NATION

PASSWORD

[out of Quorum]Submarine Warfare Resrictions

Where WA members debate how to improve the world, one resolution at a time.
User avatar
Clean Land
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 190
Founded: Oct 18, 2017
Ex-Nation

[out of Quorum]Submarine Warfare Resrictions

Postby Clean Land » Thu Jan 04, 2018 12:08 pm

Author:Ardavs
Link:https://www.nationstates.net/page=UN_view_proposal/id=ardavs_1514835143
General Assembly Proposal
ID: ardavs_1514835143
Submarine Warfare Resrictions

A resolution to slash worldwide military spending.

Category: Global Disarmament

Strength: Significant

Proposed by: Ardavs

Concerned about the victims of submarine attacks;

Observing that locating and neutralizing submarines can be a difficult task, allowing the submarines to cause severe damages to civillian and military vessels;

Further observing that some vessels, especially civillian vessels, are defenceless against submarines;

Noting that submarines, equipped with the propper technology, can pass undetected by radars or sonars;

Further noting that those submarines can carry nuclear weapons;

Defining, for the purposes of this resolution, "submarines" as any vessel which is capable of submerging (not sinking);

Further defining "cloak devices" as any device or technology that can hide an object from radars, sonars or other detection Technologies;

The World Assembly hereby:

1. Prohibits:

a) any kind of submarine assault on civillian vessels;

b) submarines to be equipped with cloaking devices, except when they are guarding national coastlines, undestanding "national coastlines" as the coastlines of the country which the submarine belongs to. Submarines shall not claim that they are guarding their national coastlines if they are more than 300km away from their national coastlines.

c) submarines to intentionally crash with other vessels.

Those who disrespect the prohibitions above shall be considered war criminals.

2. Urges member nations to remove nuclear weapons from their submarines.

3. Remembers that these regulations do NOT apply to civillian submarine vessels, and DO apply to military vessels. Making a war crime to disguise a military submarine as a civillian submarine.
Last edited by Clean Land on Thu Jan 04, 2018 3:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Clean Land
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 190
Founded: Oct 18, 2017
Ex-Nation

Postby Clean Land » Thu Jan 04, 2018 12:13 pm

Oh dear.
The title is missing a "t"
The definition of a submarine is horrible(submerged, really? Boats are partially submerged...)
Even if the definition was ok, the cloaking restriction is not even taking allies in a defense pact into account.
Against.

User avatar
United Massachusetts
Minister
 
Posts: 2574
Founded: Jan 17, 2016
Ex-Nation

Postby United Massachusetts » Thu Jan 04, 2018 12:13 pm

Out of queue by one vote.

8)

User avatar
Gig em Aggies
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7728
Founded: Aug 15, 2009
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Gig em Aggies » Thu Jan 04, 2018 12:19 pm

Clean Land wrote:Author:Ardavs
Link:https://www.nationstates.net/page=UN_view_proposal/id=ardavs_1514835143
General Assembly Proposal
ID: ardavs_1514835143
Submarine Warfare Resrictions

A resolution to slash worldwide military spending.

Category: Global Disarmament

Strength: Significant

Proposed by: Ardavs

Concerned about the victims of submarine attacks;

Observing that locating and neutralizing submarines can be a difficult task, allowing the submarines to cause severe damages to civillian and military vessels;

Further observing that some vessels, especially civillian vessels, are defenceless against submarines;

Noting that submarines, equipped with the propper technology, can pass undetected by radars or sonars;

Further noting that those submarines can carry nuclear weapons;

Defining, for the purposes of this resolution, "submarines" as any vessel which is capable of submerging (not sinking);

Further defining "cloak devices" as any device or technology that can hide an object from radars, sonars or other detection Technologies;

The World Assembly hereby:

1. Prohibits:

a) any kind of submarine assault on civillian vessels;

b) submarines to be equipped with cloaking devices, except when they are guarding national coastlines, undestanding "national coastlines" as the coastlines of the country which the submarine belongs to. Submarines shall not claim that they are guarding their national coastlines if they are more than 300km away from their national coastlines.

c) submarines to intentionally crash with other vessels.

Those who disrespect the prohibitions above shall be considered war criminals.

2. Urges member nations to remove nuclear weapons from their submarines.

3. Remembers that these regulations do NOT apply to civillian submarine vessels, and DO apply to military vessels. Making a war crime to disguise a military submarine as a civillian submarine.

