[DRAFT] Repeal "Nuclear Arms Possession Act"

[Excidium Planetis]

Ambassador, I don't think you understand somethings here.
1. NAPA enshrines the right bear Nuclear Arms to prevent nukes from being banned by the WA. Without NAPA, all that is needed to ban nukes is 1 resolution. With NAPA, a repeal and a resolution are needed. It's a safeguard.

2. There is no reason to repeal NAPA except to pass a ban on nukes, thus the assumption that you intend to ban nuclear weapons.

3. Your concern in the repeal text over the use of nuclear weapons is addressed in another WA resolution.

[Flibbleites]

Thank you for your comments. I appreciate it. I'm sorry if you felt offended at the suggestion that the resolution was poorly worded. It wasn't (obviously) personal. I mean to say that the original resolution does not give a weighted view of the issue of nuclear arms possession. Also, I've been to a lot, lot, lot of regions, raiders, defenders, feeders, sinkers, everything. the issue of WA versus non-WA doesn't exactly seem as hostile. It might have been previously. It is not now.

Maybe the hostility has died down, but we're still vastly outnumbered by non-members.

Lastly, clause three is seen as a very general and ambiguous statement. What are the precautions?

The exact precautions are not specified because what's available would vary based on a nation's tech level, it could range from a guy with a gun standing next to the weapon all the way to 27 layers of biometric scanners with laser cannons that will fry anyone who is not authorized to be there.

What decides their availability? Who are the wrong hands? Is the government to decide to decide this by WA recognition, or by their own reason?

I've said this before and I'll say it again, if a nation can't figure out for themselves who should have access to their nuclear stockpile, they probably shouldn't have one in the first place.

Is its use ratified, much like its possession? What are the conditions on that?

The use of nuclear weapons is not mentioned in the NAPA, ergo the use is not affected by the NAPA in the slightest. In fact, I've actually pointed out in the past that a proposal could be written that would ban the use of nuclear weapons completely and not contradict the NAPA

This is the reason that I am repealing this particular resolution. I do not, at all, doubt the intent of the resolution, but if it were more elaborately written, it would be much better.

That's your opinion and opinions are like orgasms, yours doesn't matter.

Oh and regarding the questioning of the category and strength. The potential need for nations to increase the security around their nuclear stockpiles and therefore increase their military expenditures, justifies it being filed as International Security, Mild.

Bob Flibble
WA Representative

[Atomic Utopia]

"I wager that this has similar chances to that of an ice cube on Venus.

Opposed because other nations might be able to destroy the WA if we are not nuclear armed."