Main | About | Tutorial | FAQ | Links | Wiki | Forum | World News | World Map | World Ranking | Nations | Electoral Calendar | Party Organizations | Treaties |
Login | Register |
Game Time: June 5461
Next month in: 02:00:25
Server time: 13:59:34, March 29, 2024 CET
Currently online (1): HopesFor | Record: 63 on 23:13:00, July 26, 2019 CET

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: Put Things Right 1: International Respect

Details

Submitted by[?]: National Forwardist Party

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 2108

Description[?]:

In an attempt to promote our national standing on an international level, the following is proposed.

It will gain us an international trust that the current legislation denies us.

Proposals

Debate

These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:

Date20:33:08, September 07, 2005 CET
FromSocial Calvinist Unionist Party
ToDebating the Put Things Right 1: International Respect
MessageI'm afraid I cannot agree with you.

Example: Let's say some tyrannical dictatorship comes to power in another country, and starts to invade other countries, and nuking them if they take too long to take down. What is to stop them from invading us? If we have nukes, then we have the "stick". Our crack Department of State will be the "carrot". If we find a balance, we will be stronger than before.

Also, isn't there an option that says we'll only use the nukes if we get nuked first?

Date20:53:41, September 07, 2005 CET
FromCovenanters (IA)
ToDebating the Put Things Right 1: International Respect
MessageYes but it would weaken deterrence and mean we can be defeated by a large conventional force and do nothing about it when we could just nuked them.

Date02:13:34, September 08, 2005 CET
FromNational Forwardist Party
ToDebating the Put Things Right 1: International Respect
Messagei do not see the correlation between slaughtering millions of innocent civilians and expelling foriegn invaders from our land.

Date11:23:38, September 08, 2005 CET
FromLuthori Green Party
ToDebating the Put Things Right 1: International Respect
MessageProperly equipped and trained conventional forces are preferable to WMDs. An elite armed forces backing a crack diplomatic corp is what I want.

Anti-ballistic missiles are cheaper and more effective than WMDs in defending ourselves against nuclear attacks.

Date13:54:37, September 08, 2005 CET
FromSocial Calvinist Unionist Party
ToDebating the Put Things Right 1: International Respect
MessageWhen we bring the fight back to the enemy, would you rather MILLIONS get slaughtered in an all-out invasion, or we just kill around 100 thousand(which is ahorrendous number, I know, but nothing compared to millions) and bring a war to it's end?


Date19:05:01, September 08, 2005 CET
FromNational Forwardist Party
ToDebating the Put Things Right 1: International Respect
Messagewho says it would bring the war to an end?

it worked that way once, but only because it was so new, so unexpected, and japan didn't have their own.

in this day and age, nuking an enemy city will not end a war, it will just get a nuke dropped on us.

Date22:44:02, September 08, 2005 CET
FromCovenanters (IA)
ToDebating the Put Things Right 1: International Respect
MessageI DO NOT advocate the use of strategic nuclear weapons against civilian targets such as population centres.

We will maintain a strategic nuclear DETERRENT and use tactical, theatre and sub-strategic weaponry against enemy military forces in order to save us from defeat or save the lives of our servicemen and civilians.

subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe

Voting

Vote Seats
yes
   

Total Seats: 156

no
   

Total Seats: 493

abstain
  

Total Seats: 101


Random fact: In Culturally Protected nations, it is the responsibility of players to ensure the candidate boxes on their Party Overview screens are filled in with appropriate names. If a player is allotted seats in a Cabinet bill and has not filled in names for the relevant candidate position, then the program will automatically fill in the positions with names which might not necessarily be appropriate for the Cultural Protocols.

Random quote: "He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from opposition; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach himself." - Thomas Paine

This page was generated with PHP
Copyright 2004-2010 Wouter Lievens
Queries performed: 68