NationStates Jolt Archive

I'm surprised so many nations are not worried about their own defense; with the WA being outnumbered by 3:1 in numbers, and other nations not having to follow the rules, the only option for us is to keep our countries militarized and ready in the possibility of subterfuge.

Delegates, I'm sure everyone can see the totals on the giant electronically updated tally-board directly above your heads -- or on the screens built into your desks -- or read the Twitters, or hear it on your earbuds, or keep up with the notes brought to you by relays of steaming yaks. Does anyone have any actual argument or discussion to add?

-- Dicey Reilly, chair pro tem and Wrongfully President for Life of Ardchoille.

The author has abandoned us, and all we can do is count down the Doomsday clock.

By the way, we're 200 ahead. :hail:

I obviously meant 'So S.H. would have been authorized to drop a nuclear bomb on New York City?'
Regrettably as with this repeal, what you "obviously meant" is unimportant in comparison with what you "actually said," honoured ambassador. Good intentions have no place in law, national or international, where precision is all.

For a while the Armed Republic of Churchriech had a very communist view to answer all questions in the world. My understanding has grown and I can finally answer with some political experience. This bill is a travesty and should be seen as such my all. Anyone who supports this bill allows for any anti-WA forces to attack and WA members and also to possibly have a stronger military force leaving the WA defenseless. I am glad to oppose this proposal and will continue to do so.

The Holy Empire of Anemos Major maintains its stance towards this bill; it is outrageous. Any fool who believes that a nation can stand unarmed in front of a hostile world can do so themselves; we regretfully inform them, however, that we will not be participating in this event.

00:21, Anemos Rei, Imperial Palace

The proposed bill had sparked outrage amongst almost everyone sat at the council table that night. The Holy Office of War in particular opposed the bill; until a completely functional missile defence shield was online, the mere thought of throwing away all nuclear weapons was complete madness. Even if there was a missile shield, maintaining nuclear weapons would provide Anemos Major with a backup plan. The chances of them actually being used were extremely low.

"We have a message from Lord Bremistyr, High Lord!" shouted a Foreign Affairs worker as he ran into the room, panting. "It says... the resolution is losing by over 200 votes!" A cheer resounded through the room, and the Regent, Arkal Therondis, waiting a moment for the cheering to subside, said "I believe it's too early to rejoice, gentlemen."

"We have a long day ahead of us."

I beleive that we may have Nuclear Weapons if we want to. I don't beleive that you should be able to tell us otherwise also. If the WA gets corrupted enough to start messing with our rights, I don't know if I would like to be a delegate.

Nuclear weapons are pointless, why do you have to destroy everything? And don't go saying that you're not going to use it to destroy, because that's clearly what nuclear weapons are for. It's not just your rights, it's general safety and peace, there's no needs for nuclear weapons.

Everyone who is claiming that they're using nuclear weapons for "defense" is full of crap.
Noone intends to use these for defense, they're offensive weapons and will always be such. Don't insult anyones intelligence by trying to make them believe you're keeping them on a back shelf in case of emergencies.
This repeal DOES NOT BAN NUCLEAR WEAPONS. It simply repeals a resolution that doesn't limit them, opening the floor for a new resolution that WILL limit them. If you can't understand this yet, you don't need to be participating in anything even LIKE politics. Everyone having as many nuclear weapons as they please is a ticking time bomb, and cannot be supported by anyone that intends for any solid length of peace. It's a good idea, even if it isn't a perfectly drafted repeal.
This being said, the countries outside of the WA not having to follow the rules is a daunting prospect. Whose to say that they won't attack a WA nation simply because they can?
Nuclear weapons shouldn't be completely banned, no matter how much we hate them, until everyone is a member of the WA and has to follow the rules. However, they SHOULD be limited and have very strict laws on their production, storage, and use. It's the only responsible thing to do.

