MainMy profileRegistrationLog outLogin
Wednesday
8.1.2025
8:50 AM
| RSS Main
[New messages · Members · Forum rules · Search · RSS ]
  • Page 1 of 1
  • 1
Archive - read only
Abolition of the Bastion Accords
Ponc_GavrisomDate: Thursday, 03 Dec 2009, 2:16 PM | Message # 1
Major general
Group: Users
Messages: 271
Awards: 3
Reputation: -12
Status: Offline
Gentlemen,

I have sickened of so many Senators attacking the treaty, which has established peace in our time, stability and has caused a massive measure of good in the galaxy. They attempt to represent their views as morally right, just and the only right course of action.

Public opinion is massively against war, no-one except certain individuals in this Senate (and radicals in the Remnant) wish to see more bloodshed.

As such I challenge the Senators who truly wish to see the bloodshed continue, so that we may grind eight more sectors into the dirt and butcher thousands more on both sides, to stand up and be counted.

I propose the motion "This Senate revokes its agreement to the Bastion Accords and states its intention to immediately resume the war with the Imperial Remnant with full force."

I personally highlight I do not support this measure, and neither does a single member of the Ruling Council. As such I cast my vote against this motion.


Ponc Gavrisom
Chief of State
 
Simon_LeviDate: Thursday, 03 Dec 2009, 2:21 PM | Message # 2
Major general
Group: Users
Messages: 395
Awards: 3
Reputation: -6
Status: Offline
Senators,

I see the Remnant taking steps to show its serious commitment to peace, its abolition of High Human culture, its moves towards the abolition of slavery and its institution of proper Judicial Process. Not to mention the fact that re-starting the war at this stage would cause massive economic harm to the Remnant and ourselves, as well as losses of men, material and the moral highground.

The Remnant is changing, it is showing its willingness to set the past aside, I say we support it, as such I vote Against this motion, and in favour of maintaining the Pellaeon-Gavrisom Treaty.

The Remnant has made huge strides in the last year, I remain confident that it will continue to do so, becoming a more tolerant and in time, democratic state under Admiral Pellaeon's leadership.


Moff of the Tammuz Sector
 
Eli_FitzgeraldDate: Thursday, 03 Dec 2009, 9:59 PM | Message # 3
Major general
Group: Users
Messages: 355
Awards: 1
Reputation: 6
Status: Offline
I am against this bill, unequivocally, in the strongest possible terms. The New Republic should finish wars, but it should not start them unless we are compelled to do so. However, I do fear that we will soon be compelled to fight when the Remnant decides on its twisted whims that the time has come to resume the war on Ralltiir, or Neimoidia, or Calibop. This is what makes the Pellaeon/Gavrisom Treaty such a disgraceful document; it subjects all of the New Republic to the whims of our enemies, as we wait and watch them recruit and rebuild (while obliviously scrapping our fleet and firing our soldiers in the meantime).

I'm sorry that I don't share the Chief of State's naïveté on this matter, and that I am not willing—as Senator Kruus is—to trust the same people who killed hundreds and thousands of innocent civilians in death camps on my homeworld (and the Chief of State accuses us of "grinding sectors into the dirt" and "butchering thousands"? This is the latest in his profoundly recreant words on this subject, and I am growing tired of him apologizing for this Republic and disparaging its military). The fact remains that Pellaeon's recent "reforms" are cosmetic and superficial; this facelift for the Remnant can't disguise the sadistic, murderous glint in its eyes.

But the treaty—the damage—has been done, and repealing it won't restore the moral high ground that the Chief of State has surrendered. No, the New Republic does not start wars, but we still must do whatever is necessary to be ready for when that war visits us again. We should be deterring and discouraging the Remnant from attacking us, not encouraging them by gutting our fleet, firing our soldiers, and dismantling our bases. I would never accuse the Chief of State of treason, but I would remind him that he took an oath to "preserve, protect and defend" the New Republic.

Furthermore, it has now been 22 days since I challenged Senator Kruus to back up his accusations with facts. He hasn't done so.


Eli Fitzgerald
Senator of Ralltiir (10 BBY—Present)

"I was elected to do some flamethrowing in the Senate. To a light a fire under those Senators and make it hot for them."
 
Artemis_VandenDate: Wednesday, 09 Dec 2009, 0:23 AM | Message # 4
Major general
Group: Users
Messages: 302
Awards: 0
Reputation: 2
Status: Offline
I am absolutely opposed, for reasons that I'm sure are self explanatory considering my many remarks on this subject. I commend the Chief of State for laying bare the emptiness of the anti-peace arguments that have become peculiar to the Senate in recent months. Apparently, many Senators are perfectly willing to criticize the peace treaty but unwilling to reverse it (or perhaps too cowardly to do so, in the case of certain members who have refused to vote on this proposal). This proves that they are, at best, ideologues and, at worst, hypocrites.

