NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.nationstates.net/92807/page=UN_proposal/start=15

Looking something like this:

Nuclear Non-Aggression Pact
Category: Global Disarmament
Strength: Significant

Description: No UN nation will launch a first strike nuclear attack against any other UN nation, nor will UN nations target each other with nuclear weapons in such a way that would allow a near-instantaneous first strike attack.

I wish there were more one-sentence proposals/resolutions. One of the best resolutions (UN taxation ban) is one sentence.

Absolutely not. Smaller nuclear-capable nations need the threat of a nuclear strike to prevent a conventional attack by a much larger enemy as a deterrent.

nor will UN nations target each other with nuclear weapons in such a way that would allow a near-instantaneous first strike attack.

If this was the case, how would my nation be able to defend itself against nuclear first strikes by other UN nations which decide to ignore this? What is the deterrence besides MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction)? If someone else new they could attack me without risking MAD, because it would take too long to get the missiles targetted to retaliate, what is the point?

Also, not all one sentence proposals are good. The some of the better ones also lay out arguments and have multitiered tasks to their proposals. Why should we adopt this resolution? It's implied, but we should understand the official reason we are doing so.

If this was the case, how would my nation be able to defend itself against nuclear first strikes by other UN nations which decide to ignore this? What is the deterrence besides MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction)? If someone else new they could attack me without risking MAD, because it would take too long to get the missiles targetted to retaliate, what is the point?

If you're being targeted then you can target back in preparation for instantaneous second strike. There's nothing to say you can't.

Also, not all one sentence proposals are good.

Give this man an award...

EXHIBIT A: I.G.N.O.R.E. Cannons exist, thereby rendering this proposal irrelevant.

Bumped for those who don't wish for nuclear obliteration.

Now here: http://www.nationstates.net/92807/pa...posal/start=10

Don't make us nuke you.

UN nations wouldn't be able to target you for the first strike. They will be held in compliance for this as with everything else. I.G.N.O.R.E. Cannons are only effective insofar as the participating nations wish to use them. As for larger conventional military strikes being levelled at a smaller nuclear capable nation. If they are aware that the near instantaneous second strike could potentially obliterate their capital cities in such a way as to render them uninhabitable for decades on end, they may well reconsider that initial conventional strike. Without this in place, there's nothing to stop them from acquiring nuclear capacity and simply decimating your capital cities and military strongholds in a single nuclear strike, renderring any second strike from you a laughable option.

Absolutely not. Smaller nuclear-capable nations need the threat of a nuclear strike to prevent a conventional attack by a much larger enemy as a deterrent.

A quick rewrite of this proposal would sort that out.

No UN nation will launch a first strike attack employing nuclear weapons against any other UN nation, nor will UN nations target each other with nuclear weapons in such a way that would allow a near-instantaneous first strike attack.

Bit better. Now if big nation attacks little nation, little nation fires nukes.

A quick rewrite of this proposal would sort that out.

No UN nation will launch a first strike attack employing nuclear weapons against any other UN nation, nor will UN nations target each other with nuclear weapons in such a way that would allow a near-instantaneous first strike attack.

Bit better. Now if big nation attacks little nation, little nation fires nukes.

This assumes UN nations never go to war with one another, but they do.

This assumes UN nations never go to war with one another, but they do.You have misread it.

Nukes cannot be used in a first strike facility. As I understand it first strike is when nation A invades B.

Nothing then to stop nation B nuking nation A

Ah, gotcha. You need to be clear that "first strike" is not the first nuclear strike then.

OOC: regarding IGNORE cannons, we don't need to bring this up in debate, do we? They're an OOC way of saying "I'm not playing with you, my triggerhappy friend." Pass this proposal and consensual RPs involving UN nations will have an extra layer of legal finesse. Which is a good thing.