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: Full Defense Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Plinio's United Followers
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: February 2093
Description[?]:
War is very expensive for our country and should be avoided at all cost. But if we ever get attacked, let us not fight with one hand tied behind our hands. This does not neccesarily mean that we will destroy everything, but lets not tie ourselves with our own laws. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning the use of chemical and biological weaponry in warfare.
Old value:: The nation shall never use chemical or biological weapons in warfare unless another nation uses them first.
Current: The nation shall never use chemical or biological weapons in warfare unless another nation uses them first.
Proposed: The nation reserves the right to use chemical or biological weapons in warfare for any reason.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning the use of nuclear weaponry in warfare.
Old value:: The nation shall never use nuclear weapons in warfare unless another nation uses them first.
Current: The nation shall never use nuclear weapons in warfare unless another nation uses them first.
Proposed: The nation reserves the right to use nuclear weapons in warfare for any reason.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
Date | 02:19:39, August 06, 2005 CET | From | Fantastic Party | To | Debating the Full Defense Act |
Message | Yes, wonder when this changed. |
Date | 07:10:15, August 06, 2005 CET | From | Mordusian Inclusion Party | To | Debating the Full Defense Act |
Message | These were added recently, I think. |
Date | 11:27:13, August 06, 2005 CET | From | Millennial Salvation Front | To | Debating the Full Defense Act |
Message | If we abandon the first strike policy, then we also abandon the moral high ground. This is a dangerous proposal. |
Date | 11:59:27, August 06, 2005 CET | From | Plinio's United Followers | To | Debating the Full Defense Act |
Message | The idea of this bill is mainly to avoid wars altogether. We should not get into any war period. With this bill it will deter other countries from attacking us in a bunch of costly minor limited wars that will bleed us dry to death. We simply dont take war as a game. |
Date | 12:20:53, August 06, 2005 CET | From | Plinio's United Followers | To | Debating the Full Defense Act |
Message | OOC: I usually review the "law sticky" thread in the forum to view what changes have been done recently. |
Date | 23:13:57, August 06, 2005 CET | From | Millennial Salvation Front | To | Debating the Full Defense Act |
Message | Abandoning the first strike policy could lead to other nations doing the same, meaning that any conflict will become more likelier to turn nuclear. Another absurd proposal from the IMA. |
Date | 02:02:17, August 07, 2005 CET | From | Plinio's United Followers | To | Debating the Full Defense Act |
Message | There should not be any conflict in the same place period. This is a message to the other nations that we are not joking around and that they should not mess with ours. Our goverment is mainly isolationist so there is no reason for us to get into any pety squabbles with other goverments. |
Date | 03:33:04, August 07, 2005 CET | From | Millennial Salvation Front | To | Debating the Full Defense Act |
Message | Yet this bill runs counter to our isolationist stance, at it makes our state look aggressive and unstable. If we are to use WMDs only in our defense, then why state openly that we could also use them on the offense? The no first strike policy is a good policy, and a moral policy. Open advocacy of the offensive use of WMDs is the reserve of tinpot dictatorships and failed states, and has no place in Mordusia. |
Date | 07:01:19, August 07, 2005 CET | From | Mordusian Inclusion Party | To | Debating the Full Defense Act |
Message | Excellent point, MSF. I agree with you on this issue. |
Date | 22:32:01, August 07, 2005 CET | From | Plinio's United Followers | To | Debating the Full Defense Act |
Message | But a country may decide to attack us on a conventional war with the security that we wont use any nuclear weapons then. Then we will have half of our weapons rendered unusable while a non nuclear country can concentrate their whole budget on conventional weapons. We will be fighting with a hand tied behind our backs, and we will be saying "its ok to attack us as long as you dont use nuclear weapons". |
Date | 05:35:35, August 08, 2005 CET | From | Millennial Salvation Front | To | Debating the Full Defense Act |
Message | Huh? Are you advocating that nuclear weapons should be used in a conventional war? Nuking our enemies during a conventional war would surely force them to nuke us back. It would be better not to provoke our potential enemies, by adopting your policy of slinging nuclear warheads if they look at us funny. |
Date | 12:49:09, August 08, 2005 CET | From | Plinio's United Followers | To | Debating the Full Defense Act |
Message | Nope, Im saying we shouldnt get in a conventional war in the first place. Besides, some of our tactical nuclear weapons are designed to hit submarines and to block passages, not every attack has to be on a civilian capitol. Anyway, all has been said, moving to a vote before the end of term. |
Date | 18:37:22, August 08, 2005 CET | From | Millennial Salvation Front | To | Debating the Full Defense Act |
Message | A nuclear strike, even on a submarine, would cause an enemy state to hit us back. And if you do not want to get into conventional wars, then you do not give your potential enemies any excuses to attack. Our potential adversaries could use our abandonment of the first strike policy as justification to invade, before we let loose our arsenal of WMDs. That is not the public image Mordusia should have. Vote no. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
Vote | Seats | ||||
yes |
Total Seats: 113 | ||||
no | Total Seats: 140 | ||||
abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
Random fact: Whilst the use of non-English languages can be appropriate for nation names, party names, constitutional titles and other variables, English is the official language of communication in the game. All descriptive texts and public communications should be in English or at least appear alongside a full English translation. |
Random quote: "Capitalism and communism stand at opposite poles. Their essential difference is this: the communist, seeing the rich man and his fine home, says: 'No man should have so much.' The capitalist, seeing the same thing, says: 'All men should have as much.'" - Phelps Adams |