[DRAFT] Repeal The Biologic Weapons Conference

[Dystopian Polymarchy]

Repeal The “Biological Weapons Conference”

A Resolution to Repeal Another Resolution

Description: The WA,

DEFINES a biological weapon as:

1) Any form of infectious or biological agent of any kind that is intended to cause death, permanent illness or injury.

2) This includes but is not limited to biologically derived toxins and poisons, living microorganisms (Bacteria, Protozoa, viruses, and fungi), and toxins (chemicals that are produced by microorganisms, plants, or animals)

3) Any synthetic agent that mimics agents listed above

APPLAUDS Biological Weapons for being able to keep a country’s wealth in tact while decimating a military force.

NOTING that the Biological Weapons Conference allows genocide, nuclear options, nerve gas, massacres, assassinations and any other possible form of horror that is not considered a biological weapon, thus over-ruling any other resolution in the “Global Disarmament” category.

ALSO NOTES that the Biological Weapons Conference forces all WA members to interfere with non-member nations to prevent the trafficking of biological weapons, or allowing any research, beneficial or malicious, to non member nations.

DETERMINES that the Biological Weapons Conference allows experimentation of biological weapons onto living subjects for vaccination purposes, which is a breach of human rights.

DECLARESthat the Biological Weapons Conference defines these weapons for defensive purposes, though these weapons have no real defensive application.

HEREBY repeals the Biological Weapons Conference.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

I would like this preposal to pass, so if anyone can give some pointers to improve it, that would be great.

-Dystopian Polymarchy

[Lowell Leber]

I think you might need a category and strength..? not sure though

[Dystopian Polymarchy]

I think you might need a category and strength..? not sure though

Didn't think i needed to post one on a draft but the category is REPEAL and the Strength is medium.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

If there is no REPEAL category, it is because this is my first actually resolution.

[Ainocra]

I would support a repeal.

[Bergnovinaia]

APPLAUDS Biological Weapons for being able to keep a country’s wealth in tact while decimating a military force.

Um...? Support.

NOTING that the Biological Weapons Conference allows genocide, nuclear options, nerve gas, massacres, assassinations and any other possible form of horror that is not considered a biological weapon, thus over-ruling any other resolution in the “Global Disarmament” category.

What the hell are you talking about...? Just because I never mention those doesn't mean the proposal allows it.

ALSO NOTES that the Biological Weapons Conference forces all WA members to interfere with non-member nations to prevent the trafficking of biological weapons, or allowing any research, beneficial or malicious, to non member nations.

Um... I'm pretty sure it's only malicious information but I could be wrong, it's been a while. Furthermore, it doesn't want WA members to get involved in supplying other nations with the weapons. It was not intended to create the WA policing force in any way since we have no control over non-members.

ALSO NOTES that the Biological Weapons Conference allows experimentation of biological weapons onto living subjects for vaccination purposes, which is a breach of human rights.

If they consent... Please quote where the WA has this listed too, thanks!

ALSO NOTES that the Biological Weapons Conference defines these weapons for defensive purposes, though these weapons have no real defensive application.

Um... again, twisting my words like a pretzel. They have offensive application to kill a nation if you get attacked.

[Dystopian Polymarchy]

NOTING that the Biological Weapons Conference allows genocide, nuclear options, nerve gas, massacres, assassinations and any other possible form of horror that is not considered a biological weapon, thus over-ruling any other resolution in the “Global Disarmament” category.

What the hell are you talking about...? Just because I never mention those doesn't mean the proposal allows it.

In your resolution, you clearly state

3. ALLOWS any member nation to attack non-member nations with any force necessary if they are attacked with biological weapons (except with biological weapons of any kind).

Another thing wrong with that statement is:

3. ALLOWS any member nation to attack non-member nations with any force necessary if they are attacked with biological weapons (except with biological weapons of any kind).

So if a non member nation is attacked with a biological weapon, then I can go in and commit genocide because your resolution is saying that I can. THEY can mean any person in the current conflict.. ALLOWS THE INFECTED WA COUNTRY is the same person that is attacked by a BioWeapon.

APPLAUDS Biological Weapons for being able to keep a country’s wealth in tact while decimating a military force.

Um...? Support.

The fact is that a biological weapon requires no explosion, unlike a nuclear missile, and therfore can be detoxed and siphoned of it's natural resources.

