You want an avatar? I could do that. :p
On a side note, our security council is surprisingly impotent. It has 2(3) options to deal with outside threats :
- Writing angry letters
- Trade Embargo
- Admitting them in the United assembly and annexing them
The humanitarian council meanwhile, is much more powerful. They have a carte Blanche action (Draft Resolution), as well as being able to create programs for which they can directly demand resources from any member nation, without any checks nor balances for the latter.
The powers of the Security Council stop just short of allowing it to declare war on behalf of its member nations. The only reason it doesn't have this power is that its mission is to promote peace, and creating war would be rather counterproductive. That said, the UA's condemnation carries more weight than you might think, and the laws the Humanitarian Committee can pass aren't binding to non-member nations, plus the Humanitarian Committee has more seats in it, and only the Security Council has the power to
enforce the HC's resolutions. So there's your checks and balances.
e: Also, the movement of the United Assembly was originally intended to go like this:
1. Individual committees are called, proposals are put forth, argued over, amended, and shot down or go on to the GA.
2. Repeat among several committees, letting bills build up waiting for passage in other committees.
3. GA and BoN have to be put in session to ensure they actually are enacted, but that prevents more bills from being drafted, forcing the AL to prioritize.
4. Budget bills add time pressure to call the GA every once in a while, to prevent the AL from stonewalling legislation too hard.
It was supposed to be like an abacus of sorts. Things get shifted around as the process continues. It only became so pressing because you guys got really into the game and wanted to get stuff done. I suppose that's the price I pay, but I'll gladly pay it, because it's fun watching you all play delegate.