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: Telamon-Davostan Security Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: United Military Party
Status[?]: defeated
Votes: This bill is a resolution. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: December 2143
Description[?]:
| Hutori is in a strategic position on the Makon continent, in between Davostan and Telamon, this is to our benefit. However, these two countries cannot be trusted, the ACP now hereby requests from the government of Hutori, to begin construction of military installations, 60 miles apart from each other, on the borders of of Hutori-Telamon and the borders of Davostan-Hutori. We also propose to send regular monthy stealth reconnaissance planes over the outlying islands of Davostan and Telamon, and other out of the way areas, to check if they are constructing anything that might be a threat to Hutori's presence on the Makon continent. |
Proposals
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 22:17:07, November 18, 2005 CET | From | Peoples Revolutionary Party | To | Debating the Telamon-Davostan Security Act |
| Message | The Peoples Communist Party can accept this bill and also proposes that we place a stagnate defence grid of SAM Site Facilities. |
| Date | 22:23:29, November 18, 2005 CET | From | United Military Party | To | Debating the Telamon-Davostan Security Act |
| Message | Or we could construct mobile SAM vehicles, cheaper, cooler, easier to build, and we can disguise them as SUV's... |
| Date | 22:25:45, November 18, 2005 CET | From | Peoples Revolutionary Party | To | Debating the Telamon-Davostan Security Act |
| Message | I like the idea. And if there near an instalation rearming and keeping supplied wont be that hard. |
| Date | 06:43:52, November 19, 2005 CET | From |  First Socialist Party | To | Debating the Telamon-Davostan Security Act |
| Message | Lets have a history lesson. Unlike every single other party here, the Socialist Party of Hutori has been around for over a century. We have also controlled the Foreign Ministry in total for about that long as well. So we can safely say we know a little more about foreign policy than anyone here. Davostan and Telamon can be trusted. The continent of Makon has had a strong bond for as long as anyone can remember, and we are more concerned about other nations than ourselves. It is in our best interest to co-operate with them. Next, Hutori is an anti-militaristic nation. We have always been (mainly thanks to the Socialist Party we own). So this sort of behaviour is very uncharacteristic and would likely result in public backlash. Finally, this bill is rather null and void while this: http://82.238.75.178:8085/particracy/main/viewtreaty.php?treatyid=62 treaty is in play. You would have to withdraw from this treaty, before any such bill as this would have any weight whatsoever. |
| Date | 06:52:16, November 19, 2005 CET | From | Peoples Revolutionary Party | To | Debating the Telamon-Davostan Security Act |
| Message | And im sure they would never break a treaty? Besides were asking for the ability to protect ourselves should somthing happen, it not like were building an invasion army just a deffender one. |
| Date | 07:02:20, November 19, 2005 CET | From | First Socialist Party | To | Debating the Telamon-Davostan Security Act |
| Message | Nothing will happen. They would have to pull out of the treaty first, and any nation that does threaten us, risks having the other nation go against them. And this is not protecting ourselves, this is spying. And we are all aware of the ACP's design on an United Makon. |
| Date | 07:04:08, November 19, 2005 CET | From | Peoples Revolutionary Party | To | Debating the Telamon-Davostan Security Act |
| Message | Unity under a single banner can be obtained not just by war, but through peaceful means as well, but as i have said before...'to prepare for peace is to prepare for war'. |
| Date | 07:10:42, November 19, 2005 CET | From | First Socialist Party | To | Debating the Telamon-Davostan Security Act |
| Message | We like to think that war is never an option, and so far we have not been proved wrong. |
| Date | 07:13:46, November 19, 2005 CET | From | Peoples Revolutionary Party | To | Debating the Telamon-Davostan Security Act |
| Message | You might change your mind should we be invaded. In either case though, i dont see how defending ones intrests could be seen badly...if we were getting ready to do Covert Strikes against them...then ya thats bad...but protection. |
| Date | 07:16:28, November 19, 2005 CET | From | First Socialist Party | To | Debating the Telamon-Davostan Security Act |
| Message | With the ACP in power, most likely. |
| Date | 07:21:24, November 19, 2005 CET | From | Peoples Revolutionary Party | To | Debating the Telamon-Davostan Security Act |
| Message | I dont think he will and if he does, he wont hold power for very long. |
| Date | 08:21:51, November 19, 2005 CET | From | First Socialist Party | To | Debating the Telamon-Davostan Security Act |
| Message | Even worse, the Libertarians are in power, of sorts. |
| Date | 14:42:24, November 19, 2005 CET | From | United Military Party | To | Debating the Telamon-Davostan Security Act |
| Message | Hardly, the treaty states that any "Agression" would break the treaty, however this is defense, we merely wish to defend ourselves against a possible threat. |
