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 Weapon Reform 4118
Details
Submitted by[?]: Fortschrittsvereinigung
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: January 4119
Description[?]:
| Our party feels very strongly that we should reserve the right to use nuclear weaponry in retaliation to a chemical and biological attack as well, not just for a nuclear one. This is to deter enemies from using chemical and biological weapons on us, especially since we have quite rightly ruled out their use by our military. As such nuclear retaliation in some cases may be our only means of defence. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning the use of nuclear weaponry in warfare.
Old value:: The nation shall never use nuclear weapons in warfare unless another nation uses them first.
Current: The nation shall never use nuclear weapons in warfare unless another nation uses them first.
Proposed: The nation reserves the right to nuclear weapons in retaliation to a nuclear, chemical or biological attack.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 18:58:49, November 10, 2016 CET | From | Konservative Union | To | Debating the Nuclear Weapon Reform 4118 |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, we cannot let this irrational, dangerous proposal to pass. Think about the commensurability of the retaliation for the attack. We cannot use nuclear weaponry in retaliation for chemical attack. Antoinette Wellner-Tesla, Defence Minister, DSU |
| Date | 19:19:58, November 10, 2016 CET | From | Fortschrittsvereinigung | To | Debating the Nuclear Weapon Reform 4118 |
| Message | Mr Speaker, What's truly irrational and dangerous is to keep our hands tied. If you look at the proposal in full detail it says we reserve the right to use nuclear weaponry in retaliation to nuclear, chemical or biological attacks. Not that we certainly WILL! We are keeping the option open in case of extreme situations which chemical attacks are used. We're not going to have technicalities hinder the defence of our nation. Furthermore especially with a biological attack but also with chemical attacks, if we used ground troops they would be extremely vulnerable, airstrikes have pilots which could be vulnerable. We believe we should reserve the right to this eventuality in case of extreme circumstances. Paula Fürst, State Chancellor of the Dorvish Republic |
| Date | 19:37:12, November 10, 2016 CET | From | Konservative Union | To | Debating the Nuclear Weapon Reform 4118 |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, From 12 years our military is equiped with the most advances military drones which requires no pilot to conduct air strikes. So your argument on airstrikes having pilots is not valid. We think that the use of nuclear weapon is unhuman and immoral and therefore we will never vote in favour of stretching the catalogue of the possible usage of this kind of weaponry. Antoinette Wellner-Tesla, DM, DSU |
| Date | 19:53:29, November 10, 2016 CET | From | Fortschrittsvereinigung | To | Debating the Nuclear Weapon Reform 4118 |
| Message | Ms Wellner-Tesla, From 12 years? Do you mean to say we don't have the most advanced military drones yet? Back to the argument, we're not saying nuclear retaliation will be the definite, default method following a potential chemical attack, we're simply not taking the cards off the table in case it is our only workable option. What if these potential chemicals somehow damaged our drone equipment? Paula Fürst, State Chancellor of the Dorvish Republic |
| Date | 19:59:48, November 10, 2016 CET | From | Konservative Union | To | Debating the Nuclear Weapon Reform 4118 |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, Defence Minister meant meant for 12 years.... Mrs. Furst let's get to the point. We will not support this bill for ideological reasons. Angela Schultz, DSU leader. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes | Total Seats: 190 | |||
| no |
Total Seats: 310 | |||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Particracy does not allow official national flags of real-life nations or flags which are very prominent and recognisable (eg. the flags of the European Union, the United Nations, Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union or the Confederate States of America). |
| Random quote: "I consider myself a citizen of the world!" - Charlie Chaplin |