[DRAFT] Repeal: "Nuclear Arms Possesion Act"

[Princess Rainbow Sparkles]

Look, my nation is pretty peaceful compared to a lot of member nations, but we recognize the powerful deterrent effect of these weapons. Possessing even a handful is a massive disincentive for any nation thinking about trying to attack. If nothing else, attackers will need to think long and hard about the consequences they risk. We wouldn't deprive our fellows of that security.

Now, the actual use of nuclear weapons very well may be a war crime, depending on the circumstances. If you're worried about the use of nuclear weapons that's what you should think about (assuming there isn't a resolution on that out there already).

Repealing NAPA isn't the way. Unless... you're a secret Maxtopian spy trying to weaken us all!

[Cambrionia]

The people of Cambrionia believe that a bunch of hypersonic tungsten rods with the same explosive yield as a nuclear weapon, that are also from space, are just as menacing as a bunch of nuclear weapons. At least there’s a chance of shooting down a nuke.

[Anne of Cleves in TNP]

This is my first ever attempt at a WA proposal, so any feedback would be really cool!

The World Assembly,

RECOGNIZING GA#10’s focus is to guarantee WA members the right to self defense,

NOTING that nuclear weapons are but one of many defenses against hostile nations, including those with nuclear weapons,

ACKNOWLEDGING that nuclear weapons can cause long-lasting after effects rendering an area uninhabitable or leaving affected peoples with diseases over a large area, and that in nearly all cases a nuclear strike’s damage is not limited to the target nation’s military,

BELIEVING that extremely high-yield nuclear weapons are completely unnecessary and if used are guaranteed to damage the environment and innocent civilians, and that the World Assembly may see the need to place restrictions on nuclear weapon possession because of this,

Hereby repeals General Assembly Resolution #10, “Nuclear Arms Possession Act”.

“Just a bit of opinionated input from me, ambassador. Don’t get me wrong, it is a good enough brief start for a proposal, but I do not like the idea of repealing the first 50 resolutions of the GA. You see, removing a part of early history can cause drastic changes, but in this case, it would be a good drastic change. Yet even still, repealing a part of early history would require an argument that considers both past and modern standards.So maybe you could input a clause or two tackling this issue from a past perspective on the target resolution.”
-Ms. Charlotte Schafer, WA Ambassador for the Clevesian Empire

[Sierra Lyricalia]

The people of Cambrionia believe that a bunch of hypersonic tungsten rods with the same explosive yield as a nuclear weapon, that are also from space, are just as menacing as a bunch of nuclear weapons. At least there’s a chance of shooting down a nuke.

"Ambassador, the majority of nations do not have a Thor system, nor the infrastructure to support the launch, proper orbital insertion, and effective targeting of its kill vehicles. Nuclear weapons are frankly simpler and more reliable."

OOC: Yeah, my RP has these things you're talking about, but there's still a major role for nukes to play. Consider the following: in 1992, if the leaders of Ukraine had known about this year's invasion, I doubt they would have given up the components of the Soviet arsenal that happened to be on their soil. But could they have put a bunch of tungsten crowbars and telephone poles, compete with deceleration thrusters and precision guidance systems, into orbit on their own? Please. The solutions you offer are not available to most countries (nor to any country in real life).

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

The people of Cambrionia believe that a bunch of hypersonic tungsten rods with the same explosive yield as a nuclear weapon, that are also from space, are just as menacing as a bunch of nuclear weapons. At least there’s a chance of shooting down a nuke.

the only use of this meme is to get your trillion dollar penis satellite blown up by your opponents with laughable ease
actually doing so is so easy we could do it today

[Separatist Peoples]

"Chemical weapons lack effective strategic-scale use, especially against hardened targets. Nuclear weapons have no such failing. They operate ideally without regard for conditions on the ground. Your alternatives are not sufficient to guarantee our safety, especially against nonmember states who would be able to continue to use nuclear arms. It's not clear why you want to destabilize the defensive posture of member states, but we cannot support it."

Simulations have shown that so-called “Rods From God” have the same explosive power as lower-yield nuclear weapons, without the radiation. As for how to protect from nuclear weapon strikes, anti-ballistic missiles should do the trick. If not, you could always try lasers. Also, the issue with nuclear weapons is that they have no regard for conditions on the ground. Lots of radiation. The bill is not meant to destabilize the defensive posture of member states, it is to try to reduce the usage of weapons that cause unnecessary damage where solutions already exist.

