|
|
Post by President Abha Kawale on Nov 19, 2015 22:34:20 GMT -5
Besides, I would never suggest someone from CHINA is uninformed.
|
|
|
|
Post by Alex on Nov 19, 2015 22:48:25 GMT -5
Now I think this sarcasm and these unintended insults are completely unnecessary. Let's move to the ACTUAL TOPIC on hand, nuclear weapons. Shall we actually begin productivity and start drafting up an international law like you suggested Abha?
|
|
|
|
Post by President Abha Kawale on Nov 21, 2015 19:13:57 GMT -5
Indeed. For the sake of our children, if nothing else, these weapons of mass destruction must be eliminated.
|
|
|
|
Post by peter on Nov 29, 2015 17:02:54 GMT -5
"Now, to draw this up we need to establish some form of international law. I propose a new international organization, a reformation of the League of Nations, to lead the way to a better future."
|
|
|
|
Post by Alex on Nov 29, 2015 17:16:52 GMT -5
That would be fantastic...what shall we call this organization? It definitely cannot have the military flaws of the League of Nations...
|
|
|
|
Post by President Abha Kawale on Nov 29, 2015 20:02:19 GMT -5
This certainly a fantastic idea. However, I believe we have overstayed our welcome. Let us continue this in another place.
[OOC: Pretend a week has passed. The delegates have moved to Delhi, where they discuss the founding of the new organization.]
|
|
|
|
Post by Yu Krane on Nov 29, 2015 20:09:43 GMT -5
I also believe that this is a good idea, and Ukraine approves of it.
|
|
|
|
Post by peter on Nov 30, 2015 17:59:27 GMT -5
The French representative would sign the final document, the Treaty of Paris Disallowing the Fundamental Production of Nuclear Weaponry, on behalf of the people of France, before passing it to his left.
|
|
|
|
Post by Yu Krane on Nov 30, 2015 18:25:08 GMT -5
Ukraine will also sign the treaty on behalf of the people of Ukraine to disallow nuclear weaponry and the representative will also pass it to his left.
|
|
|
|
Post by Alex on Nov 30, 2015 19:33:03 GMT -5
The PRC has also signed this treaty on behalf of our great people and has passed it to the left.
|
|
|
|
Post by President Abha Kawale on Nov 30, 2015 22:01:38 GMT -5
The Indian representative stands, "I will happily sign this, but first I have one question. Is this agreement is temporary until the Allied Nations decision, or will it stand afterwards? I fully support banning the production of these by individual nations, but I require some more information about the boundaries and effects of this treaty, for instance, whether it still allows the Allied Nations, when formed, to control research and production of these weapons. I also worry about how the future legality of this treaty, as when future nations join they will not be bound, which is why, while I agree with this document, I believe a future AN decision is necessary eventually. "
|
|
|
|
Post by peter on Nov 30, 2015 22:13:01 GMT -5
"No, a future decision is not. The AN is for the purpose of upholding this resolution and future resolutions which they pass, but they do not need to make a separate decision considering it will consist of these very same nations. And no, the AN does not get to control research and production of these weapons. Under no circumstances should nuclear weapons be given to any nation or terror group...ever again. We might be able to trust AN now, but in twenty years, they might be the new Communist Bloc and they might intend to start a new Nuclear War. We don't know, and we shouldn't risk it. No playing with fire."
|
|
|
|
Post by President Abha Kawale on Nov 30, 2015 22:32:59 GMT -5
"I am struggling to make sense of that first sentence with its fantastic grammar. Yes, the AN is for upholding this decision, but may I remind you that I know practically zero information about what this treat entails. You have refused to answer a single one of my questions, and my arguments remain valid. Please, sir, give me the data I require, or I refuse to sign something that I know little more than nothing about. The AN is a collection of all nations, and if they cannot be trusted, or become the "communist bloc", then you are stating that you, I, and everyone here cannot be trusted. Your arguments are ridiculous, you refuse to answer my questions, and you will not give us the data we require. Yes, a AN decision, not separate, mind you, is necessary, unless you want to repeatedly hold a Paris Convention every time a nation joins. Unless YOU, sir, wish for a nuclear war, you must understand why an AN decision, binding to all nations, is necessary. Please, answer my requests, or I shall not sign this document."
|
|
|
|
Post by rosensihamoni on Dec 6, 2015 19:35:25 GMT -5
"The NRC will sign this treaty" (1951)
|
|
