[Closed] Nuclear Non-proliferation Act.

[The Canadian North-West]

Category: Global Disarmament
Strength: Significant

Due to the recent repealing of the Nuclear Arms Protocol Act, the World Assembly, if this bill were to pass, hereby:

DEFINES nuclear weapons as any weapon which releases radioactive fallout as the result of it's usage.

DEFINES nuclear warfare as any conflict which results in the exchange of nuclear weapons.

RECOGNIZES the importance of Nuclear Warfare in our modern age.

REALIZES that smaller nations will be at an inherent disadvantage in any wars which involve nuclear weapons.

RESTRICTS the construction of future nuclear warheads.

ENCOURAGES the research and development of Nuclear Countermeasures.

and ENCOURAGES future resolutions dealing with Nuclear Disarmament.

[Grays Harbor]

May well need to try and repeal this first.

[The Canadian North-West]

May well need to try and repeal this first.

I might. Nothing in my resolution directly conflicts that one, but yeah, it might not hurt to do so.

[Grays Harbor]

May well need to try and repeal this first.

I might. Nothing in my resolution directly conflicts that one, but yeah, it might not hurt to do so.

Pretty much everything in your draft is a contradiction. And pkease, do try and repeal NAPA. We are nearing the 100th repeal attempt.

[The Canadian North-West]

I might. Nothing in my resolution directly conflicts that one, but yeah, it might not hurt to do so.

Pretty much everything in your draft is a contradiction. And pkease, do try and repeal NAPA. We are nearing the 100th repeal attempt.

Alright. Should I take this one down, and post it again once the NAPA has been repealed?

[Umeria]

I might. Nothing in my resolution directly conflicts that one, but yeah, it might not hurt to do so.

Pretty much everything in your draft is a contradiction. And pkease, do try and repeal NAPA. We are nearing the 100th repeal attempt.

Some NAPA repeal hooks, to get you started:

REALIZING that WA members are outnumbered by non members by about 3 to 1,

This is outdated. We are now outnumbered by about 6 to 1.

REALIZING that the WA members need to be able to defend themselves if attacked,

This never mentions nuclear attacks, and could be interpreted to mean all attacks.

DECLARES that WA members are allowed to possess nuclear weapons to defend themselves from hostile nations,

Notice how it doesn't mention that it should only be against non-member nations that also posses nuclear weapons. The "hostile nation" phrasing is very vague.

PRESERVES the right for individual nations to decide if they want to possess nuclear weapons,

Notice also how it says "want", not "should" or "need". Wanting something sometimes has nothing to do with it being a necessity.

REQUIRES that any nation choosing to possess nuclear weapons take every available precaution to ensure that their weapons do not fall into the wrong hands.

The "wrong hands" term is very vague and could be interpreted to mean "the non-member nations that don't have nukes but are attacking us, which we shall, with our nukes, burn to the ground".

Good luck.

[Omigodtheykilledkenny]

A repeal of NAPA is not relevant to this discussion, as nothing in this proposal contradicts it. Incidentally this proposal has nothing to do with proliferation either.

[Umeria]

A repeal of NAPA is not relevant to this discussion, as nothing in this proposal contradicts it. Incidentally this proposal has nothing to do with proliferation either.

True but I suspect the author is going to add new material to this proposal, as there is presently only one operative clause:

RESTRICTS the construction of future nuclear warheads.