|
Post by Nathan on Dec 18, 2005 14:22:31 GMT -6
I'll get a rough draft of a document ready sometime this week (i have finals monday - wednesday). Naturally anyone else can present their own draft for discussion. So maybe on Thursday I will post it and hopefully we can debate over a concrete document rather than the abstract idea it is now.
|
|
|
Post by olorix on Dec 18, 2005 20:02:07 GMT -6
A group of small nations is immensely powerful if they act together. Nevertheless, it is in your best interests to argue against it considering you would be locked out of such an arrangement, but again, I think that the Non-Aligned Movement, the G77 and the United Nations General Assembly all prove that when small nations get together, they can actually have some degree of voice.
The idea of having non-equal bargaining power between states is utterly repugnant to me, and quite frankly seems to mimic the paternalistic neo-colonial imperialist attitudes that forced the United Nations Security Council to have veto power over the General Assembly.
I think it's more just that having superpower involvement immediately makes the situation ineffective, because the superpower's disproportionate power will effectively scare everyone else into submission if there is opposition to the will of the largest nations.
|
|
|
Post by Brian Capelle on Dec 20, 2005 18:38:20 GMT -6
President Woodrow, were you not the person from Woodstania who "attacked" our forums? If so, then why the change of heart about the UC? And btw, the UC discussions will continue at unitedconfed.proboards75.com/
|
|