Scheheradze Convention

[Scott Alexander]

The Scheheradze Convention on Intermicronational Warfare is a blatant copy of the Geneva Convention and has approximately the same purpose. It is less strict than the OBC, but more broad, and has many more members. I suggest Shireroth sign onto it.You can find more information on it at its forum.What does everyone think? If we like it I'll propose it before the Landsraad.

[Emir of Raspur]

Go for it big man!

[Erik Mortis]

*gives thumbs up* Erik Mortis BrookshireCommoner of Alexandretta

[Philip Locke]

I'm banned, could you provide a copy?I opposed it this summer because it seemed to be a blatant move of Atteran imperialism. I'm guessing that my opinion hasn't changed, but I'll review it anyway.

[Gman Russell]

Quote:I'm banned, could you provide a copy?Hm...

[HIH Noseworthy]

Locke, you've been banned since April or May 2002 when the Imperial Court banished you from Atteran soil permanently. As for a copy of the Convention, it's on the Atteran government site attera.port5.com - go to govt > diplomacy > status of ties > multilateral > scheheradze Atteran Immigration Authority

[Philip Locke]

Thanks.I thought perhaps you pussies had finally unbanned me. Figures.

[HIH Noseworthy]

We're the pussies? lmao! Another horribly accurate fact coming from the mouth of one of our sector's most famous terrorists! It's pretty clear why you're still banned - the Imperial High Court hasn't been requested to review its decision. You haven't had a representative file for acquittal in the legal system of Attera so you'll remained banned as the government doesn't have the power overturn court decisions. Atteran Immigration Authority

[Philip Locke]

"What's the difference between a terrorist and an Atteran? Oh, wait."

[HIH Noseworthy]

We haven't made any terrorist attacks, they've all been state sanctioned military operations, unlike you who took it upon yourself to delete the Tymaria board which wasn't sanctioned by any legitimate government in micronationalism. Atteran Immigration Authority

[Scott Alexander]

Playing devil's advocate, what exactly is the difference between a government and an individual in micronations? A lot of the time it seems like the answer is "two extra people and a constitution drafted in fifteen minutes."But Locke, as for the SC being Atteran imperialism, it really doesn't offer any means for them to control anyone else. Not to mention that the Atterans seem to have given up on imperialism for the time being, or that the Babkhans and Baracaoans, both of whom have far more reason to be concerned about Atteran imperialism than we, have both signed it and experienced no difficulties.

[Philip Locke]

The State? The State is the single greatest terrorist in human history. Don't try to hide behind your self-empowered councils.Anyway, the sanction of one's conscience or the sanctions of half a dozen consciences...It makes little difference to me.

[HIH Noseworthy]

Scott, the State is the only legitimate authority to wage war and use militaries whereas a private citizen in the State, for example, has no such right. If the head of state authorizes military action, whether one group calls it terrorism or not, the fact remains that it is legitimate warfare (as legit as war can be of course). When a nation declares war, then international agreements it is party to come into effect to govern its actions, such as the Geneva Convention. That's basically what the Scheheradze Convention is designed to do - when a member nation declares war, as is its right, the Convention regulates how it can conduct war so collateral damage is minimal so to speak.As for Atteran military operations in the past, they have all been legitimate as the head of state has used his power to authorize military action - only difference was back then we didn't have a international convention by which to regulate how war was to be conducted (though Attera did tend to operate along the lines of the Geneva Convention since our population back then were all macronational soldiers and we taught about the Convention in their training). Mr. Locke's terrorist actions against Tymaria, and his betrayal of his oath to the Tymarian Defence Forces, however, was not part of any legitimate state-authorized military operation, and as such, was an act of terrorism. There are plenty of macronational examples that I can use to clarify my point, Iraq compared to 9/11 is one of them. The US attack on Iraq was a military operation authorized under the power of the US President and the heads of state for any other coalition partners. As such, they followed international law established at the time in how they conducted war. However, 9/11 wasn't a state sanctioned military operation and hence it has been called terrorism, and rightfully so. If 9/11 had to be a state sanctioned military attack, then it would have had legitimacy (though the state that sanctioned its military to do the attack would have been fucked in international relations of course). Atteran Immigration Authority

[Philip Locke]

Quote:Scott, the State is the only legitimate authority to wage war and use militaries whereas a private citizen in the State, for example, has no such right.Ah, the ancient fallacy. The State magically has powers to do what its puny subjects can not do, like murder (war) and steal (taxation). "Cuz that's just how it is, hyuck!!"And by that definition, is revolution something to be frowned upon?Quote:If the head of state authorizes military action, whether one group calls it terrorism or not, the fact remains that it is legitimate warfare (as legit as war can be of course). Fuck that shit. I was the head of state of Locke, and what I say went (and goes).Quote:Mr. Locke's terrorist actions against Tymaria, and his betrayal of his oath to the Tymarian Defence Forces, however, was not part of any legitimate state-authorized military operation, and as such, was an act of terrorism.Wah-wah. Tymaria needed a kick in the mouth. The memory of 4/11 and the ever-present Freenesian Cold War were probably the only things that kept it together in its last days.Quote:There are plenty of macronational examples that I can use to clarify my point, Iraq compared to 9/11 is one of them. The US attack on Iraq was a military operation authorized under the power of the US President and the heads of state for any other coalition partners. As such, they followed international law established at the time in how they conducted war. However, 9/11 wasn't a state sanctioned military operation and hence it has been called terrorism, and rightfully so. If 9/11 had to be a state sanctioned military attack, then it would have had legitimacy (though the state that sanctioned its military to do the attack would have been fucked in international relations of course). Legitmacy my ass. Bush and his NeoCon chicken-hawks should be dragged out of Washington and the troops brought home.

[Philip Locke]

After just a brief review of the Scheheradze Pact, I've found a handful of critical items that I disagree with in part or in full:-The Intermicronational War Crimes Tribunal;-It's support of the Alternate Realities Project of the traditional Micran map (Haha, Attera really chose the winning side there, right?);-The fact that it doesn't explicitly forbid DoS attacks and porno-bombs.Nada, says I.

[Ruhan Zarathustra Erudinz]

Locke... do you really have to go around antagonising everyone?Now, perhaps this shall help... I know it won't... but I've never been afraid to waste my breath or even my typing time, yes the State /does/ 'magically' get those powers. Why? Mostly because people like you exist so the people and clearly can't be trusted to act nicely or properly or safely. Also because while a person may be smart, people are not (and therefore shouldn't rule, by the way)... people are a mob and mobs are always a bad thing, a very bad thing. So yes, the State /does/ 'magically' get the powers of war and taxation. You seem to think, however, that those are the primary things it gets. It /also/ gets the ability to protect you, educate you. Those are nice things, unless... you /prefer/ anarchy (which, by the way, you wouldn't... because in anarchy demagogues, charlatans, and might make right are the rule of law... something tells me that you probably wouldn't enjoy that situation. Oh, and there'd also be nothing to prevent the "evil" Atterans from shooting you and seeing as a lot of them are soldiers, trust me... you'd be dead before you could protest the unfairness of it... cause, remember, there is no government so now /everyone/ is thinking like you, only of themselves, and so... you had better learn to shoot, forrage, and fight VERY quickly or someone shall kill you and there isn't anything anyone can do to save you... not that they'd want to, cause remember... it's now anarchy, everyone is thinking like you and only for themselves so noone wants to help you out anyhow.)So, the basic idea from this rant is: Locke... dude, really. Just bloody behave. Is it /that/ hard to be nice? If you /really/ want anarchy and to live in the state of Locke, guess what, move to some of the worst areas of the third-world. Until you do that, guess what, you live in a world where the State /is/ more important than you (The needs of the many out weigh the needs of the few, or the one) and as such, governments /can/ sanction military actions and you do not get to claim you are your own legitmate government. And as for micronations, well, really, we're here they are /government/ and /nation/ building exercises. Socio-political experiments of a most interresting and eccentric breed. So even here, once again, the State does hold power that you, yourself, do not. "Disce quasi semper victurus; vive quasi cras moriturus"

[Philip Locke]

I'm not going to bother responding point-by-point.I am not an anarchist, just a strong anti-statist, primarily because I don't believe that people are evil little fiends who would descend into chaos if much of our million man bureaucracy began withering away. I don't believe that the State is magically vested with the freedom to steal or kill or that it should possess powers that are not possessed by its citizens, simply because the State is just a blundering, destructive collection of citizens. Furthermore, chaos is not the absence of your big pal government, it's the absence of society. Paraphrasing Paine, the State and Society are two very, very different animals, the former being a nasty one and the latter being an agreeble one.

[Philip Locke]

Oh, and don't presume to barge in and begin insulting me for percieved destructive behavior. I may be ill tempered, but that doesn't mean that I've been attempting to scuttle Shireroth.Besides the little storm I raised concerning Fax's poetry in the Uni, I've been nothing but productive and helpful since I returned however many months ago. I'm an ambassador and an active citizen of Hyperborea.So there. Ner, ner, ner.

[Ruhan Zarathustra Erudinz]

I wasn't insulting you, I was attempting to help you.And as I forsaw, it was a wasted effort. "Disce quasi semper victurus; vive quasi cras moriturus"

[Philip Locke]

You weren't attempting to help me. You were stating your opinion, an opinion that I happen to largely disagree with.