| Date | 21:57:19, November 19, 2005 CET | From | Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Telamon-Davostan Security Act |
| Message | The Libertarian Party will support this. The abilities of our military to defend us is the prime concern of government. WE thank the ACP for their proposal. |
| Date | 23:48:46, November 19, 2005 CET | From | Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Telamon-Davostan Security Act |
| Message | To clarify The Libertarian Party's stance on use of our military, in response to SPH's barbed comment. The Libertarian Party support a strong military with sufficient strength in all areas to defend this nation against aggression and deter others from using WMD against us. We support a policy of massive retaliation. However we do not now nor are we ever likely to support military acquisition of territories other than the re-taking of any territory that may be lost in conflicts. We recognise the Borders of Hutori as those occupied at this time of writing. Namely April 2143. |
| Date | 00:54:46, November 20, 2005 CET | From | Democratic-Republican Party | To | Debating the Telamon-Davostan Security Act |
| Message | The Futurist Party is in favor of defending our nation, so sides with "Yea" |
| Date | 13:11:07, November 20, 2005 CET | From | First Socialist Party | To | Debating the Telamon-Davostan Security Act |
| Message | This is not defense, this active espionage. As well, we do not NEED to defend ourselves against anyone, because no nation has ever expressed any desire ever to even send a solitary troop to our waters! |
| Date | 14:05:38, November 20, 2005 CET | From | United Liberal Alliance | To | Debating the Telamon-Davostan Security Act |
| Message | The government of Telamon is concerned by this discussion and sincerely hopes that the ACPs proposals do not become law. Having signed along with Davostan the Makon Continental Friendship Treaty I think I can safely say that we all live peacefully on the continent of Makon and wish to continue to do so. I would also like to point out to the ACP and others supporting their suggestions, that as well as the MCFT which prohibits any form of agressive action against any other Makon state, we have also on a number of occassions invited Hutori to join Davostan and ourselves as well as a number of other states in the Northern Area Treaty Organisation (NATO), but as far as I am aware, Hutori has so far rejected membership of this alliance. You are of course perfectly within your rights to do so and whether or not you are members in no way affects relations with you, but you cannot construe us as a threat to you - quite the opposite, if anything we wish to be more of an ally than we are now. Finally, you will also note that you along with Davostan were invited to join us in a free trade area, the Makon Economic Area (MEA) but declined. Again we have no problem with that, as we recognised Hutori's traditionally more socialist politics, but again that offer can only be seen in the light of a wish for continued peaceful cooperation. The offer of course is still open. the NATO treaty can be found here: http://82.238.75.178:8085/particracy/main/viewtreaty.php?treatyid=55 the MEA treaty can be found here: http://82.238.75.178:8085/particracy/main/viewtreaty.php?treatyid=56 I would like to finish by reiterating that Telamon's foreign policy with regards to the nations of Makon is firmly based upon the sentiments expressed in the Makon Continental Friendship Treaty and will always remain so. We resent the suggestion by the ACP that this is otherwise and ask them to present us with evidence to justify their claims. Thank you for your time Charles Grey Foreign Minister Telamon Commonwealth |
| Date | 16:27:13, November 20, 2005 CET | From | Democratic-Republican Party | To | Debating the Telamon-Davostan Security Act |
| Message | After viewing the message from the Telamon Commonwealth and studying the bill and more provisions, and looking at the history, we change our vote to be against the active espionage against sovereign states. |
| Date | 21:09:59, November 20, 2005 CET | From | Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Telamon-Davostan Security Act |
| Message | Likewise after the comments by the ACE The Libertarian Party has changed it's position. We also intend to introduce a bill to ratify the NATO treaty. |
| Date | 22:56:07, November 20, 2005 CET | From | United Military Party | To | Debating the Telamon-Davostan Security Act |
| Message | Foiled! |
| Date | 01:17:52, November 21, 2005 CET | From | Peoples Revolutionary Party | To | Debating the Telamon-Davostan Security Act |
| Message | We as well change are view on this bill. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes | Total Seats: 27 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 205 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 17 |
| Random fact: Players consent to the reasonable and predictable consequences of the role-play they consent to. For example, players who role-play their characters as committing criminal offences should expect those characters to experience the predictable judicial consequences of that. |
| Random quote: "Wherever you have an efficient government, you have a dictatorship." - Harry S. Truman |