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: Prisoner of war treatment

Details

Submitted by^[?]: Libertarian Alcoholic Party II

Status^[?]: passed

Votes: This bill proposes the withdrawal from a treaty. It will require half of the legislature to vote in favor^[?]. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.

Voting deadline: October 2142

Description^[?]:

We should be able to treat 'em according to our laws not according to those of the international community. Our laws are humane anyway, there's no death penalty, torture or anything particularly egregious.

Proposals

Article 1

Withdraw from the Convention on the Humane Treatment of Prisoners of War.

Debate

These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:

Date	21:12:59, November 13, 2005 CET
From	Libertarian Alcoholic Party II
To	Debating the Prisoner of war treatment
Message	First we gotta get rid of this here treaty.

Date	21:18:22, November 13, 2005 CET
From	RSDP - Democratic Front
To	Debating the Prisoner of war treatment
Message	If we repeal this and allow you to change our law, there will be no international standards anymore for how we treat PoWs. You are opening the doors to torture and executions.

Date	21:43:01, November 13, 2005 CET
From	Libertarian Alcoholic Party II
To	Debating the Prisoner of war treatment
Message	There will be no international standards, there will be national standards, and national standards prevent torture and execution (check the legislation).

Date	21:45:54, November 13, 2005 CET
From	Freedom Party
To	Debating the Prisoner of war treatment
Message	That and the international standards are not defined in the treaty. Which is stupid

Date	20:38:54, November 14, 2005 CET
From	Liberal Imperialist Party
To	Debating the Prisoner of war treatment
Message	There are no international standards right now. :rolleyes:

Date	13:01:40, November 15, 2005 CET
From	Radical Freedom Party
To	Debating the Prisoner of war treatment
Message	OOC: The game says there are. So really. rolls eyes right back

Date	18:26:23, November 15, 2005 CET
From	RSDP - Democratic Front
To	Debating the Prisoner of war treatment
Message	There is a Convention drawing up the exact international standards (those that are not already in existence) at this very moment. Of course, the current Federal Government prefers to pretend it doesn't know of that Convention in order to have an argument for this Act, and, of course, the current Federal Government is so isolationist it doesn't even bother to attent international conferences.

Date	21:39:28, November 15, 2005 CET
From	Liberal Imperialist Party
To	Debating the Prisoner of war treatment
Message	"OOC: The game says there are. So really. rolls eyes right back" OOC: No it doesnt. ZOMFGOZOM\|OMFOGMDO\|MOMFG

Date	18:26:06, November 16, 2005 CET
From	RSDP - Democratic Front
To	Debating the Prisoner of war treatment
Message	OOC: It does, in referance to the Geneva Conventions. There are just some things we must take for granted in a game such as Particracy, for instance, we all take it for granted that murder is illegal whereas there is no proposal explicitely saying it is.

Date	18:52:32, November 16, 2005 CET
From	Libertarian Alcoholic Party II
To	Debating the Prisoner of war treatment
Message	Ok, we're voting this baby into legislation.

Date	18:57:53, November 16, 2005 CET
From	Liberal Imperialist Party
To	Debating the Prisoner of war treatment
Message	OOC: The Geneva Convention isnt actually binding unless you sign it. The issue was very badly drafted, and that option shouldnt exist. International standards should be set via treaties that nations must sign for them to take effect, not through a law.

Date	00:26:03, November 17, 2005 CET
From	Nationalist Party
To	Debating the Prisoner of war treatment
Message	This Treaty is only going to work if All countries abid by it. What if Nation your agianist doesnt recognise the treaty. local laws will not allow executing of the POWs but at least we will be able to treat them in the fashion of our enemies. The Bills make sense.

Date	20:49:29, November 17, 2005 CET
From	RSDP - Democratic Front
To	Debating the Prisoner of war treatment
Message	Look, what the actual proposal does is saying that you abide by the provisions of the Geneva Conventions, it does not say they are binding (but if you have that option as law, it says you agree to be bound by them).

Date	20:51:22, November 17, 2005 CET
From	RSDP - Democratic Front
To	Debating the Prisoner of war treatment
Message	And you're all using a really lame excuse, you think that because other nations don't abide by internationally-accepted standards regarding the treatment of Prisoners of War, we don't have to respect their rights either and that we can't agree to the existing standards either. And that is pure bullshit, it is by ratifying and promoting the standards that eventually all nations will abide by them!

Date	10:21:33, November 19, 2005 CET
From	RSDP - Democratic Front
To	Debating the Prisoner of war treatment
Message	The electorate will remind your lack of respect for human rights and the rights of PoWs at the next elections! Let's see how our citizens would react if Rutanian soldiers were executed because of a lack of respect for PoWs.

subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe

Voting

Vote

Seats

yes

Total Seats: 329

Total Seats: 270

abstain

Total Seats: 0

Random fact: "Kubrk" is a Jelbic word that has the colloquial meaning "old man" or "geezer".

Random quote: "It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." - Thomas Jefferson

This page was generated with PHP
Copyright 2004-2010 Wouter Lievens
Queries performed: 76