Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[andrea]

Proposed Arstotzka-Moskurg War Treaty

• The intentional usage of any solid, gaseous or liquid acidic, paralytic, or nerve agent that can directly harm humans on humans is prohibited
• The intentional usage of any weapon that utilizes harmful natural or engineered diseases that can directly harm humans on humans is prohibited
• The usage or production of any weapons capable of spreading radioactive contamination over any area is prohibited
• Only the intended recipient of an encoded message is permitted to decode it

I submit this as an amendment to the proposed treaty.

this gets my vote

[10ebbor10]

Seems acceptable.

Can we get the clause: "In the unlikely event that an agreement be made with 3 players from either side, additional rules can be put forward to vote."

Allows change, without cluttering up the thread as you need at least 3 people from either side before it even needs to be considered.

[Devastator]

I don't think there is even one signatory on team Moskurg to that..

Evilcherry is Moskurg. I take it you're voting against, though?

I'm not even certain Evilcherry said yes.  That said, one vote shouldn't be enough to carry it.  I see another from Kashyyk.  If I vote yes, would it be binding?

I'm against it.  There are many natural radioactives.  I might be in favor of the other two elements, but no banning any kind of radioactive, as it could be extended to practically any weapon if examined in detail.

[Ghazkull]

As one of the Moskurgians i vote against it except for the fourth and final clause

[andrea]

We could change it to 'radioactive contamination sufficiently higher than background radiation that it poses significant health concerns'

[Devastator]

We could change it to 'radioactive contamination sufficiently higher than background radiation that it poses significant health concerns'

(There's also the not-insignificant amount of evidence that indicates health benefits to exposure to slight but more-than-background amounts of radiation.)

What would you like to have banned?  If you need help turning it into legalese, I'd be glad to write something better.

[Kashyyk]

Proposed Arstotzka-Moskurg War Treaty

• The intentional usage of any solid, gaseous or liquid acidic, paralytic, or nerve agent that can directly harm humans on humans is prohibited
• The intentional usage of any weapon that utilizes harmful natural or engineered diseases that can directly harm humans on humans is prohibited
• The intentional usage of any weapon that causes radioactive contamination higher than background radiation such that it causes increased radiation-related health concerns is prohibited
• The usage or production of any weapons capable of spreading radioactive contamination over any area is prohibited
• Only the intended recipient of an encoded message is permitted to decode it

How's that?

[Devastator]

I still don't know what is trying to be banned with that line.

[Kashyyk]

Nukes, basically. But because legalese, it means anything that's slightly more radioactive than normal.

[Devastator]

Nukes, basically. But because legalese, it means anything that's slightly more radioactive than normal.

That's not how you ban nukes.  Here's how you would write up that:

"The employment of a weapon using a fission chain-reaction to generate explosive power."

That said, I'm against banning nukes.  It's like saying, 'we don't have a weapon, so we would like you to legally agree to not using it, in return for nothing.'

[andrea]

We are also forbidding things like dirty bombs. For example, dropping large quantities of radium. We want to preserve the island.

[Devastator]

We are also forbidding things like dirty bombs. For example, dropping large quantities of radium. We want to preserve the island.

Dirty bombs don't really work, though.  A salted fission device, which would, needs a chain reaction to work.  Cleaning up a chunk of radium requires a long-handled shovel and a steel drum, and takes quite a bit of effort to extract and purify.  Powder and explosive fragments would require, at worst, a week with fire hoses.

[andrea]

How do you define not working?  As in, they don't contaminate stuff?

[Devastator]

How do you define not working?  As in, they don't contaminate stuff?

They are not militarily effective.  They only work through the action of fear.

[andrea]

And the point is?  We want to ban them not for their incredibly powerful battlefield potential,  but to preserve our land in case someone decides to demoralize the other side with such weapons.