NATION

PASSWORD

(Proposal) Restricting Future Nuclear Weapons Proliferation

Where WA members debate how to improve the world, one resolution at a time.
User avatar
United Free States of America
Political Columnist
 
Posts: 5
Founded: Jul 04, 2018
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

(Proposal) Restricting Future Nuclear Weapons Proliferation

Postby United Free States of America » Tue Dec 11, 2018 8:20 pm

Future Nuclear Proliferation Ban
A resolution to improve world security by limiting further nuclear weapon development.

Category: International Security
Strength: Mild
Proposed by: the United Free States of America

Description:
ACKNOWLEDGING: The fact that only WA members are required to comply with WA resolutions,

NOTICING: The fact that many WA Assembly nations are in the process or have completed development on more accurate and powerful nuclear weapons,

ACKNOWLEDGING: that the WA members need to be able to defend themselves if attacked,

REALIZING: That further development of more powerful and accurate nuclear weapons increases the likelihood of nuclear combat.

1. DECLARES that WA members that currently have stockpiles of nuclear weapons halt development to make their weapons more effective, for example: installing better targeting systems, increasing payload capacity, faster delivery vehicles, etc.

2. PRESERVES the right for individual nations to build and maintain current nuclear stockpiles to maintain mission readiness,

3. REQUIRES WA member nations to allow inspections of their nuclear weapon arsenal by WA inspectors to make sure member nations aren't violating nuclear weapon restrictions.

User avatar
Araraukar
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 12262
Founded: May 14, 2007
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Araraukar » Tue Dec 11, 2018 10:39 pm

OOC post.
United Free States of America wrote:1. DECLARES that WA members that currently have stockpiles of nuclear weapons halt development to make their weapons more effective, for example: installing better targeting systems, increasing payload capacity, faster delivery vehicles, etc.

I can't help but feel that that shouldn't be there, as avoiding massive civilian casualties because of guidance system errors could only be a good thing...

2. PRESERVES the right for individual nations to build and maintain current nuclear stockpiles to maintain mission readiness,

"Build"? How can you build a current nuke stockpile? Aren't you building a future stockpile? And taken with #1, how can you "maintain mission readiness" if you're not occasionally allowed to swap parts for new ones - would you have to make crappy parts the way they were made decades ago to avoid accidentally making them better?

3. REQUIRES WA member nations to allow inspections of their nuclear weapon arsenal by WA inspectors to make sure member nations aren't violating nuclear weapon restrictions.

What restrictions? And how are the inspectors going to know if the software in the targeting system was upgraded, if there's no paper trail to prove it?

Also, you'll have a hard time of getting this past the people whose first reaction will be "keep your hands off of my nukes!"
"I've come to appreciate boring bureaucracy much more after my official execution..." - Johan Milkus, acting ambassador in the absence of miss Leveret
Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.

User avatar
Kenmoria
Senator
 
Posts: 3713
Founded: Jul 03, 2017
Corporate Bordello

Postby Kenmoria » Wed Dec 12, 2018 12:32 am

“The definition of the international security category is: ‘A resolution to improve world security by boosting police and military budgets.” How does this boost police or military budgets? There is a colourable argument for this category, but I am interested to hear your thoughts on it.

Also, despite the title, I’m not seeing what this does to reduce or restrict the proliferation of nuclear weapons. In fact, it looks more like something that could possibly improve the efficiency of some member nation’s stockpiles.”
A representative democracy with a parliament of 535 seats
Kenmoria is Laissez-Faire on economy but centre-left on social issues
Located in Europe and border France to the right and Spain below
NS stats and policies are not canon, use the factbooks
Not in the WA despite coincidentally following nearly all resolutions
This is due to a problem with how the WA contradicts democracy
However we do have a WA mission and often participate in drafting
Current ambassador: James Lewitt

For more information, read the factbooks here.

User avatar
Christian Theocratic States
Civilian
 
Posts: 1
Founded: Dec 10, 2018
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Christian Theocratic States » Wed Dec 12, 2018 5:03 pm

You lose my support by prohibiting any form of nuclear advancement, like the guy above me said, it would effectively prevent any attempt to modernize nuclear weapons, even if the changes are meant to reduce civilian fatalities or improve accuracy.

User avatar
Aclion
Minister
 
Posts: 3032
Founded: Apr 12, 2016
Anarchy

Postby Aclion » Wed Dec 12, 2018 7:10 pm

Araraukar wrote:OOC post.
United Free States of America wrote:1. DECLARES that WA members that currently have stockpiles of nuclear weapons halt development to make their weapons more effective, for example: installing better targeting systems, increasing payload capacity, faster delivery vehicles, etc.

I can't help but feel that that shouldn't be there, as avoiding massive civilian casualties because of guidance system errors could only be a good thing...

Forget errors. Accurate guidance systems are the reason saturation bombing isn't a thing anymore.
Weiner - Cummings 2020
The left-right spectrum; an analogy.
XKI: Recruiter, TITO member
TEP: WA Executive Staff member
Forest: Cartographer
Oatland: Caesar, Cartographer


Return to General Assembly

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Jamil Federations, Levantx, Separatist Peoples

Advertisement

Remove ads