Uncle Sam Caves to UK Demands, No-Confidence Vote Urged
•
by Citizen Dru
As any astute player may have observed, two hours ago, the US Federal Reserve made a donation to the United Kingdom's Bank of England in the amount of 100 Gold. This is an apparent payment for the fine assessed by the ATLANTIS treaty org for violations of the ATLANTIS Charter. No other payments to member states appear to have occurred.
A president must serve as a representative of his policies, showing leadership and making arguments for the decisions he makes. Without bothering to discuss it himself or explain his actions to the public who elected him, this payment was made quietly, seemingly in the hope that Uncle Sam could make this controversy go away. Despite vocal criticism of any such move resounding in the American press, his administration seems to have wanted to resolve this quietly and secretively, sweeping the whole issue under the carpet.
Tel Quel urges congressional reps from any party to file articles of impeachment against Uncle Sam as a measure showing that he has lost the confidence of the nation he is attempting to govern. Amid a costly and dubiously managed war, Sam has caved in to the noisy, extortionist UK. He would rather give up money to quiet a noisy "ally" than to actually supply our troops. Moreover, his silence and unwillingness to explain his policy stance come across as feeble, secretive, and confused.
Sam's routine absenteeism, lack of foresight, and secretive disregard for public opinion together make up a compelling case for his removal from the presidency.
[Update]: In comments on another article calling for his impeachment, Uncle Sam has written "Let me write an article first!" Sam, this ATLANTIS/UK contretemps have been going on for two days. Where the hell have you been?
You've had plenty of time to address this and make your case. Your failure to do so does not win the confidence of your people. Your "pay first, answer questions later" approach frankly sucks.
Vote, Comment, Subscribe &c.
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
Voted.
I demand a list of all Congressional members who supported this.
Voted.
http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/america-lifts-its-skirt-and-drops-its-panties-for-atlantis-752446/1/20
i sell q5 weapons for 2,2 gold. pm me if you want
Voted
I'm in Congress, and was not aware of or notified about such a donation. As far as I knew, we were still discussing our options. Wow.
Millions for Defense but not one cent for tribute!
A list of Congressional members who support the President's actions would be great. Then we'd know who not to vote for next election. This is ridiculous.
Although I vehemently disagree with how Uncle Sam has handled things this month I believe that impeachment is a bit extreme. It would be incredibly short sighted to just change presidents because our current president has not written an article in two days.
@DF. And it's better to have an absentee commander-in-chief who doesn't bother to explain himself or make his own case?
Say what you will about Scrabman, at least he's a capable administrator and actively involved.
LATEST ORDERS: FIGHT FOR DEFENCE!!!
@Richard — Hope you're in the congressional forum, preparing to file a motion.
@thefallenmage — You're exactly right.
But impeaching him on the grounds that he used taxpayer dollars to pay fines that many American's opposed would not be extreme. Impeaching him because the American public paid a fine incurred by the President's mistake is not unjust.
here, here. Voted
Congress never got a chance to vote on this. Uncle Sam did this without any official permission.
It's been proposed. Dobo got to it first.
You'll never get it through.
Far too many betas who love the idea of keeping ATLANTIS together.
Consider IMPEACHMENT vs. a NO-CONFIDENCE VOTE. Impeachment sounds extreme, and in the U.S. is generally warranted for "high crimes and misdemeanors". Thanks to the constitutional structures of eRep, however, there's no such requirement, and a "No-Confidence Vote" may be urged on the grounds that the commander in chief has lost the ability to effectively and competently govern his country. In this case, I think his whole handling of the entire affair, not to mention his failures in the rapidly unraveling Mexican campaign present a compelling argument that someone else ought to be in charge.
Voted.
It I was congress, I would vote impeach too.
For too long Atlantis has always given in to the USA and its demands. Now Uncle Sma had the balls to follow a vote by atlantis that said you had to pay the fine according to the treaty signed by the atlantis founders. Why is it so difficult for america to realise that one has to respect other members of an alliance for the alliance to work?
Voted and agree. This has gone down hill quickly. Uncle Sam has breached the trust of the People and needs a wake up call.
@jerry: Perhaps if the UK had respected ATLANTIS by not sending troops to fight the US in Mexico, you'd have an argument. The issue here is not the fine; the issue is that it was paid when Congress was still discussing a response.
"For too long Atlantis has always given in to the USA and its demands."
Like what? What exactly did we demand from you that was SO TERRIBLE?
WE DID NOT SEND TROOPS TO FIGHT AGAINST THE US. I am ashamed by the actions that some of our ex citzens have taken against america and i resent it. However just becuase afew of our people have fought agianst you, does not mean that anyone in our government supported it.
To promote impeachment for the president upholding the bylaws of the ATLANTIS charter is inane. The only vote should be something to do with not allowing congress to vote first.
Perhaps if congress had actually taken a stance on something instead of having their heads up their asses...
Respecting other members of an alliance is acceptable until it becomes a den of hypocrisy. Treating one member different from the rest is unacceptable. Expecting USA to pay fines and not previous transgressors is a problem.
Thank you for sharing *disinterested* Romanian and British perspectives on this Jerry and Corroded.
