IN
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.
IN

Nation Building Game Site


You are not connected. Please login or register

IN » Game » World Union » World Union Board to Prevent the Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction

World Union Board to Prevent the Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction

+3
nocbl2
Ruski
Rotaretilbo
7 posters

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Rotaretilbo



This is where nations may request World Union permission to have weapons of mass destruction. Nations must outline what kind of WMD they wish to procure, and must agree to cooperate with World Union weapons inspectors. In order to be allowed to have weapons of mass destruction, a World Union vote excluding the member in question must reach 2/3 majority approval.

Nations Allowed to Have WMDs
  • Conventional
  • Chemical
  • Biological
  • Radiological
  • Nuclear


Nations Currently in Possession of WMDs
  • Conventional
  • Chemical
    • Finland: <descriptionofweapon> (compliant)
    • Sahara Confederacy: <descriptionofweapon> (compliant)

  • Biological
    • Empire of the Rising Sun: Capability Only (compliant)

  • Radiological
    • Soviet Republic of the Moscow Union: Capability Only (compliant)

  • Nuclear
    • Democratic People's Republic of Sibaristan: <TNTyieldofeachtypeofweapon> (compliant)
    • Sahara Confederacy: <TNTyieldofeachtypeofweapon> (compliant)
    • New Guinea: <TNTyieldofeachtypeofweapon> (compliant)



Last edited by Rotaretilbo on Sun May 08, 2011 12:28 am; edited 1 time in total

Rotaretilbo



First and foremost, we need to decide whether or not to allow Finland and the Sahara Confederacy to have chemical weapons and the Democratic People's Republic of Sibaristan, the Sahara Confederacy, and New Guinea to have nuclear weapons.

Vote to Allow Finland to Possess Chemical Weapons
Yes - 0 ()
No - 0 ()
Abstain - 0 ()
Yet to Vote - 24 (Alaskan Nation, Democratic People’s Republic of Sibaristan, Eagleland, Empire of the Rising Sun, Federated States of Bolivia, German Empire, Gibraltaria, Greater Australian Republic, Iberia, Kingdom of Denmark, Kola, Nation of Superior, National Imperial Coalition, Nationally United Confederate Army, New Guinea, New Viking Nation, Outback Confederacy, Razem Milicji, Sahara Confederacy, Soviet Republic of the Moscow Union, Union of Chicagoland, United Peoples of South Africa, Usonia, Victoria)
16 needed

Vote to Allow Sahara Confederacy to Possess Chemical Weapons
Yes - 0 ()
No - 0 ()
Abstain - 0 ()
Yet to Vote - 24 (Alaskan Nation, Democratic People’s Republic of Sibaristan, Eagleland, Empire of the Rising Sun, Federated States of Bolivia, Finland, German Empire, Gibraltaria, Greater Australian Republic, Iberia, Kingdom of Denmark, Kola, Nation of Superior, National Imperial Coalition, Nationally United Confederate Army, New Guinea, New Viking Nation, Outback Confederacy, Razem Milicji, Soviet Republic of the Moscow Union, Union of Chicagoland, United Peoples of South Africa, Usonia, Victoria)
16 needed

Vote to Allow Democratic People's Republic of Sibaristan to Possess Nuclear Weapons
Yes - 0 ()
No - 0 ()
Abstain - 0 ()
Yet to Vote - 24 (Alaskan Nation, Eagleland, Empire of the Rising Sun, Federated States of Bolivia, Finland, German Empire, Gibraltaria, Greater Australian Republic, Iberia, Kingdom of Denmark, Kola, Nation of Superior, National Imperial Coalition, Nationally United Confederate Army, New Guinea, New Viking Nation, Outback Confederacy, Razem Milicji, Sahara Confederacy, Soviet Republic of the Moscow Union, Union of Chicagoland, United Peoples of South Africa, Usonia, Victoria)
16 needed

Vote to Allow Sahara Confederacy to Possess Nuclear Weapons
Yes - 0 ()
No - 0 ()
Abstain - 0 ()
Yet to Vote - 24 (Alaskan Nation, Democratic People’s Republic of Sibaristan, Eagleland, Empire of the Rising Sun, Federated States of Bolivia, Finland, German Empire, Gibraltaria, Greater Australian Republic, Iberia, Kingdom of Denmark, Kola, Nation of Superior, National Imperial Coalition, Nationally United Confederate Army, New Guinea, New Viking Nation, Outback Confederacy, Razem Milicji, Soviet Republic of the Moscow Union, Union of Chicagoland, United Peoples of South Africa, Usonia, Victoria)
16 needed

Vote to Allow New Guinea to Possess Nuclear Weapons
Yes - 0 ()
No - 0 ()
Abstain - 0 ()
Yet to Vote - 24 (Alaskan Nation, Democratic People’s Republic of Sibaristan, Eagleland, Empire of the Rising Sun, Federated States of Bolivia, Finland, German Empire, Gibraltaria, Greater Australian Republic, Iberia, Kingdom of Denmark, Kola, Nation of Superior, National Imperial Coalition, Nationally United Confederate Army, New Viking Nation, Outback Confederacy, Razem Milicji, Sahara Confederacy, Soviet Republic of the Moscow Union, Union of Chicagoland, United Peoples of South Africa, Usonia, Victoria)
16 needed

First, these nations need to describe the weapons they are already in possession of.

