, is that we should stay out of this squabble. Hence a directive compelling such.

_{Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making}
^{Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator}

PREVIOUS ROLES

Apad · 09-02-2014, 02:21 PM

I feel as if the Draft resolution should remain as only the first part of the draft with is a statement from the Assembly stating our resolve and reason for remaining neutral in this conflict and the second paragraph should be a public statement released by the cabinet thru the foreign ministry. To me it reads as the foreign policy stance of our regions government, imo.

Apad
King of Haldilwe