Wont happen everything that this proposal prohibits such as nuclear weapons on subs is unenforceable because prior WA resolution have made it near impossible to force a nation to give up its nukes. Secondly no sane submariner will ram a civilian ship unless they are on a kamikaze run Submarines are expensive to build and maintain so ramming a ship wont happen. plus civilian casualties in war will always happen regardless of some WA proposal or law. plus every nation as a different definition of what counts as a national coast line some nations consist of thousands of islands some more then 300km away from their respective main lands. Theirs also that fact that a lot of nations no longer need terrestrial based subs since they can bombard cities or nations from space with a variety of weapons such as orbital based nukes, or Rods from God, or even a space based navy like Halo or Call of Duty Infinite Warfare. really my point is this wont pass as is and doesn't take into account various aspects of what subs can do even military subs most of which just patrol and do humanitarian functions as well as Search and rescue rolls none of that is mentioned either.
“One of the serious problems of planning against Aggie doctrine is that the Aggies do not read their manuals nor do they feel any obligations to follow their doctrine.”
“The reason that the Aggies does so well in wartime, is that war is chaos, and the Aggies practices chaos on a daily basis.”
“If we don’t know what we are doing, the enemy certainly can’t anticipate our future actions!”

User avatar
United Massachusetts
Minister
 
Posts: 2574
Founded: Jan 17, 2016
Ex-Nation

Postby United Massachusetts » Thu Jan 04, 2018 12:26 pm

aaaannd....it's back. :(

User avatar
Grays Harbor
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18574
Founded: Antiquity
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Grays Harbor » Thu Jan 04, 2018 12:56 pm

Observing that locating and neutralizing submarines can be a difficult task, allowing the submarines to cause severe damages to civillian and military vessels;

You know, it sure would be awesome if there were naval vessels who were designed specifically to deal with submarines.
Oh yeah, there are.

Further observing that some vessels, especially civillian vessels, are defenceless against submarines;

Civilian vessels are pretty freaking defenseless against Battleships, Aircraft Carriers, Cruisers, Destroyers, and Frigates too. You gonna try and ban them too?

Noting that submarines, equipped with the propper technology, can pass undetected by radars or sonars;

That's kinda the whole point of submarines.

Further noting that those submarines can carry nuclear weapons;

Oh Noez! n00ks!!

Defining, for the purposes of this resolution, "submarines" as any vessel which is capable of submerging (not sinking);

Heavy Lift Ships. Are these counted? They are, many of them, submersible .

1. Prohibits:

a) any kind of submarine assault on civillian vessels;

I'm guessing you are unfamiliar with the concept of civilian ship hauling military goods and equipment during wartime. They were fairly common during WW2, for example

There is just so much wrong with this. So very much. Starting with serious misconceptions, continuing in to blatant misinformation, and following up with outright lies. This is Bad, and the author should feel bad about their complete lack of research into the topic.
Everything you know about me is wrong. Or a rumor. Something like that.

Not Ta'veren

User avatar
Tinhampton
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 13705
Founded: Oct 05, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Tinhampton » Thu Jan 04, 2018 12:59 pm

Clean Land wrote:Remembers that these regulations do NOT apply to civillian submarine vessels, and DO apply to military vessels. Making a war crime to disguise a military submarine as a civillian submarine.

Alexander Smith, Tinhamptonian Delegate-Ambassador to the World Assembly: Now I wonder if it's going to be a war crime to disguise a civilian submarine as a military one... that would be fun!
The Self-Administrative City of TINHAMPTON (pop. 329,537): Saffron Howard, Mayor (UCP); Alexander Smith, WA Delegate-Ambassador

Authorships & co-authorships: SC#250, SC#251, Issue #1115, SC#267, GA#484, GA#491, GA#533, GA#540, GA#549, SC#356, GA#559, GA#562, GA#567, GA#578, SC#374, GA#582, SC#375, GA#589, GA#590, SC#382, SC#385*, GA#597, GA#607, SC#415, GA#647, GA#656, GA#664, GA#671, GA#674, GA#675, GA#677, GA#680, Issue #1580, GA#682, GA#683, GA#684, GA#692, GA#693, GA#715
The rest of my CV: Cup of Harmony 73 champions; Philosopher-Queen of Sophia; *author of the most popular SC Res. ever; anti-NPO cabalist in good standing; 48yo Tory woman w/Asperger's; Cambridge graduate ~ currently reading The World by Simon Sebag Montefiore

User avatar
Stoskavanya
Envoy
 
Posts: 207
Founded: Aug 08, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Stoskavanya » Thu Jan 04, 2018 1:41 pm

Just sent this message to all the Delegates who approved the proposal;
Hello Esteemed Delegate,

I urge you NOT to vote for "Submarine Warfare Resrictions" to reach quorum.