"These systems are prohibitively expensive compared to maintaining solid state fuel ICBMs on the surface and in submarine deployments, while also not encouraging satellite-based weaponry, which would spread debris into orbit preventing space travel.

"No."

[Cambrionia]

I'm going to try to create a different proposal that isn't so controversial. When I started this I didn't know it had already been attempted 4 times, and I didn't consider a lot of reasons why people like NAPS. I'm not going to forget this thing though, I'm going to save it for later. You will (or won't) see this draft again at some point!

[Imperium Anglorum]

There is no interaction between the gameside elements like issues and the WA. WA resolutions do have marginal stat effects but they're very generic. The WA could pass a ban on nuclear weapons and WA members could still choose the research nuclear weapons issue option and earn the nuclear weapons state policy banner.

OOC: They mean in terms of resolution legality, because WA resolutions that try to change game mechanics aren't allowed

WA rules treat nation "Policies" as if they did not exist.

"Chemical weapons lack effective strategic-scale use, especially against hardened targets.

Also a nice blog post on this topic: https://acoup.blog/2020/03/20/collectio ... s-anymore/. The TLDR is that (1) modern militaries are basically immune to chemical weapons because they can all afford NBC equipment, (2) chemical weapons impede manoeuvre warfare, (3) chemical weapons are not cost efficient compared to high explosive.

[Kardashev III Civilization]

"These systems are prohibitively expensive compared to maintaining solid state fuel ICBMs on the surface and in submarine deployments, while also not encouraging satellite-based weaponry, which would spread debris into orbit preventing space travel.

"We concur," says the obelisk, which seems to have managed to silently sneak into the drafting room—that is, with all the silence of not smashing through walls.

With several clicks from its internal mechanisms, the obelisk projects a video upon one of said unsmashed walls, displaying a representation of several planets experiencing severe Kessler syndrome. "We have data on approximately 780 planetary masses for which the installation of low orbit weapons systems, followed by their destruction in military action, rendered low orbit space unreasonably expensive to navigate. Cleanup, as may be expected, is no less expensive, especially when destroyed orbiters contained large components specifically selected for their density. Recommendation: installation of nuclear devices in high planetary orbit or, ideally, in high stellar orbit, from which devices may be efficiently activated against any starward targets with minimal chance of detection."

[Kaprein]

What is an extremely high yield warhead defined as?

It would also remove clause 3 "REQUIRES that any nation choosing to possess nuclear weapons take every available precaution to ensure that their weapons do not fall into the wrong hands." By passing this resolution it would not restrict nuclear weapon possession, and it would remove a prohibition towards supplying nuclear weapons towards those who should not have nuclear weapons.

Harry Adler, Permeant Representative of Kaprein to the World Assembly

[Heavens Reach]

"Chemical weapons lack effective strategic-scale use, especially against hardened targets. Nuclear weapons have no such failing. They operate ideally without regard for conditions on the ground. Your alternatives are not sufficient to guarantee our safety, especially against nonmember states who would be able to continue to use nuclear arms. It's not clear why you want to destabilize the defensive posture of member states, but we cannot support it."

Simulations have shown that so-called “Rods From God” have the same explosive power as lower-yield nuclear weapons, without the radiation. As for how to protect from nuclear weapon strikes, anti-ballistic missiles should do the trick. If not, you could always try lasers. Also, the issue with nuclear weapons is that they have no regard for conditions on the ground. Lots of radiation. The bill is not meant to destabilize the defensive posture of member states, it is to try to reduce the usage of weapons that cause unnecessary damage where solutions already exist.

Support in principle. The use of powerful "conventional" weaponry over nuclear weapons is obviously preferable.

