SENATE BILL: No Unilateral Disarmament Act (Tabled)

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

No Unilateral Disarmament Act
-The President- or any one on his behalf- may not order a reduction in our nuclear arsenal without the approval by the Senate of a treaty which specifies equivalent proportional reductions in the nuclear arsenals of another nuclear-weapon state

Sponsor: Clarence

[Senator Clarence]

I believe this is fairly simple and agreeable- disarming our arsenals is a fine goal to have but we can't weaken ourselves relative to other nations. The President announced a reduction in our arsenal before he reached an agreement with Russia or China- that is a travesty

[Senator Ben]

Senator, I find that this legislation is, frankly, not necessary.  The President's announcement is not particularly extreme; if anything, it is mild compared with previous decisions.  I have never found it important to have an outsized nuclear arsenal, especially given how potent a few weapons can be.  The President has mentioned working towards agreements with Russia and China, negotiations which I am also a part of, and I can assure you, there is nothing to worry about.

[Senator Sbane]

I'm with Ben here. Even drastically reducing our nuclear warheads would still leave us with the capability to respond if we were to be struck ourselves.

[Secretary Polnut]

I respect the Senator's position, however to suggest that the President would act in a way that would actively engage in an activity that would weaken our country is a little offensive.

[Senator Clarence]

I want to say that I do not believe Polnut or any one else is intentionally aiming to weaken our nation... I respect Ben's point of view especially seeing his opinion on other military issues. I want to add that I do not know the details of the fantasy budget- are we gutting the military on here as well or is the military budget staying put?

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Any such "gutting" probably already occured back in 2006 or 2007 on here.


Are we ready for a final vote here?

[ilikeverin]

I disagree with this bill - though I see what it's trying to do, I sincerely do not understand what the purpose of having so many nuclear weapons is.  I have no idea what the Atlasian state of affairs is as far as nukes go, but I think it's simply ridiculous that the fictional nation of the United States of America from that very famous fictional book series should have so many nuclear weapons.

[Comrade Shmoo]

I disagree with this bill - though I see what it's trying to do, I sincerely do not understand what the purpose of having so many nuclear weapons is.  I have no idea what the Atlasian state of affairs is as far as nukes go, but I think it's simply ridiculous that the fictional nation of the United States of America from that very famous fictional book series should have so many nuclear weapons.

Agreed. We have enough nukes to take over the world right now, power a rocket to Mars, and then take that over too.

Maybe not that many, but you get Ilikeverin's point.

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

CLARENCE!!!!

[Senator Clarence]

Yes???

I will withdraw this bill if I can- I believe the sentiment but Ben and Polnut have reassured me

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I was asking if you were done so we could move to a final vote.


So you want to withdraw it? (clarification)

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Withdrawal takes 72 hours. You have give the other Senators that long to assume sponsorship.

We could probably table it faster.

[Senator Clarence]

I move to table then- that also gives the option to bring it back up so may be better

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Seconded (Did we past that requirement, oh well just to be safe).



A vote is now open on the motion to table this bill, please vote Aye, Nay or Abstain.

[Senator Clarence]

Aye

[Governor Scott]

Aye.

I deeply care about having a strong defense, but as others said, I don't think this is necessary because the President's decision doesn't weaken us just because it reduces nuclear weapons.

[TJ in Wisco]

Aye

[Senator Sbane]

Aye

[ilikeverin]

Yup

[asexual trans victimologist]

Aye.

We could cut our nuclear arsenal by well, well over half and it would still be an effective deterrent by nature of how nukes work and how very many we have.

[Comrade Shmoo]

Aye.

We could cut our nuclear arsenal by well, well over half and it would still be an effective deterrent by nature of how nukes work and how very many we have.

Aye.

Everyone always makes my arguments before me!

[pillage the village, trash the scene]

Aye

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Aye

Vote on Motion to Table:

Aye (9): Alfred F. Jones, Clarence, ILV, Nathan, NC Yankee, Pingvin, Sbane, Scott, and TJ in Cleve
Nay (0):
Abstain (0):

Didn't Vote (1): MoPolitico

With eight votes in the affirmative, the "No Unilateral Disarmament Act" has been tabled.