NATION

PASSWORD

[ON HOLD]Limiting Nuclear Proliferation

Where WA members debate how to improve the world, one resolution at a time.
User avatar
The Akashic Records
Diplomat
 
Posts: 803
Founded: May 21, 2013
Ex-Nation

[ON HOLD]Limiting Nuclear Proliferation

Postby The Akashic Records » Wed Jul 31, 2013 10:57 pm

Yes, I'm aware that nations may choose not to have them, and it is based on the infringement of National Sovereignty, among other things, that I made this into a [JOKE] proposal, even though it is in no way funny. Also, UFoC, borrowed some things from ye :P


Speaking of past reasoning, I'll put this post in case anyone read what I said before and wants to use it against me. I remember it perfectly well, and have calmed down considerably to actually assess my own argument.

Screw that reasoning, I'm not taking heat when I should if I really want to learn. Well, improvements are welcome. Even if this was* against my principles, this was the first idea to actually become coherent. Also, given that people don't generally read the whole thread, I'd like to thank Abacathea as well for his awesome idea of extending powers of multiple WA committees to regulate stuff.

Also, I'm a rules-lawyer, not a legislator, but I'd like to improve in that area, so here goes one attempt at being wrong to understand what it is I'm doing wrong, even though I partook in debates of drafts, there are many things that I tend to miss.

*It was about making people give away their weapons at first, but now it's about restricting it.

(2831 characters)

Links:
Nuclear Testing Safety
WA General Funds
Preparing for Disasters

On Nuclear Over-proliferation
Category: International Security
Strength: Significant

The World Assembly,

Believing that it is every member nation's right to arm themselves with nuclear weapons adequately so as to defend themselves against threats by those who chose to possess nuclear weapons,

Recognizes that some nations choose to possess nuclear weapons, and further recognizes that some nations choose not to possess nuclear weapons, or have yet to develop them,

Appalled that there are nations that will not be able to adequately defend themselves should a nuclear threat present itself,

Convinced that the threat of mutually assured destruction would deter all but the most irrational of nations,

For the purposes of this resolution defines:

A nuclear weapon as a weapon whose destructive power comes from energy produced exclusively by nuclear reactions,

Proliferation as the spread of nuclear weapons, fissile material, and weapons-applicable nuclear technology and information,

Mandates that:
1. Every single member nation have nuclear weapons.
2. Should member nations be unable to procure them, they are to be forcefully given these weapons by those who have a surplus.
3. Should member nations not have the technology, they are to be assisted by willing member nations in developing them.

For cases in which member nations be unable to procure the nuclear weapons themselves or have yet to have the technology to do so:

1. Empowers the General Accounting Office (GAO) to conduct any and all essential financial checks on a nation before deciding on the ability of a member nation in procuring nuclear weapons.

2. Extends the powers of the Nuclear Testing Oversight Agency (NTOA) so as to encompass the auditing of member nation whose technology have yet to be able to develop nuclear weapons in order to make sure that they truly require help in developing their nuclear weapons.
Proliferating Nuclear Weapons
Category: International Security
Strength: Significant

The World Assembly,

Believing that it is every member nation's right to arm themselves with nuclear weapons adequately so as to defend themselves against threats by those who chose to possess nuclear weapons,

Recognizes that some nations choose to possess nuclear weapons, and further recognizes that some nations choose not to possess nuclear weapons, or have yet to develop them,

Appalled that there are nations that will not be able to adequately defend themselves should a nuclear threat present itself,

Convinced that the threat of mutually assured destruction would deter all but the most irrational of nations,

For the purposes of this resolution defines:

A nuclear weapon as a weapon whose destructive power comes from energy produced exclusively by nuclear reactions,

Proliferation as the spread of nuclear weapons, fissile material, and weapons-applicable nuclear technology and information,

Mandates that:
1. Should member nations wishing to have them be unable to procure them, they are to be given these weapons by those who have a surplus.
2. Should member nations not have the technology, they are to be assisted by willing member nations in developing them.

For cases in which member nations be unable to procure the nuclear weapons themselves or have yet to have the technology to do so:

1. Empowers the General Accounting Office (GAO) to conduct any and all essential financial checks on a nation before deciding on the ability of a member nation in procuring nuclear weapons.

2. Extends the powers of the Nuclear Testing Oversight Agency (NTOA) so as to encompass the auditing of member nation whose technology have yet to be able to develop nuclear weapons in order to make sure that they truly require help in developing their nuclear weapons.
Proliferating Nuclear Weapons
Category: International Security
Strength: Significant

The World Assembly,

Believing that it is every member nation's right to arm themselves with nuclear weapons adequately so as to defend themselves against threats by those who chose to possess nuclear weapons,

Recognizes that some nations choose to possess nuclear weapons, and further recognizes that some nations choose not to possess nuclear weapons, or have yet to develop them,

Appalled that there are nations that will not be able to adequately defend themselves should a nuclear threat present itself,

Convinced that the threat of mutually assured destruction would deter all but the most irrational of nations,

For the purposes of this resolution defines:

A nuclear weapon as a weapon whose destructive power comes from energy produced exclusively by nuclear reactions,

Proliferation as the spread of nuclear weapons, fissile material, and weapons-applicable nuclear technology and information,

Mandates that:
1. Should member nations wishing to have them be unable to procure them, they are to be given these weapons by those who have a surplus.

2. Should member nations not have the technology, they are to be assisted by willing member nations in developing them.

3. For cases in which member nations be unable to procure the nuclear weapons themselves or have yet to have the technology to do so:
(a) Empowers the General Accounting Office (GAO) to conduct any and all essential financial checks on a nation before deciding on the ability of a member nation in procuring nuclear weapons.
(b) Extends the powers of the Nuclear Testing Oversight Agency (NTOA) and the World Assembly Disaster Bureau (WADB):
(i) so as to encompass the auditing of member nation whose technology have yet to be able to develop nuclear weapons in order to make sure that they truly require help in developing their nuclear weapons,
(ii) so as to encompass the auditing the member nation who offered to help to make sure that their research safety standards meets international standards.

