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: Chemical and biological weaponry
Details
Submitted by[?]: Christian Democrat Party
Status[?]: passed
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: December 2709
Description[?]:
| We believe chemical and biological weaponry is a disgusting form of warfare. They cause unnecessary pain, suffering and deaths that could be avoided. If our nation participates in wars, we must be making sure we gain victory with as little deaths caused as possible - using these types of weapons is not the way to go about doing this. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning biological and chemical weaponry.
Old value:: The nation reserves the right to develop, construct and store biological and chemical weapons.
Current: The nation reserves the right to develop, construct and store biological and chemical weapons.
Proposed: The nation shall never develop, purchase or store biological or chemical weaponry.
Article 2
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 reserves the right to use chemical or biological weapons in warfare for any reason.
Proposed: The nation shall never use chemical or biological weaponry in warfare.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 13:44:26, February 07, 2009 CET | From | TW@ | To | Debating the Chemical and biological weaponry |
| Message | but you still think that it is good to use nuclear weapons, which kill MORE people under any circumstances. You seem to be contradicting yourselves here... |
| Date | 14:22:08, February 08, 2009 CET | From | Christian Democrat Party | To | Debating the Chemical and biological weaponry |
| Message | Your arguments are completely ungrounded. Show me the evidence that I think as you say "it is good to use nuclear weapons". I have never made such a statement and I never will. It is also a totally irrelevant point - even if I did think it is "good" to use nuclear weapons, this bill does not include anything at all about them - so what is the point of mentioning them at all. If you agree that chemical and biological weapons should not be used - vote for this bill, if not don't vote for it. Even if you believe I am contradicting myself - why does it matter? Consider the bill at present - not anything else. |
| Date | 16:14:04, February 08, 2009 CET | From | United Workers | To | Debating the Chemical and biological weaponry |
| Message | what so you suggest that we nuke the place as apposed to using bio warfare? don't you think that the bio warfare allowes us to salvage something from the war zone? in the interest of Our Nation, we believe that the use of bio warfare is critical for the wars that the country shall fight in the future |
| Date | 18:21:47, February 08, 2009 CET | From | Neo Kanist Rite Party of Sorbanika | To | Debating the Chemical and biological weaponry |
| Message | The TW@ party and the SDOL party seem to be taking this out of context. The fact that the CDP states that nuclear weapons should only be used in retaliation to a nuclear strike and that bio/chemical weapons should not be used does not mean that they support a policy of tactically bombing targets using nuclear weapons as a preferred means of attack. They have clearly stated that they do not want to use nuclear weapons unless we are victim to a nuclear attack, they are not neccesarily suggesting "that we nuke the place as apposed (sic) to using bio warfare" as the SDOL states, in practice it would be a fairly difficult move to retaliate to a nuclear attack with bological and chemical weapons if this is an alternative that you propose. The NKRP are pro-military, we always have been and we always will be, but this doesn't mean that we support the use of chemical and biological weapons. We believe that they are a cowardly tool of war which cause unneccessary civilian death, and whilst other parties may point out the fact that nuclear weapons also cause unneccessary civilian death we would like to state our beliefs on the matter. "We believe that a world without nuclear weapons would be ideal, but whilst there are still nuclear weapons in the hands of other nations, some of which may be considered as being irresponisible, we believe that the Ascendant Union of Greater Likatonia should keep a nuclear arsenal primarily to act as a deterant and secondarily to use against any nations which launch a tactical nuclear strike on our nation"- NKRP Party Manifesto. You may say that the same applies for chemical and biological weapons but we believe it does not, these weapons are not a worthy deterant, they are unneccessary and have no place in our armed forces. We also believe that the TW@ party will vote yes on this bill, and may decide to put more effort into their own arguments than they do trying to shoot down those of the CDP. We hope that all other parties vote honestly on this bill. The NKRP will be voting yes. |
| Date | 22:33:03, February 08, 2009 CET | From | TW@ | To | Debating the Chemical and biological weaponry |
| Message | The evidence is all in this bill http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=238734 |
| Date | 22:43:41, February 08, 2009 CET | From | Christian Democrat Party | To | Debating the Chemical and biological weaponry |
| Message | Unfortunately, twat, there is no evidence in that bill whatsoever. I voted against that bill as I believed that the proposal would mean the detonation of nuclear weapons to be more likely, as I stated in my comments on the bill. I would suggest that you read the comments more clearly in the future. Other parties, e.g. the NKRP, also voted against the bill on these grounds. You're difficulty in understanding that reasoning was what lead to the weakness of your arguments for that bill. Therefore, you can argue against my belief that the proposal would increase the likelihood of nuclear weapon use, but you cannot argue that I support the use of nuclear weapons - quite the contrary in fact. |
| Date | 22:47:25, February 08, 2009 CET | From | Christian Democrat Party | To | Debating the Chemical and biological weaponry |
| Message | And why twat have you voted against this bill - please state your reasons. Is it simply because I voted against your nuclear weapon bill that you are trying to gain revenge?? You are not thinking of the good of our nation at all. Banning chemical and biological weaponry will not at all effect the likelihood of nuclear weapon use - and as that is the only argument you have given on this page, I struggle to understand the reason for this vote. Please explain your support for these types of weapons. |
| Date | 18:57:39, February 09, 2009 CET | From | Christian Democrat Party | To | Debating the Chemical and biological weaponry |
| Message | We love you Coalition of the Willing - all is forgiven :) |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 379 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 287 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Treaties will be eligible for deletion if they are more than 50 in-game years old and have no currently ratified members. |
| Random quote: "When there's a single thief, it's robbery. When there are a thousand thieves, it's taxation. " -Vanya Cohen |