ALSO NOTES that the Biological Weapons Conference forces all WA members to interfere with non-member nations to prevent the trafficking of biological weapons, or allowing any research, beneficial or malicious, to non member nations.

Um... I'm pretty sure it's only malicious information but I could be wrong, it's been a while. Furthermore, it doesn't want WA members to get involved in supplying other nations with the weapons. It was not intended to create the WA policing force in any way since we have no control over non-members.

In your resolution, you allow testing on living subgects for vaccine purposes. Are you saying that having a defence against Biological weapons is malicious??? In the interest of killing two birds with one stone, you have never mentioned that it is required for a living subject to have consent to BioWeapon Testing.

ALLOWS member nations to use such agents for peaceful purposes, either nationally or internationally, which includes and does not exclude, experimentation and implementations for vaccinations and other preventative treatments, testing for decontamination purposes, or other peaceful purposes. However, appropriate and effective measures are taken with regard to safety and security.

You show me where it says that you need consent.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

Sorry for not posting a link to the resolution. The URL is http://www.nationstates.net/page=WA_past_resolutions/council=1/start=60

--OR--

Resolution #65 "Biological Weapons Conference"

[Unibot]

3. ALLOWS any member nation to attack non-member nations with any force necessary if they are attacked with biological weapons (except with biological weapons of any kind).

Yep thats a dangerous line, because any force necessary could include preemptive nuclear strikes, anti-matter explosions, releasing the Kraken .. ect. -- and does seem to suggest that anything is allowed, thus preventing any further total bans on weaponry in the future.

OOC: Hhhm.. I did come up with the argument for you, Poly, so I like it, I'd replace all of the 'ALSO NOTES' and remove the 'THEREFORE' clause because its illegal, you can only REPEAL the proposal in its entirety, you cannot stipulate what portions you wish to repeal.

[Dystopian Polymarchy]

OOC: Hhhm.. I did come up with the argument for you, Poly, so I like it, I'd replace all of the 'ALSO NOTES' and remove the 'THEREFORE' clause because its illegal, you can only REPEAL the proposal in its entirety, you cannot stipulate what portions you wish to repeal.

OOC: I know. Thanks again Uni. Ummm... replace the ALSO NOTES with what exactly?

[Hindopia]

I see no reason for the repeal of said resolution. Hindopia will oppose any attempt to remove any decent and well written resolution from WA law.

-Vargas Harrowsing, Hindopian Delegate to the WA

[Flibbleites]

This may seem strange coming from the author of the NAPA, but I must stand in opposition to this repeal. Biological weapons are a danger to not just the people they're used on, but to everyone else on the planet as well. They are simply too unpredictable.

Bob Flibble
WA Representative

[Doomiedoomiedoom]

This may seem strange coming from the author of the NAPA, but I must stand in opposition to this repeal. Biological weapons are a danger to not just the people they're used on, but to everyone else on the planet as well. They are simply too unpredictable.

Bob Flibble
WA Representative

I see your argument there, ambassador... But biological weapons are more of a physiological weapon. If you just have them, even if you don't fire them, they tend to deter wars.

I would be in support of this though. Biological weapons proved quite effective back in the days of the Doomian Revolution...

[Charlotte Ryberg]

Ms. Harper still remains in support of a ban of Biological weapons. The worst case scenario would have been a mass-megaton weapon armed with a smart virus that self-mutates every 72 hours and is incurable and is airborne.

[Acycia]

YOU WILL NOT TAKE OUR BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS FROM US!!!

[Dystopian Polymarchy]

I see no reason for the repeal of said resolution. Hindopia will oppose any attempt to remove any decent and well written resolution from WA law.

-Vargas Harrowsing, Hindopian Delegate to the WA

So if I was attacked by a non member Nation, I would have the right to commit genocide against them? If you do not support the repeal to use them, at least support the repeal to come up with one that doesn't have such a huge loophole.

[Bears Armed]

I see no reason for the repeal of said resolution. Hindopia will oppose any attempt to remove any decent and well written resolution from WA law.

-Vargas Harrowsing, Hindopian Delegate to the WA

So if I was attacked by a non member Nation, I would have the right to commit genocide against them?

No. Resolution #38 prohibits genocide.

[Dystopian Polymarchy]

No. Resolution #38 prohibits genocide.

Aahh, but resolution Resolution #65 "Biological Weapons Conference" states that:

ALLOWS any member nation to attack non-member nations with any force necessary if they are attacked with biological weapons (except with biological weapons of any kind).

