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: Military Enhancement and Acquisition
Details
Submitted by[?]: Saridani Progressive Alliance
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 2826
Description[?]:
| A military bill again, designed to boost the militaries equipment acquisition abilities and their roles in both deterrence and compellence. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The nation's defence industry.
Old value:: Defence industries are privately owned but subsidised by the state.
Current: The state owns national defence industries but these exist alongside privately owned defence industries.
Proposed: The state owns national defence industries but these exist alongside privately owned defence industries.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The policy with respect to nuclear weaponry.
Old value:: The nation shall never produce or store nuclear weaponry for military purposes. Research and development of the technology is permitted.
Current: The nation shall never develop or produce nuclear weaponry but is permitted to allow allied nations to use its territory to store nuclear weapons or conduct nuclear weapons research.
Proposed: The nation reserves the right to develop, produce and store nuclear arms.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 19:09:59, October 01, 2009 CET | From |  Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Military Enhancement and Acquisition |
| Message | WE STRONGLY support the right to store nuclear arms and thought it was that way already, in fact shocked it wasn't! The other one about national defense were not against so well support. |
| Date | 19:10:59, October 01, 2009 CET | From | Saridani Progressive Alliance | To | Debating the Military Enhancement and Acquisition |
| Message | Just a point people, but "Reserves the right to" means that we are merely not ruling out our maintaining a NBC Deterrent capability, it doesn't necessarily mean that we have to have if at any point in time. Personally, the SCA is in favour of Saridan maintaining a small active Virtual Nuclear Deterrent and a small stockpile of Biological and Chemical Agents, in case of emergencies, with well defended and secured facilities capable of rapid assembly of units should they be required. |
| Date | 19:16:13, October 01, 2009 CET | From | Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Military Enhancement and Acquisition |
| Message | (I have to leave now but) in a few months the LJP will review the current defense laws and may draft their own new bill for a stronger military. In the meantime the LJP gives their support to this bill as it is now. |
| Date | 19:17:55, October 01, 2009 CET | From | Saridani Progressive Alliance | To | Debating the Military Enhancement and Acquisition |
| Message | Not really sure that we can enhance our capabilities further, we're already holding a lot of cards in reserve atop of our already powerful military. |
| Date | 21:43:11, October 01, 2009 CET | From | Golemian Oligarchy Party | To | Debating the Military Enhancement and Acquisition |
| Message | Yes, during our time as praetor we would like to get all parties to agree on a bill that improves our military in every aspect. |
| Date | 21:43:22, October 01, 2009 CET | From | Golemian Oligarchy Party | To | Debating the Military Enhancement and Acquisition |
| Message | Yes, during our time as praetor we would like to get all parties to agree on a bill that improves our military in every aspect. |
| Date | 22:43:32, October 01, 2009 CET | From | Saridani Progressive Alliance | To | Debating the Military Enhancement and Acquisition |
| Message | Do you two chuckleheads even understand the concept of restraint? Or a Virtual Deterrent for that matter.... This bill makes our military about as strong as it can be... Maintaining a large and efficient NBC Deterrent actually serves in another role and ramps up hostility, in most cases causing an arms race, therefore a smaller complement for rapid reaction and the ability to in a short period deploy more is much more effective and in keeping with a stable Foreign policy, which is beneficial for the nation as a whole. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes |
Total Seats: 446 | |||
| no | Total Seats: 0 | |||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 304 |
| Random fact: In cases where players have failed to clearly and accurately reference their nation's RP laws in the "Bills under debate" section, Moderation will rule them invalid if a challenge is made to their validity. |
| Random quote: "We cannot acknowledge allegiance to any human government... Our country is the world, our countrymen are all mankind." - William Lloyd Garrison |