Main | About | Tutorial | FAQ | Links | Wiki | Forum | World News | World Map | World Ranking | Nations | Electoral Calendar | Party Organizations | Treaties |
Login | Register |
Game Time: December 5502
Next month in: 03:11:08
Server time: 12:48:51, June 22, 2024 CET
Currently online (2): Caoimhean | MrFacts | 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: Military Bill (2134)

Details

Submitted by[?]: Deltarian Nationalist Party

Status[?]: defeated

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: January 2136

Description[?]:

This bill is to strengthen our nation and our allies. We have no need to trade arms with anyone other than our close allies. By reserving the right to construct nuclear weapons we can have a strong deterant to any nation aggressive to ours.

Proposals

Debate

These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:

Date10:34:42, November 01, 2005 CET
FromUnited Blobs
ToDebating the Military Bill (2134)
MessageAs our membership in the International WMD Abolition Movement shows we cannot accept article 1. We also cannot accept article 2 as it limits our options for arms sales, at present we coould only trade arms with the Selucian Empire if it was implemented.

Date10:47:39, November 01, 2005 CET
FromDeltarian Nationalist Party
ToDebating the Military Bill (2134)
MessageMy membership of GAMA and World Nuclear League show that i am in favour of nuclear deterant and with arms sales i feel it's unethical to sell arms to anyone but close allies (I know you feel nuclear weapons may be unethical but we'll just have to dissagree on these things)

Date10:53:51, November 01, 2005 CET
FromUnited Blobs
ToDebating the Military Bill (2134)
MessageFor Hobrazia the fact that nuclear weapons are extremely expensive is more of a reason to not buy them.

Date12:15:57, November 01, 2005 CET
FromWe Say So! Party
ToDebating the Military Bill (2134)
MessageHaving Nuclear weapons is a pointless endeavour. Rather than constructing our own weapons we should be attempting to put pressure on those countries who already have said weapons to decommission them.
Change to Artilce 2 is also unrequired. We trust in our Government, and all those Parties that could currently become a part of said Government, to use the current law sensibly. Limiting our options on the ability to sell weapons, should we find a requirement, would not only be foolish, but also economically unsound.

Date23:12:03, November 01, 2005 CET
FromNational Imperial Hobrazian Front
ToDebating the Military Bill (2134)
Message@TP: Currently we have the ability to only sell to our close allies. That's the point of having it on a case-by-case scenario; that way we can carefully screen to which nation states we sell our arms.

Date23:29:00, November 01, 2005 CET
From Liberal-Progressive Union
ToDebating the Military Bill (2134)
MessageI agree with my esteemes collegues..

Date03:23:57, November 02, 2005 CET
From Liberal-Progressive Union
ToDebating the Military Bill (2134)
Messageesteemed

subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe

Voting

Vote Seats
yes
 

Total Seats: 73

no
       

Total Seats: 327

abstain

    Total Seats: 0


    Random fact: Moderation will not implement nation renaming requests where the proposed name does not comply with the requirements set out in the Nation Renaming Guide: http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=6364

    Random quote: "Judge me all you want, just keep the verdict to yourself." - From a Winston advertisement

    This page was generated with PHP
    Copyright 2004-2010 Wouter Lievens
    Queries performed: 73