[Flibbleites]

This may seem strange coming from the author of the NAPA, but I must stand in opposition to this repeal. Biological weapons are a danger to not just the people they're used on, but to everyone else on the planet as well. They are simply too unpredictable.

Bob Flibble
WA Representative

I see your argument there, ambassador... But biological weapons are more of a physiological weapon. If you just have them, even if you don't fire them, they tend to deter wars.

I would be in support of this though. Biological weapons proved quite effective back in the days of the Doomian Revolution...

Nuclear weapons can be used in the same way, and nukes have the added benefit of being legal for WA members to possess.

YOU WILL NOT TAKE OUR BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS FROM US!!!

We can't, you're not a WA member.

No. Resolution #38 prohibits genocide.

Aahh, but resolution Resolution #65 "Biological Weapons Conference" states that:

ALLOWS any member nation to attack non-member nations with any force necessary if they are attacked with biological weapons (except with biological weapons of any kind).

But since Genocide is already prohibited, obviously it's not an available option.

Bob Flibble
WA Representative

[Philimbesi]

Aahh, but resolution Resolution #65 "Biological Weapons Conference" states that:

Resolutions don't override each other. It doesn't work that way.

[Krioval]

If there is no REPEAL category, it is because this is my first actually resolution.

OOC: To repeal a resolution, you have to look up that resolution on this list. In your case, you want this one. Scroll down to the bottom of the resolution's text, and you'll see a link called "Repeal this resolution". Click there and it will direct you to enter your repeal text. A repeal cannot make any new legislation; it can only strike out existing legislation. Keep in mind that you'll need two endorsements to write a proposal (and that you need to be a WA member, of course).

IC:

The Imperial Chiefdom of Krioval does not support a repeal of the Biological Weapons Conference for reasons mentioned by several of our colleagues already.

Ambassador Darvek-kan Tyvok
Imperial Chiefdom of Krioval

[Bergnovinaia]

Oh, and that's why your able to twist my words like pretzels is because I can't stack up passed laws saying: "Any force necessary except genocide as in act #?? but nuclear arms are allowed as stated in NAPA." It doesn't work that way.

[Dystopian Polymarchy]

Obviously the real problem with the line, "ALLOWS any member nation to attack non-member nations with any force necessary if they are attacked with biological weapons (except with biological weapons of any kind)." is that it is a blocker proposal for other Global Disarmament proposal for the future that wish to ban weapons that fall under that 'any force necessary' category.

[The Swiss Guardsmen]

Believe it or not, there are non-WA nations out there in possession of chemical weapons whose intentions are not as civil as WA members. This proposal ties a noose around any WA country who is not fully prepared for an attack by a rouge nation. I swear, if our nation is assaulted in any way through the use of chemical weapons launched from a rouge country, we're opening our thermonuclear ballistic missile command module and push the red button to make a light show so large that we can take a few snapshots of it from space! Screw a nuclear winter, at least we're prepared for it. Thats the price for not being allowed to use biological weapons while others can.

[Bergnovinaia]

Believe it or not, there are non-WA nations out there in possession of chemical weapons whose intentions are not as civil as WA members. This proposal ties a noose around any WA country who is not fully prepared for an attack by a rouge nation. I swear, if our nation is assaulted in any way through the use of chemical weapons launched from a rouge country, we're opening our thermonuclear ballistic missile command module and push the red button to make a light show so large that we can take a few snapshots of it from space! Screw a nuclear winter, at least we're prepared for it. Thats the price for not being allowed to use biological weapons while others can.

Don't grave dig...

[Neutonica]

Neutonica would be in support of the repeal if and only if a suitable replacement to the act, which eliminates terms like "by any means" for example, is proposed. Currently, we withhold judgment.

Dr Isaac Corrigan
Delegate of Neutonica

[Novus Niciae]

This may seem strange coming from the author of the NAPA, but I must stand in opposition to this repeal. Biological weapons are a danger to not just the people they're used on, but to everyone else on the planet as well. They are simply too unpredictable.

Bob Flibble
WA Representative

I have to agree here, the wind can change unexpectedly and blow the infectious agent into a neutral adjoining country killing millions of civilians and causing a major diplomatic incident, and giving the government of that nation a very valid casus belli to declare war against the person who launched the agent. Or worse still the wind could blow the agent over the troops who launched it.