NationStates Jolt Archive

I am proposing a bill to repeal the nuclear UN resolution. Please vote for my propsal. We need non UN nations to have nukes!

The forum labelled "The United Nations" would probably be a better choice for this thread than "NationStates". Moved.

I am proposing a bill to repeal the nuclear UN resolution.Which one? There's, like, three or four.

We need non UN nations to have nukes!Um... they do?

We need non UN nations to have nukes!

Then why is this an issue for the UN as they already have no means to stop NON UN nations from having nukes.

Also many NON UN nations in NS already have them in place and possibly have even used them a lot more than they have been in real world....

I am proposing a bill to repeal the nuclear UN resolution. Please vote for my propsal. We need non UN nations to have nukes!

1) Um....non UN nations have nukes
2) Um....non UN nations are not affected by UN resolutions
3) Um....UNR #151 does not prevent any nation from having nukes
4) Um....if you're concerned about not being able to get nuclear tech, why don't you talk to some fellow non-members?

4) Um....if you're concerned about not being able to get nuclear tech, why don't you talk to some fellow non-members?It appears this Brozvakia is a UN member; he's not allowed to.

Then his last sentence makes even less sense.

Repeal "Nuclear Armaments"
A proposal to repeal a previously passed resolution


Category: Repeal
Resolution: #109
Proposed by: Gallipoli-China

Description: UN Resolution #109: Nuclear Armaments (Category: International Security; Strength: Mild) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: A resolution to assure UN defence

RECOGNIZING as it states in Resolution 109 that "UN members are outnumbered by non members by about 3 to 1," that "the fact that UN resolutions only affect UN members," and that "the UN members need to be able to defend themselves if attacked,"

ACKNOWLEDGEING that membership in the UN is fluid,

OBSERVING that Resolution 109 makes no provision for the fate of the nuclear weapons in former member states control,

ADMITTING the destructive role that these weapons can have in the world outside of UN control, especially to the interests of UN member nations,

CONCEDING that UN member nations may have at least partial control over their own affairs,

PROPOSES that individual UN members may not posess nuclear weapons,

PROPOSES that all nuclear weapons posessed by UN member states revert to UN control,

CREATES a UN Council for Nuclear Defence, consisting of all interested Member States, the aim of which is to decide, by common consent, how many nuclear weapons may be stockpiled and produced by the UN, and who they will be used against.

Approvals: 0

Status: Lacking Support (requires 125 more approvals)

Voting Ends: Wed Apr 26 2006

Didn't see the one to repeal 151 but this one is in house and needs 151 to be repealed before it can be passed.. As it clearly would violate the intent of 151 when nations turn over control of their nukes to the UN....

Also in that it proposed actions other than the repeal of the intended R109 it is not legal to repeal and propose in same one..

Didn't see the one to repeal 151 but this one is in house and needs 151 to be repealed before it can be passed.. As it clearly would violate the intent of 151 when nations turn over control of their nukes to the UN....Actually you're wrong, the UN is not a nation so therefore there is no conflict with #151

Also in that it proposed actions other than the repeal of the intended R109 it is not legal to repeal and propose in same one..
Which makes the above point completly moot.

Bob Flibble
UN Representative

Actually you're wrong, the UN is not a nation so therefore there is no conflict with #151.

Bob Flibble
UN Representative
True it's not a nation in itself but it's made up of elected delagates that represent nations thus they are the ones that would get control of any nukes since they are in so called control of UN thus... Nations or whatever transfer contol of nukes from one to other... be it UN or a single nation...

Incorrect and irrelevent. "Player controlled" characters are simply representatives and suchwise. They control nothing. Control of any weapons or technology is strictly in the tiny hands of the UN Gnomes. Any people that they delegate control to are fiercely loyal to the UN and the UN only; not any individual nation. Any restriction to nations does not apply to the UN as it is not a nation. It is above such designations.

Control of any weapons or technology is strictly in the tiny hands of the UN Gnomes. Any people that they delegate control to are fiercely loyal to the UN and the UN only;


Wouldn't this violate the "No UN-controlled military forces" rule?

Eh? I was more speaking hypothetically. I wasn't aware that 151 gave the UN control of actual arms...

Eh? I was more speaking hypothetically. I wasn't aware that 151 gave the UN control of actual arms...


I thought we were now talking about the interaction with 151 of the proposed [illegal] repeal of #109 that was quoted above...

I thought we were now talking about the interaction with 151 of the proposed [illegal] repeal of #109 that was quoted above...Oh, yeah. That's no good.

Sorry; I've been ill lately and a little out of it.

I've been ill lately and a little out of it.

Sorry to hear that: Get well soon!