WesWorld

Quoted

Originally posted by perdedor99
Procedure is fine but but the perception already was put on the mind of the voters...

The Council voted against the motion because the discussion on the General-Assembly floor that followed the motion, not the motion itself. Votes are not taken inmediatly after a motion is presented. Nations need to study the situation before reaching a decision.

In which case, they should have presumably READ the resolution and realized that idle chit-chat among the delegates has exactly zippo, nada, nothing to do with what we were actually voting on.

Since we've apparently stuck a poison pill in the first resolution, let's try this again.

Sometime in April
The Chilean delegate proposes the following resolution to the League of Nations for a vote.

Quoted

- Condemnation of intentional Nationalist attacks on neutral merchant shipping.
- Recognition of the Persian Loyalists as the legitimate government.
- Requesting nations not to sell military supplies to the Persian Nationalists.
- Nationalist overseas money would be seized and returned to the Loyalists.
- No additions or subtractions to this resolution will be tolerated and nations will vote ONLY on the terms of this resolution and nothing else.

New resolution with modification vote:

permanent (10 Countries):
SAE => Player (HoomAn)
US => Player (Hrolf) Aye
Nordmark => Player (????)
Atlantis => Player (Smily) Aye
UK => Player (Hood) Nay
Italy => Player (RedAdmiral) Abstain
Japan => Player (Rooijen) Nay
France => Player (Agent148 ) Aye
Russia => Player (AdmKuznet) Aye
Germany => Player (Hrolf) Nay

non-permanent (10 Countries):
Argentina => Player (Hood) Aye
Australlia => Player (Desert) Nay
Chile => Player (Brock) Aye
Denmark => Player (CG) Abstain
Iberia => Player (CG) Nay
Mexico => Player (Desert) Nay
Poland => Player (Canadian) Aye
India => Player (perdedor) Aye
China => Player (parador) Nay
Canada => Player (ShinRa)

Italy still doesn't really care.

Can we have a new resolution proposing to do away with the League due to it's general uselessness?

Chile votes Aye.

Bulgaria, Azerbaijan and Armenia symbolically vote Aye.

Quoted

Originally posted by Red Admiral
Italy still doesn't really care.

Can we have a new resolution proposing to do away with the League due to it's general uselessness?

Quoted

Originally posted by thesmilingassassin
I am surprised however that Canada would vote Nay.

Canada didn't; someone just recorded it that way;

Quoted

Originally posted by ShinRa_Inc
Canada:

someone was supposed to demand a translator at that point

Canada is still evaluating it's position; On one hand, support of the Crown is expected, and Canada has no real problem watching the Persians beat themselves over the head with blunt objects (figuratively speaking). On the other, Canada's leery of certain other powers taking advantage of the situation at the Empire's expense.

A point of order on Nordmark; isn't RLBH running it?

Quoted

Originally posted by Red Admiral
Italy still doesn't really care.

Can we have a new resolution proposing to do away with the League due to it's general uselessness?

Withdrawal from the League would be the historical sign of displeasure.

Quoted

Originally posted by ShinRa_Inc

Quoted

Originally posted by thesmilingassassin
I am surprised however that Canada would vote Nay.

Canada didn't; someone just recorded it that way;

Interesting, between that and the Phantom troops issue....

My votes are still the same, the only one that really counts however is the Atlantean vote. I didn't see anything about troops in the resolution.

The Mexican and Australian votes remain the same.

Mexico - nay
Australia - whatever GB says

OOC - ok, I will admit to getting confused by the collateral chat around the first resolution.

However, having now read the resolution in isolation from all the clutter, the resolution is too broad.

Resolution points -
1 - It asks for a condemnation of one party in the Persian CIVIL war, and it's attacks on shipping.

2 - It asks for support for the other party in the Persian CIVIL war

3 - It asks for the cessation of trade with one party, and the seizure of it's foreign assets.

Answers =
1 = Ok, this I can accept as a logical request. Easy to deal with, and if necessary, easy to act in support of.

2 = Why should we be asked to support the other party?
Is the full reasoning for the rebellion available?
This is after all, an internal Persian affair, and with the exception of the shipping attacks, hasn't strayed beyond it's borders

3 = Almost impossible to implement with the technology of the day. As the assets of the nationalists is likely to be held as funds by private individuals or companies, it would be extremely difficult to trace. And the IMF doesn't yet exist........

Taking the above into consideration, the following is IC...

So, as to Denmark's vote.....
Part 1 - Aye
Part 2 - Nay
Part 3 - Nay
So, with no clear answer, Denmark chooses to ABSTAIN

So, as to Iberia's vote.....
Part 1 - Aye
Part 2 - Nay
Part 3 - Nay
So, by 2/3 majority, Iberia votes NAY due to the resolutions wording.

Quoted

Originally posted by ShinRa_Inc
A point of order on Nordmark; isn't RLBH running it?

In theory, but I haven't seen any in-character posts from him in this regard.

Perhaps all the talk is why Great Britain decided to act rather than sit about in grand halls and talk the situation to death, with repeat votes until someone gets the result their after, rather than the vote that captures the true mood of the League members at this time.

The rebels will be smashed, there is no doubt. I can't see what this resolution will do.


- Condemnation of intentional Nationalist attacks on neutral merchant shipping. Any nation can do this at any time of its own right, it doesn't stop such attacks happening but a massive Anglo-Bharati and now with Dutch aid etc is making serious inroads into the problem.

- Recognition of the Persian Loyalists as the legitimate government. Taken as granted but the former Shah's wishes. If the rebels won no doubt they would become the legitimate gov't in the absence of anyone else.

- Requesting nations not to sell military supplies to the Persian Nationalists. Grand aims, about the best point of the proposal, even so since access to Persia is somewhat problematical, esp the Nationalist areas, its likely the blockade in place will prevent or limit that.

- Nationalist overseas money would be seized and returned to the Loyalists. Sounds fine.

- No additions or subtractions to this resolution will be tolerated and nations will vote ONLY on the terms of this resolution and nothing else. A tad inflexible methinks. Resembles a dictatorship to British democratic thinking. But since all the chatter so far has been wasted its probably the logical move.

If anyone can tell me how this will practically help the situation costing British servicemen's lives as we speak as well as Indians and Persians of whatever side then please do so. At the moment it looks like a useless scrap of paper to ease someone's conscience.
[OOC Sorry Chamberlain ain't waving no "Peace in our time" notes this year in WW like OTL]

Therefore GB says Nay yet again.

will cut down on arms smuggling and the like. Central Asia is, um, lightly governed, for the most part, so the extra effort may have an impact.

Quoted

If anyone can tell me how this will practically help the situation costing British servicemen's lives as we speak as well as Indians and Persians of whatever side then please do so.

So Russia votes Aye.

Quoted

Originally posted by Hood
- No additions or subtractions to this resolution will be tolerated and nations will vote ONLY on the terms of this resolution and nothing else. A tad inflexible methinks. Resembles a dictatorship to British democratic thinking. But since all the chatter so far has been wasted its probably the logical move.

It was added because I was extremely torqued off that people were apparently voting Nay because they thought the resolution said something it didn't.

I assume Germany's vote is the same?

Yep, looks like it.

....lets get the votes done gentlemen. Practice your right to democracy!

Quoted

Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
Yep, looks like it.

U.S. Vote same too?

Polands vote may change due to circumstance, mainly from the unauthorized sale of weaponry to the Persian Nationalists (official Polish government's take on the issue). Should the vote take place after this discovery, Poland will abstain, otherwise Poland votes Aye as before. Brazil, and Romania symbolically vote Aye.

Quoted

Originally posted by thesmilingassassin

Quoted

Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
Yep, looks like it.

U.S. Vote same too?

Yes, US votes Aye as before.

Regarding the New Proposal in discussion:

- Condemnation of intentional Nationalist attacks on neutral merchant shipping.
- Recognition of the Persian Loyalists as the legitimate government.
- Requesting nations not to sell military supplies to the Persian Nationalists.
- Nationalist overseas money would be seized and returned to the Loyalists.
- No additions or subtractions to this resolution will be tolerated and nations will vote ONLY on the terms of this resolution and nothing else.

The French Government votes: Aye

Quoted

Originally posted by thesmilingassassin
....lets get the votes done gentlemen. Practice your right to democracy!

Not on the Council of 20