4. Member nations in any form of alliances be exempt from the audit by the GAO, but not the audits by the NTOA and WADB.

Declares that nothing this resolution shall be construed as limiting the World Assembly from further legislating on nuclear weapons.
Proliferating Nuclear Weapons
Category: International Security
Strength: Significant

The World Assembly,

Believing that it is every member nation's right to arm themselves with nuclear weapons adequately so as to defend themselves against threats by those who chose to possess nuclear weapons,

Recognizes that some nations choose to possess nuclear weapons, and further recognizes that some nations choose not to possess nuclear weapons, or have yet to develop them,

Appalled that there are nations that will not be able to adequately defend themselves should a nuclear threat present itself,

Convinced that the threat of mutually assured destruction would deter all but the most irrational of nations,

For the purposes of this resolution defines:

A nuclear weapon as a weapon whose destructive power comes from energy produced exclusively by nuclear reactions,

Proliferation as the spread of nuclear weapons, fissile material, and weapons-applicable nuclear technology and information,

Mandates that:
1. Should member nations wishing to have them be unable to procure them, they are to be given these weapons by those who have a surplus.

2. Should member nations not have the technology, they are to be assisted by willing member nations in developing them.

3. For cases in which member nations be unable to procure the nuclear weapons themselves or have yet to have the technology to do so:
(a) Empowers the General Accounting Office (GAO) to conduct any and all essential financial checks on a nation before deciding on the ability of a member nation in procuring nuclear weapons.
(b) Extends the powers of the Nuclear Testing Oversight Agency (NTOA) and the World Assembly Disaster Bureau (WADB):
(i) so as to encompass the auditing of member nation whose technology have yet to be able to develop nuclear weapons in order to make sure that they truly require help in developing their nuclear weapons,
(ii) so as to encompass the auditing the member nation who offered to help to make sure that their research safety standards meets international standards.

4. Member nations in any form of alliances be exempt from the audit by the GAO, but not the audits by the NTOA and WADB.

5. Member nations must take any and all safety precautions in the safety of the transfer process of the weapons and technology in order to avoid them from falling into the hands of rogue states, terrorist and/or extremist organizations.

Declares that nothing this resolution shall be construed as limiting the World Assembly from further legislating on nuclear weapons.
Proliferating Nuclear Weapons
Category: International Security
Strength: Significant

The World Assembly,

Believing that it is every member nation's right to arm themselves with nuclear weapons adequately so as to defend themselves against threats by those who chose to possess nuclear weapons,

Recognizes that some nations choose to possess nuclear weapons, and further recognizes that some nations choose not to possess nuclear weapons, or have yet to develop them,

Appalled that there are nations that will not be able to adequately defend themselves should a nuclear threat present itself,

For the purposes of this resolution defines:

A nuclear weapon as a weapon whose destructive power comes from energy produced exclusively by nuclear reactions,

Proliferation as the spread of nuclear weapons, fissile material, and weapons-applicable nuclear technology and information,

Mandates that:
1. Should member nations wishing to have them be unable to procure them, they are to be given these weapons by those who have a surplus.

2. Should member nations not have the technology, they are to be assisted by willing member nations in developing them.

3. For cases in which member nations be unable to procure the nuclear weapons themselves or have yet to have the technology to do so:
(a) Empowers the General Accounting Office (GAO) to conduct any and all essential financial checks on a nation before deciding on the ability of a member nation in procuring nuclear weapons.
(b) Extends the powers of the Nuclear Testing Oversight Agency (NTOA) and the World Assembly Disaster Bureau (WADB):
(i) so as to encompass the auditing of member nation whose technology have yet to be able to develop nuclear weapons in order to make sure that they truly require help in developing their nuclear weapons,
(ii) so as to encompass the auditing the member nation who offered to help to make sure that their research safety standards meets international standards.

4. Member nations in any form of alliances be exempt from the audit by the GAO, but not the audits by the NTOA and WADB.

5. Member nations must take any and all safety precautions in the safety of the transfer process of the weapons and technology in order to avoid them from falling into the hands of rogue states, terrorist and/or extremist organizations.

Declares that nothing this resolution shall be construed as limiting the World Assembly from further legislating on nuclear weapons.
Proliferating Nuclear Weapons
Category: International Security
Strength: Significant

The World Assembly,

Believing that it is every member nation's right to arm themselves with nuclear weapons adequately so as to defend themselves against threats by those who chose to possess nuclear weapons,

Recognizes that some nations choose to possess nuclear weapons, and further recognizes that some nations choose not to possess nuclear weapons, or have yet to develop them,

Appalled that there are nations that will not be able to adequately defend themselves should a nuclear threat present itself,

For the purposes of this resolution defines:

A nuclear weapon as a weapon whose destructive power comes from energy produced exclusively by nuclear reactions,

Proliferating as the act of spreading of nuclear weapons, fissile material, and weapons-applicable nuclear technology and information,

Mandates that:
1. Should member nations wishing to have them be unable to procure them, they are to be given these weapons by those who have a surplus.

2. Should member nations not have the technology, they are to be assisted by willing member nations in developing them.

3. For cases in which member nations be unable to procure the nuclear weapons themselves or have yet to have the technology to do so:
(a) Extend the powers of the General Accounting Office (GAO) to do a complete audit of the nation's finances before deciding on the ability of a member nation in procuring nuclear weapons.
(b) Extends the powers of the Nuclear Testing Oversight Agency (NTOA) and the World Assembly Disaster Bureau (WADB):
(i) so as to encompass the auditing of member nation whose technology have yet to be able to develop nuclear weapons in order to make sure that they truly require help in developing their nuclear weapons,
(ii) so as to encompass the auditing the member nation who offered to help to make sure that their research safety standards meets international standards.

4. Member nations in any form of alliances be exempt from the audit by the GAO, but not the audits by the NTOA and WADB.

5. Member nations must take any and all safety precautions in the safety of the transfer process of the weapons and technology in order to avoid them from falling into the hands of rogue states, terrorist and/or extremist organizations.

Declares that nothing this resolution shall be construed as limiting the World Assembly from further legislating on nuclear weapons.
Proliferating Nuclear Weapons
Category: International Security
Strength: Significant

The World Assembly,

Believing that it is every member nation's right to arm themselves with nuclear weapons adequately so as to defend themselves against threats by those who choose to possess nuclear weapons,

Recognizes that some nations choose to possess nuclear weapons, and further recognizes that some nations choose not to possess nuclear weapons, or have yet to develop them,

Appalled that there are nations that will not be able to adequately defend themselves should a nuclear threat present itself,

For the purposes of this resolution defines:

A nuclear weapon as a weapon whose destructive power comes from energy produced exclusively by nuclear reactions,

Proliferating as the act of spreading of nuclear weapons, fissile material, and weapons-applicable nuclear technology and information,

Surplus as any amount of nuclear weapons that a nation in possession of nuclear weapons deem to be more than enough for the purpose of self-defence, however, exempts weapons that are manufactured for the purpose of trade from being declared as surplus,

Mandates that:
1. Should member nations wishing to have them be unable to procure them, they are to be given these weapons by those who have a surplus. However, if the receiving nation does not have the technology to handle nuclear weapons safely yet, they are bound (2).

2. Should member nations not yet have the technology to handle nuclear weapons safely, they are to be assisted by willing member nations in developing them.

3. For cases in which member nations be unable to procure the nuclear weapons themselves or have yet to have the technology to do so:
(a) Extend the powers of the General Accounting Office (GAO) to do a complete audit of the nation's finances before deciding on the ability of a member nation in procuring or creating nuclear weapons.
(b) Extends the powers of the Nuclear Testing Oversight Agency (NTOA) and the World Assembly Disaster Bureau (WADB):
(i) so as to encompass the auditing of member nation whose technology have yet to be able to develop nuclear weapons in order to make sure that they truly require help in developing their nuclear weapons,
(ii) so as to encompass the auditing the member nation who offered to help to make sure that their research safety standards meets international standards.

4. Only member nations that pass the NTOA and WADB are allowed to volunteer as mentors or receive nuclear weapons.

5. Member nations in any form of alliances be exempt from the audit by the GAO, but not the audits by the NTOA and WADB.

6. Member nations must take any and all safety precautions in the safety of the transfer process of the weapons and technology in order to avoid them from falling into the hands of rogue states, terrorist and/or extremist organizations.

Declares that nothing this resolution shall be construed as limiting the World Assembly from further legislating on nuclear weapons.
Proliferating Nuclear Weapons
Category: International Security
Strength: Significant

The World Assembly,

Believing that it is every member nation's right to arm themselves with nuclear weapons adequately so as to defend themselves against threats by those who choose to possess nuclear weapons,

Recognizes that some nations choose to possess nuclear weapons, and further recognizes that some nations choose not to possess nuclear weapons, or have yet to develop them,

Appalled that there are nations that will not be able to adequately defend themselves should a nuclear threat present itself,

For the purposes of this resolution defines:

A nuclear weapon as a weapon whose destructive power comes from energy produced exclusively by nuclear reactions,

Proliferating as the act of spreading of nuclear weapons, fissile material, and weapons-applicable nuclear technology and information,

Surplus as any amount of nuclear weapons that a nation in possession of nuclear weapons deem to be more than enough for the purpose of self-defence, however, exempts weapons that are manufactured for the purpose of trade from being declared as surplus,

Mandates that:
1. Should member nations wishing to have them be unable to procure them, they are to be given these weapons by those who have a surplus, subject to limitations of clauses 3 and 4.

2. Should member nations not yet have the technology to handle nuclear weapons safely, they are to be assisted by member nations in developing them, subject to limitations of clauses 3 and 4.

3. For cases in which member nations be unable to procure the nuclear weapons themselves or have yet to have the technology to do so:
(a) Extend the powers of the General Accounting Office (GAO) to do a complete audit of the nation's finances before deciding on the ability of a member nation in procuring or creating nuclear weapons.
(b) Extends the powers of the Nuclear Testing Oversight Agency (NTOA) and the World Assembly Disaster Bureau (WADB):
(i) so as to encompass the auditing of member nation whose technology have yet to be able to develop nuclear weapons in order to make sure that they truly require help in developing their nuclear weapons,
(ii) so as to encompass the auditing the member nation who offered to help to make sure that their research safety standards meets international standards.
(c) If the receiving nation does not have its own nuclear weapons research programme to safely handle the nuclear weapons that it is to receive, it is subject to the limitations of clause 2 of this resolution.
(d) The member nation assigned as the mentor nation must not be in any past or present conflict, or future conflict, if there are sufficient grounds to believe that a future conflict could occur between the nations involved.

4. Only member nations that pass the NTOA and WADB are allowed to be mentors or receive nuclear weapons.

5. Member nations in any form of alliances be exempt from the audit by the GAO, but not the audits by the NTOA and WADB.

6. Member nations must take any and all safety precautions in the safety of the transfer process of the weapons and/or technology in order to avoid them from falling into the hands of rogue states, terrorist and/or extremist organizations.

7. Member nations are prohibited from aiding rogue states, terrorist and/or extremist organizations in the acquisition of nuclear weapons and/or technology.

Declares that nothing this resolution shall be construed as limiting the World Assembly from further legislating on nuclear weapons.
Proliferating Nuclear Weapons
Category: International Security
Strength: Significant

The World Assembly,

Believing that it is every member nation's right to arm themselves with nuclear weapons adequately so as to defend themselves against threats by those who choose to possess nuclear weapons,

Recognizes that some nations choose to possess nuclear weapons, and further recognizes that some nations choose not to possess nuclear weapons, or have yet to develop them,

Appalled that there are nations that will not be able to adequately defend themselves should a nuclear threat present itself,

For the purposes of this resolution defines:

Surplus as any amount of nuclear weapons that a nation in possession of nuclear weapons deem to be more than enough for the purpose of self-defence, however, exempts weapons that are designated for the purpose of trade from being declared as surplus,

Mandates that:
1. Should member nations wishing to have them be unable to procure them, they are to be given these weapons by those who have a surplus, subject to limitations of clauses 3 and 4.

2. Should member nations not yet have the technology to handle nuclear weapons safely, they are to be assisted by willing member nations in developing them, subject to limitations of clauses 3 and 4.

3. For cases in which member nations be unable to procure the nuclear weapons themselves or have yet to have the technology to do so:
(a) Extend the powers of the General Accounting Office (GAO) to do a complete audit of the nation's finances before deciding on the ability of a member nation in procuring or creating nuclear weapons.
(b) Extends the powers of the Nuclear Testing Oversight Agency (NTOA) and the World Assembly Disaster Bureau (WADB):
(i) so as to encompass the auditing of member nation whose technology have yet to be able to develop nuclear weapons in order to make sure that they truly require help in developing their nuclear weapons,
(ii) so as to encompass the auditing the member nation who offered to help to make sure that their research safety standards meet international standards.
(c) If the receiving nation does not have its own nuclear weapons research programme to safely handle the nuclear weapons that it is to receive, it is subject to the limitations of clause 2 of this resolution.
(d) The member nation assigned as the mentor nation must not have strained relations, politically, culturally, or otherwise, or have sufficient grounds to believe that future conflict will emerge.
(e) A member nation is allowed to object to sharing its nuclear weapons or technology if there are sufficient grounds to believe that the receiving nation will use it in more capacity than self-defence.