Artemis Vanden
Representative of the Naboo
 
Cul-utaanForteDate: Wednesday, 09 Dec 2009, 1:01 AM | Message # 5
Colonel
Group: Users
Messages: 150
Awards: 0
Reputation: -10
Status: Offline
I will abstain from this vote. Personally, we must attempt to unite ourselves, not divide. I find this as nothing more than a sick, political trap on the eve of the elections of many members who oppose Chief Gavrisom. One that I find unbecoming of the Chief of State, in abusing his position of power in an attempt to remove those that do oppose him by attempting to sway popular opinion against them. Bad form, Ponc...bad form...

General Cul'utaan'forte
Forte's Legion
 
OrionKarathDate: Wednesday, 09 Dec 2009, 1:10 AM | Message # 6
Lieutenant general
Group: Administrators
Messages: 612
Awards: 1
Reputation: 0
Status: Offline
Eh...what the hell. Might as well do the Corellian thing and piss on the odds.

I vote In Favor.

While Senator Fitzgerald makes good points, and indeed they are good values to uphold. There have been reports of continuing sentient rights abuses, lack of civil liberties, and many other atrocities well known to be perpetrated by the "New Order" or whatever the Nine Hells they want to call their idealology...Palpatine's whore is what they are, burying their faces into his crotch as he pleased. I bet if old wrinkles and lots of ugly came back up, some damned way again, they'd bend over as long as he made promises of a reach around. And I've gone hopelessly off topic.

The point remains, the Remnant has not changed from its way at a operational level. Yea, they may say pretty words, but they're still the group of people that destroyed Alderaan, killed Eli's parents, among countless other innocents on Ralltiir, among many, many other countless, bloody atrocities that has rid this galaxy of wonderous places and great beings. We should have accepted nothing but an unconditional surrender in the first place...and liberating these eight sectors that still chafe under Imperial oppression, will finally right a wrong.


Orion Karath
Manager from June 2009 to Present, Administrator from December 2011 to Present
My posts here, pre-2009 archives here
 
Ponc_GavrisomDate: Thursday, 10 Dec 2009, 12:50 PM | Message # 7
Major general
Group: Users
Messages: 271
Awards: 3
Reputation: -12
Status: Offline
Mr Karath, you are called to order for inflammatory and unparliamentary language that is unbecoming of a Senator. He is cautioned that any further inapropriate language will result in his ejection from the chamber.

Mr Forte, far be it from me to gauge Senatorial Opinion! I would note to the chamber that Mr Forte has not even dained this to be worth voting on, and evidently has no opinion on whether there is peace or war?


Ponc Gavrisom
Chief of State
 
Simon_LeviDate: Thursday, 10 Dec 2009, 12:52 PM | Message # 8
Major general
Group: Users
Messages: 395
Awards: 3
Reputation: -6
Status: Offline
I vote against this motion. NO more blood must be spilled, peace first!

Moff of the Tammuz Sector
 
Ponc_GavrisomDate: Thursday, 10 Dec 2009, 1:00 PM | Message # 9
Major general
Group: Users
Messages: 271
Awards: 3
Reputation: -12
Status: Offline
The chamber is advised this vote will be closed in 24 hours.

Ponc Gavrisom
Chief of State
 
Jamie_the_HuttDate: Thursday, 10 Dec 2009, 1:06 PM | Message # 10
Major general
Group: Users
Messages: 392
Awards: 0
Reputation: -4
Status: Offline
I vote against the motion, my world is one on the border of Imperial Space, and my people have suffered, vastly worse than rich core worlds such as Corellia. But the core has ever been blind to the needs of the rim, and Corellia especially blind to the needs of the rest of the galaxy with its bloodlust and constant disruption to the Galaxy. While we would vote against a motion to renew war with the Empire, we would vote in favour of a motion to expunge Corellia from the galaxy, so that it may no more disrupt galactic affairs in a manner so disproportionate to its population.
 
Ilanah_ThanatosDate: Thursday, 10 Dec 2009, 2:41 PM | Message # 11
Colonel general
Group: Users
Messages: 891
Awards: 3
Reputation: 4
Status: Offline
I also vote against this motion. I find it ridiculous to even put such a proposition on the table when you state the fact that the residents of this galaxy are AGAINST war. Are we not to be working FOR the people?

Ilanah R. Thanatos
Senator of Chandrila
 
Jory_CarsonDate: Monday, 14 Dec 2009, 4:47 PM | Message # 12
Major general
Group: Users
Messages: 317
Awards: 1
Reputation: 7
Status: Offline
"There are hardly words that can describe this blatant misuse of the position of President. To compel sentients across the board to reinstate the war simply because you cannot handle criticism (I remind the Senate that we have all endured such), to mislead individuals by back stepping, to trap us with words, Sir, is a disgrace unbecoming of a Senator, much less the Chief of State.

"It is a disgrace to those worlds which were subjected to the violence of the Empire, it is a disgrace to those races which were eradicated, or nearly so. It is a disgrace to those who were uprooted from their worlds. But most of all, Chief of State, it is a disgrace to every member of the military who gave his or her life to secure peace for millions of billions; not only those but they who live, and serve, or have served.

"I am compelled to call for a vote of no confidence for the merest hint of this suggestion. I think that it stands to reason that I am AGAINST this bill, as against it as I can possibly be."

 
Ponc_GavrisomDate: Monday, 14 Dec 2009, 9:49 PM | Message # 13
Major general
Group: Users
Messages: 271
Awards: 3
Reputation: -12
Status: Offline
Senator Carson,

What you mean is, you are happy to beat the war drum, until it comes down to the fact. You are happy to shout the call of war and criticise my government on that basis, but when it comes down to it you are in fact too cowardly to endorse a renewal of the war, despite the massive moral obligation you seem to believe is so extant on the matter.

Mr Carson, you have trapped only yourself, with your hypocrisy, on this matter.

Allow me to quote a recent speech from the Honourable Senator Carson "“How far have we already gone that we will hide behind ‘peace first’ to justify our fears of confronting the enemy as we did in times past. How easily have we forgotten the sacrifices of our friends and relatives whose blood bought us the very freedom we now throw in the heap as so much garbage?" indeed he went further! "here once stood a Paragon of swift justice purposed in fighting for those who lives were swept away by the breath of tyranny, I find a coward whose paramount concern is to add some form of respect to his, otherwise lacking, being with words like ‘peace’ and ‘treaty’ heedless of the thousands doomed to continued subjugation at the hands of the enemy. Our hands."

Mr Carson, did you not address a speech to the Senate, directly insinuating that we had a moral obligation to in fact address this very motion? Did you not address a speech saying that by NOT being at war with the Empire we dishonour ourselves greatly.

No Senator Carson, it does not seem unbecoming of me to highlight the hypocrisy of most of the pro-war movement, it is unbecoming of the pro-war Senators to show their decided lack of honesty in citing a "moral obligation for war" then backpeddling as soon as it comes to a vote.

This motion fails.


Ponc Gavrisom
Chief of State
 
Jory_CarsonDate: Tuesday, 15 Dec 2009, 4:36 PM | Message # 14
Major general
Group: Users
Messages: 317
Awards: 1
Reputation: 7
Status: Offline
“What I mean to say, Mr. President, is that this administration is a failure, and has caused the New Republic to fail as well. What I mean to say is that your Bastion Accords were a disgrace to begin with and that to further desecrate our military (by which I mean decommissioning our soldiers and parting our ships) by insinuating that we want war is ludicrous at best.

“What I mean to say, Gavrisom, is that no one wants war, but the Remnant is still out there, preparing, and we are opening the doors for them, and inviting them in. You set the precedent with the Bastion Accords willingly leaving billions undefended; we cannot go back to war now, and to even suggest so, without provocation, is a disgrace.

“We do have a moral obligation, to protect those that we left undefended, but you have tied our hands and now, we can only watch, and wait, but I assure you that when they strike again I will be ready ‘beat the drum’, and ‘shout the call of war’.

“If anything other than plain meaning can be construed from this then intelligence clearly no longer resides within these walls.”

 
Simon_LeviDate: Wednesday, 16 Dec 2009, 3:33 PM | Message # 15
Major general
Group: Users
Messages: 395
Awards: 3
Reputation: -6
Status: Offline
Mr Carson.

You believe the New Republic has "failed", indeed at its very moment of triumph! At the moment peace and prosperity has been re-established (and may it last a hundred thousand more years!). Indeed this is a view so far out of place, so at odds with your own people, who by a massive majority support peace.

The Bastion Accords have finally ended a bloody struggle, and legitimised indeed your worlds prime export.. and allows your world to trade openly with the Remnant (which has been a voracious consumer of your products). I think that Mr Carson, you are showing your un-patriotic hankerings in criticising the Administration, and criticising the will of the New Republic's Demos.

All I can say is, I think the people of Kuat should bear in mind that Mr Carson would prefer to renew the War and cut off their trade with the Remnant if elected to another term!


Moff of the Tammuz Sector
 
  • Page 1 of 1
  • 1
Search:


Copyright MyCorp © 2025
Create a free website with uCoz