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: Unconventional Weaponry Restriction Act, Part I
Details
Submitted by[?]: Democratic-Republican 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: December 2164
Description[?]:
| This act bans the use of biological and chemical weapons, with the exception that others have used them first. This will prevent the DR Hutori from appearing as warmongering and dangerous to the rest of Terra. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning the use of chemical and biological weaponry in warfare.
Old value:: The nation reserves the right to use chemical or biological weapons in warfare for any reason.
Current: The nation shall never use chemical or biological weaponry in warfare.
Proposed: The nation shall never use chemical or biological weapons in warfare unless another nation uses them first.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 19:50:47, December 29, 2005 CET | From | Peoples Revolutionary Party | To | Debating the Unconventional Weaponry Restriction Act, Part I |
| Message | No, the ability to prove that we are willing to defend this land to the death by such means as Biological and Chemical Weapons proves to others that we are not to be taken lightly in times of agression. |
| Date | 21:23:52, December 29, 2005 CET | From | Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Unconventional Weaponry Restriction Act, Part I |
| Message | Absolutely against. As long as others have the weapons so must we. |
| Date | 17:20:29, December 31, 2005 CET | From | Democratic-Republican Party | To | Debating the Unconventional Weaponry Restriction Act, Part I |
| Message | We will ALWAYS have the weapons. We still reserve the right to have them and stockpile them. |
| Date | 17:51:51, December 31, 2005 CET | From | Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Unconventional Weaponry Restriction Act, Part I |
| Message | But often in warfare there is a need to strike first. e.g. if the opposition attacks with overwhelmingly superior numbers! |
| Date | 20:37:31, January 01, 2006 CET | From | Global Democracy Movement Party | To | Debating the Unconventional Weaponry Restriction Act, Part I |
| Message | I think the point should be, this nation will avoid the use of this weapon type in warfare, and should abrange that point of view to the other nations. If we have the weapons, we have the rigth to use them in agression, but if we can make all nations to understand the negative effect of using them, that is one battle that we won. But i guess we cant be holding back expecting to be attacked and mesure the damage to then strike back, we should avoid the use of this kind of weapon, but in all ways we can't expect for the other side to react. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes | Total Seats: 81 | ||||
| no | Total Seats: 209 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 3 |
| Random fact: Use a valid e-mail address for your Particracy account. If the e-mail address you entered does not exist, your account may be suspected of multi-accounting and inactivated. |
| Random quote: "A lot of people are waiting for Martin Luther King or Mahatma Gandhi to come back, but they are gone. We are it. It is up to us. It is up to you." - Marian Wright Edelman |