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: No drafting act
Details
Submitted by[?]: dAda rEvoluTion
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: May 2282
Description[?]:
| Bill |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change National service.
Old value:: All adults upon completion of schooling can be required in times of war to serve a term in the military.
Current: All adults upon completion of schooling must serve a term in the military, but can shorten their term/forego it completely by paying a certain amount of money.
Proposed: There shall be no mandatory military or civilian national service.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 14:40:47, September 09, 2006 CET | From | Liberal Democrat Party | To | Debating the No drafting act |
| Message | No support. This is an extreme preventative measure that has never been used |
| Date | 19:14:27, September 09, 2006 CET | From | Social Devolutionist | To | Debating the No drafting act |
| Message | A law that has never been used is rarely a good law. Yes it a preventative measure, but conscription has seldom done more than anger the populace and turn the country against the legitimate and trained military. Heaven forbid that Vanuku is never in a war, but if it is I want this country defended, and represented by committed, trained and professioonal soldiers, not gap year students with guns. The SD supports this amendment. |
| Date | 12:31:25, September 10, 2006 CET | From | Liberal Democrat Party | To | Debating the No drafting act |
| Message | The SD have clearly lost the plot. If 1,000,000 soldiers attack our 200,000 we know the 1,000,000 will win easily. You would rather lose the nation than put in an effort to fight |
| Date | 20:43:05, September 10, 2006 CET | From | Social Devolutionist | To | Debating the No drafting act |
| Message | The LDP raises a very basic argument. If our army is well equipped and well trained I see no reason why an army of 200,000 could not hold out against a much larger force. I appreciate One could just as easily ask what happens if we are attacked by 5,000,000 or 10,000,000. Yes, A larger army will have an advantage over a smaller army, that is hardly the work of a military genius. No matter how large our army though a larger army may come along, but I would still suggest the best defence remains a modern well equipped and well trained army, and forcing people to fight will not win wars. Were Vanuku to come under direct attack it is likely that there would be a great number of voluunteers among eligible men and women looking to serve. Good, theywould have my blessing, and they would be respected for volounteering because they chose to fight, not because they were forced into it. I am aware of only one war in history where a conscript army actually won, that being the eastern front during the second world war, and that owed as much to the russian winter, and stretched german supply lines as it did to the russian army. I don't mind debating these issues, but if you are going to make personal attacks like 'the SD has lost the plot' please at least back them up with proper arguments. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes |
Total Seats: 305 | |||
| no | Total Seats: 255 | |||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Real-life organisations should not be referenced in Particracy, unless they are simple and generic (eg. "National Organisation for Women" is allowed). |
| Random quote: "The worst thing the bad guys can do is force us to doubt the good ones." - Viria Agelasta, former Selucian politician |