Everyone who is claiming that they're using nuclear weapons for "defense" is full of crap.
Noone intends to use these for defense, they're offensive weapons and will always be such. Don't insult anyones intelligence by trying to make them believe you're keeping them on a back shelf in case of emergencies.
This repeal DOES NOT BAN NUCLEAR WEAPONS. It simply repeals a resolution that doesn't limit them, opening the floor for a new resolution that WILL limit them. If you can't understand this yet, you don't need to be participating in anything even LIKE politics. Everyone having as many nuclear weapons as they please is a ticking time bomb, and cannot be supported by anyone that intends for any solid length of peace. It's a good idea, even if it isn't a perfectly drafted repeal.
This being said, the countries outside of the WA not having to follow the rules is a daunting prospect. Whose to say that they won't attack a WA nation simply because they can?
Nuclear weapons shouldn't be completely banned, no matter how much we hate them, until everyone is a member of the WA and has to follow the rules. However, they SHOULD be limited and have very strict laws on their production, storage, and use. It's the only responsible thing to do.

Believe or not, Ambassador, but there are those among us that use them only as deterents so they wont be attacked by other nations.

As far as non members are concerned, they can't be told to limit the amount of arms they produce, they'd have to be forced to join this organization and that's not gonna happen.

I do understand that the prospect of having no means of defense against hostile nations with no obvious laws is a frightening concept.
However,
I do not believe that fear should influence nations to take up an unlimited amount of nuclear arms. The bottom line is that nuclear arms are dangerous, offensive weapons. Nuclear weapons devastate whole countries full of innocent people, not just those people that would attack you first, and should thus only be used in cases of extreme emergency when whole countries rally to attack you. As this is an unlikely situation, it isn't necessary to have unlimited nuclear weapons. If you will remember from Japan, one or two does the job.
Why is everyone so opposed to having stricter laws on nuclear arms? This isn't attacking human rights, its attempting to protect human life, even from those with no intention of destroying it. When someone passes a resolution to take your nuclear arms, rally to the defense, but even you must realize that not everyone here running a country has the adequate amount of intelligence to do it responsibly. That's what laws are for.

Everyone who is claiming that they're using nuclear weapons for "defense" is full of crap.
Noone intends to use these for defense, they're offensive weapons and will always be such. Don't insult anyones intelligence by trying to make them believe you're keeping them on a back shelf in case of emergencies.
This repeal DOES NOT BAN NUCLEAR WEAPONS. It simply repeals a resolution that doesn't limit them, opening the floor for a new resolution that WILL limit them. If you can't understand this yet, you don't need to be participating in anything even LIKE politics. Everyone having as many nuclear weapons as they please is a ticking time bomb, and cannot be supported by anyone that intends for any solid length of peace. It's a good idea, even if it isn't a perfectly drafted repeal.
This being said, the countries outside of the WA not having to follow the rules is a daunting prospect. Whose to say that they won't attack a WA nation simply because they can?
Nuclear weapons shouldn't be completely banned, no matter how much we hate them, until everyone is a member of the WA and has to follow the rules. However, they SHOULD be limited and have very strict laws on their production, storage, and use. It's the only responsible thing to do.

Now, if a nation wants to limit its own nuclear weapons, then it is free to do so. But with this many other nations outside the WA not participating in this endeavour, then it's pretty much pointless to limit your nuclear weapons. If a nation's nuclear weapons are unsafe, then the entity affected the most by this will be that naion itself, and therfore they would be fools not to deal with the problem. It is a nation's decision whether they keep nuclear weapons or not. Anyways, if 'one or two' do the job, what's the point of limiting the amount of nuclear weapons you can have (unless you're going to make it one or two)? As I mentioned a few sentences ago, it's a nation's decision whether they keep nuclear weapons or not; again, it's the sae with how many: it's up to the state itself to decide how many they should have and can have without making the nation go completely bust.

Each nation state has the rights to possess nuclear weapons or to not possess nuclear weapons and no nation should dictate on terms whether nations can or cant possess nuclear weapons and or how they can possess them. It is clearly upto the individual nation on whether to possess nuclear weapons or not and how to possess them.

Stopping nations from possessing nuclear weapons and restricting them is not in the best interests of neither parties.

I am glad that Resolution #10 Nuclear Proliferation Act will be saved and that this repeal is going to go down in history.

You can try and pry my nuclear weapons from my COLD DEAD KUNG FU GRIP!!