4. Only member nations that pass the NTOA and WADB are allowed to be mentors or receive nuclear weapons.

5. Member nations in any form of alliances be exempt from the audit by the GAO, but not the audits by the NTOA and WADB.

6. Member nations must take any and all safety precautions in the safety of the transfer process of the weapons and/or technology in order to avoid them from falling into the hands of rogue states, terrorist and/or extremist organizations.

7. Member nations are prohibited from aiding rogue states, terrorist and/or extremist organizations in the acquisition of nuclear weapons and/or technology.

Declares that nothing this resolution shall be construed as limiting the World Assembly from further legislating on nuclear weapons.
Limiting Nuclear Proliferation
Category: International Security
Strength: Significant

The World Assembly,

Believing that it is every member nation's right to arm themselves with nuclear weapons adequately so as to defend themselves against threats by those who choose to possess nuclear weapons,

Recognizes that some nations choose to possess nuclear weapons, and further recognizes that some nations choose not to possess nuclear weapons, or have yet to develop them,

Mandates that:
  1. Should a member nation wish to give its nuclear weapons away to another that is unable to purchase them, they are subject to limitations of clauses 3 and 4.
  2. Should member nations not yet have the technology to handle nuclear weapons safely, they are to be assisted by willing member nations in developing them, subject to limitations of clauses 3 and 4.
  3. For cases in which member nations be unable to purchase the nuclear weapons themselves or have yet to have the technology to do so:
    1. Extend the powers of the General Accounting Office (GAO) to do a complete audit of the nation's finances before deciding on the ability of a member nation in procuring or creating nuclear weapons.
    2. Extends the powers of the Nuclear Testing Oversight Agency (NTOA) and the World Assembly Disaster Bureau (WADB):
      1. so as to encompass the auditing of member nation whose technology have yet to be able to develop nuclear weapons in order to make sure that they truly require help in developing their nuclear weapons,
      2. so as to encompass the auditing the member nation who offered to help to make sure that their research safety standards meet international standards.
    3. If the receiving nation does not have its own nuclear weapons research programme to safely handle the nuclear weapons that it is to receive, it is subject to the limitations of clause 2 of this resolution.
    4. The member nation assigned as the mentor nation must not have strained relations, politically, culturally, or otherwise, or have sufficient grounds to believe that future conflict will emerge.
    5. A member nation is allowed to object to sharing its nuclear weapons or technology if there are sufficient grounds to believe that the receiving nation will use it in more capacity than self-defence.
  4. Only member nations that pass the NTOA and WADB are allowed to be mentors or receive nuclear weapons.
  5. Member nations in any form of alliances be exempt from the audit by the GAO, but not the audits by the NTOA and WADB.
  6. Member nations are prohibited from aiding non-state actors in the acquisition of nuclear weapons.
  7. Declares that nothing this resolution shall be construed as limiting the World Assembly from further legislating on nuclear weapons.
Draft 11
Limiting Nuclear Proliferation
Category: International Security
Strength: Significant

The World Assembly,

Believing that it is every member nation's right to arm themselves with nuclear weapons adequately so as to defend themselves against threats by those who choose to possess nuclear weapons,

Recognizes that some nations choose to possess nuclear weapons, and further recognizes that some nations choose not to possess nuclear weapons, or have yet to develop them,

Mandates that:
  1. Should a member nation wish to give its nuclear weapons away to another that is unable to purchase them, they are subject to limitations of clauses 3 and 4.
  2. Should member nations not yet have the technology to handle and maintain nuclear weapons safely, they are to be assisted by willing member nations in developing them, subject to limitations of clauses 3 and 4.
  3. For cases in which member nations be unable to purchase the nuclear weapons themselves or have yet to have the technology to do so:
    1. Extend the powers of the General Accounting Office (GAO) to do a complete audit of the nation's finances before deciding on the ability of a member nation in purchasing, creating, maintaining, or aiding in the development of nuclear weapons.
    2. Extends the powers of the Nuclear Testing Oversight Agency (NTOA) and the World Assembly Disaster Bureau (WADB):
      1. so as to encompass the auditing of member nation whose technology have yet to be able to develop nuclear weapons in order to make sure that they truly require help in developing their nuclear weapons,
      2. so as to encompass the auditing the member nation who offered to help to make sure that their research safety standards meet international standards.
    3. If the receiving nation does not have its own nuclear weapons research programme to safely handle and maintain the nuclear weapons that it is to receive, it is subject to the limitations of clause 2 of this resolution.
    4. The member nation assigned as the mentor nation must not have strained relations, politically, culturally, or otherwise, or have sufficient grounds to believe that future conflict will emerge.
  4. Only member nations that pass the GAO, NTOA and WADB are allowed to be mentors or receive nuclear weapons.
  5. Member nations must take any and all safety precautions in the safety of the transfer process of the weapons and/or technology in order to avoid them from falling into the hands of non-state actors.
  6. Member nations are prohibited from aiding non-state actors in the acquisition of nuclear weapons.
  7. Unless non-member nations agree to the terms of the resolution, member nations are prohibited from cooperating with them in regards to the development or procurement of nuclear weapons.
  8. Declares that nothing this resolution shall be construed as limiting the World Assembly from further legislating on nuclear weapons.
Draft 8 to Draft 9
  • Removed the mandate to give nuclear weapons, instead, it reverses the logic.
  • Removed the definition of surplus as it's no longer needed
Draft 9 to 10
  • Removed
    6. Member nations must take any and all safety precautions in the safety of the transfer process of the weapons and/or technology in order to avoid them from falling into the hands of rogue states, terrorist and/or extremist organizations.

