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: Implementation of M.A.D
Details
Submitted by[?]: Militant Alliance of the Left
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: April 2220
Description[?]:
| Mutually Assured Destruction was the primary reason that the Cold War never went "hot". This policy, adopted by the superpowers of the USA and USSR was a global equivalent of "an eye for an eye". It meant that neither side would strike first, but would respond to any attack with one of equal magnitude (e.g. If New York was attacked, then the USA would attack an equivalent city, such as Leningrad). This policy reduces the chance of a full scale war, and means that the only wars carried out are against guerilla armies without a nuclear capability. This will allow spending on the military to be reduced and diverted to much more important issues. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning the use of chemical and biological weaponry in warfare.
Old value:: The nation reserves the right to use chemical or biological weapons in warfare for any reason.
Current: The nation shall never use chemical or biological weaponry in warfare.
Proposed: The nation shall never use chemical or biological weapons in warfare unless another nation uses them first.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning the use of nuclear weaponry in warfare.
Old value:: The nation reserves the right to use nuclear weapons in retaliation to any attack.
Current: The nation shall never use nuclear weapons in warfare.
Proposed: The nation shall never use nuclear weapons in warfare unless another nation uses them first.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 13:35:25, April 25, 2006 CET | From | Experimentum Party | To | Debating the Implementation of M.A.D |
| Message | Hmmm... We are normally supportive of your party's proposals, however, have you considered the possibility that Rutania may not be in a position to retaliate should it be struck first? |
| Date | 18:35:28, April 25, 2006 CET | From | Militant Alliance of the Left | To | Debating the Implementation of M.A.D |
| Message | Rutania has always "reserved the right to develop and store NCB weapons", and I believe the defense industries who develop our weapons will have taken advantage of this. If you are doubtful, then propose that the government intervenes in the actions of these private companies and sets the agenda to build such weapons, although it will be a burden on the economy if such an action is taken. |
| Date | 22:17:59, April 25, 2006 CET | From | Libertarian Alcoholic Party II | To | Debating the Implementation of M.A.D |
| Message | Mutually Assured Destruction is an awful policy. Living in constant terror has bad economic and social repercussions. |
| Date | 01:04:25, April 26, 2006 CET | From | League of Rutanian Fremen | To | Debating the Implementation of M.A.D |
| Message | While we support this bill, we support the curretn policy as well. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes | Total Seats: 201 | ||||
| no | Total Seats: 112 | ||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 286 |
| Random fact: In Culturally Protected nations, special care must be taken to ensure realism is maintained when role-playing a government controlled by an ethnic and/or religious minority. If it is to be supposed that this government is supported by a majority of the population, then this should be plausibly and sufficiently role-played. The burden of proof is on the player or players role-playing such a regime to demonstrate that it is being done realistically |
| Random quote: "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the colour of their skin but by the content of their character." - Martin Luther King Jr. |