NationStates Jolt Archive

Debate & discuss Nuclear disarmament treaty. Also approve it before jan 17th.

It's considered polite to post your proposal text, so we don't need to go looking for it.

Alright, so:

Nuclear Disarmament Treaty
A resolution to improve world security by boosting police and military budgets.

Category: International Security
Strength: Significant
Proposed by: Disallusioned youths

Description: Recognising that;
1. Nuclear Weapons are a threat to humanity and world peace.
2. That Nuclear Weapons are obsolete and should be replaced by thermonuclear 'Hydrogen Warheads', which are much more effective.
3. That thermonuclear weapons would actually PREVENT war as most leader would be afraid to use them, or make another nationstate use them.
4. That you will be given a 5 year program to get rid of Nuclear Weapons in a safe and environentally friendly manner, and a further 10 years to build up a stock of Thermonuclear Weapons.
5. This program will come into effect on all United Nations member states immediately after the motion is passed (if at all).Debate & discussOK, the proposal is illegal and contradicts Nuclear Armaments. Add to that the requirement of Thermonuclear weapons contradicts United Nations Security Act.

Discussion over.

What is the point of Nuclear Disarmerment if your just replaceing the Nukes with even more powerful substitutes? This seems like a rather expensive rearmermant plan that ultimatly ends up makeing the situation worse ar at least the same as it was before.

The Holy Empire of Imota asserts the right to maintain strategic and tactical nuclear and thermonuclear weapons and thus can not and will not agree to the measure proposed.

One thing that the Republic of Delehan agrees with you on is that yes, Nuclear Weapons are a threat to humanity and world peace. And yes, disarmament is a proposal that we would be willing to take into consideration. However, replacing "obsolete" weapons with weapons that could only cause more mass destruction is contradictory and unnecessary. The threat of nuclear attack is one that already is frightening. The thought of a more effective nuclear attack is downright unacceptable.

Kenneth Riala
UN Ambassador
The Republic of Delehan

This is like taking the weapons from a medieval army and then arming it with bazookas. Nothing good will come from this. If countries want cheaper bombs with some less destructive power, then let them.

Yes but the point is that because Thermonuclear weapons are so powerful, and so dangerous that people would be far too afraid to use them; or want to start a war with anyone.

Yes but the point is that because Thermonuclear weapons are so powerful, and so dangerous that people would be far too afraid to use them; or want to start a war with anyone.

A more important point is, that your proposal is illegal because of my resolution (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9384768&postcount=110). A point which the Kennyites brought up and you completely ignored.

Bob Flibble
UN Representative

A more important point is, that your proposal is illegal because of my resolution (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9384768&postcount=110). A point which the Kennyites brought up and you completely ignored.

Bob Flibble
UN Representative

And a point that was also made here (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=13370785#post13370785) .

Besides we can always repeal previous resolutions. Perhaps your taking this game a little too seriously :):pI wonder how serious the mods are when they click the button marked "Delete this proposal"?

:gundge::confused::eek::headbang:

A more important point is, that your proposal is illegal because of my resolution (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9384768&postcount=110). A point which the Kennyites brought up and you completely ignored.

Bob Flibble
UN Representative

Sorry - it's impossible working your way through the list of previous resolutions as i have no idea where anything is and there's no search tool. Besides im a bit of a noob to this game.

Sorry - it's impossible working your way through the list of previous resolutions as i have no idea where anything is and there's no search tool. Besides im a bit of a noob to this game.

There's a listing of them in the sticky, you should take a glance, and I'm sure someone will post the search tool that was created that I can't find the URL for.

A HUGE suggestion would be to start a thread and hash out the resolutions BEFORE you submit them. I really can't think of any resolution that's made it without being debated first.

Another suggestion is to hang back a little at first and learn how things are done. It'll save you some embarrassment later.

Agregorn is for the use of stronger weapons, though this does stir an issue in our minds to which we are divided. We would love the sanctity of the UN to use Thermonuclear weapons, chemical and biological devastating weapons, xenomorphic parasites (also a biological weapon, but an adequate measure of true fear) or anything that would allow us to cleanse the earth of the cowardly nations that send zealots to strike out of the shadows of our own and many other civilized cities. They do not recognize the sovereignty of our borders, or that we have earned our fiscal place in the world and order of things through deed and not entitlement. In our eyes, they are not entitled to breath, and we'd love to be the hand that takes it from them. However, encouraging M.A.D. (Mutually Assured Destruction) with civilized nations (many of whom are UN members) is silly, when the real threat are the rabid degenerate apes that call themselves human. Were civility also mandated in all sentient and threatening life on this world, M.A.D. makes sense in a terrifying dystopia sort of way. However, we can see past our own blood-lust to realize that arming our enemies for an unprofitable war is mutually detrimental, most importantly, severely detrimental to us.

I really can't think of any resolution that's made it without being debated first.

I can, Max Barry Day.:rolleyes:

Bob Flibble
UN Representative

I can, Max Barry Day.:rolleyes:

Bob Flibble
UN Representative

I revise and extend my remarks...

No "quality" resolution.

The Confederacy of Tokonaga Empire for one has to say in this kind of matter would and will be against this.

We believe in the use of nuclear power in balance of other generated powers while preserving our lands in acceptable environmental states.

However,We do not believe in using such powers and technology like nuclear for mass destructive weapons such as nukes let alone thermonuclear.

So on that note and statement,The Confederacy of Tokonaga Empire is against this debate in usage of such weapons to fight a battle let alone a war.

Sorry - it's impossible working your way through the list of previous resolutions as i have no idea where anything is and there's no search tool.

(OOC: You may want to try Safalra's search tool (http://www.safalra.com/other/nationstates/un-resolution-search/) for UN resolutions.)

IC:

The government of Altanar would be opposed to any measure such as this. The UN has come to the consensus that nuclear weaponry should be the prerogative of each nation to decide upon, and we see no reason to change that.

Ikir Askanabath, Ambassador

Debate & discuss Nuclear disarmament treaty. Also approve it before jan 17th.

You do realize that "thermonuclear hydrogen weapons" are of what is known as a fission-fusion type, using an initial fission reaction to initiate a secondary fusion reaction. It's typically done using an implosion type warhead, with a layered core, at the center usually tritium, surrounded by a plutonium isotope, and then covered in a sphere of HE(High explosive) caps.... The initially explosive reaction of the HE compresses the plutonium into a fissionable mass, when then explodes, compressing and heating the tritium to initiate a fusion reaction...