[UNDER REVIEW] Nuclear Arms Act

[ABC]

The World Assembly, hereby forbids the use of Nuclear Arms by any member state no matter how high their political power in the WA may be.

NOTING that widespread disaster and fear has been a result of Nuclear Arms.

FURTHERMORE NOTING that many times the country being targeted with Nuclear Arms has none itself due to high costs.

CONCERNED about the effect Nuclear Arms have on climate change by sending large amounts of CO2 and particulates into the atmosphere.

THE WA HEREBY:

BANS all Nuclear Arms for hope of preventing conflict and slowing down climate change.

CREATES a communication system allowing member nations to report countries they suspect to have Nuclear Arms.

EXPRESSES HOPE that with this resolution, conflict and mass destruction will no longer be commonplace and that with the banning of Nuclear Arms, climate change will slow without so much material being sent into the atmosphere by Nuclear Arms.

https://www.nationstates.net/page=UN_view_proposal/id=abc_1487755100

[Araraukar]

This post is out of character: Welcome to the GA forum!

I wish you had posted this draft here before submitting it, because it's illegal (against proposal rules) because it contradicts an existing resolution, the Nuclear Arms Possession Act. I suggest you make a GHR and ask the mods to remove it now, to avoid a black mark on your account.

I will also go through your proposal to give feedback.

The World Assembly, hereby forbids the use of Nuclear Arms by any member state no matter how high their political power in the WA may be.

This "political power" things sounds like it refers to the gameside stuff, either the national statistic or endorsement count of regional delegates. Referring to game stats directly in proposal text is not allowed. If you don't mean the gameside stuff, you might want to reword it.

On the plus side, you're starting it with "The World Assembly", which is the norm in proposal format.

NOTING that widespread disaster and fear has been a result of Nuclear Arms.

This doesn't sound quite right. What widespread disaster? Also, there exists a resolution, the Nuclear Disaster Response Act, which deals with nuclear disasters. Using nuclear weapons in a war is by definition an act of war and not a disaster.

FURTHERMORE NOTING that many times the country being targeted with Nuclear Arms has none itself due to high costs.

I don't know how realistic this is either, considering that if the weapons have such high costs, most nations wouldn't have them, period, and as such this proposal wouldn't be needed.

CONCERNED about the effect Nuclear Arms have on climate change by sending large amounts of CO2 and particulates into the atmosphere.

On the CO₂ this is a blatant lie, and unless we're talking about supermassive nukes, the particles aren't a long-term issue either, because rain would bring them down.

THE WA HEREBY:

I suggest you nix the "the WA" bit from here, and move the "hereby" stuff from your opening line under this part, so that everything coming before this is what's called "preamble", aka the part where you try to convince people that this proposal is a good idea.

BANS all Nuclear Arms for hope of preventing conflict and slowing down climate change.

Banning nukes wouldn't prevent more than nuclear conflict, and the climate change part of this is incorrect. If anything, the particles thrown into the atmosphere would have a cooling effect. Also, this is the part that contradicts NAPA and makes this illegal.

CREATES a communication system allowing member nations to report countries they suspect to have Nuclear Arms.

Due to the contradiction in the previous clause this one won't fly either. Also, what communication system? The majority of WA nations aren't on the same planet, how do you communicate between different solar systems or even between different universes?

EXPRESSES HOPE that with this resolution, conflict and mass destruction will no longer be commonplace and that with the banning of Nuclear Arms, climate change will slow without so much material being sent into the atmosphere by Nuclear Arms.

This is repetition, but I won't repeat what I've said previously. Just re-read previous lines of feedback.

All in all, you're almost spot on with the most common format, but you need to do some fact-checking, as well as check your proposal against the existing resolutions to make sure you don't contradict or majorly duplicate any of them. Since that is quite a large job, it's best to post drafts onto this forum before submitting them, so others can point out errors you have missed.

[ABC]

Thanks, I've lodged a request with the mods and I will change this.