We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: Nuclear De-escalation Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: United Republics Party
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: November 2413
Description[?]:
| States Lodamun's intentions not to use it's nuclear aresenal as a first strike weapon. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning the use of nuclear weaponry in warfare.
Old value:: The nation reserves the right to use nuclear weapons in warfare for any reason.
Current: The nation shall never use nuclear weapons in warfare.
Proposed: The nation shall never use nuclear weapons in warfare unless another nation uses them first.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 01:00:11, June 04, 2007 CET | From | Radical Nationalist Party | To | Debating the Nuclear De-escalation Act |
| Message | Yes that is useful when we are already destroy. |
| Date | 01:31:18, June 04, 2007 CET | From | Lodamun Distributionist Party | To | Debating the Nuclear De-escalation Act |
| Message | We wish to draw the legislature's collective attention to a few facts. Namely, the combined passage of the "Legislation to Increase Lodamun's Tech Standings" (passed 2412) and the "Restructuring of the National Space Program" (currently in debate). With the increased satellite activity and the boosted space and technology industries due to these two pieces of critical legislation, there will soon be no place on Terra that a nuclear attack (such that would cause any Lodamun city to be destroyed) will be able to be launched without our immediate knowledge. It is the fervent hope of the LDP that some day in the near future Lodamun will have in place a defensive missile shield that will allow us to reduce drastically the size of our fund-draining nuclear intercontinental ballistic missile program. It is with this in mind that we support this bill. |
| Date | 01:43:04, June 04, 2007 CET | From | Free Lodamun | To | Debating the Nuclear De-escalation Act |
| Message | Do we have one now? no? then why the suicidal PUBLIC legislation. this puts us in danger. Our arms are a deterent, this is well known. Let's not go crazy here. This is already our unnofficial policy, why announce to the world that we're willing to be attacked first. as a civilized nation of course we'll only attack if we;re attacked first, but the threat must remian. |
| Date | 01:52:20, June 04, 2007 CET | From | Lodamun Distributionist Party | To | Debating the Nuclear De-escalation Act |
| Message | Then it is that much more important to pass "Restructuring of the National Space Program." |
| Date | 04:57:41, June 04, 2007 CET | From | Free Lodamun | To | Debating the Nuclear De-escalation Act |
| Message | Despite my unyeilding and original support of your space bill, I find your strong-arm tactics despicable. Let me see if i've got this right: You want to cripple our foreign policy by taking away our ability to pre-emptive strike. You want to do this immediately. In order to compensate for this, you want a missle shield (an excellent idea that i'm %100 for) that won't be comleted for, bear minimum, 5-10 years. I'm not a mathematician, but it seems to be this leaves us vulnerable for 5-10 years. We can change policy, that's fine. But let's be patient and not jump the gun. Let's finish our missle shield first, it only makes sense. |
| Date | 21:10:51, June 04, 2007 CET | From | Free Lodamun | To | Debating the Nuclear De-escalation Act |
| Message | et tu moderates? Fine. Perhaps the next Bill from the LDP can include legislation to help fund private fall-out shelters and draft apology letters to the families of our future dead. This is a mistake of the highest possible caliber. The 5 Kingdoms have entrusted us with their safety and we're abandoning them with this issue. |
| Date | 01:00:54, June 06, 2007 CET | From | Independent Republican Party | To | Debating the Nuclear De-escalation Act |
| Message | If our nation uses nuclear weapons first in war, the victimized nation will surely retalliate causing Mutually Assured Destruction. Why would we even do that if the other nation had nuclear weapons? If we dropped a nuke first, we'd still end up being screwed. Nukes should only be used for defense and not for aggressive purposes. Passage of this bill won't leave us vulnerable since we will still be able to use nuclear weapons in defense. |
| Date | 03:17:29, June 06, 2007 CET | From | Free Lodamun | To | Debating the Nuclear De-escalation Act |
| Message | As I stated above, no rational person wants war with nukes. No rational purpose WANTS to use them, let alone to use them first. The 5 Kingdoms' policy since we adopted this first strike policy has been to publically announce that we CAN use them first. But we haven't. Not even once. We can't take this option off the table and we certainly can't do it out in the open like this. By discussing this in committe and passing this legislation, we're telling our enemies we're vulnerable. For instance, we put an awful lot of money into our intellegence services. Let's say we're told by them that a nation has every intention of nuking us. If we keep our current policy, we hit them first, destroying thier ability to hit us back. The alternative is wait until we're hit, then react. ALSO leading to mutually assured destruction. MAD is a worst case scenario no matter what policy we have but by specifically reacting, we lower our own survival chances. Look, nuclear weapons are evil, if there was a way to get rid of them forver, I'd be all for it. But the fact remains that we live in a hostile world, a world where nutjobs can gain control of a nuclear arsonal. We simply can't hamstring ourselves by saying we won't strike first. At least if we hit them first, we have a chance to survive, by reacting our chances diminish. |
| Date | 09:57:13, June 08, 2007 CET | From | United Republics Party | To | Debating the Nuclear De-escalation Act |
| Message | FL: "At least if we hit them first, we have a chance to survive, by reacting our chances diminish." A scary comment. A nuclear war must never be fought. |
| Date | 17:14:48, June 08, 2007 CET | From | Free Lodamun | To | Debating the Nuclear De-escalation Act |
| Message | FL: "no rational person wants war with nukes... we live in a hostile world, a world where nutjobs can gain control of a nuclear arsonal." Obviously a war shouldn't be fought. Nuclear war isn't good for anyone, but don't we want to be on the side with the greatest chance of survival? This policy isn't about starting a nuclear war, this policy is about survival. If we react after being attacked, we may as well not attack at all and save our attakcer's civilians. Not only will retaliation be expected, it will be prepared for. |
| Date | 21:02:01, June 09, 2007 CET | From | United Republics Party | To | Debating the Nuclear De-escalation Act |
| Message | Once again it seems that the MRP is the only party willing to act in Lodamun's best interest. The URP thanks them for their vote in reducing the likelihood of provoking a nuclear exchange. |
| Date | 14:32:05, June 13, 2007 CET | From | Lodamun Liberal-Conservative Party | To | Debating the Nuclear De-escalation Act |
| Message | We do not want to limit the capabilities of our defense with unnessicary, legally binding bureaucratic red-tape. Even if we do not intend to use nuclear weapons before an enemy in the circumstance of war, it is important that we have that capability available legally, so as not to restrict ourselves. Enemies may see such legally binding legislation on weaponry as a sign of weakness, essentially positioning us as an easy target. We cannot support for the afore mentioned reasons. |
| Date | 20:22:03, June 13, 2007 CET | From | United Republics Party | To | Debating the Nuclear De-escalation Act |
| Message | I cannot believe so many parties have taken a position which threatens peace. |
| Date | 04:54:11, June 14, 2007 CET | From | New Democratic Party | To | Debating the Nuclear De-escalation Act |
| Message | Agreed. Nuclear proliferation must be stopped by slow, incremental steps. Let the United Kingdoms set the good example worldwide by taking this first step. We must also be prudent in updating our technological and tactical defenses. Perhaps we should look to our Space Program, but looking to weapons of mass destruction as a first line attack or defense is to turn our backs on progress. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes | Total Seats: 349 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 216 | ||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 34 |
| Random fact: Information about the population of each country can be found on the Population Information thread: http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=8663 |
| Random quote: "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting that vote." - Unknown |