Weapons of Mass Destruction Act

[Victor Exercitus]

Unnerved at the suspension of military power by the WA, Restricting a nation's military use of WMD,Nuclear and ICBM weapons.

Recognizing the right of member nations to keep and deploy nuclear weapons for the purposes of national defense, and or attacking enemy nations,whilst not intentionally harming civilian targets.

1. DEFINES, for purposes of this resolution:
“Weapons of Mass Destruction” to be considered anything nuclear,biological,or chemical.
"Civilian” to be anyone or anything that has not initiated or threatened explicit violence against your nations or allies.
2. PERMITS nations to carry and use,if they feel necessary, biological weapons and or;WMD’s,ICBM’s,and Nuclear weapons.Only to defend their nation,not to initiate war

3. PROHIBITS the use of any WMD targeted towards civilians,and may only be used for homeland defense or military targets

4. ENCOURAGES nations to seek alternatives to nuclear attack in a situation of combat,and go through a strict series of rules of engagement before using said weapons.

[The Greater Siriusian Domain]

Teran Saber: "Supportive of the idea, but I have a feeling this won't do very well at vote. Also, I have a gut feeling that this is a duplicate proposal."

[Imperium Anglorum]

Violates the Bioweapons legislation which we passed some time ago.

[Calladan]

Unnerved at the suspension of military power by the WA, Restricting a nation's military use of WMD,Nuclear and ICBM weapons.

Recognizing the right of member nations to keep and deploy nuclear weapons for the purposes of national defense, and or attacking enemy nations,whilst not intentionally harming civilian targets.

1. DEFINES, for purposes of this resolution:
“Weapons of Mass Destruction” to be considered anything nuclear,biological,or chemical.

If you are going to define WMD as "nuclear, biological or chemical" then the use of "WMD, nuclear and ICBM" in the first line is somewhat tautologous - should probably be just "WMD"?

"Civilian” to be anyone or anything that has not initiated or threatened explicit violence against your nations or allies.

Arguably speaking this could include any nation's military forces - for example if Calladan has NOT specifically done anything to initiate or threaten violence against your country, then - under your definition - then my entire military structure would classify as civilian. Which I am not sure is what you were aiming for.

2. PERMITS nations to carry and use,if they feel necessary, biological weapons and or;WMD’s,ICBM’s,and Nuclear weapons.Only to defend their nation,not to initiate war

First there is the repetition again - WMD (by your terms) includes biological and nuclear weapons, so you do not need to include them in the list. Second - they are NOT defensive weapons. You can not - by any stretch of the imgination - use a nuclear or biological weapon - as a defensive measure. Nuclear weapons are used to wipe out entire cities in one go - how can that EVER be defensive?? Biological weapons are used to poison an entire race of people - again, not something that can be used defensively.

If you unleash them on someone who is inside your borders, you would be killing your own people as well as the attacker - that would be kind of self-defeating

Thirdly - I am fairly sure there are WA resolutions that banned biological warfare a long while back.

3. PROHIBITS the use of any WMD targeted towards civilians,and may only be used for homeland defense or military targets

See above, both in regard to "defensive use" and "civilians"

4. ENCOURAGES nations to seek alternatives to nuclear attack in a situation of combat,and go through a strict series of rules of engagement before using said weapons.

I think you mean "WMD attack" rather than "Nuclear attack" - otherwise it would not cover biological agents or ICBMs.

I realise all this seems picky and - of all of my points - only the one about previous WA resolutions on biological warfare really matter - but sometimes the letter of the law is as important as the spirit.

Plus the idea of using nuclear weapons for defensive purposes is really not logical.

[Noahs Second Country]

Seems like a duplicate
needs to be more specific

[Imperium Anglorum]

More specifically, legalisation of biological weapons would contradict this.

[Rutarded]

Has anyone mentioned suicide bombers? Some of our more adventurous people love running solo missions. praise be

[Separatist Peoples]

Has anyone mentioned suicide bombers? Some of our more adventurous people love running solo missions. praise be

"Terrorism is already illegal under extant legislation, and I have a hard time seeing suicide units as anything less than an act to deliberately terrorize."

[Kaboomlandia]

IC (role-played): Ambassador Miller takes a look at the draft before giving Mr. Exercitus a phone call. "On first glance, this appears to duplicate a couple resolutions, namely the Chemical Weapons Accord, Biological Warfare Convention, and a good chunk of the resolutions that already cover nuclear weapons. I don't see where this can go."

OOC (out-of-character, which means I'm speaking as myself and not as my role-played ambassador, Terry Miller): This duplicates quite a few resolutions, which means that if you submit this, it will be ruled illegal by the moderators and removed from the submission queue. I suggest dropping this and reading through the pinned threads at the top of the forum, namely the proposal rules and the list of passed resolutions.

Hope to see you around!

[The Interstellar Federation]

This sounds very familiar. I swear I saw another WMD resolution a few days ago...