The United Sovereign Nations
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.
The United Sovereign Nations


You are not connected. Please login or register

United Forces Bill 2012

+7
alerules22
Kurt
Chip
Carl
Jon
Qorten
Daniel
11 posters

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Pass the bill below?

United Forces Bill 2012 Pollle1050%United Forces Bill 2012 Pollri10 50% [ 8 ]
United Forces Bill 2012 Pollle1031%United Forces Bill 2012 Pollri10 31% [ 5 ]
United Forces Bill 2012 Pollle1019%United Forces Bill 2012 Pollri10 19% [ 3 ]
Total Votes : 16

Poll closed

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 2]

1United Forces Bill 2012 Empty United Forces Bill 2012 Wed Jan 04, 2012 4:02 pm

Daniel

Daniel

UNITED FORCES BILL
2012

To provide for the common defense and welfare of the various nations of the United Sovereign Nations of the World, it is our wish to make provision for the creation of a military force to be known as the United Forces, which shall serve as defenders of our nations, and keepers of the peace.

I: The United Forces shall ideally be composed of people from every USNW member.
II: National participation in induvidual United Forces missions is completely optional.
III a: There shall be no minimum count for military personnel contribution.
III b: Excessive contribution of soldiers shall be decided upon by the Minister of Defense.
III c: If a member state wishes to do so, they may contribute medical staff in addition to, or instead of, military personnel.
IV: The United Forces may only be used in a peacekeeping role, and cannot be used in combat, except with 90% approval from the International Assembly, excluding abstentions.
V: Should they be permitted to participate in combat, the United Forces may only play a defensive role in combat and may not take part in frontline advancement.
VI: The United Forces may only be deployed for any purpose with a 70% vote of approval in the International Assembly.
VII: Peacekeeping missions may only last a maximum of two years, and further deployment may only be granted with a majority vote of approval.
VIII: Military missions may last as long as is nessecary, but upon completion of their mission, the forces must be withdrawn within six months.
IX: The headquarters of the United Forces shall be located in ___________, _______________
X: The USNW Minister of Defense shall be Commander-in-Chief of the United Forces.
XI: The Minister of Defense, or the International Assembly, by decree, may dissolve the United Forces.



Last edited by Daniel on Sat Jan 07, 2012 2:53 pm; edited 4 times in total

2United Forces Bill 2012 Empty Re: United Forces Bill 2012 Wed Jan 04, 2012 4:05 pm

Qorten

Qorten
Member (Ami Confederation)

Again?

3United Forces Bill 2012 Empty Re: United Forces Bill 2012 Wed Jan 04, 2012 5:04 pm

Jon

Jon
First Minister (Kaskaskia & Insulo)
First Minister (Kaskaskia & Insulo)

Insulo will continue it's opposition to the creation of an international military force, and will not participate in such a force should it be created

4United Forces Bill 2012 Empty Re: United Forces Bill 2012 Wed Jan 04, 2012 6:06 pm

Carl

Carl

According to the Article 2 of the 1968 Troix constitution, our nation is opposed to any war and it does not have a right to declare combat. We oppose this creation of an international army force, and will not participate.

http://oktimes.canadian-forum.com

5United Forces Bill 2012 Empty Re: United Forces Bill 2012 Wed Jan 04, 2012 8:42 pm

Guest


Guest

New Chandler will remain neutral on this matter for the time being. New Chandler finds a more organized way of bringing together two or more countries if needed more reasonable compared to a new military.

6United Forces Bill 2012 Empty Re: United Forces Bill 2012 Wed Jan 04, 2012 9:34 pm

Chip

Chip
Webmaster

The Kingdom of Posillipo will support this bill and will take part in this force if it is created.

http://www.usnw.net

7United Forces Bill 2012 Empty Re: United Forces Bill 2012 Thu Jan 05, 2012 3:19 am

Daniel

Daniel

To the governments of Insulo and Troix: We would like to clarify that this is a peacekeeping force, not a military force, and may only be used in a peacekeeping role, unless 100% of the Union, excluding abstentions, votes to use it in combat operations; and even then, it should only be used in a defensive role. This means that if even one nation chooses to vote "no" on the potential issue of transforming it into a "true" military force in the future, that vote will count as a veto, canceling out the option of using it in combat. The proposal has been edited to reflect this.

8United Forces Bill 2012 Empty Re: United Forces Bill 2012 Thu Jan 05, 2012 11:27 am

Kurt

Kurt
Admin (Shayden)
Admin (Shayden)

Shayden approves this and will vote yes on it.

