by Croato-Slavia » Tue Nov 23, 2021 9:45 am
by Separatist Peoples » Tue Nov 23, 2021 9:48 am
by Tinhampton » Tue Nov 23, 2021 9:59 am
by The New California Republic » Tue Nov 23, 2021 10:05 am
Croato-Slavia wrote:Noting that the resolution fails to acknowledge the following:
1. The consequences it would create in nature, such as:
a) Vast climate change due to the resources and processes needed to construct nuclear weapons.
Croato-Slavia wrote:I. This violates multiple passed Resolutions, and some laws inside of multiple member Nations.
Croato-Slavia wrote:c) If a nuclear weapon is detonated by accident, or on purpose, it could cause a nuclear winter which might affect World Assembly members.
Croato-Slavia wrote:2. That anyone can enter the World Assembly, hostile or not, get hold of nuclear weapons, resign/leave the World Assembly, then attack the World Assembly. This means that there is a loophole in the Resolution.
Croato-Slavia wrote:3. The resolution is vastly outdated, being implemented in 2008. This means that it is a possibility that some information (such as that the World Assembly is outnumbered to non-members 3 to 1, or that most of the non-member countries are hostile) is outdated.
Croato-Slavia wrote:4. Because it's voluntary, member Nations can choose not to participate. This Resolution is over 12 years old, so it's mostly forgotten at this point, thus if hostile nations attack the WA, there is a chance that it cannot defend itself, since it does not have sufficient nuclear weapons, due to some member states choosing not to possess nuclear weapons.
Croato-Slavia wrote:5. The labour that is needed to construct a nuclear weapon is extreme and could exhaust workers, ignite widespread protests, start mutinies or tank the morale and support of the people.
Croato-Slavia wrote:Believing that this resolution is greatly flawed, is very old and unused, we have concluded that this is a flawed, ineffective and overall aged resolution.
by Polomon Islands » Tue Nov 23, 2021 10:08 am
by Separatist Peoples » Tue Nov 23, 2021 10:08 am
by Polomon Islands » Tue Nov 23, 2021 10:09 am
by The New California Republic » Tue Nov 23, 2021 10:09 am
by Polomon Islands » Tue Nov 23, 2021 10:10 am
The New California Republic wrote:Oh, it's gone.
by The New California Republic » Tue Nov 23, 2021 10:11 am
Separatist Peoples wrote:Ooc: Nuking your proposal because you didn't like the feedback is very, very bad form.
by Polomon Islands » Tue Nov 23, 2021 10:11 am
by Tinhampton » Tue Nov 23, 2021 10:13 am
by Polomon Islands » Tue Nov 23, 2021 10:14 am
by The New California Republic » Tue Nov 23, 2021 10:14 am
by Outer Sparta » Tue Nov 23, 2021 3:05 pm
by Polomon Islands » Tue Nov 23, 2021 3:06 pm
Outer Sparta wrote:I don't get why you would get rid of your entire draft. Not a good practice to abandon it and try to shred it in a paper shredder.
At least you put a draft, but don't just get rid of the entire thing if things aren't working well, OP.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement