Main | About | Tutorial | FAQ | Links | Wiki | Forum | World News | World Map | World Ranking | Nations | Electoral Calendar | Party Organizations | Treaties |
Login | Register |
Game Time: April 5461
Next month in: 01:33:05
Server time: 06:26:54, March 29, 2024 CET
Currently online (0): Record: 63 on 23:13:00, July 26, 2019 CET

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: Independant Thought Number 2

Details

Submitted by[?]: Likaton Coalition of the Willing

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: March 2333

Description[?]:

Think.

We believe that:

There is never a cause so just as would justify the use of a weapon of mass destruction; the loss of innocent life would always outweigh the military victory.

If we will not use them, we should not have them. We cannot ask other nations to refrain from WMD development and stockpiling if we will not do the same.

If we cannot trust, we should not be trusted. Our Special Forces should not be asked to achieve political goals; we should use them to ensure our safety, but not at the expense of pre-emptive strikes within other nations.

Proposals

Debate

These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:

Date21:59:36, December 20, 2006 CET
FromAM Populist Social Democrats
ToDebating the Independant Thought Number 2
MessageThis would only encourage other nations to use them against us, knowing we could not retaliate.

Date13:08:15, December 21, 2006 CET
FromUnited Democratic Labour Party
ToDebating the Independant Thought Number 2
MessageSorry, that's the same argument young guys use for carrying knifes or guns in the street, and that just leads to more stabbings and shootings, not less

Date15:20:55, December 21, 2006 CET
FromAM Populist Social Democrats
ToDebating the Independant Thought Number 2
MessageIf a particular person were committed to not using the knife or gun in anything other than in retaliation, and carried it openly stating that intent, we would see the analogy working; but only then.

We proposed, and would still support, a "no first use" of chemical or biological weapons law, making their use legal only in cases of retaliation. But, we wish to minimize the risk of such weapons being used against us, and unilateral disarmament adds to the risk rather than subtracting from it.

subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe

Voting

Vote Seats
yes
  

Total Seats: 71

no
  

Total Seats: 59

abstain
  

Total Seats: 69


Random fact: The majority of nations in Particracy are "Culturally Protected" with an established cultural background. Only the "Culturally Open" nations are not bound by the rules surrounding culture. The Cultural Protocols Index should be consulted for more information about the cultural situation of each nation.

Random quote: "If voting changed anything, they'd abolish it." - Ken Livingstone

This page was generated with PHP
Copyright 2004-2010 Wouter Lievens
Queries performed: 59