Main | About | Tutorial | FAQ | Links | Wiki | Forum | World News | World Map | World Ranking | Nations | Electoral Calendar | Party Organizations | Treaties |
Login | Register |
Game Time: August 5475
Next month in: 01:44:27
Server time: 22:15:32, April 26, 2024 CET
Currently online (2): burgerboys | JourneyJak | Record: 63 on 23:13:00, July 26, 2019 CET

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: Nuclear Rearmament Act

Details

Submitted by[?]: Txurruka/Aperribai/Mayoz's OPX

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: March 2177

Description[?]:

A bill to protect Baltusia from foreign force.

Proposals

Debate

These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:

Date01:54:33, January 26, 2006 CET
From Txurruka/Aperribai/Mayoz's OPX
ToDebating the Nuclear Rearmament Act
MessageNumber of nations with nuclear weapons: 46
Number of nations who have disarmed: 5
Number of nations who could potentially strike first: 20

It is ridiculous that in a world bristling with such weapons that we leave ourselves unprotected. The primary goal of government is to protect its people. The current laws see that we get done right up the ass in this respect. If we ever to go war, now a much more likely prospect without the nuclear deterrent and the rise of incompetent idiots to positions of power, we will lose as we have no recourse against a nuclear weapon. And when that happens, I hope you all hide well because the people will rise up and kill you.

The best path to a peaceful society is not to disarm (at least not in the current Terra) but to:
*Free trade between nations (a homage to the saying "If our goods do not cross your border, our soldiers will")
*Friendly relations between nations (as evidenced by the fact Gaduridos, a member of the AXIS and a neighbour, had no designs on invading us)
*Nuclear deterrent to, in our case, make any invasion a conventional war, not a nuclear war.

Remember, the NCB (if they had any powers, although they are still active) did not maintain any nuclear weapons. Only in the event of war could construction even begin and only when a nuclear weapon had been used against us could we use them in retaliation. If war is a necessity, then rearming ourselves will ensure it is a conventional war.

Date11:11:33, January 26, 2006 CET
From National Party of Baltusia
ToDebating the Nuclear Rearmament Act
MessageThe NCB are a homage to an antiquated nuclear-war theory in Baltusia. They are a symbol of a brutal device. Simply having them ready, even only in the event of a war, is a sign to other nations we have strike capability.

Date14:44:43, January 26, 2006 CET
From Txurruka/Aperribai/Mayoz's OPX
ToDebating the Nuclear Rearmament Act
Message"Simply having them ready, even only in the event of a war, is a sign to other nations we have strike capability."
That's the point ISP, that's the point. The important bit you've overlooked is that its not *first* strike capability but only a response capability.

subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe

Voting

Vote Seats
yes
    

Total Seats: 191

no
   

Total Seats: 160

abstain
  

Total Seats: 10


Random fact: If there are no parties in your nation with seats, feel free to visit the forum and request an early election on the Early Election Requests thread: http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=4362

Random quote: "The more you can increase fear of drugs and crime, welfare mothers, immigrants and aliens, the more you control all the people." - Noam Chomsky

This page was generated with PHP
Copyright 2004-2010 Wouter Lievens
Queries performed: 54