|
Repeal of turbolasers provision
| |
| Crin_Star | Date: Saturday, 13 Nov 2010, 6:52 PM | Message # 46 |
|
Major general
Group: Users
Messages: 313
Status: Offline
| "I would remind the senator from Sluis Van that the chair just spoke about making personal attacks against other senators and 'I' am not the issue on debate here. As for you analogy yes two normal blasters would be better than a single heavy blaster but two heavy blasters would be more effective than a two heavy and a heavy blaster and a normal blaster would still be more effective.
|
| |
| |
| Titus_Veritas | Date: Saturday, 13 Nov 2010, 7:04 PM | Message # 47 |
 Colonel
Group: Users
Messages: 166
Status: Offline
| I will abstain from this vote. After careful consideration of both sides of the argument, each with valid points, as well as the original legislation and its outcome, I have come to believe I was short sighted in this matter, but I am still conflicted and remain not entirely convinced by Senator Oriel's beliefs. Also, the Defense Committee stands without an opinion on this bill. I do ask that some form of civility returns to this debate, not childish banter and jabs. This is the Imperial Senate and we are the galactic government, I hope some of our junior members, and even a few senior ones, can begin to act like it. This isn't the Republic after all, and I'd hate to see some of you replaced, although you are making a compelling case for an established age requirement for delegates at the moment.
Viceroy Titus Veritas, House Veritas
Consul of the House of Lords
Former Senator of Deralia and the Tammuz Sector (50 BBY - 30 BBY, 18 BBY - 10 BBY)
Former Chairman of the Imperial Senate Defense Committee (18 BBY - 10 BBY)
Message edited by TitusVeritas - Saturday, 13 Nov 2010, 7:09 PM |
| |
| |
| Toben-Domon | Date: Saturday, 13 Nov 2010, 7:07 PM | Message # 48 |
 Major general
Group: Users
Messages: 347
Status: Offline
| I do not make a personal attack on yourself, Senator. I simply point out that I do not comprehend the way the human mind works at times. If two standard blasters are sufficient, why is there a need for two heavy blasters? I am afraid that heavier armaments are not a necessity these days. Everyone is trying to downsize from the war, Senator, yet you seem to see things in the shadows. Boogeymen, I believe humans call them? These creatures in the form of defeated Separatists and criminal organizations just rushing to infest your home. Perhaps, as the only advice I can offer, is that you look to your world's internal defenses and not concentrate so much on a single vessel.
Toben Domon
Senator, Sluis Van
|
| |
| |
| Taja_Lohden | Date: Saturday, 13 Nov 2010, 11:50 PM | Message # 49 |
 Lieutenant
Group: Users
Messages: 79
Status: Offline
| Very well, it would seem I am in the minority vote here, and while it may call my common sense into question, I am sticking with that vote. Kaal, being a strategically unimportant world, is not likely to come under fire any time soon, but it is not just Kaal for which I worry. Often have I decried the fearmongers among us, and yet on this motion I find myself inclined to account for the possibility that there may still be threats out there. I have faith in the Imperial Navy to do what is required of it, and while some of Senator Star's points are shrewd, I think she has a point about our Navy not being able to be everywhere at once. It saddens me that little compromise can be found on this matter, but I digress. Keeping to the business of my own world, Kaal is a tourist-heavy resort world, one which people frequently come to in order to forget the troubles and nuiances of everyday life. That is why, despite our increasing security, one will never see a Stormtrooper on Kaal until they are needed. It is why our defense fleet is small and heavily armed; civillians don't want to be faced with an armada upon entering our system. For the sake of adhering to the law, I will put plans into order to have our fleet revised, but I am not sure every world will be able to reasonably do so. Much as I would like to abstain from this vote, as Senator Veritas has, I do not feel that I could rightfully air my opinions if I did, nor feel that I had at least tried to fight the battle in the name of planetary security, something which I have long since come to believe I have violated since voting in favour of the original bill. My vote stands as in favour of the proposed amendments, and I'm afraid that because this playground squabble is deteriorating into the absurd, this is my final decision, Senators.
|
| |
| |
| Crin_Star | Date: Sunday, 14 Nov 2010, 6:17 AM | Message # 50 |
|
Major general
Group: Users
Messages: 313
Status: Offline
| Thank you Senator Lohden, for having a voice of reason in this.
|
| |
| |
| Dierna_Chakrei | Date: Sunday, 14 Nov 2010, 6:22 PM | Message # 51 |
|
Private
Group: Users
Messages: 5
Status: Offline
| Aeeq votes in favor of this motion to repeal
|
| |
| |
| Sate_Pestage | Date: Sunday, 14 Nov 2010, 6:38 PM | Message # 52 |
 Lieutenant general
Group: Moderators
Messages: 639
Status: Offline
| Senator Chakrei, please bear in mind my reminder to the Senate and explain, if you will, what Aeeq's interest is in this provision. Senator Fowlkes, I would also be interested to know, as, I'm sure, would the people of Telos IV, why you have decided to vote as you have. Mind you, Senators, this is not a comment upon your votes—only the lack of explanation for them. On this issue in particular, where accusations have been made of potential conflicts of interest, I feel it is particularly important for Senators to be candid with their reasons why they support or oppose the measure.
Sate Pestage
Grand Vizier of the Empire
Assistant to Emperor Palpatine
Chair of the Imperial Senate
Message edited by Sate_Pestage - Sunday, 14 Nov 2010, 6:41 PM |
| |
| |
| Exar_Ray | Date: Monday, 15 Nov 2010, 3:05 AM | Message # 53 |
 Major general
Group: Users
Messages: 353
Status: Offline
| I am going to abstain from voting on this bill. My reasoning is because while we could have a friendly debate on this, it has turned into a kindergarten playground from both sides in trying to convince the Senate to vote in their respective favor. I suggest that the chair close this forum, and that Senator Star re-introduce this bill with a little bit more of a professionalism look to it, and keeping personal comments in mind, we all properly comment on it.
|
| |
| |
| Crin_Star | Date: Monday, 15 Nov 2010, 5:26 AM | Message # 54 |
|
Major general
Group: Users
Messages: 313
Status: Offline
| "I would like to take a moment to respond to the accusations of bias and having a vested interest in this measure. While it is true Volus DOES have a capital ship with guns as powerful as those listed in the act, where it is untrue is that Senator Oriel's act would have any effect on them as they are already individual cannons, able to operate independently of one another. For those Senators, who see this as a vested interest you might want to get your facts right before making false and wild allegations against myself and the Volusian people. However Senator Ray I do believe you are right that this particular measure has become too mired by personal attacks, a few of which I myself may be guilty of, and as such would like to ask the chair if it would be possible to begin this much needed amendment again with a temporary increase in the rules regarding debate and decorum so that we may focus on the issue at hand and not each other."
|
| |
| |
| Senator_Cambrist | Date: Monday, 15 Nov 2010, 7:35 AM | Message # 55 |
 Lieutenant general
Group: Users
Messages: 761
Status: Offline
| If I may be forgiven my immodesty, Brentaal is, in my opinion, the most strategically important world in the Empire, and even it has no need for weapons of the sort that Senator Star means to permit. If we did need these weapons, placing them on a defense platform would be quite adequate, I should think. The only advantage to having these weapons on a ship (as far as I can see, not being a tactician myself) is mobility. That is, to project power—specifically firepower—to other worlds, systems, and sectors. Brentaal has no desire to do this. It is concerned with defense, not offense, and as of now its defenses are adequate without these weapons. Brentaal votes against the proposal.
|
| |
| |
| Senator_Ordan | Date: Monday, 15 Nov 2010, 9:52 AM | Message # 56 |
 Lieutenant general
Group: Users
Messages: 633
Status: Offline
| I think we've been over this enough times Senator Star. The Senate as a whole is obviously largely apathetic or opposed to your motion. I really think it would be better if once this motion is closed, you accept the will of the Senate (expressed twice now). And concentrated on legislating on matters of importance to the Galaxy instead of wasting everyone's time in such a manner. Your objections have been all rebutted many times, very few worlds have articulated support in a coagent manner. Come now Senator Star, are there not more important matters to occupy our time?
Senator Hubert Ordan
__________________________
Senator of the Azure Sector
Foreign Minister of Anaxes
Captain-General of the Azure Interest Protection Squadron
Deputy Chairman of the Ethics Committee
Worshipful Master of the Most Loyal and Honourable Company of Blockadeers
Archtreasurer of the Vault of Pols Anaxes
Autocrat of Selgon
Owner of Azure Durasteel
Systems Admiral (Ret)
Order of the Canted Circle
|
| |
| |
| Crin_Star | Date: Monday, 15 Nov 2010, 10:17 AM | Message # 57 |
|
Major general
Group: Users
Messages: 313
Status: Offline
| There are no matters more important than the security of our worlds, it is a shame you can not see it Senator Ordan but this measure weakens the security of planets, and I for one will not stop until the security of worlds is no longer threatened by this measure.
|
| |
| |
| Senator_Cambrist | Date: Monday, 15 Nov 2010, 10:26 AM | Message # 58 |
|
Lieutenant general
Group: Users
Messages: 761
Status: Offline
| If I may proffer a suggestion, Senator Star, if you are concerned for the security of Volus might you request a heightened Imperial presence on your world?
|
| |
| |
| Crin_Star | Date: Monday, 15 Nov 2010, 10:30 AM | Message # 59 |
|
Major general
Group: Users
Messages: 313
Status: Offline
| "The security of Volus is fine and not of concern here, what is of concern is the danger of this bill."
|
| |
| |
| Sate_Pestage | Date: Monday, 15 Nov 2010, 4:01 PM | Message # 60 |
|
Lieutenant general
Group: Moderators
Messages: 639
Status: Offline
| It seems this debate has exhausted itself. I will excuse Senator Chakrei and Senator Fowlkes this one, last time. But in the future, I do expect an explanation from all Senators, however brief, of their reasoning. The vote is now closed, and the repeal fails with 66% of votes opposed and 33% in favor.
Sate Pestage
Grand Vizier of the Empire
Assistant to Emperor Palpatine
Chair of the Imperial Senate
|
| |
| |
|
