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: Improving National Defence Through a Robust Military
Details
Submitted by[?]: Agramontian League (AL)
Status[?]: defeated
Votes: This bill proposes the withdrawal from a treaty. It will require half of the legislature to vote in favor[?]. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: October 4474
Description[?]:
| National defence should be the priority for any government. We can improve our position by increasing the strength of our military forces. Guillermo Berrocal, Leader of the Agramontian League |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy towards civilians who conscientiously object to being required to perform military service (if applicable).
Old value:: Conscientious objectors are exempted.
Current: Conscientious objectors are exempted.
Proposed: Conscientious objectors can be exempted from combatant roles, but not from non-combatant roles.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change National service.
Old value:: All adults upon completion of schooling must serve a term of civilian national service.
Current: All adults upon completion of schooling must serve a term of civilian national service.
Proposed: All adults upon completion of schooling must serve either a term in the military or a lesser paid term of civilian national service, at their option.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change Appointment of military officers
Old value:: The Ministry of Defense is authorized to appoint military officers.
Current: The Ministry of Defense is authorized to appoint military officers.
Proposed: The head of state is responsible for the appointment of military officers.
Article 4
Withdraw from the Abolition of Nuclear Weapons Treaty.
Article 5
Withdraw from the Anti Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Weapons Treaty.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 04:13:00, October 23, 2018 CET | From | United Kalistani Worker’s Front | To | Debating the Improving National Defence Through a Robust Military |
| Message | We strongly oppose every article on this bill. |
| Date | 06:31:59, October 23, 2018 CET | From | Socialist Party of Kalistan (SPoK) | To | Debating the Improving National Defence Through a Robust Military |
| Message | We will oppose. The Anti Nuke Treaties are a non-negotiable point for the SP. |
| Date | 13:21:44, October 23, 2018 CET | From | National Conservative Party | To | Debating the Improving National Defence Through a Robust Military |
| Message | We disagree with all legislative articles in this bill, but support the withdrawal from these one-nation treaties. We also do support the idea of revitalizing our military, but the articles in this bill would restrict the freedoms of the Kalistani people (article 3), negatively affect the public economy (article 4), or negatively affect the military by making it a Presidential power rather than a power of the Ministry of Defense to appoint officers. Let us make it known that we wish to withdraw from the Abolition of Nuclear Weapons Treaty and the Anti Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Weapons Treaty for two reasons: 1) One-nation treaties are meant for the sole reason of restricting legislatures and are put in place by parties that temporarily gain a majority in their nation and wish to ensure that changing their policies become highly difficult. 2) We believe that Kalistan should arm itself with nuclear weapons, as Mutually Assured Destruction is the greatest deterrence from war. |
| Date | 14:58:35, October 23, 2018 CET | From | Kalistan First | To | Debating the Improving National Defence Through a Robust Military |
| Message | We still support this, and I applaud our colleges for wanting us to have a strong military. |
| Date | 02:18:46, October 24, 2018 CET | From | Socialist Party of Kalistan (SPoK) | To | Debating the Improving National Defence Through a Robust Military |
| Message | We are in these "one nation treaties" as our comrades in the NCP puts it, for two reasons: 1) They haven't always been one nation Treaties, and if we leave them they will be (OOC: erased, so we're just going to have to redraft them again.) It is better to stay in them to keep them on the books for when the political situation inevitably changes in Kalistan once more and we will need to rejoin them, and 2) Because the goal is to keep nuclear weapons, biological weapons and chemical weapons completely out of Kalistan. We cannot do that as long as warmongers continue to think that those weapons of mass destruction are the most effective deterrent. Here's why we should not pursue these weapons, nor allow them in our nation. If we do not wish to make the moral argument about the demonic destructive capabilities of these weapons and the demonic natures of those people who wish to force them onto our nation, we can make a purely economic argument. A single nuclear weapon will require the wasting of such vast sums of our national treasury that even a research program will bankrupt our treasury, unless we dramatically raise taxes to cover the sum. It is such a collosal waste of money to even produce just one, let alone the damage caused in testing and research of the capability, which is an absolutely necessary pre-requisite. Kalistan does not have a nuclear test range, nor do we have room for one, as our nation is fairly extensively developed. The arsenal we would have to produce to create a credible deterrent would crowd out so many social policy priorities that we would have to undergo a tragic and complete revolution where we more or less cut the people of the Republic adrift and began deficit spending for the first time in perhaps centuries, maybe millenia. This does not even get into the destructive capabilities of chemical and biological weapons. How would we acquire them? Where would we get them from? How would we develop them? How would we test them? What happens if an accident happened? Have those seeking to impose their militancy on the nation considered any of these questions, or is support based solely on a principle of withdrawing from one nation treaties? We strongly oppose the withdrawal from these treaties for these reasons and will continue to support banning nuclear, biological and chemical weapons from Kalistan, both on moral grounds in that we do not like to see thousands, hundreds of thousands, and millions of people die to satisfy the avarice of any sort of demon who would ever deploy those weapons, and for purely economic reasons. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes | Total Seats: 8 | |||||
| no | Total Seats: 78 | |||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 164 |
| Random fact: "Spamming", or the indiscriminate posting of unsolicited messages, is not allowed. |
| Random quote: "I am a conservative to preserve all that is good in our constitution, a radical to remove all that is bad. I seek to preserve property and to respect order, and I equally decry the appeal to the passions of the many or the prejudices of the few." - Benjamin Disraeli |