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: Defensive Nuclear Policy
Details
Submitted by[?]: Tuesday Is Coming
Status[?]: defeated
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: January 2092
Description[?]:
| The Independent Republic Of Lodamun shall develop and retain a nuclear deterrent. This deterrent shall, hopefully, never be used, and shall be prohibited from use, unless another nation has previously used nuclear arms against citizens of Lodamun. Our policy shall remain: "The nation shall never use nuclear weapons in warfare unless another nation uses them first" However, we shall, from this point forward, retain the right to produce, possess, and retain them. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The policy with respect to nuclear weaponry.
Old value:: The nation shall never develop, produce or store nuclear weaponry.
Current: The nation shall never produce or store nuclear weaponry for military purposes. Research and development of the technology is permitted.
Proposed: The nation reserves the right to develop, produce and store nuclear arms.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 16:16:11, August 05, 2005 CET | From | Adam Smith Party | To | Debating the Defensive Nuclear Policy |
| Message | We assume that we are rejecting the first strike possibility as we are a peaceful nation. |
| Date | 17:40:10, August 05, 2005 CET | From |  Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Defensive Nuclear Policy |
| Message | "We assume that we are rejecting the first strike possibility as we are a peaceful nation." This is why we include the following in the bill: "Our policy shall remain: "The nation shall never use nuclear weapons in warfare unless another nation uses them first" However, we shall, from this point forward, retain the right to produce, possess, and retain them." If our policy with regard to the above were different, it would have been included as a proposal. |
| Date | 17:43:57, August 05, 2005 CET | From | Adam Smith Party | To | Debating the Defensive Nuclear Policy |
| Message | ((Just emphasising the popint)) |
| Date | 22:31:59, August 05, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Defensive Nuclear Policy |
| Message | ((just confirming your assumption ;-) )) |
| Date | 00:10:04, August 06, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Defensive Nuclear Policy |
| Message | No objections from green advantage? |
| Date | 00:22:00, August 06, 2005 CET | From | Cooperative Commonwealth Federation | To | Debating the Defensive Nuclear Policy |
| Message | obviously we object to reserving any rights to develop nuclear weapons. |
| Date | 00:35:02, August 06, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Defensive Nuclear Policy |
| Message | You would have Lodamun completely disarmed and at the mercy of foreign states? Instead of retaining a nuke or few for purely defensive reasons(restricted to this by law)? "In a political context, freedom has only one meaning -- freedom from the initiation of force by other men. Only by the initiation of force can a man be: prevented from speaking, or robbed of his possessions, or brutally murdered. Only by the initiation of force can a man's rights be violated. Only the initiation of force against a man can stop his mind, thus rendering it useless as a means of survival. It is for this reason -- that force renders a man's mind useless -- that every man has the right to self-defense -- the right to use force to retaliate against those who first start the use of force, but never may one morally initiate it. The use of force, in and of itself, is not evil; but, to initiate (start) force is evil. To use force in retaliation -- in self- defense against those who initiate it -- is not a moral option, but a moral requirement. A moral man has nothing to gain when a man tries to kill him, but he has much to lose if he does not defend himself. For this reason it is right, just, and proper to use force in retaliation and self-defense. Contrary to the vile doctrines of the pacifists, force used in self-defense is a species of the good." |
| Date | 00:44:45, August 06, 2005 CET | From | Cooperative Commonwealth Federation | To | Debating the Defensive Nuclear Policy |
| Message | you can't be surprised that the Greens are opposed to any form of nuclear weapon for any reason, it has been our policy for a long time. The philosophy about the right to self-defence is not relevant, since we do not believe nuclear arms have any defensive function. |
| Date | 07:57:17, August 06, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Defensive Nuclear Policy |
| Message | Except that people will hesitate to hit someone who can obliterate them.... |
| Date | 07:59:06, August 06, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Defensive Nuclear Policy |
| Message | Surely you dont disagree with that... When was the last time you saw an on-duty, armed, police officer get mugged? The thief would prefer a...different kind of victim. |
| Date | 15:24:03, August 06, 2005 CET | From | National People's Gang | To | Debating the Defensive Nuclear Policy |
| Message | The Officer Down Memorial Page, Inc., (ODMP) is a non-profit organization dedicated to honoring America's fallen law enforcement heroes. Year-to-date Total Line of Duty Deaths: 81 Aircraft accident: 2 Automobile accident: 16 Drowned: 1 Duty related illness: 1 Gunfire: 32 Gunfire (Accidental): 4 Heart attack: 10 Motorcycle accident: 1 Stabbed: 1 Struck by vehicle: 4 Training accident: 1 Vehicular assault: 6 Vehicle pursuit: 2 http://www.odmp.org/search.php?searching=1&yearfrom=2005&yearto=2005&cause=19 |
| Date | 21:09:14, August 06, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Defensive Nuclear Policy |
| Message | I am aware of that. But how often does a thief pick out a fully armed victim? That some officers die in the line of duty wasnt the point. That a police officer, or anyone with an obvious ability to fight back is a rare victim of crime, that was the point. What is the year to date total number of crime related deaths in the US? Police would be a minority. |
| Date | 16:39:47, August 07, 2005 CET | From | National People's Gang | To | Debating the Defensive Nuclear Policy |
| Message | Hey, it was your analogy, we just gave you the figures. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 200 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 233 | ||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 17 |
| Random fact: In cases where a party has no seat, the default presumption should be that the party is able to contribute to debates in the legislature due to one of its members winning a seat at a by-election. However, players may collectively improvise arrangements of their own to provide a satisfying explanation for how parties with no seats in the legislature can speak and vote there. |
| Random quote: "The strength of a nation derives from the integrity of the home." - Confucius |