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: Defence Reform Agenda of 2180
Details
Submitted by[?]: Mouvement des Conservateurs
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: February 2181
Description[?]:
| Honorable Colleagues, You have to interpret the two articles above differently, we 'reserve the right to - ' is the most important part in those article texts. For the safety of our nation we must alarm all future and potential threats, therefor we ask the consensus of the assembly to ratify this resolution act that will allow the military to 'reserve the right to use biochemical weapons in warfare' - this will set and send a message to the outside world that our country is well protected, not military agressive but decently prepared. Regards. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning biological and chemical weaponry.
Old value:: The nation shall never develop, purchase or store biological or chemical weaponry.
Current: The nation reserves the right to develop, construct and store biological and chemical weapons.
Proposed: The nation reserves the right to develop, construct and store biological and chemical weapons.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning the use of chemical and biological weaponry in warfare.
Old value:: The nation shall never use chemical or biological weaponry in warfare.
Current: The nation reserves the right to use chemical or biological weapons in warfare for any reason.
Proposed: The nation reserves the right to use chemical or biological weapons in warfare for any reason.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 21:22:47, February 03, 2006 CET | From | Devout Ecologists Party | To | Debating the Defence Reform Agenda of 2180 |
| Message | No. Why? We do not want to radiate any kind of possible threat. We want our nation to be a beacon of peace, of example of how it can be. So far we have never been in a war, so there is no reason for this either. There are no threats against us, and nor do we pose one. Let us keep it that way. |
| Date | 22:49:49, February 03, 2006 CET | From |  Mouvement des Conservateurs | To | Debating the Defence Reform Agenda of 2180 |
| Message | It didn't say there were any threats or that our nation is in any danger. I said we might want to defend ourselfs against possible future threats. |
| Date | 01:01:00, February 04, 2006 CET | From | Lutte Féministe de Libération | To | Debating the Defence Reform Agenda of 2180 |
| Message | Again, we'd like to question the DEP's desire to join in cabinet with parties that would support measures that are such blatant attacks on mother Earth. Earth is a treasured land. We have but one planet. We must cherish it. But measures such as these that reserve as our right the ability to destroy this planet in the name of some fool hope for military glory and national honor violate this belief. Fool is the man who would join in the madness that is nuclear war or chemical attacks! Our opponents would have us believe that they have the best interests of our nation in heart. But what interests are these? The right to destroy the very planet and people that we exist to preserve? And then our opponents counter that they seek only to reserve for Rildanor the right to engage in such destructive conflict. But we say in response: our fear is not whether we reserve or do not reserve such a right, because we deny that any such right exists in the first place. What right is this, the right to destroy the Lord's creation? Esteemed members of the Rotunda Assembly, cast out this evil that is maddened war in the name of national honor! Rildanor seeks but one claim to honor, the belief that we are all God's creation, and that we strongly believe that nation shall not rise up against nation, nor learn war anymore! |
| Date | 03:25:01, February 04, 2006 CET | From | Mouvement des Conservateurs | To | Debating the Defence Reform Agenda of 2180 |
| Message | What is up with this attempt to put up a generall political correctness? In that case, 23CC is politically incorrect and prout of it! The answer on your statement is in my bill description. |
| Date | 03:26:03, February 04, 2006 CET | From | Mouvement des Conservateurs | To | Debating the Defence Reform Agenda of 2180 |
| Message | *general *proud |
| Date | 03:42:08, February 04, 2006 CET | From | Lutte Féministe de Libération | To | Debating the Defence Reform Agenda of 2180 |
| Message | "What is up with this attempt to put up a generall political correctness? In that case, 23CC is politically incorrect and prout of it! The answer on your statement is in my bill description." Apologies, but I have no idea what you're talking about. |
| Date | 03:56:37, February 04, 2006 CET | From | Mouvement des Conservateurs | To | Debating the Defence Reform Agenda of 2180 |
| Message | Being 'political correct' is claiming that your own point of view on a subject, is only correct one and that every other approach to it needs to be labeled as 'bad, damaging, criminal, ...'. |
| Date | 00:34:11, February 05, 2006 CET | From | Lutte Féministe de Libération | To | Debating the Defence Reform Agenda of 2180 |
| Message | I don't know where you come from, but in my world political correctness has nothing to do with politics. It's about controlling what people say. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 189 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 264 | |||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 47 |
| Random fact: Check out the forum regularly for game news. http://forum.particracy.net/ |
| Random quote: "Unlike the world of free-markets, in political government when some individuals win, other individuals lose." - Robert Klassen |