    7. Member nations are prohibited from aiding rogue states, terrorist and/or extremist organizations in the acquisition of nuclear weapons and/or technology.
  • Added
    6. Member nations are prohibited from aiding non-state actors in the acquisition of nuclear weapons.
Draft 10 to 11
  • added maintaining to the GAO audit
  • added and maintain to clauses 2 and 3(c)
  • removed the alliance clause
  • clarified clause 4 to make sure that only nations that are financially capable should be able to receive nuclear weapons or be mentors
  • added non-proliferation when dealing with non-members
Last edited by The Akashic Records on Tue Nov 12, 2013 4:16 am, edited 42 times in total.
About my posts:
Unless otherwise stated, everything I say is in character.
Coleman T. Harrison,
WA Ambassador for The Akashic Records
On Sanity - Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can borrow mine.
No, the idea behind it (free will) is that one has the option to be Good (tm) and the option to be Bad (tm). God is rather pro-choice. - The Alma Mater -

User avatar
United Federation of Canada
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1417
Founded: Oct 09, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby United Federation of Canada » Wed Jul 31, 2013 11:20 pm

The Akashic Records wrote:Yes, I'm aware that nations may choose not to have them, and it is based on the infringement of National Sovereignty, among other things, that I made this into a [JOKE] proposal, even though it is in no way funny. Also, UFoC, borrowed some things from ye :P

Also, I'm a rules-lawyer, not a legislator, but I'd like to improve in that area, so here goes one attempt at being wrong to understand what it is I'm doing wrong, even though I partook in debates of drafts, there are many things that I tend to miss.


On Nuclear Over-proliferation
Category: International Security
Strength: Significant

The World Assembly,

Believing that it is every member nation's right to arm themselves with nuclear weapons adequately so as to defend themselves against threats by those who chose to posses nuclear weapons,

Recognizes that some nations choose to possess nuclear weapons, and further recognizes that some nations choose not to possess nuclear weapons, or have yet to develop them,

Appalled that there are nations that will not be able to adequately defend themselves should a nuclear threat present itself,

Convinced that the threat of mutually assured destruction would deter all but the most irrational of nations,

For the purposes of this resolution defines:

A nuclear weapon as a weapon whose destructive power comes from energy produced exclusively by nuclear reactions,

Proliferation as the spread of nuclear weapons, fissile material, and weapons-applicable nuclear technology and information,

Mandates that:
1. Every single member nation have nuclear weapons.
2. Should member nations be unable to procure them, they are to be forcefully given these weapons by those who have a surplus.
3. Should member nations not have the technology, they are to be assisted by willing member nations in developing them.

For cases in which member nations be unable to procure the nuclear weapons themselves or have yet to have the technology to do so:

1. Empowers the General Accounting Office (GAO) to conduct any and all essential financial checks on a nation before deciding on the ability of a member nation in procuring nuclear weapons.

2. Extends the powers of the Nuclear Testing Oversight Agency (NTOA) so as to encompass the auditing of member nation whose technology have yet to be able to develop nuclear weapons in order to make sure that they truly require help in developing their nuclear weapons.


Hey... Doesn't actually look that bad to me. It is the exact oposite of what we were trying to achieve, but it seems like the end result would be the same.

I give you permission to use any clauses you would like, and suggest you change this from a joke, to an actual real proposal, which I would put my whole weight behind in supporting.

Nicely done sir.

User avatar
The Akashic Records
Diplomat
 
Posts: 803
Founded: May 21, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby The Akashic Records » Thu Aug 01, 2013 2:01 am

Thank you Mr. Pearson, but doesn't mandating that every member possess nuclear weapons after recognizing their rights to not have one contradictory? We do appreciate the support, and if enough people think this is plausible, we would revise a better draft. I do have to thank Mr. Chombers as well, it was his draft on Uranium Mining that gave me some of the clauses in this idea of mine.
About my posts:
Unless otherwise stated, everything I say is in character.
Coleman T. Harrison,
WA Ambassador for The Akashic Records
On Sanity - Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can borrow mine.
No, the idea behind it (free will) is that one has the option to be Good (tm) and the option to be Bad (tm). God is rather pro-choice. - The Alma Mater -

User avatar
The Akashic Records
Diplomat
 
Posts: 803
Founded: May 21, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby The Akashic Records » Thu Aug 01, 2013 7:38 am

Bring out the big guns.
About my posts:
Unless otherwise stated, everything I say is in character.
Coleman T. Harrison,
WA Ambassador for The Akashic Records
On Sanity - Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can borrow mine.
No, the idea behind it (free will) is that one has the option to be Good (tm) and the option to be Bad (tm). God is rather pro-choice. - The Alma Mater -

User avatar
Point Breeze
Diplomat
 
Posts: 709
Founded: Dec 26, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Point Breeze » Thu Aug 01, 2013 8:28 am

I think your mandates have a lot of contradiction. First you say that other nations should provide nukes. Ok. Then they're supposed to provide technology to make nukes.... then the GAO is supposed to do an audit before anyone gets nukes, then the NTOA is supposed to do an audit before anyone gets nukes. I just don't follow.

Also, I find warmongering to be appalling, especially with nuclear weapons. In fact, you're mandate goes against my founding principle of pacifism, which might make this an ideological ban.
Thane of WA Affairs for Wintreath

User avatar
The Akashic Records
Diplomat
 
Posts: 803
Founded: May 21, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby The Akashic Records » Thu Aug 01, 2013 8:53 am

Point Breeze wrote:I think your mandates have a lot of contradiction. First you say that other nations should provide nukes. Ok. Then they're supposed to provide technology to make nukes.... then the GAO is supposed to do an audit before anyone gets nukes, then the NTOA is supposed to do an audit before anyone gets nukes. I just don't follow.

Also, I find warmongering to be appalling, especially with nuclear weapons. In fact, you're mandate goes against my founding principle of pacifism, which might make this an ideological ban.
No ideology ban here, as it states that "should member nations choose", meaning that it is a decision by the member nations. The audits by both GAO and the NTOA were placed there to prevent member nations from saying "I don't have enough money, give me a nuke", as well as "I want nukes, but I have no idea what I'm doing, so I'll just do whatever". It might border on optionality, but given that it only applies to those who wants nuclear weapons, as per the edit, as far as my limited understanding goes, shouldn't affect members who wishes to forgo nuclear weapons, much like how neutral one wants to be.

