Advertisement
by The New Cordian Empire » Wed Sep 09, 2020 10:18 pm
by Imperium Anglorum » Wed Sep 09, 2020 10:45 pm
by Ardiveds » Wed Sep 09, 2020 10:45 pm
by The New Cordian Empire » Thu Sep 10, 2020 8:54 am
by Ardiveds » Thu Sep 10, 2020 9:05 am
The New Cordian Empire wrote:OOC: So I need to think of another way.
by The New Cordian Empire » Thu Sep 10, 2020 12:55 pm
by Ardiveds » Thu Sep 10, 2020 8:18 pm
The New Cordian Empire wrote:Ardiveds wrote:OOC: what was wrong with the previous way?... you know, you nuke first, everybody can nuke u first.
OOC: I felt like it needed some teeth. The previous way did that, sure, but there was no punishment for nuking unprovoked, so, as long as you destroy the enemy nation in the first volley, you’re fine and can’t be harmed (the original way)
by The New Cordian Empire » Sun Sep 13, 2020 11:42 pm
by Kenmoria » Sun Sep 13, 2020 11:50 pm
by Ardiveds » Mon Sep 14, 2020 4:52 am
The New Cordian Empire wrote:[align=center]
[*]That any nation found to be in violation of this resolution by the WACC shall no longer be subject to the protections of this resolution until a nation attempts to use WMDs against it.
by The New Cordian Empire » Tue Sep 15, 2020 12:59 pm
by The New Cordian Empire » Thu Sep 17, 2020 3:32 pm
by Tinhampton » Thu Sep 17, 2020 4:26 pm
by The New Cordian Empire » Fri Sep 18, 2020 12:15 pm
Tinhampton wrote:Proposed rewrite (plz do not credit Tinhampton as co-author thx):The World Assembly,
Understanding that the use of weapons of mass destruction to attack other nations can lead to high levels of death and destruction in those nations,
Noting that many often unsavory nations have proven complicit in using such weapons arbitrarily, and
Realizing that many wars could be avoided should this practice be banned by international law, within the restrictions of previously passed and still extant resolutions, hereby:
- Defines "weapons of mass destruction" as weapons that are capable of causing massive structural damage or large-scale loss of life; and
- Declares that no member state may use weapons of mass destruction against another member state, without evidence that the other member had recently used (or intends to use in the near future) such weapons against that nation or an allied nation.
by The New Cordian Empire » Sun Sep 20, 2020 2:45 pm
by Refuge Isle » Sun Sep 20, 2020 3:18 pm
The New Cordian Empire wrote:Preventing Unprovoked Use of Weapons of Mass Destruction
Category: Global Disarmament | Strength: Significant
The World Assembly,
Understanding that the use of weapons of mass destruction to attack other nations can lead to high levels of death and destruction in those nations,
Noting that many often unsavory nations have proven complicit in using such weapons arbitrarily, and
Realizing that many wars could be avoided should this practice be banned by international law, within the restrictions of previously passed and still extant resolutions, hereby:
- Defines "weapons of mass destruction" as weapons that are capable of causing massive structural damage or large-scale loss of life; and
- Declares that no member state may use weapons of mass destruction against another member state, without evidence that the other member had recently used (or intends to use in the near future) such weapons against that nation or an allied nation.
by Cretox State » Sun Sep 20, 2020 3:41 pm
Defines "weapons of mass destruction" as weapons that are capable of causing massive structural damage or large-scale loss of life;
by The New Cordian Empire » Mon Sep 21, 2020 11:41 am
Cretox State wrote:This has definitely come a long way since the first draft!
I personally can’t support this, however, simply because I find the premise more than a bit silly. Let’s say a member nation uses a nuclear weapon in contravention of this resolution. What, exactly, is the WACC going to do? Sanction an apocalyptic wasteland?
You could say that WMDs are not limited to nuclear weapons, and I agree with that. However, this makes some more problems apparent. The proposal defines WMDs as such:Defines "weapons of mass destruction" as weapons that are capable of causing massive structural damage or large-scale loss of life;
What, exactly, qualifies a weapon as “capable of causing massive structural damage or large-scale loss of life”? Let’s say I detonate a small-yield explosive in a cavern, causing it to collapse and bury 10,000 people. Does that explosive qualify as a WMD? Any old rifle is “capable” of causing large-scale loss of life with enough reloading. Does this proposal ban the preemptive use of guns? How about swords? Is this proposal intended to prevent war?
Additionally, what constitutes “evidence”?
by The New Cordian Empire » Mon Sep 21, 2020 12:44 pm
by Araraukar » Tue Sep 22, 2020 9:14 am
Apologies for absences, non-COVID health issues leave me with very little energy at times.Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
by The New Cordian Empire » Tue Sep 22, 2020 9:23 am
Araraukar wrote:OOC: A "series of strikes" doesn't sound like "a single use". If you drop enough anti-personnel explosives on a city in a series of strikes, you're going to kill enough people and cause enough damage for them to collectively count as WMD, but few would think classifying a regular hand grenade as a WMD would make any sense.
by Araraukar » Tue Sep 22, 2020 9:36 am
The New Cordian Empire wrote:OOC: Carpet bombing and other such practices make complete sense in WMD legislation. Think: The US' carpet and firebombing of Japan caused more death than both nuclear bombs combined.
Apologies for absences, non-COVID health issues leave me with very little energy at times.Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
by Ardiveds » Tue Sep 22, 2020 10:32 am
The New Cordian Empire wrote:Araraukar wrote:OOC: A "series of strikes" doesn't sound like "a single use". If you drop enough anti-personnel explosives on a city in a series of strikes, you're going to kill enough people and cause enough damage for them to collectively count as WMD, but few would think classifying a regular hand grenade as a WMD would make any sense.
OOC: Carpet bombing and other such practices make complete sense in WMD legislation. Think: The US' carpet and firebombing of Japan caused more death than both nuclear bombs combined.
by The New Cordian Empire » Tue Sep 22, 2020 11:31 am
Araraukar wrote:The New Cordian Empire wrote:OOC: Carpet bombing and other such practices make complete sense in WMD legislation. Think: The US' carpet and firebombing of Japan caused more death than both nuclear bombs combined.
OOC: Was literally thinking of the firebombing of Japan when I wrote what I wrote. And I repeat that calling a single firebomb of that type a Weapon of Mass Destruction would make no sense whatsoever. You should pull the submission and work on that issue.
by The New Cordian Empire » Tue Sep 22, 2020 11:54 am
Ardiveds wrote:The New Cordian Empire wrote:
OOC: Carpet bombing and other such practices make complete sense in WMD legislation. Think: The US' carpet and firebombing of Japan caused more death than both nuclear bombs combined.
OOC: An assault rifle can potentially cause more deaths than both nuclear bombs. If you take multiple small weapons as one WMD then all the guns used by the wehrmacht throughout the war was one giant WMD.
Advertisement
Advertisement