Indeed the east pacific made this a double digit vote. Haven't seen anything this close in quite sometime.
Of Course you haven't seen anything this close. Every other bill has been a bias left wing bill non-threatening to anyone's economy or national security. The second you try to take weapons away you see a lot of people turn coat to the right wing and sound a lot like me......

Of Course you haven't seen anything this close. Every other bill has been a bias left wing bill non-threatening to anyone's economy or national security. The second you try to take weapons away you see a lot of people turn coat to the right wing and sound a lot like me......



What was "left wing" about the NAPa, or the World Assembly Economic Union, or the Ban on Piracy, or several other resolutions which this organisation has ratified.

And what is particularly "right wing" about desiring to protect the security of one's state ?

And why would the honoured Ambassador for Churchreich see this bill as an opportunity to expound on their deeply naive understanding of a primitive and over simplified political world view ?


Yours,

Of Course you haven't seen anything this close. Every other bill has been a bias left wing bill non-threatening to anyone's economy or national security. The second you try to take weapons away you see a lot of people turn coat to the right wing and sound a lot like me......
You Callin' us COWARDS??!!???!!
DEATH TO SASHA
LONG Live AssStoneria

Why is everyone so opposed to having stricter laws on nuclear arms? So write a proposal that puts stricter laws on nuclear weapons. As long as you don't ban possession you're not contradicting the NAPA.

Bob Flibble
WA Representative

*snip post*OOC: Psst, sigs are limited to 8 lines.

Methinks this is about to die a horrible death, and rightly so.

It's over.

And with a difference of 385 votes! When was it the last time any voting was this close?

The resolution "Repeal "Nuclear Arms Possession Act"" was defeated 2,758 votes to 2,373.

Checking the records, this repeal was the closest vote in WA history. The vote was 34 votes closer than the previous holder, World Assembly Headquarters proposed by OMGTKK.

The closest vote on record for the entire history of the game belongs to the Free Expression Act also proposed by OMGTKK which failed by 71 votes.

Checking the records, this repeal was the closest vote in WA history.Er, not quite (http://www.nswiki.net/index.php?title=Veterans_Reform_Act). :tongue:

I accept the defeat, but we lost a battle, not the war.

p.s. now take this fuc**ing resolution which gives even terrorists the possiblity to hold nuclear weapons, as it doesn't define what a terrorist is.

Stay ready, because in one month I'll repost the repeal with a broader consensus.

I accept the defeat, but we lost a battle, not the war.

p.s. now take this fuc**ing resolution which gives even terrorists the possiblity to hold nuclear weapons, as it doesn't define what a terrorist is.

Stay ready, because in one month I'll repost the repeal with a broader consensus.


Ignorance of the complete canon of laws of this organisation has lead the delegation of Kohlhassenbruck in to a very grave misapprehension about the possibility of misuse of nuclear weapons it seems.

Being rude and ill mannered and foul mouthed has lost them the respect of this organisation.

This repeal will fail even more resoundingly should it be brought to vote ever again. It is clear that this organisation has made its democratic will completely clear on two separate occasions about the NAPa.


Yours,

OOC: Psst, sigs are limited to 8 lines.

OOC: Never got round to changing it. Please wait until I come up with something new.

Ignorance of the complete canon of laws of this organisation has lead the delegation of Kohlhassenbruck in to a very grave misapprehension about the possibility of misuse of nuclear weapons it seems.

Being rude and ill mannered and foul mouthed has lost them the respect of this organisation.

This repeal will fail even more resoundingly should it be brought to vote ever again. It is clear that this organisation has made its democratic will completely clear on two separate occasions about the NAPa.


Yours,

Hear, hear!

Er, not quite (http://www.nswiki.net/index.php?title=Veterans_Reform_Act). :tongue:


Ah, I was sorting by percentages and must have missed that, don't see how considering I repealed the damn thing. Either way this was the closest repeal in the WA's history.

I accept the defeat, but we lost a battle, not the war.

p.s. now take this fuc**ing resolution which gives even terrorists the possiblity to hold nuclear weapons, as it doesn't define what a terrorist is.