The clause "have yet to develop" could also be construed to mean developing defenses against nuclear weapons, whatever that may be. I have no intention of promoting wars, only giving everyone a big enough [arse]nal to stop everyone from actually going to war. That said, it would still not address the core problem of international relations and understanding, but many of those have already been covered by other resolutions.
Last edited by The Akashic Records on Thu Aug 01, 2013 8:58 am, edited 1 time in total.
About my posts:
Unless otherwise stated, everything I say is in character.
Coleman T. Harrison,
WA Ambassador for The Akashic Records
On Sanity - Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can borrow mine.
No, the idea behind it (free will) is that one has the option to be Good (tm) and the option to be Bad (tm). God is rather pro-choice. - The Alma Mater -

User avatar
Point Breeze
Diplomat
 
Posts: 709
Founded: Dec 26, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Point Breeze » Thu Aug 01, 2013 9:08 am

The Akashic Records wrote:
Point Breeze wrote:I think your mandates have a lot of contradiction. First you say that other nations should provide nukes. Ok. Then they're supposed to provide technology to make nukes.... then the GAO is supposed to do an audit before anyone gets nukes, then the NTOA is supposed to do an audit before anyone gets nukes. I just don't follow.

Also, I find warmongering to be appalling, especially with nuclear weapons. In fact, you're mandate goes against my founding principle of pacifism, which might make this an ideological ban.
No ideology ban here, as it states that "should member nations choose", meaning that it is a decision by the member nations. The audits by both GAO and the NTOA were placed there to prevent member nations from saying "I don't have enough money, give me a nuke", as well as "I want nukes, but I have no idea what I'm doing, so I'll just do whatever". It might border on optionality, but given that it only applies to those who wants nuclear weapons, as per the edit, as far as my limited understanding goes, shouldn't affect members who wishes to forgo nuclear weapons, much like how neutral one wants to be.

The clause "have yet to develop" could also be construed to mean developing defenses against nuclear weapons, whatever that may be. I have no intention of promoting wars, only giving everyone a big enough [arse]nal to stop everyone from actually going to war. That said, it would still not address the core problem of international relations and understanding, but many of those have already been covered by other resolutions.


I still have a problem with MAD, but its me, not you. You've dispelled all my concerns with this draft.
Thane of WA Affairs for Wintreath

User avatar
The Akashic Records
Diplomat
 
Posts: 803
Founded: May 21, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby The Akashic Records » Thu Aug 01, 2013 9:13 am

Thank you Dr. Keogh, but if you read my reasoning, you'd understand my position on the matter. I'd much rather have the Nuclear Proliferation Accords or any such measure pass, but given that many members love their nuclear weapons so much, I've decided to regulate it in a roundabout way.
About my posts:
Unless otherwise stated, everything I say is in character.
Coleman T. Harrison,
WA Ambassador for The Akashic Records
On Sanity - Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can borrow mine.
No, the idea behind it (free will) is that one has the option to be Good (tm) and the option to be Bad (tm). God is rather pro-choice. - The Alma Mater -

User avatar
Republic of Greater America
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 406
Founded: Apr 27, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Republic of Greater America » Thu Aug 01, 2013 10:59 am

From what I understand, I'm assuming that this resolution would allow any nation to possess nukes, right? If so, I give my full support.

User avatar
Abacathea
Minister
 
Posts: 2060
Founded: Nov 17, 2012
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Abacathea » Thu Aug 01, 2013 12:52 pm

Republic of Greater America wrote:From what I understand, I'm assuming that this resolution would allow any nation to possess nukes, right? If so, I give my full support.


NAPA already does that.
G.A #236; Renewable Energy Installations (Repealed)
G.A #239; Vehicle Emissions Convention (Repealed).
G.A #257; Reducing Automobile Emissions (Repealed).
G.A #263; Uranium Mining Standards Act
G.A #279; Right of Emigration
G.A #292; Nuclear Security Convention
(Co-Author)
G.A #363; Preservation of Artefacts (repealed)
S.C #118; Commend SkyDip
S.C #120; Commend Mousebumples
S.C #122; Condemn Gest
S.C #124; Commend Bears Armed
S.C #125; Commend The Bruce
S.C #126; Commend Sanctaria
S.C #131: Commend NewTexas
(Co-Author)
S.C #136; Repeal "Liberate St Abbaddon" (Co-Author)
S.C #143; Commend Hobbesistan
S.C #146; Repeal "Liberate Hogwarts"

User avatar
Abacathea
Minister
 
Posts: 2060
Founded: Nov 17, 2012
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Abacathea » Thu Aug 01, 2013 12:56 pm

Those last two clauses look incredibly similar to two of mine from my mining act, especially since it's not common that the GAO or NTOA have come up in resolutions, nor had their powers extended. Nor is it common for a member of only two months to be familiar with the NTOA given i had to research its existence before adding it to the act. I'm a little irked by virtue of that. Poor move on your part. If I had any proof other than my suspicions i'd be calling serious bullshit on this proposal.

As it currently stands, expect a no vote irrespective of my feelings on the act and a repeal if it passes.
G.A #236; Renewable Energy Installations (Repealed)
G.A #239; Vehicle Emissions Convention (Repealed).
G.A #257; Reducing Automobile Emissions (Repealed).
G.A #263; Uranium Mining Standards Act
G.A #279; Right of Emigration
G.A #292; Nuclear Security Convention
(Co-Author)
G.A #363; Preservation of Artefacts (repealed)
S.C #118; Commend SkyDip
S.C #120; Commend Mousebumples
S.C #122; Condemn Gest
S.C #124; Commend Bears Armed
S.C #125; Commend The Bruce
S.C #126; Commend Sanctaria
S.C #131: Commend NewTexas
(Co-Author)
S.C #136; Repeal "Liberate St Abbaddon" (Co-Author)
S.C #143; Commend Hobbesistan
S.C #146; Repeal "Liberate Hogwarts"

User avatar
The Akashic Records
Diplomat
 
Posts: 803
Founded: May 21, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby The Akashic Records » Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:37 pm

Republic of Greater America wrote:From what I understand, I'm assuming that this resolution would allow any nation to possess nukes, right? If so, I give my full support.
It adds bureaucracy and forces the NTOA to act, making at least safer for people who wants to have nukes of their own. The Nuclear Testing Safety only makes it so that nations invite them during testing, this audit on feasibility would at least save some nation from blowing themself up when they research their nuclear weapons, because if they can't, they will be appointed a sort of mentor nation who are willing to do so.

Abacathea wrote:Those last two clauses look incredibly similar to two of mine from my mining act, especially since it's not common that the GAO or NTOA have come up in resolutions, nor had their powers extended. Nor is it common for a member of only two months to be familiar with the NTOA given i had to research its existence before adding it to the act. I'm a little irked by virtue of that. Poor move on your part. If I had any proof other than my suspicions i'd be calling serious bullshit on this proposal.

As it currently stands, expect a no vote irrespective of my feelings on the act and a repeal if it passes.
Might I understand further why that is? I've stated that it was thanks to your draft that I had the idea to extend the powers of those agencies.
The Akashic Records wrote:Thank you Mr. Pearson, but doesn't mandating that every member possess nuclear weapons after recognizing their rights to not have one contradictory? We do appreciate the support, and if enough people think this is plausible, we would revise a better draft. I do have to thank Mr. Chombers as well, it was his draft on Uranium Mining that gave me some of the clauses in this idea of mine.
I detest copyright, but I still respect an author's right.

Also, I plan on fleshing it out with perhaps more restrictions and bureaucracy. As it is, it is still a rough draft from a completely self-contradictory made not so contradictory. The debate transcript is there for you to peruse.
About my posts:
Unless otherwise stated, everything I say is in character.
Coleman T. Harrison,
WA Ambassador for The Akashic Records
On Sanity - Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can borrow mine.
No, the idea behind it (free will) is that one has the option to be Good (tm) and the option to be Bad (tm). God is rather pro-choice. - The Alma Mater -

User avatar
Abacathea
Minister
 
Posts: 2060
Founded: Nov 17, 2012
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Abacathea » Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:45 pm

If you did so I must have missed it. It certainly isn't in the mining thread and the only author I saw noted on this thread was UFoC. If I have missed it my apologies.

I would only ask you allow my act to go through first prior to campaigning for this one. Two acts so similar to one another in close proximity can be a bit iffy and after all I did have mine first ;)
G.A #236; Renewable Energy Installations (Repealed)
G.A #239; Vehicle Emissions Convention (Repealed).
G.A #257; Reducing Automobile Emissions (Repealed).
G.A #263; Uranium Mining Standards Act
G.A #279; Right of Emigration
G.A #292; Nuclear Security Convention
(Co-Author)
G.A #363; Preservation of Artefacts (repealed)
S.C #118; Commend SkyDip
S.C #120; Commend Mousebumples
S.C #122; Condemn Gest
S.C #124; Commend Bears Armed
S.C #125; Commend The Bruce
S.C #126; Commend Sanctaria
S.C #131: Commend NewTexas
(Co-Author)
S.C #136; Repeal "Liberate St Abbaddon" (Co-Author)
S.C #143; Commend Hobbesistan
S.C #146; Repeal "Liberate Hogwarts"

User avatar
The Akashic Records
Diplomat
 
Posts: 803
Founded: May 21, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby The Akashic Records » Thu Aug 01, 2013 4:01 pm

Don't worry Mr. Chombers, this is probably months away from being legal to submit under International Security and Significant. I'll also update the OP to reflect your contribution to it.

[edit]Also, I meant for it to be a bad joke earlier, but after Mr. Pearson's recommendation, I changed it to a draft instead[/edit]
Last edited by The Akashic Records on Thu Aug 01, 2013 4:05 pm, edited 2 times in total.
About my posts:
Unless otherwise stated, everything I say is in character.
Coleman T. Harrison,
WA Ambassador for The Akashic Records
On Sanity - Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can borrow mine.
No, the idea behind it (free will) is that one has the option to be Good (tm) and the option to be Bad (tm). God is rather pro-choice. - The Alma Mater -

User avatar
Lillitania
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 176
Founded: Apr 22, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Lillitania » Thu Aug 01, 2013 9:27 pm

Yeah, I'm going to go ahead and say this is a little but of a waste of time. I need to hire interns to proof-read these proposals...

I'd like to start off by saying that nation's may already do this, I'm guessing you're trying to secure this right?

Abacathea wrote:ix: Empowers the General Accounting Office (GAO) to conduct any and all essential financial checks on a nation before deciding on the approval of funds and to confer with the Nuclear Testing Oversight Agency (NTOA) to determine exactly what actions will be required on a case by case basis by nations applying under this act.


The Akashic Records wrote:1. Empowers the General Accounting Office (GAO) to conduct any and all essential financial checks on a nation before deciding on the ability of a member nation in procuring nuclear weapons.


By the way, am I the only one that sees a little 'inspiration' from the Mining Standards Act proposal. Might just be me.

Jerry Greyer
General Assembly Office
Liberty, Democracy, Equality
Hippostania - Unjustly deleted 30/7/2013
Napkiraly wrote:To be fair to the Americans, I've met quite a number of Europeans who also have no clue as to what communism or socialism really is. Same goes for Canada. Ignorance knows no borders.
AMERICAN
Picture of Me
Pro: United States, Patriotism, Guns, LGBT Rights, Liberation, Capitalism
Anti: Communism/Socialism, Nation-bashing, American Prejudice
CUBAN IMMIGRANT

User avatar
United Federation of Canada
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1417
Founded: Oct 09, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby United Federation of Canada » Thu Aug 01, 2013 9:30 pm

Lillitania wrote:
By the way, am I the only one that sees a little 'inspiration' from the Mining Standards Act proposal. Might just be me.

Jerry Greyer
General Assembly Office


Check two comments back for the answer to your question.

User avatar
Lillitania
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 176
Founded: Apr 22, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Lillitania » Thu Aug 01, 2013 9:58 pm

United Federation of Canada wrote:
Check two comments back for the answer to your question.


Oh, thanks for that!

Jerry Greyer
General Assembly Office
Liberty, Democracy, Equality
Hippostania - Unjustly deleted 30/7/2013
Napkiraly wrote:To be fair to the Americans, I've met quite a number of Europeans who also have no clue as to what communism or socialism really is. Same goes for Canada. Ignorance knows no borders.
AMERICAN
Picture of Me
Pro: United States, Patriotism, Guns, LGBT Rights, Liberation, Capitalism
Anti: Communism/Socialism, Nation-bashing, American Prejudice
CUBAN IMMIGRANT

User avatar
Norway and Iceland
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 168
Founded: Dec 21, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Norway and Iceland » Fri Aug 02, 2013 3:11 am

I am commanded by Her Majesty the Queen to express to the Assembly her utmost dismay at the substance of this proposal.
Þór Þórusson
Private Secretary to the Queen
The United Kingdom of Norway and Iceland

User avatar
Lillitania
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 176
Founded: Apr 22, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Lillitania » Fri Aug 02, 2013 11:18 am

Norway and Iceland wrote:I am commanded by Her Majesty the Queen to express to the Assembly her utmost dismay at the substance of this proposal.


No offence to her majesty, but elaborating helps other people understand them.

Now on the matter of the mandates...

The Akashic Records wrote:Mandates that:
1. Should member nations wishing to have them be unable to procure them, they are to be given these weapons by those who have a surplus.
2. Should member nations not have the technology, they are to be assisted by willing member nations in developing them.


Mandate number one, is this enforced? You should specify, the current wording has me believe that nations MUST give their surplus missiles to those who don't have. Lillitania is vehemently against that.

Jerry Greyer
General Assembly Office
Last edited by Lillitania on Fri Aug 02, 2013 11:19 am, edited 1 time in total.
Liberty, Democracy, Equality
Hippostania - Unjustly deleted 30/7/2013
Napkiraly wrote:To be fair to the Americans, I've met quite a number of Europeans who also have no clue as to what communism or socialism really is. Same goes for Canada. Ignorance knows no borders.
AMERICAN
Picture of Me
Pro: United States, Patriotism, Guns, LGBT Rights, Liberation, Capitalism
Anti: Communism/Socialism, Nation-bashing, American Prejudice
CUBAN IMMIGRANT

User avatar
Point Breeze
Diplomat
 
Posts: 709
Founded: Dec 26, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Point Breeze » Fri Aug 02, 2013 1:03 pm

After thinking this over a little more, I've come to the conclusion that there are certain nations that should not have nuclear weapons, no matter how much they want them. Its true that mutually assured destruction is an effective deterrent in the vast majority of scenarios, but there are many forces that push people to do things that aren't in their best interests. These include radical religious beliefs, duress, and Ariel Dumont Midnight Mist© fragrances....* ahem*. Anyway...

I'm imagining a scenario that a new , relatively weak government requests nuclear weapons technology from its developed, advanced neighbor. The weak, unpopular government falls and a radical entity takes control of the nation and its new, modern supply of nuclear weapons.
Thane of WA Affairs for Wintreath

User avatar
Norway and Iceland
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 168
Founded: Dec 21, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Norway and Iceland » Fri Aug 02, 2013 10:13 pm

Lillitania wrote:
Norway and Iceland wrote:I am commanded by Her Majesty the Queen to express to the Assembly her utmost dismay at the substance of this proposal.


No offence to her majesty, but elaborating helps other people understand them.

None taken :) I am happy to answer on Her Majesty's behalf. The simple problem we see here is that encouraging the proliferation of nuclear weapons is dangerous and irresponsible. It is akin to the argument that if everyone has guns, then there will be less people killed by guns. In particular we would like to point out our disagreement with the following clause:
Convinced that the threat of mutually assured destruction would deter all but the most irrational of nations

In our humble opinion, there are many nations who would become irrational when heavily provoked. If one were to desire examples of this provocation, have a read of the wars occuring beyond the walls of this Assembly.

However, we respect the right for other nations to have opposing views on this subject.
Þór Þórusson
Private Secretary to the Queen
The United Kingdom of Norway and Iceland

User avatar
The Akashic Records
Diplomat
 
Posts: 803
Founded: May 21, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby The Akashic Records » Sat Aug 03, 2013 5:37 am

Ambassador Greyer, it is a must, however, what constitutes a 'surplus' is completely up to the respective member nations. That is to say, if you do not believe that you have a surplus, then you would be exempt from having to give them nuclear weapons. Do note that nukes that are for sale does not in any way constitute a surplus, as those are considered economic goods.

Dr. Keogh, I can see your concerns, but under your situation, I would like to ask, which one is considered the legitimate government? For me, it would depend on their constitution, as the ones who sent their ambassador to the World Assembly would, logically be the one from the legitimate government. Though, coming up with provisions for those matters are on my things to do list, if you have any good beginnings, we would be very thankful for it.

Ambassador, Þór Þórusson? I'm not quite sure how to pronounce your name, forgive me if it sounds a little off. Well, yes, I've heard of wars that happened simply because a nation eats pizza with forks, but the threat of complete and utter destruction of both sides, as the members of the assembly who voted against the Nuclear Proliferation Accords would have me believe, would at least halt them from furthering their war, and perhaps open a path to peace talks. My intention with this particular resolution is to try and regulate proliferation in a roundabout way, as we have stated earlier.
Last edited by The Akashic Records on Sat Aug 03, 2013 10:32 am, edited 1 time in total.
About my posts:
Unless otherwise stated, everything I say is in character.
Coleman T. Harrison,
WA Ambassador for The Akashic Records
On Sanity - Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can borrow mine.
No, the idea behind it (free will) is that one has the option to be Good (tm) and the option to be Bad (tm). God is rather pro-choice. - The Alma Mater -

User avatar
The Akashic Records
Diplomat
 
Posts: 803
Founded: May 21, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby The Akashic Records » Sat Aug 03, 2013 10:01 am

Updated the draft, but it still feels incomplete.
About my posts:
Unless otherwise stated, everything I say is in character.
Coleman T. Harrison,
WA Ambassador for The Akashic Records
On Sanity - Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can borrow mine.
No, the idea behind it (free will) is that one has the option to be Good (tm) and the option to be Bad (tm). God is rather pro-choice. - The Alma Mater -

User avatar
Retired WerePenguins
Diplomat
 
Posts: 767
Founded: Apr 26, 2006
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Retired WerePenguins » Sat Aug 03, 2013 10:48 am

I like this; the category/strength is appropriate to the resolution at hand.
One thought; nations that receive these weapons should ensure that they do not fall into non-government organization's (NGO) hands.
(Terrorists are insane and Corporations are greedy and neither understand MAD.)
Totally Naked
Tourist Eating
Ex WA
NationState_
"That's the one thing I like about the WA; it allows me to shove my moral compass up your legislative branch, assuming a majority agrees." James Blonde
"Even so, I see nothing in WA policy that requires that the resolution have a concrete basis in fact," Minister from Frenequesta
"There are some things worse than death. I believe being Canadian Prime Minister is one of them." Brother Maynard.

User avatar
The Akashic Records
Diplomat
 
Posts: 803
Founded: May 21, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby The Akashic Records » Sat Aug 03, 2013 5:19 pm

Thank you Mr. James Blonde, it looks better now.
About my posts:
Unless otherwise stated, everything I say is in character.
Coleman T. Harrison,
WA Ambassador for The Akashic Records
On Sanity - Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can borrow mine.
No, the idea behind it (free will) is that one has the option to be Good (tm) and the option to be Bad (tm). God is rather pro-choice. - The Alma Mater -

Next

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General Assembly

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Amecet, Kenmoria, Salterra

Advertisement

Remove ads