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: National Service Act 2170
Details
Submitted by[?]: Democratic Liberal Party
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: January 2171
Description[?]:
| A bill to bring and end to unfair compulsory national service. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change National service.
Old value:: All adults upon completion of schooling can be required in times of war to serve a term in the military.
Current: All adults upon completion of schooling can be required in times of war to serve a term in the military.
Proposed: There shall be no mandatory military or civilian national service.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 21:28:30, January 11, 2006 CET |
From | Democratic Socialist Party | To | Debating the National Service Act 2170 | | Message | We will support this. Reserves of biological/chemical weaponry pose a risk to our own populace as well as to the civilians of other nations, as it is impossible to guarantee they will never fall into the hands of those who would harm us, or to guarantee there are no accidents. |
| Date | 21:30:32, January 11, 2006 CET |
From | Democratic Liberal Party | To | Debating the National Service Act 2170 | | Message | I rise to present a bill that is intended to show the world that Aloria opposes war and conflict which brings horror to so many.
Articles 1 and 3 relate to Aloria's development and storage of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons. These are not weapons that we wish to see Aloria storing. We should not keep them if we intend to use them nor as a threat. Diplomacy is the real answer.
Article 2 relates to the current forced service in the military. The DLP sees this as an infringement of basic human rights, people should not be forced into such a job in which their lives are at risk.
I commend this bill and hope for cross-party support. |
| Date | 22:56:03, January 11, 2006 CET |
From | Independent Capitalist Party | To | Debating the National Service Act 2170 | | Message | Against. Pacifist. With no weapons of mass destruction we will be an open target to enemies as we would not be able to retaliate. You will make Aloria an open target and are a threat to national security! |
| Date | 22:57:19, January 11, 2006 CET |
From | Independent Capitalist Party | To | Debating the National Service Act 2170 | | Message | "Articles 1 and 3 relate to Aloria's development and storage of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons. These are not weapons that we wish to see Aloria storing. We should not keep them if we intend to use them nor as a threat. Diplomacy is the real answer."
Fine then. YOU negotiate with a mad dictator hell-bent on taking over the world. If people are insane enough to use WMDs, then they'll be too insane to negotiate with. We need to have mutually assured destruction - if they attack us, we will destroy them too. Even an insane person wants to keep their power. |
| Date | 00:11:54, January 12, 2006 CET |
From | Democratic Liberal Party | To | Debating the National Service Act 2170 | | Message | If we have no biological, chemical or nuclear weapons then we do not seem like a threat and we will not have hostile actions from other nations.
I would hate to see Terra on the verge of a Nuclear War because everyone is suspiscious of each others' nuclear stockpiles. |
| Date | 00:24:27, January 12, 2006 CET |
From | Independent Capitalist Party | To | Debating the National Service Act 2170 | | Message | The ICP would only support disarmament if *every* other country (49 others) simultaneously also disarmed. Otherwise it won't work and we'll always need defense. |
| Date | 12:40:23, January 12, 2006 CET |
From |  Aloria Green Socialist Party | To | Debating the National Service Act 2170 | | Message | What are we defending ourselves from? Other ICP nutjobs in other countries? If the world was run by parties that care, you wouldn't feel the need to arm... |
| Date | 13:14:36, January 12, 2006 CET |
From | Independent Capitalist Party | To | Debating the National Service Act 2170 | | Message | DSP, I will not compromise to destroy our country.
AGSP, just because I want to defend myself, doesn't mean that I'd be the agressor. For instance, we've supported the new, democratic Deltarian regime. That in itself put a target sign on us. |
| Date | 18:55:36, January 12, 2006 CET |
From | Democratic Liberal Party | To | Debating the National Service Act 2170 | | Message | OK, then we will ammend this act and introduce a resolution on NBC weapons. If the resolution recieves good support then a further bill will be brought before Parliament. |
| Date | 19:05:43, January 12, 2006 CET |
From | Democratic Liberal Party | To | Debating the National Service Act 2170 | | Message | We accept that fully - I realised that the only way a defence reform bill could possibly be passed was without the NBC proposals.
Currently, Aloria is not at war, we are not in a time of conflict and have no particular need for everyone to serve in the military. The armed forces would be strong enough if only people who choose to serve in there did so.
Under the current law, so many people who do not want to serve in the military have to, this is not fair. Therefore, compulsory national service should be ended. |
| Date | 19:08:31, January 12, 2006 CET |
From | Democratic Liberal Party | To | Debating the National Service Act 2170 | | Message | We feel the need to clarify our previous comment - we realise that the law currently is 'in a time of war' people are required to serve in the armed forces.
This is unfair because a military with people who want to be there will be:
1.) Big enough
2.) Composed of people who wish to be there, thus increasing morale and performance |
| Date | 19:12:11, January 12, 2006 CET |
From | Independent Capitalist Party | To | Debating the National Service Act 2170 | | Message | Well, it is only for emergencies. I like it as it is. Basically, it leaves the option of a draft open in case we have a shortage of troops in a large war. What's wrong with leaving options open? |
| Date | 20:42:50, January 12, 2006 CET |
From | Democratic Liberal Party | To | Debating the National Service Act 2170 | | Message | Well, hopefully Aloria will not be involved in a large war, so this will not be a problem.
This bill will be moved to the vote, debate can continue there. |
| Date | 21:07:27, January 12, 2006 CET |
From | Independent Capitalist Party | To | Debating the National Service Act 2170 | | Message | A *temporary* no. Anyways, I like the option of a draft in case we get invaded by our neighbors in Dundorf. Until you can counter that reasonably, I'm against this bill. |
| Date | 00:13:59, January 13, 2006 CET |
From | Hammerian Capitalist Party | To | Debating the National Service Act 2170 | | Message | "Hoping" we don't enter a war will only go so far. We would much rather have an Aloria *prepared* for war, or as close to prepared as we can get, when war comes our way. We'd rather not mess around for a whole year in bureaucratic nonsense while we try to pass a reform to this. |
subscribe to this discussion -
unsubscribeVoting
| Vote |
Seats |
| yes | Total Seats: 332 |
| no | Total Seats: 268 |
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Real-life quotations may be used in Particracy, but the real-life speaker or author should always be referenced in an OOC (out-of-character) note alongside the quotation. |
| Random quote: "I reject the cynical view that politics is a dirty business." - Richard M. Nixon |