Stay ready, because in one month I'll repost the repeal with a broader consensus.

Seeing as I'm not a member of this organization, I'm not required to maintain any level of civility towards any members there of. And I shall practice the use of abuse above and beyond the level that you have already displayed towards not only my self but some of my friends within this organization. Here goes.

You ignorant simple-minded twat. How many bloody times do I have to tell you that NAPA does not need to define what a terrorist is or deny nations from trading with terrorists because the WA Counterterrorism Act does that for it!!!!!

I've got half a mind to declare war on your nation to prove to you than a non member will hold absolutely no restraint on seeking the absolute and total annihalation of your nation, and then you'll be so damn glad that we don't have the limit laws because you'll be working your ass off to keep up with my stockpiles. You are an undermining, coniving little brat and I hope you never darken the doorways of this establishment ever again.


OOC: Before anyone shouts off with his head, all those comments are IC as given by Emperor Zarquon and how he feels about this situation and do not reflect my own views. Mainly because I don't have a nuke handy. :p

I accept the defeat

Do you really have a choice?

but we lost a battle, not the war.

You're showing the same amount of competence, in terms of battles and war, that caused your government to launch this repeal in the first place. Know what amount that is? I'll give you a hint: it starts with "n", ends with "e", and has the word "on" in the middle.

p.s. now take this fuc**ing resolution which gives even terrorists the possiblity to hold nuclear weapons, as it doesn't define what a terrorist is.

We have legislation that defines (http://www.nswiki.net/index.php?title=WA_Counterterrorism_Act) who a terrorist is already, which you would know if you had read through previous legislation at all. Said legislation also prevents states from supplying terrorists with weapons, equipment or assistance, which would make it pretty damn hard for a WA state to help a terrorist get a nuke. I should know - I helped write it.

I'd also love to see an explanation as to how your repeal, which was the cornerstone to a future ban effort, would've kept terrorists from getting nukes, even if the WA Counterterrorism Act didn't exist.

Stay ready, because in one month I'll repost the repeal with a broader consensus.

If you don't change anything in it, be prepared to lose again too. Delegates don't like to have their time wasted by seeing the same resolution of fail they've already rejected once before.

-Jaris Krytellin, Ambassador

I voted FOR the Repeal but after listening to the views of the leaders here i have now discussed and re-thought my position and hereby declare, if given the chance to vote against the new repeal.

Well, now that the excitement's over, I have one question. Who won the karaoke contest?

Bob Flibble
WA Representative

Who says it's over, Ambassador?

[Now it's Commander Chiang's turn to jump up onto the table; she's wearing her usual leather pants, only this time she has a flower in her hair, a tacky (if colorful) ankh necklace, and a tie-dye baby-tee pulled on over her leather corset. She grabs the microphone and launches into her usual dance routine as a familiar anthem to Sixtydom plays:]

You can't stop an avalanche as it races down the hill
You can try to stop the seasons, girl, but you know you never will
And you can try to stop my dancing feet, but I just cannot stand still!

'Cause the world keeps spinnin' round and round
And my heart's keepin' time to the speed of the sound
I was lost 'til I heard the drums, then I found my way
'Cause you can't stop the beat

Ever since the whole world began
A woman found out if she shook it, she could shake up a man
And so I'm gonna shake and shimmy it with all of my might today
'Cause you can't stop the motion of the ocean or the sun in the sky
You can wonder, if you wanna, but I never ask why
And you can try to hold me down, but I'll spit in your eye and say
That You Can't Stop the Beat!

Meanly, Dicey turns out the lights.

Happy Hour's just starting in the Strangers' Bar and she's not going to miss a minute.

______________________________

EDIT: OOC: Zarquon, you're dancing with the devil there, since Kohlhaasenbruck has apparently been making his comments OOC, so abuse may be seen as directed towards him-the-player, not his ambassador.

I wouldn't want any of the newcomers thinking that going IC gives them carte blanche for personal abuse -- Dicey abusing Commander Chang for her absolutely ghastly fashion sense is a lot different from me abusing Kenny-the-player for ... well, what could anyone possibly abuse Kenny-the-player for, anyway? :tongue: