Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to The City State of Q102. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Locked Topic
The United Opposition Coalition; [OOC UOC Party only]
Topic Started: Dec 22 2005, 06:27 PM (3,698 Views)
Joe Bobs
Member Avatar
Former Delegate of Q102
Member
Well, they wouldn't be hypocrites, because they argued against neutrality. What I mean is, we need to put down this Democratic League and talk about all the negative consequences, how it could drag us into wars due to the less stable regions it involves, wars that shouldn't involve us, and then if they go for it, they'll lose popularity, and if they dont we can call them hypocrites and they'll still lose popularity.

The wonders of politics.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
lamedud
Member Avatar
Councillor of Q102
Councillor
We should throw them the definition of neutral we came up with as well..
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Calm Minds
Member Avatar

Member
dont worry boys, iam on the case
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Joe Bobs
Member Avatar
Former Delegate of Q102
Member
I posed a question in the "questions for the council" forum, but I haven't followed it up.

edit: Just read you bit in the "Democratic League" forum CM. Very good. Loving it. :D
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Blue Tiger
Member Avatar
The Bluest Memeber of Q102
Member
^ Agrees with above post :yes:

But what's OUR postition on the Democratic League? I know we're suppposed to be an oppostion, but just picking the other side of an argument isn't always great. (If they say that it's a good thing we won WWII, we should say no it wasn't ? lol) What is our parties' intresrts here besides making the PPP less popular (after all, JB pointed out that it's impossible not to make them less popular).
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Calm Minds
Member Avatar

Member
well as it stands right now...no go, too many holes, and i for one do not want to be part of a chearleaders convention if they are not going to do anything.....i think the point i am trying to get across is that, untill more info is made avalible, we should go there, after some time, maybe.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Blue Tiger
Member Avatar
The Bluest Memeber of Q102
Member
That was the "vibe" I was getting from you.

However, I would like to point out that if we head over to the fourm she posted, we could try and shape into less of a cheerleading squad without getting comitted to joining. She did mention that in the thread I belive..
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Calm Minds
Member Avatar

Member
i ahve been poping over there a couple times.....if you want BT you could look at it and see were the whole thing is heading, i dont think anyone esle would have a problem wiht it.

Guys?
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Joe Bobs
Member Avatar
Former Delegate of Q102
Member
No of course. But we should stick to our guns and oppose it until its goals have become clearer. It still sounds like an alliance in a think tanks clothing to me.

We should wait and see what it does with its members within the first month or so before we consider joining. If we were to join and then leave again it would make us look weak.

edit: Brilliant VoP CM. Loved it.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Blue Tiger
Member Avatar
The Bluest Memeber of Q102
Member
QPD

Hmm.... opinions?
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Calm Minds
Member Avatar

Member
i really dont think that we have to do anything withthe QDF, its a form of defence. how it is used is what we have to look out for
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
lamedud
Member Avatar
Councillor of Q102
Councillor
QDF? RDF? QPD?

BUHA??! Is this a regional defence force if ever i saw one?
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Joe Bobs
Member Avatar
Former Delegate of Q102
Member
But it is merely defence, so does not effect our stance on neutrality. I mean, if someone attacks us, then neutrality is not concerned as it is unavoidable. So I don't see a reason to oppose this. It isn't going to be used as an offensive weapon. What does everyone else think?
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
lamedud
Member Avatar
Councillor of Q102
Councillor
Yes you're right there JB. I think we should back it, but try and pick holes into it. I mean, are all those sections necessary?!
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Peachydom
Member Avatar
Retired Delegate and Humphrey Boggarts back-up singer
Elder Statesman
HalOoOoOoOO!! Im back!!! Wooop....hopefully some people are happy to see me? *see's one waving hand in the vast audience*
meh
Anyway....do u like me banner? I think red suits. So whats the crak then peeps? Wots bin going on?
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · The Lobby · Next Topic »
Locked Topic