Ruski

Ruski

"Moscow votes the following:

Finland (Chemical) - No

Sahara Confederacy (Chemical) - No

Democratic People's Republic of Sibaristan (Nuclear) - Yes

Sahara Confederacy (Nuclear) - No

New Guinea (Nuclear) - No

Democratic People's Republic of Sibaristan is exempt from our vote in no only because of the conflict with Manchuria and the possibility that they may have nuclear weapons as well. However, once the conflict is done and over with, we recommend that a new vote be done if Sibaristan does pass."

Rotaretilbo



"The German Empire would like to remind everyone that completely disarming ourselves will only remove the mutually assured destruction that keeps these weapons from being used. While we respect the right of each nation to vote as they will, we urge all other nations to not vote no across the board simply for the sake of complete disarmament. At the very least, wait for the descriptions of what exactly we're voting yes or no for."

nocbl2



"The URS votes the following:

Finland (Chemical) - No

Sahara Confederacy (Chemical) - No

Democratic People's Republic of Sibaristan (Nuclear) - No

Sahara Confederacy (Nuclear) - No

New Guinea (Nuclear) - No"


Perhaps the WU could have a nuclear weaponry stockpile that could be used in the case of MAD?

BALLINMONK



"G.A.R has decided to vote the following"


Finland (Chemical) - No

Sahara Confederacy (Chemical) - No

Democratic People's Republic of Sibaristan (Nuclear) - No

Sahara Confederacy (Nuclear) - No

New Guinea (Nuclear) - No

Rotaretilbo



"We don't even know what kinds of weapons we're voting for, yet you all are overeager to immediately condemn any kinds of weapons. Simply put, because we cannot control every nation, some nations need to retain these kinds of weapons, in order to assure mutual destruction and thus prevent others from using these kinds of weapons on us or our allies.

Consider the alternate suggestion of having a World Union nuclear stockpile. Where would this stockpile be kept? Because it would have to be kept on the soil of some World Union nation. And who would be in charge of launching these missiles, should the need arise? Because trust me, if the need does arise, there will not be time for a vote. Nor can we just trust any member of the World Union to have the launch codes. A specific nation, likely the one hosting the stockpile, will have to be in charge of whether or not these missiles are used. And in the end, will that be any different than that nation simply having their own stockpile?

What if that nation is invaded conventionally and the stockpile captured? What will the World Union do then, with all its eggs in one basket? This proposed stockpile would need to be in the care of at least a few different nations. And what if we have a nuclear stockpile, and some rogue nation makes a chemical attack on a member of the World Union. Do we respond to nerve gas with nuclear warfare? We would need to keep several different types of these weapons on hand, each in multiple locations.

For the suggestion to be plausible, we would essentially have several different nations, each with their own funded and maintained stockpiles. The only difference between what it is an alternative to is that the World Union would pay for these nations' personal stockpile of WMDs.

In the end, the alternative achieves nothing other than to burn through the World Union's funding for no particular reason. So no, having a World Union stockpile does not solve the issue at all. In any way. Whatsoever.

So if you would all please stop voting without having a clue why you were voting other than some sentimental bullshit that, logically, doesn't make a lot of sense, the German Empire would greatly appreciate it."

dragoon9105

dragoon9105

"On the note of where a stockpile should be placed. It should be placed at one of the larger nations in the WU with enouch economic power and government stability to have alternate methods then using the nuclear payload. The GLC, UPSA, NIC and Saharan confederacy a good examples. The NIC and the GLC have the capability to store warheads in space, the NIC can go one step further and store them on the moon where they will be virtually impossible to capture."

"UPSA has a large enough army and the economic stability to back it, In addition UPSA has proven itself to be a very good neutral party member in the past, a helpful reassurance that UPSA will not take sides in a war between WU members and make use of said stockpile to help one of them."

"The Saharan confederacy ---(i dont know much about them but they are pretty big)"

Ruski

Ruski

"Moscow Union retracts it's votes as of now, but would like the information to be presented in a timely manner. We do not want to wait weeks upon weeks to get it, or we will be forced to keep our vote the same."

Gauz



"I believe all nations in possession of weapons of mass destruction should be allowed to keep them in their possession. Perhaps we can resolve on discontinuing the production of these weapons?

Stockpiling all of the weapons in the possession of one nation would be absolutely ridiculous. We're all in the World Union, we should be focusing on the nations NOT in the UUU that have WMD's."

CivBase

CivBase

"A corrupt organization cannot root out corruption."

Rotaretilbo



"Which is why this is being put to a vote. However, no examples of corruption have been brought forward to suggest that those nations in the World Union already in possession of weapons of mass destruction cannot be trusted with them. Thus far, it has all been rhetoric about complete disarmament that is pretty much useless to our cause.

Gauz



"I firmly believe that stopping production of these weapons is all the action we need. These weapons can be used as deterents to war, if anything."

Rotaretilbo



((Just so everyone knows, this vote is immune to the normal time limit, outlined in the charter, because out of game issues are affecting BB's involvement, and thus the various NPCs in question.))

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

IN » Game » World Union » World Union Board to Prevent the Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum