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: Ratification of the Telamon Mutual Defense Pact
Details
Submitted by[?]: Conservative Ordo Malleus (COM)
Status[?]: defeated
Votes: This bill proposes for the ratification of a treaty. It will require two-thirds of the legislature to vote in favor[?]. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: July 2550
Description[?]:
| This bill asks for the ratification of the <a href="viewtreaty.php?treatyid=962">Telamon Mutual Defense Pact</a>. If this treaty is ratified, it becomes binding and will define national law. This is a modified and updated version of the Anti-Likatonia Defensive Treaty. We will be asking the nations from the Anti-Likatonia Defensive Treaty to ratify the Telamon Mutual Defense Pact instead of the Anti-Likatonia Defensive Treaty. |
Proposals
Article 1
Ratify the Telamon Mutual Defense Pact.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 19:31:07, March 23, 2008 CET | From | Conservative Ordo Malleus (COM) | To | Debating the Ratification of the Telamon Mutual Defense Pact |
| Message | It appears that the United Republics of Lodamon will be ratifying this defensive pact. I am curious as to how the RP and RRP can favor the Anti-Likatonia Defense Treaty yet object to the Telamon Mutual Defense Pact. They are both the same with one small difference. The TMDP provides Telamon with the option of sending help to other members if it is able and willing to do so. This ensures that we do not become embroiled in a war that we are not capable to participate in. We must ensure that Telamon's defenses remain strong and there are other forms of assistance besides military force. This pact addresses all avenues while keeping the power in our Parliament. I ask that those who oppose this pact rethink this treaty. It is beneficial to all signatories. Do not hesitate to voice what you wished modified so that your party can support a revised pact. -President Thorden Raxney Jr. |
| Date | 20:11:53, March 23, 2008 CET | From | Rightful Radical Party | To | Debating the Ratification of the Telamon Mutual Defense Pact |
| Message | And why my dear friends did you vote 'NO' on the only legislation that needs to be brought? Our block doesn't think that more interference is necessary. - Vojislav Krkljus, Chairman of the RRP |
| Date | 00:41:05, March 24, 2008 CET | From | Conservative Ordo Malleus (COM) | To | Debating the Ratification of the Telamon Mutual Defense Pact |
| Message | Unfortunately I am confused by your statement. Of what legislation do you refer? What interference do you mean? Do you refer to the Anti-Likatonia Defense Treaty? If so you can see that treaty mandates action by all signatories, even if it means their destruction. Whereas the TMDP lets each signatory make the choice. If, for example, Telamon cannot afford to send forces abroad then Telamon can choose not to. If, however, Telamon is in a better position then it may send those forces. The TMDP keeps the decision in each nation's legislature to ensure that each nation doesn't cause its ruination. Consider this, what if a minor border skirmish exists. If the ALDT is ratified Telamon becomes mandated to enter war over a border dispute. Such a skirmish can easily be rectified by the existing participants without Telamon's inclusion. If Telamon has internal problems while that skirmish exists we have to make a choice. Break the treaty and deal with our own problems. Or, send help and let Telamon fall to pieces. I think the choice is clear. When we form a treaty our word is our bond. As such, we must only form bonds that we intend to honor and are capable of honoring. It is important to help our neighbors, and for them to help us, but only when we are able to do so. The Telamon Mutual Defense Pact puts this in writing. I must add that Lodamon will soon ratify this pact. If they have no problem with its terms then why do we when this pact greatly benefits us? -President Thorden Raxney Jr. |
| Date | 18:24:30, March 24, 2008 CET | From | Rightful Radical Party | To | Debating the Ratification of the Telamon Mutual Defense Pact |
| Message | That is your opinion Mr Raxney (or do you prefer the prefix Jr.?). Our opinion that any legislation different from the piece we proposed is unnecessary. - Voja Krkljus, RRP |
| Date | 23:18:06, March 24, 2008 CET | From | Conservative Ordo Malleus (COM) | To | Debating the Ratification of the Telamon Mutual Defense Pact |
| Message | Sir, when you address me you address the office of the President of Telamon. Please show the office respect, even if you hold none for me, and address me as Mr. President or President Raxney. I hope you agree that we all love Telamon and owe her our respect. -President Thorden Raxney Jr. |
| Date | 13:48:04, March 25, 2008 CET | From | Rightful Radical Party | To | Debating the Ratification of the Telamon Mutual Defense Pact |
| Message | Oh, no, no, no, I didn't mean to offend you Mr Raxney but I do not want to address you as the President because you already know that you are the President. I don't ask the same for my functionaries. - Vojislav Krkljus, the RRP |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes | Total Seats: 99 | |||
| no |
Total Seats: 107 | |||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Periodically, it is a good idea to go through your nation's Treaties and arrange to withdraw from any that are unwanted. |
| Random quote: "A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government." - George Washington |