*Ahem*
- Thread starter Heft
- Start date
Grosseschnauzer
TNPer
There is a recordkeeping issue here.
While the referendum on that treaty ended on the 23rd of October, the treaty itself makes reference to the date of the last signature, and there's no record of that date, is there?
In fact that quoted text fails to show the date of the signatures for either party to the treaty.
While the referendum on that treaty ended on the 23rd of October, the treaty itself makes reference to the date of the last signature, and there's no record of that date, is there?
In fact that quoted text fails to show the date of the signatures for either party to the treaty.
True.
Ok, poking around the RLA and TPC forums some. I've found a copy of The Communist Manifesto, and an article called "The Abolition of Work". That sounds fun. Wow, I really should read some of these. "Ten Recurring Economic Fallacies: 1774-2004".
Alright....getting frustrated. Whatever, can't find it (probably hidden, and I don't know the layout of those forums too well).
I believe, however, that it was ratified by the RLA on October 28th. Maybe the 27th. So that gives you a few more days. Still, though.
Ok, poking around the RLA and TPC forums some. I've found a copy of The Communist Manifesto, and an article called "The Abolition of Work". That sounds fun. Wow, I really should read some of these. "Ten Recurring Economic Fallacies: 1774-2004".
Alright....getting frustrated. Whatever, can't find it (probably hidden, and I don't know the layout of those forums too well).
I believe, however, that it was ratified by the RLA on October 28th. Maybe the 27th. So that gives you a few more days. Still, though.
Tresville
TNPer
Oct 25 2005 was the date in which this proposal passed. The RV's would be the last party to sign. The vote was extended 2 days to allow for the RV's to vote as this proposal was in the RA first, but later moved.
U can find that proposal here (click me).
U can find that proposal here (click me).
Grosseschnauzer
TNPer
Tresville, it was the 23rd. If you read the editorial note I inserted at the time at the end of the quoted treaty in italics, the dates given for the referendum covers 9 days (14th-23rd) rather than 7.
Tresville
TNPer
Namyeknom
TNPer
(Not being able to remember much before December, I'm guessing alot of this).
OK, my assumption was that the 90 day clause was intended as a way for us the count the benefit/disadvantage of this treaty, and reconsider. Therefore, when it was originally proposed, I'm guessing it was intended to be put to the RA for discussion when the 90 days was up.
Then I assume between the MoEA and the MoD and what changes the RLA may want, we'd have to patch together a treaty suitable for all.
Which would then have to before the RA for a vote.
Which could then be signed.
And I know it sounds as if I'm trying to get out of sorting this out, mainly because I am, but it seems pointless to start up any kind of dialogue with the RLA before, 1) we know what we want; 2) the elections have been sorted, as the incoming cabinet may have a different view on what to do.
So I'm happy for a discussion to be started in the RA, and I'll even contact the RLA to tell them treaties up discussion. But I can't see much point in doing anymore than that, when their might be a reverse course on foreign policy come Feb 8th.
Sound good to all?
OK, my assumption was that the 90 day clause was intended as a way for us the count the benefit/disadvantage of this treaty, and reconsider. Therefore, when it was originally proposed, I'm guessing it was intended to be put to the RA for discussion when the 90 days was up.
Then I assume between the MoEA and the MoD and what changes the RLA may want, we'd have to patch together a treaty suitable for all.
Which would then have to before the RA for a vote.
Which could then be signed.
And I know it sounds as if I'm trying to get out of sorting this out, mainly because I am, but it seems pointless to start up any kind of dialogue with the RLA before, 1) we know what we want; 2) the elections have been sorted, as the incoming cabinet may have a different view on what to do.
So I'm happy for a discussion to be started in the RA, and I'll even contact the RLA to tell them treaties up discussion. But I can't see much point in doing anymore than that, when their might be a reverse course on foreign policy come Feb 8th.
Sound good to all?
Haor Chall
The Power of the Dark Side
- TNP Nation
- Haor Chall
Direct democracy and diplomacy do not good bedfellows make...
Anyway, two points. Firstly, the article refers to sending "representatives" and more importantly from my understanding of it, the Lion-Star Pact would be a mutual defence treaty which doesn't need RA approval only a Cabinet vote.
Anyway, two points. Firstly, the article refers to sending "representatives" and more importantly from my understanding of it, the Lion-Star Pact would be a mutual defence treaty which doesn't need RA approval only a Cabinet vote.
Good job, Nam...I don't envy your busy-ness right now. 
Haor Chall
The Power of the Dark Side
- TNP Nation
- Haor Chall
So... Was anything done with this?
Haor Chall
The Power of the Dark Side
- TNP Nation
- Haor Chall
No problem, with the timing it probably makes sense. I was just making sure that I didn't cover something that hadn't already been covered that was all. 