The fact remains, a lively debate has been going on in the US about what our obligations are under the Treaty of ATLANTIS. Uncle Sam neatly decided to sidestep this altogether, circumventing congress and public opinion. Even he should have known there would be consequences to this.
Um... did anyone else see the part of the discussion in the boards where I was (a) outed, and (b) mocked for my sexuality?
What the hell is wrong with the people in this game?
Yeah. Ian was insanely out of line, and the "Speaker of the House" does nothing.
I reported his ass, but I doubt anything will happen. Same-old, same-old. The old guard get huffy, someone crosses the line, and the thread gets shut down. The last hasn't happened yet, but I bet you it will.
"extortionist UK" I hardly think that upholding a treaty is extortionist behaviour and i believe we voted fr the money to be paid in the other cases (correct me if I'm wrong) so the UK has been fairly solid about this issue and i believe that a deal is being sorted out so be patient and don't write about stuff you obviously don't have a clue about
Everyone that wants Sam's blood, I say bring him to eUSA Court.
Geez...easy fellas. Let's all breathe for a moment.
To Hari and thefallenmage: Congress did not vote on this action, because the donation was made by "Fort Knox," which is an Uncle Sam org - not an official government entity as far as the game is concerned.
To all: Doing things in the heat of the moment often leads to poor decisions. Impeaching a president would have major consequences, and should be something that we weigh very, very carefully.
"Congress did not vote on this action, because the donation was made by "Fort Knox," which is an Uncle Sam org - not an official government entity as far as the game is concerned."
So it's not just undemocratic, it's underhanded. That money has, whether directly or indirectly, come straight from the national coffers. Sam has done this without a Congress vote and is therefore all the more culpable. If a vote wasn't reached, you must impeach.
As I predicted, the SoH locked the thread.
I voted this article already, and I understand the desire for blood, but from what I see the Brits have done a valiant job of limiting the damage. Face it: Sam is a smart & likable guy, but he messed up under the treaty. Similar poor communication is costing us dearly in Mexico right now.
Yes, Atlantis is way too opaque, & some partners are better than others, but strategically I don't see the win in walking out.
One thing I failed to notice in Uncle Sam's statement is any culpability in incurring this fine. "the US broke the treaty". No, Sam, you did, and it's coming out of our pockets. Thanks for that.
PM Gerry of the UK: finally, you reveal your prejudice. Quite different from your official statement.
PM Gerry: jerryGFL
18
jerryGFL3 hours ago
"For too long Atlantis has always given in to the USA and its demands. Now Uncle Sma had the balls to follow a vote by atlantis that said you had to pay the fine according to the treaty signed by the atlantis founders. Why is it so difficult for america to realise that one has to respect other members of an alliance for the alliance to work?"
and btw... cave to ATLANTIS?
or cave to the population who are proposing disastrous plans of action?
Because other members of the alliance have done the exact same thing with no reprecussions. That's why jerry. When Spain coughs up the gold for what they did, and when Romania hands over their savings before they're conquored by indonesia... then I'll agree to pay the fine. You can't enforce the rules some of the time. You have to enforce them ALL of the time. Or else not at all!
Sam, your actions and poor planning have demonstrated a profound indifference to the opinions of the public that elected you. You have to have expected there would be consequences.
And if ATLANTIS falls apart, so much the better. We'd be able to pursue our own policy, and from its ashes we'd be able to find out who our actual allies are.
Let me spam my own forum poll under General Political Discussion, in which by 52%-42% of a total of 40 respondents, there is majority support for your removal from office.
One thing to consider is that congress has to allow funds to be transferred to what is in effect Uncle Sam's private treasury, no pun intended.
If congress wishes to deny him the ability to throw America's gold away like this, they should vote NO on all transfers to Fort Knox.
Additionally, congress has only to propose impeachment and vote on it. A vote is the quickest way to put this issue to rest. If congress votes not to impeach, it will be their heads when election day comes, should the people choose to recognize this as the wrong choice.
Not voted, No confidence doesn't even exist, and Impeachment is too drastic to be used. Ever.
I see 2 major issues in the eUS public reaction and, even though I may be a relative noob, I am still able to see this: 1. The newer players don't know much about ATLANTIS or how it has ever benefitted us and it's policies seem new to us, when they actually have existed, although not known to most of the newer population. 2. Many people in the eUS would like to think (as many US people often do in RL) that we would do fine without alliances, but this is simply not true. We would like to think that everyone will just leave us alone and, if they don't, we'll just beat em till they cry...this is pride speaking, but not the reality of the military capabilities of 10,000 average citizens against 10,000 well-trained people in organized alliances.
The public had little knowledge about the workings of our treaties with ATLANTIS, but Uncle Sam did. Sam has honorably tried to uphold our obligations to the alliance; however, this should have been done through congressional vote.
What is going on now with the Mexican-American war is a test for ATLANTIS. Will the gold that is given be used to defend the eUS, who is still an ally? Right now, we have MPPs with 7 countries. (The eUK is NOT one of them and I don't see any proposals for MPP with our "friends" in the eUK). If ATLANTIS can hold PEACE off, then the alliance is worthy. If not, then the validity of ATLANTIS is in question.