MainMy profileRegistrationLog outLogin
Monday
6.1.2025
12:16 PM
| RSS Main
[New messages · Members · Forum rules · Search · RSS ]
  • Page 2 of 2
  • «
  • 1
  • 2
Archive - read only
Ban on Capital Ships in Planetary Fleets
Capital ships are not necessary for planetary fleets, and should be limited.
1. Yes [ 2 ] [28.57%]
2. No [ 5 ] [71.43%]
Answers total: 7
OrionKarathDate: Friday, 30 Oct 2009, 1:02 AM | Message # 16
Lieutenant general
Group: Administrators
Messages: 612
Awards: 1
Reputation: 0
Status: Offline
Senator Kruus, we alll know floating monument to yourself would be included in the ban, so there is no need to fight the matter. And as for your stance, and that of your political allies...I see a very large case of duality here. I believe your most recent musical piece was aimed against the Anti-Treaty movement in the Senate, accusing it of essentially spooking everyone with the threat of Imperial aggression. You've shouted up and down these halls of how the treaty is honored, and such a great document. And yet here you are, on the verge of a panic attack because Neimoidia, a world in the Colonies Region, is under threat from Imperial attack. This is hypocracy at it's finest, my friends.

Senator Kruus has slammed the conservatives of the chamber for the past few weeks on their expressed want of continued strong defense, and yet here he is, screaming for strong defense to remain. He calls for demilitarization and disarmament, and strictly expects all to follow the Peace At Any Cost policy, as does Senator Cambrist, and Chief of State Gavrisom...and yet when it comes to their own worlds, or in Cambrist and Gavricom's case their allies, suddenly they do a complete reversal of their policies and beliefs. And as my office was made aware just hours ago began the process of purchase for a Morgan-class Destroyer by Rendili StarDrive. While length wise, it wouldn't be effected by this bill, it's high amount of weaponry puts it in a grey area, that I would almost say Senator Vanden would intend such a vessel (As it could be considered a Missle Destroyer, almost) to be banned. It's no wonder you wish to oppose this bill, and Chief Gavrisom is going against his trademark policy to protect his allies. This is a disgusting act of hypocricy I've ever seen since joining the Senate.

While my principles in believing in planetary rights state I vote against this bill, proof that too many worlds are misusing their capital ships in Imperialistic ventures far beyond their bounds, or declared intentions in this debate for that matter, pushes my moral values to support a vote for this bill. Due to inner conflict, unless the arguement for or against clears up, I abstain from the vote.


Orion Karath
Manager from June 2009 to Present, Administrator from December 2011 to Present
My posts here, pre-2009 archives here
 
Cul-utaanForteDate: Friday, 30 Oct 2009, 1:19 AM | Message # 17
Colonel
Group: Users
Messages: 150
Awards: 0
Reputation: -10
Status: Offline
Citing the points made for this bill by Senator Vanden, and the points against its opposition by Senator Karath, I vote In Favor of this bill. The heavy warships should be kept in the federal forces, not used in imperialist gambits by wreckless planetary governments that step far beyond their bounds and even regional concern. I believe my views on Neimoidia's conquests are very public record.

General Cul'utaan'forte
Forte's Legion
 
Jamie_the_HuttDate: Friday, 30 Oct 2009, 1:35 AM | Message # 18
Major general
Group: Users
Messages: 392
Awards: 0
Reputation: -4
Status: Offline
I vote against this motion.
 
Artemis_VandenDate: Friday, 30 Oct 2009, 12:58 PM | Message # 19
Major general
Group: Users
Messages: 302
Awards: 0
Reputation: 2
Status: Offline
I am thankful for the votes in favor of this motion, and for Senator Karath's abstention. I have thought on this measure overnight and I suppose, if it will prevent acrimony on this matter and bring about a greater degree of consensus, I will agree to remove the requirement to decommission and dismantle existing warships. However, this is a matter I intend to take up again in the near future because I believe it is an important element of comprehensive disarmament. In the meantime, this bill will apply only to future construction.

Does this satisfy the Chief of State?


Artemis Vanden
Representative of the Naboo


Message edited by Artemis_Vanden - Friday, 30 Oct 2009, 12:59 PM
 
Ponc_GavrisomDate: Friday, 30 Oct 2009, 4:36 PM | Message # 20
Major general
Group: Users
Messages: 271
Awards: 3
Reputation: -12
Status: Offline
In favour of amendment as laid out by Mr Vanden.

Ponc Gavrisom
Chief of State
 
Tremaine_FowlkesDate: Saturday, 31 Oct 2009, 3:41 AM | Message # 21
Colonel general
Group: Users
Messages: 881
Awards: 0
Reputation: 3
Status: Offline
While I do disagree with Senator Vanden's original proposal, I vote in favor of his amendments. However, I would to propose that we put up some sort of restrictions for planetary fleets such as Neimoidia or Brentaal. However their intentions may be good, the planetary forces are supposed to stay and defend their homeworlds. The Blockade of Acherin was necessary, but for future use, planetary forces should not leave their territory. There are some worlds that do not have sufficient Republic forces because the planetary forces is capable of defending attacks. But what would happen if most of the defending forces left? That would leave such world vulnerable to an attack, most likely from the rogue warlords.

Tremaine Fowlkes,
Senator of Mowgle


Tremaine Fowlkes
Senator of Telos IV
 
Jamie_the_HuttDate: Saturday, 31 Oct 2009, 9:37 AM | Message # 22
Major general
Group: Users
Messages: 392
Awards: 0
Reputation: -4
Status: Offline
For the reasons listed by Senator Fowlkes I vote in favour of Mr Vandens ammendment.
 
Ponc_GavrisomDate: Saturday, 31 Oct 2009, 1:29 PM | Message # 23
Major general
Group: Users
Messages: 271
Awards: 3
Reputation: -12
Status: Offline
With 1 vote against, 1 vote in favor of the original motion, 1 vote abstaining and 4 in favour of the Amendment by Mr Vanden allowing currently commissioned ships to stay in service, this Act passes with that Amendment.

I have had a question from the Senator from Calamari when this will apply, and it will apply from the end of todays session (5pm Coruscant time), as with all legislation.


Ponc Gavrisom
Chief of State


Message edited by Ponc_Gavrisom - Saturday, 31 Oct 2009, 1:38 PM
 
Senator_CambristDate: Saturday, 31 Oct 2009, 2:18 PM | Message # 24
Lieutenant general
Group: Users
Messages: 761
Awards: 6
Reputation: -5
Status: Offline
If Senator Fowlkes resigns as Senator, becomes a citizen of Brentaal and assumes a commission in its planetary defense fleet, then we might listen to his opinions on how our world conducts its own affairs.



Message edited by Reuke_Cambrist - Saturday, 31 Oct 2009, 2:24 PM
 
  • Page 2 of 2
  • «
  • 1
  • 2
Search:


Copyright MyCorp © 2025
Create a free website with uCoz