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: The Kalistan Treaty Repeal
Details
Submitted by[?]: Nationalist Party of Gaduridos
Status[?]: passed
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: February 2157
Description[?]:
In light of Kalistan's current belligerence, we propose the following repeal. In no way should we be bound to stand on the sidelines against a nation that allows its own to mobilise for war and threaten our people. http://82.238.75.178:8085/particracy/main/viewbill.php?billid=14997 |
Proposals
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 08:30:55, December 14, 2005 CET | From | Nationalist Party of Gaduridos | To | Debating the The Kalistan Treaty Repeal |
| Message | These newly proposed bills will be sent to vote AFTER the early election. |
| Date | 09:44:02, December 14, 2005 CET | From | Traxian Imperial Party | To | Debating the The Kalistan Treaty Repeal |
| Message | We agree with this bill, but no aggesive overt action should be implemented against Kalistan before they attack us in any manner. |
| Date | 09:44:20, December 14, 2005 CET | From | Traxian Imperial Party | To | Debating the The Kalistan Treaty Repeal |
| Message | But we should withdraw from the non-aggression pact. |
| Date | 11:01:33, December 14, 2005 CET | From | Post-Revolutionary Pragmatic Party | To | Debating the The Kalistan Treaty Repeal |
| Message | We disagree. Withdrawing from this treaty will make us look like the aggressor, and practically hands them a casus belli on a silver platter. On the other hands, should they attack us while the treaty is still in place, this will make them look extremely bad and give us something to exploit in our propaganda efforts. Prepare for war, yes, but this withdrawal would do more harm than good. |
| Date | 12:01:39, December 14, 2005 CET | From | Totalitarian Party | To | Debating the The Kalistan Treaty Repeal |
| Message | The treaty was formed to allay fears that the Kalistanis were plotting against us. We have already been involved in a war with them, almost a century ago. As it is now obvious that at least some of Kalistan's parties have been planning for a war involving our nation, we must withdraw from this treaty to ensure we are able to defend ourselves and provide aid to our allies. |
| Date | 12:23:35, December 14, 2005 CET | From | Post-Revolutionary Pragmatic Party | To | Debating the The Kalistan Treaty Repeal |
| Message | My right honourable friend seems to be overestimating the power of treaties. Should it become necessary to disregard the treaty, we could freely do so. However, for PR purposes, we would recommend not to repeal it. If we withdraw, that's an overt act of aggression on our part that could be used to justify war by the Kalistanis, both to the world and to their citizens. However, if we keep the treaty, and they attack, we can exploit this for our own propaganda. Should it become needed to initiate the first strike ourselves, we can always come up with a justification or claim they violated it first. It should not be above our intelligence services to stage an incident - Article 3 in particular seems to have potential for this kind of action. |
| Date | 13:26:48, December 14, 2005 CET | From | Nationalist Party of Gaduridos | To | Debating the The Kalistan Treaty Repeal |
| Message | This is a formal statement of our distrust for the Kalistani government and their handling of this incident. It is NOT a declaration of war. If they choose to make it such, they will be the ones who are besmirched. The withdrawal itself will be handled with complete propriety. |
| Date | 13:42:05, December 14, 2005 CET | From | Post-Revolutionary Pragmatic Party | To | Debating the The Kalistan Treaty Repeal |
| Message | A withdrawal seems counterproductive to this party, and would help the Kalistani government more than it would help ours. If they want war, let them be liars and treaty breakers - dissolving the treaty would work to their advantage, not ours. Let us prepare for war, yes, but we can express our distrust by other means. |
| Date | 13:54:33, December 14, 2005 CET | From | Progressive Imperial Party | To | Debating the The Kalistan Treaty Repeal |
| Message | If they attack us, they will be destroyed. We have not withdrawn missiles from launch positions. Casus Belli or not, we will be the ones writing the history books. Daniel Edward Cashion III, Defence Minister (Gaduridos) Progressive Imperial Party. |
| Date | 13:59:32, December 14, 2005 CET | From | Nationalist Party of Gaduridos | To | Debating the The Kalistan Treaty Repeal |
| Message | How will it help them more than us? How will there be ANY detriment to our Great Nation, as long as we hold our forces until they take action?! |
| Date | 14:00:54, December 14, 2005 CET | From | Progressive Imperial Party | To | Debating the The Kalistan Treaty Repeal |
| Message | Or we could just hold our forces indefinitely.... |
| Date | 14:06:44, December 14, 2005 CET | From | Post-Revolutionary Pragmatic Party | To | Debating the The Kalistan Treaty Repeal |
| Message | As our party has stated before, withdrawing from this treaty has a very definite risk of backfiring in terms of international perception as well as providing Kalistan with a casus belli. On the other hand, there is no negative effect to staying in this treaty, as long as our nation's forces are wary, prepared, and on alert. |
| Date | 14:17:42, December 14, 2005 CET | From | Nationalist Party of Gaduridos | To | Debating the The Kalistan Treaty Repeal |
