| Assembly-Cabinet discussion on conference attendance |
(09-01-2014, 12:22 PM)Lord Ravenclaw Wrote: And that is expected due to the treaty. That's unavoidable, we get that. The conference however, is avoidable. What I'm saying is that there's no point in getting upset and knocking the conference about having a few days dedicated to talking about the Lazarus-Osiris war and how it relates to regional sovereignty, when we're going to be talking to Lazarus about the war in a much more direct and meaningful way anyways. (09-01-2014, 12:24 PM)Sandaoguo Wrote:So we already have a more direct and more meaningful way to have this conversation with Lazarus, rendering this new dedication to the subject in the conference unnecessary. This goes to my point that TSP should show up for the second half of the conference at most.(09-01-2014, 12:22 PM)Lord Ravenclaw Wrote: And that is expected due to the treaty. That's unavoidable, we get that. The conference however, is avoidable.
As a disclaimer I am a citizen of Europeia though influential enough to have absolutely no involvement or input with the communications from Europeia to TSP regarding TSP's participation in either conference.
(09-01-2014, 12:26 PM)PhDre Wrote: So we already have a more direct and more meaningful way to have this conversation with Lazarus, rendering this new dedication to the subject in the conference unnecessary. This goes to my point that TSP should show up for the second half of the conference at most. Pulling out of the conference for the first 3 days would send a public message that we don't want to touch Lazarus with a 10-foot pole regarding the war, even though we're supposed to be allies. If we go to the conference, we should go to the whole thing. TSP will be talking to Lazarus about the war through other channels, because those discussions need to be confidential. That likely means little participation on the forum while more meaningful discussions are being held in private. That is different than publicly pulling out of the first half of the conference. (09-01-2014, 12:37 PM)Sandaoguo Wrote:(09-01-2014, 12:26 PM)PhDre Wrote: So we already have a more direct and more meaningful way to have this conversation with Lazarus, rendering this new dedication to the subject in the conference unnecessary. This goes to my point that TSP should show up for the second half of the conference at most. You know what would send a public message? A public message that discusses why we will not contribute to a public discussion of the war on Lazarus's forums. Not to be patronizing but we can control the message here. I would really hope that we wouldn't just silently do this w/o a word as to why.
I agree with a few others and think we should just say "screw you" to everyone and go to both, not co-hosting Europeia's. Honestly I don't see a problem with discussing how the war relates to regional sovereignty at a conference about regional sovereignty... And an ally sending an ultimatum is not exactly a good thing nor something we want to give in to.
Delegate of Spiritus
Vice Secretary-General of the World Assembly "When you are the potatoes guy everyone is like, 'Yeah, it's the potatoes guy!'" - Max Barry (09-01-2014, 12:18 PM)PhDre Wrote: I do not agree the first half of the conference is dedicated to war planning, though the skew in the conference room would understandably give that impression. It's not war-planning. We're mostly discussing about how we encourage non-aggression, protect regional sovereignty and promote regional security. The conference has already begun. Personally, I think TSP has a lot to say which would be relevant to the discussion.
We can not attended Europeia's conferences considering they have blackmailed us. We MUST place stations on them or go to war. As far as I can see Europeia is no longer an ally, they have blackmail us and have said that if we do go to the Lazarus conferences they will not take any responsibility if their allies attack us or do anything else. Unless Europeia says we can go to both we MUST place stations upon them.
Europeian Ambassador to The South Pacific
Former Local Council Member Former Minister of Regional Affairs Former High Court Justice
Punchwood: we are not going to war. Period.
-- I had a discussion with Europeia, and was told that their conference was set to begin this week but had been postponed because he hadn't decided whether to host or not. When I pointed out that then there would be no conflict of dates, I was told that now the problem was the closeness of dates. I thought the Assembly should know of this. 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 (09-01-2014, 01:14 PM)Unibot Wrote:(09-01-2014, 12:18 PM)PhDre Wrote: I do not agree the first half of the conference is dedicated to war planning, though the skew in the conference room would understandably give that impression. Let me quote myself: "I do not agree the first half of the conference is dedicated to war planning." Coming off of a vote of no confidence which has a majority in favor of recalling the Minister of Foreign Affairs, it makes sense that the Assembly was asked for feedback, and you can choose to ignore it. As for Punchwood, I have no idea what a station is, and I assure you that while you may not consider Europeia an ally there is a treaty in place. I would say that you are overreacting here. |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 1 Guest(s) |