[DRAFT]Repeal GAR #60 "Nuclear Disaster Response Act"

[John Turner]

No you can't. Clause seven of Nuclear Testing Protocol specifically prohibits it, as all information regarding nuclear tests are to be classified state secrets.

I see. That does create a significant dissonance between these two resolutions. I don't see much else to question here, so I'll extend my tentative support.

Your support is greatly appreciated Ambassador. Perhaps this is the first step to to resumption of cordial relations between our delegations?

[Wallenburg]

I see. That does create a significant dissonance between these two resolutions. I don't see much else to question here, so I'll extend my tentative support.

Your support is greatly appreciated Ambassador. Perhaps this is the first step to to resumption of cordial relations between our delegations?

That was OOC, but either way, I highly doubt you'll let that happen. We can always hope, though.

[Gandharasila]

Why can't you just introduce a proposal to amend the existing resolution instead of introducing a repeal proposal? The proposed amendments make sense. Would support if it would not involve the repeal of the original resolution. Or am I missing something here?

[Imperium Anglorum]

Why can't you just introduce a proposal to amend the existing resolution instead of introducing a repeal proposal? The proposed amendments make sense. Would support if it would not involve the repeal of the original resolution. Or am I missing something here?

In the General Assembly, you cannot amend resolutions.

[Gandharasila]

Why can't you just introduce a proposal to amend the existing resolution instead of introducing a repeal proposal? The proposed amendments make sense. Would support if it would not involve the repeal of the original resolution. Or am I missing something here?

In the General Assembly, you cannot amend resolutions.

Thank you and apologies for missing that rule.

Edit: Reviewing the motion.

[Imperium Anglorum]

I oppose this proposal for the same reasons which I have already sent to multiple delegates, according my records, three times. To quote the concluding statements from the counter-campaigns against those attempts to sneak this proposal under the radar, 'the repeal is composed of disingenuous statements, claiming that a definition is inaccurate when it does not require anything of nations, accusing disregard for military secrets when the existence of a massive explosion is impossible to hide, and blatantly misrepresenting the resolution'.

I am very happy that the author has decided to engage in discourse with the rest of us instead of attempting blatant unilateral action that precludes any kind of recourse other than a counter-campaign.

[John Turner]

I oppose this proposal for the same reasons which I have already sent to multiple delegates, according my records, three times. To quote the concluding statements from the counter-campaigns against those attempts to sneak this proposal under the radar, 'the repeal is composed of disingenuous statements, claiming that a definition is inaccurate when it does not require anything of nations, accusing disregard for military secrets when the existence of a massive explosion is impossible to hide, and blatantly misrepresenting the resolution'.

I am very happy that the author has decided to engage in discourse with the rest of us instead of attempting blatant unilateral action that precludes any kind of recourse other than a counter-campaign.

I am unsure why you oppose this as much as you do. All we are trying to do is right a wrong.