9United Forces Bill 2012 Empty Re: United Forces Bill 2012 Thu Jan 05, 2012 4:41 pm

alerules22

alerules22
Member (Oxacmela & Balisca)
Member (Oxacmela & Balisca)

Ruteria will abstain in this Proposal as our Constitution doesn't allows us to use our Military in Peacekeeping Missions.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gamat approves this proposal, but we do not have any military forces, but we will use our Peacekeeping Forces to help.

http://www.usnw.net

10United Forces Bill 2012 Empty Re: United Forces Bill 2012 Thu Jan 05, 2012 7:53 pm

Guest


Guest

alerules22 wrote:Ruteria will abstain in this Proposal as our Constitution doesn't allows us to use our Military in Peacekeeping Missions.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gamat approves this proposal, but we do not have any military forces, but we will use our Peacekeeping Forces to help.
You only have one vote, you've gotta choose Razz

11United Forces Bill 2012 Empty Re: United Forces Bill 2012 Thu Jan 05, 2012 8:06 pm

alerules22

alerules22
Member (Oxacmela & Balisca)
Member (Oxacmela & Balisca)

Yea, I know, That is why I will abstain

http://www.usnw.net

12United Forces Bill 2012 Empty Re: United Forces Bill 2012 Sat Jan 07, 2012 8:06 am

androidboi

androidboi

New Friscia will approve and vote yes on the following proposed revision:

I: The United Forces shall ideally be composed of soldiers from every USNW member state.
II: Participation in United Forces missions is completely optional.
III a: There shall be no minimum count for military personnel contribution.
III b: Excessive contribution of soldiers shall be decided upon by the Minister of Defense.
IV: The United Forces may only be used for peacekeeping and cannot be used in combat, except with the majority approval of the International Assembly (>50% yes).
V: The United Forces may only play a defensive role in combat and may not take part in front line advancement.
VI: The United Forces may only be deployed for any purpose with the majority approval in the International Assembly.
VII: Peacekeeping missions may only last a maximum of two years, and further deployment may only be granted with the majority approval of the International Assembly.
VIII: [removed entirely]
IX: The headquarters of the United Forces shall be located in Lamare, New Friscia.
X: The USNW Minister of Defense shall be the Commander-in-Chief of the United Forces.
XI: The Minister of Defense -OR- the International Assembly, by decree, may dissolve the United Forces.

13United Forces Bill 2012 Empty Re: United Forces Bill 2012 Sat Jan 07, 2012 2:56 pm

Daniel

Daniel

The Imperial Federal Kingdom of Grand, Belluterra, and Malo has taken your proposals into consideration, and has added most of them to the bill. However, the location of the headquarters of the United Forces will remain a decision that is given to the Executives.

14United Forces Bill 2012 Empty Re: United Forces Bill 2012 Sat Jan 07, 2012 3:28 pm

Guest


Guest

Rheinland supports the changed measures to the proposed United Forces Bill. We also approve New Friscia's request for the headquarters to be located in Lamare.

Adolf Dässler
Chancellor of Rheinland

15United Forces Bill 2012 Empty Re: United Forces Bill 2012 Sat Jan 07, 2012 3:35 pm

kj34

kj34
Member (Paradise)
Member (Paradise)

The Commonwealth of Paradise approves, and will vote yes when it comes to a vote.

16United Forces Bill 2012 Empty Re: United Forces Bill 2012 Sat Jan 07, 2012 4:35 pm

Chip

Chip
Webmaster

Posillipo approves of the revised bill, but believes that the headquarters should be in New Chandler City, or whatever city the International Assembly is located in in the future.

http://www.usnw.net

17United Forces Bill 2012 Empty Re: United Forces Bill 2012 Sat Jan 07, 2012 6:15 pm

Carl

Carl

Troix is still unsure of the bill and will be sent in the House of Officers for review.

Several Protesters in the Imperial Square have gathered to reject the proposed bill.

http://oktimes.canadian-forum.com

18United Forces Bill 2012 Empty Re: United Forces Bill 2012 Sat Jan 07, 2012 7:03 pm

Chip

Chip
Webmaster

Putting this to vote, only the revised version will go to vote.

http://www.usnw.net

19United Forces Bill 2012 Empty Re: United Forces Bill 2012 Sun Jan 08, 2012 12:36 am

Carl

Carl

Ummm, Poll? Razz

http://oktimes.canadian-forum.com

20United Forces Bill 2012 Empty Re: United Forces Bill 2012 Sun Jan 08, 2012 1:59 am

androidboi

androidboi

Chip wrote:Posillipo approves of the revised bill, but believes that the headquarters should be in New Chandler City, or whatever city the International Assembly is located in in the future.

Dang I thought spreading union ministry headquarters was a good thing. bounce

21United Forces Bill 2012 Empty Re: United Forces Bill 2012 Sun Jan 08, 2012 3:35 am

Fox



My Nation approves of the bill with it's current changes.

We hope that this leads to a something good.

We'd also like to see the HQ located in a very active, Full Member of the Union, to avoid lengthy delays when action is needed.

22United Forces Bill 2012 Empty Re: United Forces Bill 2012 Sun Jan 08, 2012 3:52 am

Carl

Carl

Troix has chosen to abstain the vote.

http://oktimes.canadian-forum.com

23United Forces Bill 2012 Empty Re: United Forces Bill 2012 Sun Jan 08, 2012 8:18 am

Daniel

Daniel

Voted Smile

Also, shouldn't this be moved to the Voting Chamber? Wink

24United Forces Bill 2012 Empty Re: United Forces Bill 2012 Sun Jan 08, 2012 1:43 pm

Kurt

Kurt
Admin (Shayden)
Admin (Shayden)

Shayden has voted.

25United Forces Bill 2012 Empty Re: United Forces Bill 2012 Sun Jan 08, 2012 2:13 pm

Guest


Guest

United Forces Bill 2012 Rheinlandauswartigesamt
Rheinland has voted with its delegate.

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 2]

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum