Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
This forum is used with the NationStates web-game designed and run by Max Barry. While not officially affiliated, this serves as the regional forum for the regions: Middle East, African Continent, American Continent, Asian Continent, and European Continent.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and can "read only".

In order to get the most out of these forums, please become a member and read this guide - http://z3.invisionfree.com/nationstates/index.php?showtopic=3060


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
OOC Ideas; Regarding Sinai and Israel
Topic Started: Mar 27 2006, 09:35 PM (631 Views)
Rhadamanthus
Member Avatar
Legitimist

I think he meant nuclear power, not nuclear weapons. Or would that also be a problem?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Catholic Europe
Member Avatar
Spammer
Like I said, it's against Church teaching ;)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
United State of Israel
Member Avatar
A Light to the Gentiles
 *  *  *  *  *  *
Paradise
Mar 31 2006, 07:54 PM
I still believe my current proposal (the one in this topic) is the fairest for all parties.

Frankly I don't think so. You've told me your main idea in this proposal is two split the land equally, but I'm afraid your plan simply doesn't do it.

Quote:
 
The TC is however open to further negotiations to improve upon Resolution 591. We invite all interested nations to Sharm el Sheikh for another conference that should permanently resolve the situation."

Can't we do it in the current conference, after the UN resolution be approved?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Paradise
Member Avatar
Resident bureaucrat

United State of Israel
Mar 31 2006, 04:36 PM
Paradise
Mar 31 2006, 07:54 PM
I still believe my current proposal (the one in this topic) is the fairest for all parties.

Frankly I don't think so. You've told me your main idea in this proposal is two split the land equally, but I'm afraid your plan simply doesn't do it.

Oh, there can be a margin of error of 10%. I mean, how is it possible to calculate exactly 50%?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
United State of Israel
Member Avatar
A Light to the Gentiles
 *  *  *  *  *  *
Paradise
Apr 1 2006, 12:39 AM
United State of Israel
Mar 31 2006, 04:36 PM
Paradise
Mar 31 2006, 07:54 PM
I still believe my current proposal (the one in this topic) is the fairest for all parties.

Frankly I don't think so. You've told me your main idea in this proposal is two split the land equally, but I'm afraid your plan simply doesn't do it.

Oh, there can be a margin of error of 10%. I mean, how is it possible to calculate exactly 50%?

Of course it can't be completely accurate, but obviously your proposal gives at least 60-65% of the land to the TC ;)
And as I said, only the size of the UN sector and the north combined can equal to the TC's part. By taking off half of the UN sector, obviously you could never achieve that balance.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Paradise
Member Avatar
Resident bureaucrat

Yeah, but then again, important cities seem to be in the North. I think it's fair enough.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
United State of Israel
Member Avatar
A Light to the Gentiles
 *  *  *  *  *  *
Yeah, but since you can create as many cities as you like, it's really the size of the territory that really matters.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Paradise
Member Avatar
Resident bureaucrat

Yeah, but then again are you going to create religious cities or rather use the existing ones?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tristan da Cunha
Member Avatar
Science and Industry
OOC

Also important to the TC are the "religious lands." By this I mean core lands part of the ancient Hebrews kingdom: roughly everything north of Beersheba, south of Haifa, and west of Ammon (Ammon, Jordan, which is in RD). The most desirable cities are Jerusalem and Hebron.

The evil master plan of the TC is to annex these lands. But I'm patient and I can hold off the evil master plan indefinitely, since there are other more important things going on such as the anti-BP effort.

USOI - if you want, you can take the Negev and the south, and I'll go to the north. That way you can have the larger south.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Paradise
Member Avatar
Resident bureaucrat

Oh, finally we found a deal?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tristan da Cunha
Member Avatar
Science and Industry
Here is a rough sketch of my proposal, I will do a neater one for IC discussions.

I believe it is a more than fair deal, since in order to accomodate the USOI's concerns, the TC would have to sacrifice a lot of demands and interests stated during the Sinai Conference.

Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Paradise
Member Avatar
Resident bureaucrat

Except for NE Gaza, it seems a pretty fair deal. USOI gets more land and TC gets more religious cities. Everyone is happy :)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tristan da Cunha
Member Avatar
Science and Industry
OOC

The TC requires that in any acceptable deal, NE needs to have a coastal enclave in Israel. The motive is of course that NE needs a presence in Israel as part of the IFP counterweight to the Baghdad Pact. Another point would be that many NE citizens already live here in the holy land, and they need a compensation.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Paradise
Member Avatar
Resident bureaucrat

If NE gets Gaza, Paradise won't recognize it as a nagian-owned territory, but rather as a nagian-occupied territory. That means Paradise could legitimally invade nagian Gaza and set up a puppet state there.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tristan da Cunha
Member Avatar
Science and Industry
Resolution 591 the Sinai Accords transfers Gaza to Nag.

I know you'll probably go veto it in the BP thread.

The final treaty has to make a provision to give land to Nag. This problem will need to be solved later. Right now I need to get food!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Paradise
Member Avatar
Resident bureaucrat

It does transfer control to nag, but it doesn't specify ownership.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
United State of Israel
Member Avatar
A Light to the Gentiles
 *  *  *  *  *  *
TC, dude, you got a serious biblical complex :blink: :)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nag Ehgoeg
Member Avatar
The Devil's Advocate

This is the Middle East, what do you expect?

Juresalem has less than no tactical value to NE.

What reason could Paradise possbibly have for objecting to a Nagian presence in Gaza? Surely it's better than the TC - a vastly superior military power - set up there with Nag in Juresalem?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Catholic Europe
Member Avatar
Spammer
Or indeed Catholic Europe! ;)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Paradise
Member Avatar
Resident bureaucrat

Nag Ehgoeg
Apr 1 2006, 06:42 AM
This is the Middle East, what do you expect?

Juresalem has less than no tactical value to NE.

What reason could Paradise possbibly have for objecting to a Nagian presence in Gaza? Surely it's better than the TC - a vastly superior military power - set up there with Nag in Juresalem?

You're the leader of the IFP, a pact whose aim is to counter the BP. The emperor fears you for what you could do (diplomatically at least). The farthest NE is from Paradise, the safest is Paradise (in the head of the emperor).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
United State of Israel
Member Avatar
A Light to the Gentiles
 *  *  *  *  *  *
OOC: I might be willing to accept the TC's plan, on the condition that USOI will be given access to the Dead Sea and that USOI's norther coastal area will have a more secure boundaries - which means moving the line a few miles east. But I'm not sure yet.

Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rhadamanthus
Member Avatar
Legitimist

OOC:

In that proposal, is Sinai given to me, or what?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nag Ehgoeg
Member Avatar
The Devil's Advocate

OOC: Oh right, just because I found it I'm the leader :shy:

Unlike the BP - I have no say over what the IFP/JP does. And Paradise is threatened by Nag Ehgoeg... pull the other one :P :lol: :rolleyes:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
United State of Israel
Member Avatar
A Light to the Gentiles
 *  *  *  *  *  *
The Resplendent Dawn
Apr 1 2006, 10:27 PM
OOC:

In that proposal, is Sinai given to me, or what?

Yep, just like the TC's original proposal. This is just a refinement.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Al Araam
Member Avatar
Demigod of Death & Inactivity

Nag Ehgoeg
Apr 1 2006, 12:31 PM
OOC: Oh right, just because I found it I'm the leader  :shy:

Unlike the BP - I have no say over what the IFP/JP does. And Paradise is threatened by Nag Ehgoeg... pull the other one :P :lol:  :rolleyes:

Now we see the IFP's true flaw. While the Baghdad Pact promotes stability and true democracy, the International Freedom Pact promotes anarchy and would do nothing to prevent infighting between its members.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Middle East · Next Topic »
Add Reply