[HIH Noseworthy]

Quote:Ah, the ancient fallacy. The State magically has powers to do what its puny subjects can not do, like murder (war) and steal (taxation)."Cuz that's just how it is, hyuck!!"And by that definition, is revolution something to be frowned upon?Whether you want to admit it or, as it seems, rather believe in your philosophical drabble, that's the way the real world works.Quote:Fuck that shit. I was the head of state of Locke, and what I say went (and goes)."Locke" wasn't a recognized state and as such had no legitimacy in conducting operations against another nation. Attera, when we did conduct military operations, was recognized by dozens of other states as a soveriegn state and as such there was legitimacy behind our operations.Quote:Wah-wah. Tymaria needed a kick in the mouth. The memory of 4/11 and the ever-present Freenesian Cold War were probably the only things that kept it together in its last days.If it were some popular uprising in Tymaria that took control, for example, then I would agree that the ends justified the means. However, you acted alone and without the support of Tymarians in your goal to "kick Tymaria in the mouth" and as such the ends don't justify the means in that case.Quote:Legitmacy my ass. Bush and his NeoCon chicken-hawks should be dragged out of Washington and the troops brought home.As CinC of the United States military, Bush had the legitimacy to conduct military operations. I don't overly support his use of false information regarding WMD to go to war, but the fact remains that he was fully entitled to use the US military to conduct a military invasion under the terms of international law (i.e. respecting the Geneva Convention and providing the support necessary for the invaded country to recover, hence why US troops are still there). That is how the real world works...maybe your "enlightenment" you underwent last year, or was it back in 2002, needs to be adjusted to open you back up to the real world. Philosophy is so useless in justifying real events....

[Ruhan Zarathustra Erudinz]

Now for some real questions. Is this the same Scheheradza Convention as was made and ratified awhile ago? Or is it like a second one?Cause, er, I thought Shireroth attended the original convention? "Disce quasi semper victurus; vive quasi cras moriturus"

[HIH Noseworthy]

Not sure if Shireroth was at the original convention, either way, it never did ratify the Charter. It's pretty much the same charter that was developed in the 2002 conference. I think there was one change to make what world map a memberstate was on a non-issue, or something like that...if it was amended to the AR map, that'll change this time around as Attera will be motioning for an amendment to get rid of any influence of cartography projects on the convention.

[SaiKar LumEth]

Quote:"Locke" wasn't a recognized state and as such had no legitimacy in conducting operations against another nation. Attera, when we did conduct military operations, was recognized by dozens of other states as a soveriegn state and as such there was legitimacy behind our operations.Interesting. This seems to imply that if I can convince all/most other nations to unrecognize Attera as a soveriegn state, then Attera's military operations will turn into terrorist acts.That seems like a worthy enough goal.

[HIH Noseworthy]

If we weren't recognized by several micronations as well as IGOs, then yes, our military operations would amount to terrorism - much like the Taliban were considered terrorist.Of course, luckily for Attera, your personal influence outside of Shireroth, and probably Treesia, is next to none Steffke.

[Austi Scot]

May I respectfully disagree with a few items.The state doesn’t 'magically' get the powers of war and taxation. Philip is right when he complains ** Ah, the ancient fallacy. The State magically has powers to do what its puny subjects can not do, like murder (war) and steal (taxation).However Philip is wrong when he complains** Ah, the ancient fallacy. The State magically has powers to do what its puny subjects can not do, like murder (war) and steal (taxation). Philip is right, the State doesn’t magically have powers, these or any other power.Philip is right, the State doesn’t have any power to do what it subjects can’t do.Philip is wrong, people do have the power to make war and to tax.Philip is wrong, the State does not have powers to do these things it is authority.People have the right to do things and people legally delegate those rights to the State. This gives the State the authority to make war and to tax. The State has no right to do anything that people don’t have the right to do. The State is a mechanism for the collective exercise of rights.People have the right to protect themselves (self-defense). This right is legally delegated to the State in the case of war. (also in other situations).People have the right to spend their funds as they wish. An example is a household – several people in the household have the right to earn money and to then put that money together for any purpose they decide. People have the right to delegate the collection of funds to the State and to delegate to the State the decisions concerning the spending of those funds.States have no rights! --- People have rights --- States have authority.Both have power --- it’s just that states have more power than individuals.Austi

[Philip Locke]

Quote:hat is how the real world works...maybe your "enlightenment" you underwent last year, or was it back in 2002, needs to be adjusted to open you back up to the real world. Philosophy is so useless in justifying real events.... I was not enlightened, I just grew up. Idolizing war and the State just becomes ridiculous past a certain point. And I'm very realistic. I'm not a blackshirt anarchist, or an anarchist of a different set of stripes, or even a communard or syndicalist or any such thing. I'm an "Old West", community-focused libertarian with too much of an education and too much influence from the Left to support the complete abolition of all State projects and welfares that aren't totally necessary (like disabled benefits, farm subsidies, etc). Edited by: Philip Locke at: 3/17/04 1:54 pm

[SaiKar LumEth]

Quote:Of course, luckily for Attera, your personal influence outside of Shireroth, and probably Treesia, is next to none Steffke. Truth. And even if I did bother to come back and make an attempt, there is not really a whole lot of satisfaction in ruining Attera's reputation anyway.

[Philip Locke]

Noseworthy,Yap, yap, yap. Everyone knows that Attera is nothing more than a dolled-up terrorist network.Oh, sorry. I mean Your Imperial Highness Noseworthy!