by Bergnovinaia » Fri Aug 28, 2009 2:32 pm
by Malikov » Fri Aug 28, 2009 4:10 pm
"Friendship is two pals munching on a well cooked face together."Tiurabo wrote:Your forces are weak because you are capable of reigning them in.
by Bergnovinaia » Fri Aug 28, 2009 4:15 pm
Malikov wrote:Bio weapons can be aimed specifically at the extermination of a single sentient being. Traditional bombs cause damage to everything they come into contact with. Bio-bombs are much less detrimental on the environment. Now, I know you'll say that bio-bombs much more detrimental to a single sentient species then traditional bombs, but thats the point of war, to eliminate the enemy. All this is doing is restricting our ability to defend ourselves from non-WA nations. WA nations have a history of being against resolutions that restrict the effectivness of national security.
by Grittonia » Fri Aug 28, 2009 4:20 pm
Grittonia's Law wrote:Everyone is gay, they just don't know it.
One who automatically claims they are straight without probing are undoubtedly gay.
Gren's Theorem wrote:Everyone is attracted to Grit. Those who say differently simply refuse to acknowledge it.
"Oy vey! All he talked about was parties and sex! And those Perviolosi twins kept tugging at my pants. Get me some tylenol." - Roman Ambassador after meeting Pappa Nick & his entourage
by Bergnovinaia » Fri Aug 28, 2009 4:22 pm
by Malikov » Fri Aug 28, 2009 4:37 pm
"Friendship is two pals munching on a well cooked face together."Tiurabo wrote:Your forces are weak because you are capable of reigning them in.
by Bergnovinaia » Fri Aug 28, 2009 4:41 pm
Malikov wrote:Bad proposal. Wont pass.
'Nuff said.
by Malikov » Fri Aug 28, 2009 4:55 pm
"Friendship is two pals munching on a well cooked face together."Tiurabo wrote:Your forces are weak because you are capable of reigning them in.
by Bergnovinaia » Fri Aug 28, 2009 4:58 pm
Malikov wrote:I think that disease has the ability to kill more people then nuclear arms, mostly because they have the ability to mutate, and continue infecting and killing, long after their release. Plus, nations generally don't have the facilities to treat armies of dying soliders. Nuclear weapons are more dramatic. Bio weapons are infinitly more deadly, as they have the ability to kill people, military or civilian, for generations after the war is over.
Which would you feel more comfortably doing (if forced to of course). Launching a nuke at a major city, or releasing a highly contagious, mutanagenic, not to mention extremely deadly virus or bacteria into an entire nation?
by Malikov » Fri Aug 28, 2009 5:03 pm
"Friendship is two pals munching on a well cooked face together."Tiurabo wrote:Your forces are weak because you are capable of reigning them in.
by Niur » Fri Aug 28, 2009 5:04 pm
Bergnovinaia wrote:Malikov wrote:I think that disease has the ability to kill more people then nuclear arms, mostly because they have the ability to mutate, and continue infecting and killing, long after their release. Plus, nations generally don't have the facilities to treat armies of dying soliders. Nuclear weapons are more dramatic. Bio weapons are infinitly more deadly, as they have the ability to kill people, military or civilian, for generations after the war is over.
Which would you feel more comfortably doing (if forced to of course). Launching a nuke at a major city, or releasing a highly contagious, mutanagenic, not to mention extremely deadly virus or bacteria into an entire nation?
First of all it is not total disarmament. Read the proposal. Second, nukes can cause genetic mutations decades after the initial explsoion. Look at Hiroshima and Nagasaki in RL for example. They're still uninhabitable.
by Bergnovinaia » Fri Aug 28, 2009 5:04 pm
Malikov wrote:Limiting the amount of bio-weapons a nation can have reduces the effectivness of a WA nations ability to defend itself. Non-WA nations could have thousands of bios weapons, and if this passed, we would only get a puny one-hundred!? Sorry, but this is something I will never support.
ENCOURAGES member nations to support member nations that are involved in a biological war if the weapons said member nation is attacked with exceeds 100 weapons.
by Niur » Fri Aug 28, 2009 5:07 pm
by Malikov » Fri Aug 28, 2009 5:08 pm
"Friendship is two pals munching on a well cooked face together."Tiurabo wrote:Your forces are weak because you are capable of reigning them in.
by Bergnovinaia » Fri Aug 28, 2009 5:09 pm
Malikov wrote:Yet, there are still more non-WA nations then WA nations. Your draft (as I've said time, and time again) will make WA nations more vulnerable against non-WA nations then we already are! How about a draft that gurantees a nations right to bio weapons, and encourages the exchange of information regarding these weapons between member nations? Thats something I would support.
by Niur » Fri Aug 28, 2009 5:10 pm
Niur wrote:you know if you are attacked with 100 bio-weopons you are pretty much screwed anyway.
by Malikov » Fri Aug 28, 2009 5:11 pm
"Friendship is two pals munching on a well cooked face together."Tiurabo wrote:Your forces are weak because you are capable of reigning them in.
by Bergnovinaia » Fri Aug 28, 2009 5:13 pm
Malikov wrote:So you'll write a draft encouraging the possesion of bio-weapons, after writing a draft to restrict the possesion of bio-weapons? I don't mean to be offensive, but thats something even Meldaria wouldn't do.
by Bergnovinaia » Fri Aug 28, 2009 5:15 pm
by Niur » Fri Aug 28, 2009 5:15 pm
Malikov wrote:So you'll write a draft encouraging the possesion of bio-weapons, after writing a draft to restrict the possesion of bio-weapons? I don't mean to be offensive, but thats something even Meldaria wouldn't do.
by Malikov » Fri Aug 28, 2009 5:16 pm
"Friendship is two pals munching on a well cooked face together."Tiurabo wrote:Your forces are weak because you are capable of reigning them in.
by Niur » Fri Aug 28, 2009 5:17 pm
Bergnovinaia wrote:
Or maybe a clause that says, "Encourages WA members to commit suicide." Much simpler than yours.
by Bergnovinaia » Fri Aug 28, 2009 5:18 pm
by Omigodtheykilledkenny » Fri Aug 28, 2009 5:28 pm
by Bergnovinaia » Fri Aug 28, 2009 7:01 pm
Omigodtheykilledkenny wrote:Biological weapons have no legitimate defensive applications whatsoever, and the WA already allows members to possess nukes, so why would they even need a "defensive" bioweapons arsenal? If you're going to ban bioweapons, then ban them; don't try to appease inhuman countries by assuring them a "defensive" arsenal they can use against non-WA nations. It is a war crime to kill citizens of non-WA nations just as it is to kill citizens of nations in the WA. It seems to me the WA would want to eliminate crimes against humanity by its members, not simply categorize them as an offense punishable only when your enemy is in the WA.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement