Main | About | Tutorial | FAQ | Links | Wiki | Forum | World News | World Map | World Ranking | Nations | Electoral Calendar | Party Organizations | Treaties |
Login | Register |
Game Time: March 4459
Next month in: 03:56:19
Server time: 20:03:40, September 23, 2018 CET
Currently online (10): CivilixXXX | diepotato | Gerhard Paulsen | IslingtonNorth | matix1992 | nads | PLUR | Ryouta_12 | thepromulgator | Zohius Snake | Record: 63 on 23:28:53, August 06, 2007 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: Ratification of the Telamon-Lodamun Friendship Treaty

Details

Submitted by[?]: Rightful Radical Party

Status[?]: passed

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: June 2558

Description[?]:

This bill asks for the ratification of the Telamon-Lodamun Friendship Treaty. If this treaty is ratified, it becomes binding and will define national law.

Proposals

Debate

These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:

Date22:42:53, April 02, 2008 CET
FromConservative Ordo Malleus (COM)
ToDebating the Ratification of the Telamon-Lodamun Friendship Treaty
MessageWe have concerns about the vagueness of the articles in the treaty. Additionally, was this treaty even vetted with the President and Prime Minister? Their party, the Republican Party, as co-largest party should have been consulted. Matter of fact, my party should have been consulted too as co-largest party.

We are concerned that the first article is too vague. Exactly what kind of "cooperation" is meant? Is it words of goodwill, monetary expenditures, military forces? If military forces isn't it more of a defensive alliance than simply a declaration of friendship?

We have no issue with wanting to declare non-aggression with another nation, as demonstrated by our sponsored Telamon-Likatonia Non-Aggression Pact that Parliament, in its wisdom, chose to not ratify. But, the first article is worrisome. Perhaps a restructured treaty to address that issue is at hand.
-Roger Evars, COM Party Leader

Date11:44:09, April 03, 2008 CET
FromRightful Radical Party
ToDebating the Ratification of the Telamon-Lodamun Friendship Treaty
MessageThis treaty by-all-means does not meat agression and war. It is just means the bringing together Lodamun and Telamon. I consulted the largest parties in Lodamun and we both mean that we will not make any aggression by the ratification of this bill. The Telamon-Likatonia Non-Aggression Pact didn't gain our support, because Likatonia was in those days in war with Lodamun. We could not accept the ratification of that bill because that means we are forming an alliance against Lodamun and peace with an aggressive country.
- Ljubomir Adamovic, Foreign Affairs Minister

Date14:58:22, April 03, 2008 CET
FromDemocratic Capitalist Delegation
ToDebating the Ratification of the Telamon-Lodamun Friendship Treaty
MessageWe accept this explaination of the treaty from the RRP, and we particularly favor the clauses which imply widening our involvment with wordly affairs. With our concerns addressed, we repeal our no vote and officially endorse this bill.

James Lott
Chairman
Democratic Capitalist Delegation

Date18:18:09, April 03, 2008 CET
FromRightful Radical Party
ToDebating the Ratification of the Telamon-Lodamun Friendship Treaty
MessageWe think that the DCD really deserves seats in the Parliament. Better more seats with full heads than more seats with vacant heads.
- Vojislav Krkljus, Chairman of RRP

Date21:39:13, April 03, 2008 CET
FromThe Liberal Party
ToDebating the Ratification of the Telamon-Lodamun Friendship Treaty
MessageI urge all parties in Telamon to pass this treaty. This treaty is going to be beneficial for both nations. My party, the Liberal Party, is in favor of this treaty.

President David Carter
United Republics of Lodamun

Date05:11:44, April 04, 2008 CET
FromConservative Ordo Malleus (COM)
ToDebating the Ratification of the Telamon-Lodamun Friendship Treaty
MessageActually, and this is in response to statements of Minister Adamovic, the TLNAP was a pact to declare non-aggression against the signing members. It was not, and is not, a bill to create an alliance. Please refer to the Telamonian Dictionary for the exact definitions of non-aggression and alliance. You will see there are not synonyms.

Additionally, we all need to note that a peace treaty, at the same time of the TLNAP, was sponsored by this party and that too was turned down by Parliament. We, none of us, shouldn't vote against a bill just because a party voted against your bill before. We need to vote on a bill based on its merits.

The vagueness of article 1 of this proposed treaty is troubling because it can be used to force Telamon into warfare when we are not prepared or willing to otherwise engage in war. If war comes to Telamon, Telamon must defend its citizens. But, Telamon must not seek out war.
-Roger Evars, COM Party Leader

Date18:39:14, April 07, 2008 CET
FromRightful Radical Party
ToDebating the Ratification of the Telamon-Lodamun Friendship Treaty
MessageNeither you nor I are from 'yesterday' as my folks would say, Mr Evars. We all know it wasn't an official alliance BUT Lodamun could have thought of it as an alliance, you know, the all 'Telamon makes peace with the country that attacked us', I wouldn't blame them. This is just a treaty for us to be more closer to Lodamun.
Vojislav Krkljus
Chairman of the RRP

Date01:45:08, April 08, 2008 CET
FromConservative Ordo Malleus (COM)
ToDebating the Ratification of the Telamon-Lodamun Friendship Treaty
MessageWe shall support this bill to help foster mutual friendship. But, rest assured that before any act of cooperation or assistance is given by Telamon it will be thoroughly inspected.
-Thorden Raxney

subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe

Voting

Vote Seats
yes
      

Total Seats: 348

no

    Total Seats: 0

    abstain
      

    Total Seats: 14


    Random fact: It is possible for players in a Culturally Open nation to establish a Cultural Protocol if doing so would not reduce the overall number of Culturally Open nations below 10. The Cultural Protocol bill must be passed by a 2/3rds majority of all players with seats (not just those with seats who vote), and at least 2 players with seats must support the motion, both of whom must have been currently continuously active in the nation (ie. no inactivations) for at least 1 month.

    Random quote: "When I was a boy I was told that anybody could become President; I'm beginning to believe it." Clarence Darrow

    This page was generated with PHP
    Copyright 2004-2010 Wouter Lievens
    Queries performed: 59