| Message | Yes, but if this provides Kalistan with a casus belli, International perception will NOT be in their favour. While we sit, removed from a treaty, they will be using their newly mobilised arms and striking at our nation. Our removal from this treaty is only in response to their threats, to NOT do so is cowardice. We are showing that we are willing to pussyfoot around and play the diplomatic game of the dishonest. I do not believe that is the Gaduri way. Yes, our troops will stay on alert. All this treaty is, is a lie of propriety and THAT is why it should not be held! |
| Date | 14:27:33, December 14, 2005 CET | From | Post-Revolutionary Pragmatic Party | To | Debating the The Kalistan Treaty Repeal |
| Message | Difficult to say what international perception will be, but we feel that a country attacking a country it has a non-aggression pact with will suffer a larger backlash than a country attacking a country it doesn't have one with (particularly if said country unilaterally cancelled such a pact first). There is nothing cowardly about using diplomatic means to up the costs of going to war. It is this party's feel that, if war is inevitable and we have the upper hand, we should attack immediately, using the treaty as cover and possible justification (referring to article 1 and 3 of said treaty). However, if this is not the case, we should keep all tools to our disposal, including the discouraging effect of this treaty. |
| Date | 14:40:24, December 14, 2005 CET | From | Nationalist Party of Gaduridos | To | Debating the The Kalistan Treaty Repeal |
| Message | Their nation's defence budget is less than half our own and soon it is to be only a quarter. They cannot use nuclear or chemical weaponry unless another nation uses them first. Do you honestly feel that we need to rely upon your cowardly and suggested course of action; striking back at another nation behind their back whilst betraying an internationally recognised treaty, forged with honourable intent? You stated yourself that such actions on their part would make them look like the enemy, and yet you suggest such a course for our own people! 'Using the treaty as cover', you say. BAH! Perhaps the PRPP's leaders would sneak up to an ant before crushing it beneath his heel, but when faced with insignificance, such measures are below us. We are not forced into guerilla warfare... WE ARE THE SUPREME POWER HERE! Why degenerate and tarnish our honour with such cowardice!? If they want war, they shall be the first to initiate it, and we will strike them down more severely than ever before. The Federal Union they once challenged is nothing compared to the greatness of our New Order and Exalted Empire! Let the Kalistani warmongering animals raise their banner. Let them come. |
| Date | 14:57:10, December 14, 2005 CET | From | Post-Revolutionary Pragmatic Party | To | Debating the The Kalistan Treaty Repeal |
| Message | My right honourable friend is letting his noble and honourable temperament interfere with his judgement. Notice that what was said was: 'if war is inevitable'. Necessity knows neither bounds nor limits, and if we must resort to dishonourable means to save our nation, so be it. While breaking the treaty could indeed be used against us, it would be balanced by the advantage of surprise. However, my party does not think war is inevitable here. Not for our nation, not for theirs. If we wish to avoid war, we would do well to avoid making it seem unavoidable. Reaffirming our commitment to this treaty might be an appropriate course of action... Again, my party reaffirms its belief that the wiser course of action would be to leave the treaty in place, particularly keeping in mind the sovereign's commitment to letting the Kalistans act first, all the more to get the world on our side. |
| Date | 15:04:22, December 14, 2005 CET | From | Nationalist Party of Gaduridos | To | Debating the The Kalistan Treaty Repeal |
| Message | This does not make it seem unavoidable. The action is taken in response to undisciplined threats from their people and exists as a gesture of entirely justified distrust. Relations have never been overwhelmingly positive with Kalistan and our party has not forgotten the effects of the war which their people waged upon our good people. Now, in this modern era, they still do not show respect to our people by disciplining the war mongering factions within their nation, inspite of KNOWING the enmity that exists between our countries. Again, you speak of 'surprise'. They are a military joke compared to us. Why risk the international deplorement that breaking this unnecessary treaty would bring?! We DO NOT need this treaty, they do. We do not need the element of suprise. THEY DO! |
| Date | 15:27:19, December 14, 2005 CET | From | International Society of Bankers | To | Debating the The Kalistan Treaty Repeal |
| Message | This is exactly how the first war started... well sorta. Arms build up, and then the authoritarian nation (which was Kalistan, now Gaduridos) promised not to attack first, then they betrayed that and invaded Marlingatos. The Libertarian Militia pledges support for Kalistan, but will do nothing unless war is declared. |
| Date | 15:36:37, December 14, 2005 CET | From | Post-Revolutionary Pragmatic Party | To | Debating the The Kalistan Treaty Repeal |
| Message | We wish to make clear that our party was never in favour of breaking the treaty and attacking Kalistan; this was merely a hypothetical example. Indeed they need surprise, and as we're all aware of their actions, they do not have it. While we understand the sovereign's wish to make his distrust known, we would like to point out that there are other ways of doing this, and that withdrawing from this treaty might antagonise the war-mongering factions of Kalistan further. While they have no potential to do our nation great amounts of harm, our party feels that exactly this allows us to take the moral high ground. If there must be treaty-breaking, let them do it. Our nation has no need of it, indeed, but it is not harmed by it either. |
| Date | 16:23:06, December 14, 2005 CET | From | Nationalist Party of Gaduridos | To | Debating the The Kalistan Treaty Repeal |
| Message | We respect the PRPP's views, however, we disagree. At least it is obvious that both parties have the interests of Gaduridos at heart, each in their own way. Voting will decide upon the outcome. As for the Libertarian Militia, we beileve that their party is meaningless and uneducated. There are no 'Authoritarians', in charge. My party fervently advocates individual freedoms and the other parties of Our Great Nation, who do favour regulation, do so in an understandable and defensible way. Side with Kalistan all you like, but know that you own presence is certainly unwanted by our party regardless. |
| Date | 16:34:39, December 14, 2005 CET | From | Post-Revolutionary Pragmatic Party | To | Debating the The Kalistan Treaty Repeal |
| Message | We understand the NPG's position and pledge to respect the decision of the majority. However, we felt it was necessary to voice our concerns before the issue was brought to vote. |
| Date | 16:59:05, December 14, 2005 CET | From | Traxian Imperial Party | To | Debating the The Kalistan Treaty Repeal |
| Message | We believe that given thier attitudes towards us no country will denie us the right to withdraw from a treaty, If they declare war for that then they will be the aggressors not us. As such we should remove ourselves from this treaty as a international sign we will not side with countries like Kalistan but remain neutral. If they change that situation it will be on THEIR heads not ours. We support. |
| Date | 16:59:15, December 14, 2005 CET | From | Traxian Imperial Party | To | Debating the The Kalistan Treaty Repeal |
| Message | We believe that given thier attitudes towards us no country will deny us the right to withdraw from a treaty, If they declare war for that then they will be the aggressors not us. As such we should remove ourselves from this treaty as a international sign we will not side with countries like Kalistan but remain neutral. If they change that situation it will be on THEIR heads not ours. We support. |
| Date | 18:25:59, December 14, 2005 CET | From | Progressive Imperial Party | To | Debating the The Kalistan Treaty Repeal |
| Message | As the NPG has so rightly stated, this treaty benefits Kalistan, not us. In an out and out war, they cannot make full use of surprise, as a result of their laughable nuclear and chemical weapons restrictions, and on a direct battlefield, our navy would have Kalistan totally blockaded within a week- that's if we didn't even BOTHER with nuclear weapons. The simple fact is that our nation is better prepared for anything they could throw at us (our extremely complete shelter system)- and they are not. We have something more effective than a non-aggression pact with them- we have the threat of TOTAL ANNIHILATION. This treaty serves us not in the slightest. Away with it. |
| Date | 22:16:37, December 15, 2005 CET | From | Conservative Party/Church of Kalistan | To | Debating the The Kalistan Treaty Repeal |
| Message | I'd like to point out that the only parties with hatred towards Gaduridos are no longer in power. Most of us don't even want a war with Deltaria, let alone your fine nation. Please stop this rash course you are about to take. The People's Front of Kalistan has been reprimanded for speaking against your nation and Deltaria out of our nation, already preparing for war. I beg of you, stop this. |
| Date | 22:19:50, December 15, 2005 CET | From | Progressive Imperial Party | To | Debating the The Kalistan Treaty Repeal |
| Message | This is not a rash course! We simply feel a non-aggression pact is no longer beneficial. We have not declared war. |
| Date | 00:44:21, December 16, 2005 CET | From | Conservative Party/Church of Kalistan | To | Debating the The Kalistan Treaty Repeal |
| Message | Be realistic, war will soon follow this action. |
| Date | 09:34:12, December 16, 2005 CET | From | Malivia Liberals | To | Debating the The Kalistan Treaty Repeal |
| Message | From my party, please stay in the pact for yalls sake. Do not do a parade and "show off" Prepare defenses. I wish our government can help, but some people like all the power for themsevels and not let us try to be more open to other nations. If it comes ness. I will push to send AID asap, Please keep in contact. |
| Date | 11:24:47, December 16, 2005 CET | From | Nationalist Party of Gaduridos | To | Debating the The Kalistan Treaty Repeal |
| Message | 'Be realistic, war will soon follow this action.' We have just been threatened. |
| Date | 11:29:18, December 16, 2005 CET | From | Nationalist Party of Gaduridos | To | Debating the The Kalistan Treaty Repeal |
| Message | Could our Malivian interpreter please translate what their Liberal party said? |
| Date | 11:56:45, December 16, 2005 CET | From | Nationalist Party of Gaduridos | To | Debating the The Kalistan Treaty Repeal |
| Message | To the ICP: We WILL NOT attack your people unless Kalistan is the aggressor. This Bill is simply the vocalised distrust of our people, because of the actions of some of those within your government. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 358 | ||||||
| no | Total Seats: 83 | ||||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Large scale RP planning (such as wars, regional/continental conflicts, economic collapse, etc.) should be planned (as best as it can be) and should have consent of a majority of players involved. |
| Random quote: "The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to defend minorities." - Ayn Rand |