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: NRG Military Policy - 3634
Details
Submitted by[?]: Great National Republican Guard
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: July 3634
Description[?]:
| The NRG's stance on specific military issues, being proposed to the Presidium for adaptation into law. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change National service.
Old value:: All adults upon completion of schooling must serve a term of civilian national service.
Current: All adults upon completion of schooling can be required in times of war to serve a term in the military.
Proposed: All adults upon completion of schooling must serve either a term in the military or a lesser paid term of civilian national service, at their option.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy regarding the treatment of prisoners of war.
Old value:: Prisoners of war must be treated well, according to internationally-accepted standards.
Current: Prisoners of war must be treated well, according to internationally-accepted standards.
Proposed: Prisoners of war are treated according to the national laws of the captor power.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 05:28:22, March 06, 2014 CET | From | Allied Humanists | To | Debating the NRG Military Policy - 3634 |
| Message | This is both absurd and inhumane. WHY? Why could it possibly be conceived for us to force persons to join the military or be subject to a "lesser" standard of living? It is downright outrageous to propose this as no one would opt for lesser pay. In regards to treating Prisoners of War according to our laws, we agree to the extent where government expenditure may be concerned as it regards to care of said PoWs but we won't stand for ill-treatment unless there is SOLID proof of criminality. Arceus Plato Justice Correspondent Secretary, Allied Humanists |
| Date | 05:36:41, March 06, 2014 CET | From |  Great National Republican Guard | To | Debating the NRG Military Policy - 3634 |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, Arceus Plato is misrepresenting the proposal in the bill, creating his own idea and attacking that idea. It's a typical strawman fallacy. The existing law requires everyone to serve a term of civilian national service after completing school. The proposed law will allow graduates to have the option to join the military instead, where they will be paid more. What is this nonsensical talk of lesser "standard of living" that they bring up? Military life is harder, and it is a 24-7 thing. In civilian national service, there is room to separate your personal life from work. Naturally, those doing civilian national service will get paid less because civilian national service is easier and more people will gravitate to it. Military service, on the other hand, will likely be less often chosen, and it only makes sense to give a greater incentive for the less desired job. If both options paid the same, no-one would pick military service. The PoW proposal is just a law change, bringing up the micro-management of it is irrelevant. The point about conditions for ill-treatement can't be addressed in the law itself. It's either it is allowed or not allowed. The Humanists can decide when they will mistreat PoWs as soon as they become the government. Right now, they're not the government. We will decide how to implement law when it is in effect. -- Motya Bogomolov, NRG Spokesman on Defence |
| Date | 06:36:44, March 06, 2014 CET | From | Allied Humanists | To | Debating the NRG Military Policy - 3634 |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, Spoken like a true dictator. Michael Struudel Chairman, Allied Humanists |
| Date | 07:04:22, March 06, 2014 CET | From | Grand Nationalist Fraction | To | Debating the NRG Military Policy - 3634 |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, at this point, is there any national regulation on how to treat PoW's? We are in the opinion that PoW's should be interned, but should be provided with sufficient food and medical care. We also wonder what the stance should be concerning civilians that join the fighting. Because a captured civilian, who has committed acts of agression against soldiers, can not be considered a PoW. We understand this matter is not completely relevant right now, but we just made the reflection. Paul Spaak P&A spokesman |
| Date | 13:57:05, March 06, 2014 CET | From | Great National Republican Guard | To | Debating the NRG Military Policy - 3634 |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, This is about the 2nd or 3rd time that the Allied Humanists (and what they were called before that) are calling me a dictator. How am I, Motya Bogomolov, a dictator? I haven't held an office or any power for years. In response to Mr. Spaak, Mr. Speaker, I will say that PoWs will be treated like regular Lodamese prisoners. We will consider foreign civilians, who have committed acts of aggression against our soldiers, to be PoWs as well. -- Motya Bogomolov, NRG Spokesman on Defence |
| Date | 14:02:28, March 06, 2014 CET | From | Grand Nationalist Fraction | To | Debating the NRG Military Policy - 3634 |
| Message | Mr. Bogomolov, thank you for your reply. We will consider our vote. Paul Spaak |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes | Total Seats: 332 | |||
| no |
Total Seats: 267 | |||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Particracy does not allow real-life brand names (eg. Coca Cola, McDonalds, Microsoft). However, in the case of military equipment brand names it is permitted to use simple number-letter combinations (eg. T-90 and F-22) borrowed from real life, and also simple generic names, like those of animals (eg. Leopard and Jaguar). |
| Random quote: "It would be nice if the poor were to get even half of the money that is spent in studying them." - Bill Vaughan |