As you point out, weapons of similar or greater yield could act as deterrents without the threat of nuclear fallout. I say "or greater yield" in anticipation of an argument to the effect of "fallout is part of the incapacitating effect of nuclear weapons and, thus, of its deterrence." However, weapons causing radiation sickness to civilians should be considered particularly heinous under the same guiding principles that chemical weapons are considered particularly heinous. Radiation sickness from fallout would cause not just widespread, but a particularly ghastly sort of suffering; uncontrolable and far-reaching ecological damage; massive civilian casualties that continue to rack up years after the act of war itself; degradation of collective genomic data for every exposed species, but of particular concern for those species which are sentient, sapient or a cornerstone species of their respective biome; and the potential for global (interpreted in this case to mean the collective of nations, rather than just any one particular planet) economic or even civil collapse. And it's unnecessary. A conventional weapon can be as terrifying and awe-inspiring as a radioisotope-generating weapon, given sheer power. "Rods from god" is certainly an example, but there are others, including one particularly terrifying one on the far end of the mass-to-yield spectrum -- antimatter.

We support a repeal, and also a follow-up resolution strictly prohibiting radioisotope-generating weapons of all kinds (generally speaking, these are weapons -- like fission and hydrogen bombs -- that rely on neutron-nuclei chain reactions to generate their explosive yield, but these technical details need not necessarily be included in either a repeal or follow-up resolution.)

[Outer Sparta]

What is an extremely high yield warhead defined as?

It would also remove clause 3 "REQUIRES that any nation choosing to possess nuclear weapons take every available precaution to ensure that their weapons do not fall into the wrong hands." By passing this resolution it would not restrict nuclear weapon possession, and it would remove a prohibition towards supplying nuclear weapons towards those who should not have nuclear weapons.

Harry Adler, Permeant Representative of Kaprein to the World Assembly

Why are you digging up a thread that the OP hasn't worked on in three months? Although they said they might rework or create a different proposal, it doesn't necessary mean it's still ongoing.

[United Eastern Vodia]

The people of United Eastern Vodia will not stand by this, we cannot give up our nuclear weapons program if we get hit by one, we will have no response we need these weapons to defend ourselves

[Kaprein]

What is an extremely high yield warhead defined as?

It would also remove clause 3 "REQUIRES that any nation choosing to possess nuclear weapons take every available precaution to ensure that their weapons do not fall into the wrong hands." By passing this resolution it would not restrict nuclear weapon possession, and it would remove a prohibition towards supplying nuclear weapons towards those who should not have nuclear weapons.

Harry Adler, Permeant Representative of Kaprein to the World Assembly

Why are you digging up a thread that the OP hasn't worked on in three months? Although they said they might rework or create a different proposal, it doesn't necessary mean it's still ongoing.

Because I had previously commented on it, and I had found further issues with the draft.

[Excidium Planetis]

Edit: didn't realize this thread was dead, but I'm so proud of this post I'm just gonna leave it here.

Simulations have shown that so-called “Rods From God” have the same explosive power as lower-yield nuclear weapons, without the radiation. As for how to protect from nuclear weapon strikes, anti-ballistic missiles should do the trick. If not, you could always try lasers. Also, the issue with nuclear weapons is that they have no regard for conditions on the ground. Lots of radiation. The bill is not meant to destabilize the defensive posture of member states, it is to try to reduce the usage of weapons that cause unnecessary damage where solutions already exist.

The roar of a Gladius-class Corvette's nuclear engines carries across the WAHQ super-heavy aircraft landing strip and shakes the debate chamber just enough to knock all of the pens off your desk.

A few minutes later, Adelia Meritt, still wearing her zero-g suit, enters the chamber and removes her helmet. "So, uh, what did I miss?"

She reads over the proposal before her and the transcript of the debate. She frowns.

"Now, er, Ambassador... and, don't take this the wrong way, I'm not suggesting anything of the sort at all, we're really really trying to put that past behind us, but if, say, the Dawn Fleet of Excidium were to warp in a few hundred Halberd-class Cruisers into the space above your home planet and commence a planetary bombardment, how, uh, how exactly would these 'rods from gods' help you?"

[Sealandiccountry]

nations have the right to self defence, nukes are ok unless used extremely

[Outer Sparta]

Why are you digging up a thread that the OP hasn't worked on in three months? Although they said they might rework or create a different proposal, it doesn't necessary mean it's still ongoing.

Because I had previously commented on it, and I had found further issues with the draft.

Doesn't mean you should dig up this thread. Now, if the OP was still working on it or decided to make an update, then go ahead.