Main | About | Tutorial | FAQ | Links | Wiki | Forum | World News | World Map | World Ranking | Nations | Electoral Calendar | Party Organizations | Treaties |
Login | Register |
Game Time: January 5475
Next month in: 00:26:29
Server time: 19:33:30, April 25, 2024 CET
Currently online (6): AethanKal | albaniansunited | HopesFor | Paulo Nogueira | RogueALD | VojmatDun | 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: Reduction of Military Spending Act

Details

Submitted by[?]: Working People's Alliance (Allaway)

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: November 2742

Description[?]:

-

Proposals

Debate

These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:

Date03:00:59, April 16, 2009 CET
FromRossiterian Conservative Party
ToDebating the Reduction of Military Spending Act
MessageArticles 1 & 2- I think its in our best interest to retain nuclear weapons as a deterrent.

Articles 3 & 4- I agree that we should move away from the use of chemical and biological weapons

Article 5- I would approve of "All adults upon completion of schooling can be required in times of war to serve a term in the military" This would be as a last resort

Date22:15:13, April 16, 2009 CET
FromPeople's Populist Party - Zogist Mafia
ToDebating the Reduction of Military Spending Act
MessageThis is an appttempt to betray Beluzia to the foreign menace!!!

Date22:39:08, April 16, 2009 CET
FromFree Liberal Party
ToDebating the Reduction of Military Spending Act
MessageWe will support articles 1 & 2. We would support article 3 if it was changed to what the RCP suggest. The other articles we feel we must keep as is.

Date22:59:00, April 16, 2009 CET
FromWorking People's Alliance (Allaway)
ToDebating the Reduction of Military Spending Act
MessageI'll make these adjustments just now then. From our point of view it's better to get something progressive through than nothing at all.

Date06:29:18, April 17, 2009 CET
FromBeluzian Defense and Federalist Party
ToDebating the Reduction of Military Spending Act
MessageWe need nukes to prevent bio/chem weapons from being used.

Bio/Chem should be kept around for research, but not for a military purpose. Think about it: if we dont store it for testing, we can never really make sure our gas masks work or not. Going into combat with crappy equipment is silly. Using these weapons is wrong, but whats wrong with research?

Draft: in a war yes. Otherwise no.

Bottom line: Article One makes me vote no on an otherwise acceptable bill. Dont hinder our military...

Date02:23:25, April 18, 2009 CET
FromWorking People's Alliance (Allaway)
ToDebating the Reduction of Military Spending Act
MessagePoisonous gases can easily be replaced in testing and training with harmless substitutes such as laughing gas.

subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe

Voting

Vote Seats
yes
    

Total Seats: 295

no
 

Total Seats: 177

abstain
  

Total Seats: 278


Random fact: Particracy does not allow role-play that seems to belong to the world of fantasy, science fiction and futuristic speculation.

Random quote: "The 20th century has been characterised by three developments of great political importance: the growth of democracy, the growth of corporate power; and the growth of corporate propaganda against democracy." - Alex Carey

This page was generated with PHP
Copyright 2004-2010 Wouter Lievens
Queries performed: 77