The author of this resolution has made no effort to draft on the World Assembly forum, or collaborate with other World Assembly nations to make effective legislation. As a result, the resolution has poor spelling and grammar ("Resrictions" is spelled wrong right in the title), ineffective provisions, and duplicative statements that contradict with other General Assembly resolutions.

In addition to these faults, the proposal is a massive intrusion onto YOUR national sovereignty, without achieving any meaningful benefits.

Thank you for your time, if you have any questions let me know.

The People of Stoskavanya

Last I checked it was 93/95, hopefully it does not reach quorum in the next 8 hours so we don't have to stare at this for the next couple days.

User avatar
Araraukar
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15899
Founded: May 14, 2007
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Araraukar » Thu Jan 04, 2018 1:54 pm

Stoskavanya wrote:ineffective provisions, and duplicative statements that contradict with other General Assembly resolutions.

OOC: Exactly which are those?
- ambassador miss Janis Leveret
Araraukar's RP reality is Modern Tech solarpunk. In IC in the WA.
Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
Apologies for absences, non-COVID health issues leave me with very little energy at times.

User avatar
Clean Land
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 190
Founded: Oct 18, 2017
Ex-Nation

Postby Clean Land » Thu Jan 04, 2018 3:23 pm

The unapproval campaign will probably be successful. Good.

User avatar
Stoskavanya
Envoy
 
Posts: 207
Founded: Aug 08, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Stoskavanya » Thu Jan 04, 2018 3:29 pm

Araraukar wrote:
Stoskavanya wrote:ineffective provisions, and duplicative statements that contradict with other General Assembly resolutions.

OOC: Exactly which are those?

OOC: Definition first of all does not even cover submarines, so thats pretty ineffective, among other things. As for duplication, there is already resolutions about not firing on civilian ships, and one that already covers nuclear weapons. Granted, I did not scrutinize the proposal too intensely, but i'm sure its not an unfair assessment.

Approvals are down to 88/95 last I checked.
Last edited by Stoskavanya on Thu Jan 04, 2018 3:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
NeoOasis
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1099
Founded: Apr 07, 2017
Ex-Nation

Postby NeoOasis » Thu Jan 04, 2018 6:23 pm

Clean Land wrote:
Noting that submarines, equipped with the propper technology, can pass undetected by radars or sonars;


OOC: Okay... while English may sort of be my first language... this forum has caused doubts to form as to my grasp of this language.

What the hell is a "propper?!"
Eternally salty, quite tired, and perhaps looking for a brighter future.

User avatar
Greater vakolicci haven
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18661
Founded: May 09, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Greater vakolicci haven » Thu Jan 04, 2018 6:26 pm

NeoOasis wrote:
Clean Land wrote:
Noting that submarines, equipped with the propper technology, can pass undetected by radars or sonars;


OOC: Okay... while English may sort of be my first language... this forum has caused doubts to form as to my grasp of this language.

What the hell is a "propper?!"

A better word would be 'appropriate.'
Join the rejected realms and never fear rejection again
NSG virtual happy hour this Saturday: join us on zoom, what could possibly go wrong?
“I predict future happiness for Americans, if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.” - Thomas Jefferson
“Silent acquiescence in the face of tyranny is no better than outright agreement." - C.J. Redwine
“The rifle itself has no moral stature, since it has no will of its own. Naturally, it may be used by evil men for evil purposes, but there are more good men than evil, and while the latter cannot be persuaded to the path of righteousness by propaganda, they can certainly be corrected by good men with rifles." - Jeff Cooper

User avatar
Jabberwocky
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1114
Founded: Nov 02, 2017
Democratic Socialists

Postby Jabberwocky » Thu Jan 04, 2018 9:29 pm

The logic is as fractured as the syntax.
'Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gambol in the wabe.
All mimsy were the borogoves
And the mome raths outgrabe.


User avatar
The New California Republic
Post Czar
 
Posts: 35483
Founded: Jun 06, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby The New California Republic » Fri Jan 05, 2018 4:14 am

Frisbeeteria wrote:
21 minutes ago: The General Assembly proposal "Submarine Warfare Resrictions" [Ardavs] failed to achieve quorum.

OOC: Good, if only for the fact that it keeps that horrifying spelling mistake off of the front page of the World Assembly, "Resrictions".
Last edited by Sigmund Freud on Sat Sep 23, 1939 2:23 am, edited 999 times in total.

The Irradiated Wasteland of The New California Republic: depicting the expanded NCR, several years after the total victory over Caesar's Legion, and the annexation of New Vegas and its surrounding areas.

White-collared conservatives flashing down the street
Pointing their plastic finger at me
They're hoping soon, my kind will drop and die
But I'm going to wave my freak flag high
Wave on, wave on
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||


Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General Assembly

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AnnaK

Advertisement

Remove ads