Baptism of Fire
K to the izza Mo Fo
Well it has certainly been an interesting few weeks to begin my elife with although hopefully in times to come the excitement isn't coupled with mass invasion and a potential PTO.
So since my last article I have been trying to build up my business, got my food and weapon factory to Q2 wooo only 5 to go -.- and my strength too I'm nearly into 4 figures with that! To start with the slow long play nature of the game was starting to annoy me, I mean I go to a battlefield and if I can hit over 100k without rockets bombs or bazookas I feel like doing a victory dance and then you look up and there's people already sitting on a few mil damage and its disheartening. But now I have came to terms with and I cant wait to that's me!
But anyway I digress so I better get back on topic. The mass invasion of the eUK by multiple enemies, all I could think of was damn we are getting smashed here as I watched territory after territory change colour and you cant help but feel helpless as a little division 1 less than 1000str minnow but still I fought every battle I could and done as much damage as I could even if it was inconsequential but I can say I was there, I helped hold the line and I helped take back what was ours. Sadly from what I have been reading others cannot say the same and they where not minnows and there damage would not have been inconsequential. But at the end of the day we have nearly retook all our lost lands and I look forward to some revenge attacks.
So there I am sitting proud as punch as my fellow countrymen rallied and you start to get some national pride and then what happens? Some toe rags sneak in and PTO one party in the top 5 and potentially another one and now we face a completely different threat but just as dangerous and I hope my fellow eBrits rally around just as before.
I would also like to thank TUP my initial party but I feel I have found a more natural feeling home at PCP where I find my beliefs to be more matched and so a shout out to my new comrades is also in order!
I would like to close this article posing two questions to any readers I may have;
1. Should we airstrike Moldova for revenge and help wipe them off the map?
2. Should we be worried about our Speaker, iAdrastos?
I ask question 2 as others have spoken out about our speaker and I found a comment in his last article a bit worrying.
Defence and Foreign Affairs Committee – Co-Chairmen: Rob the Bruce and Lonqu
The role of having a Chair is particularly important in the Defence and FA Committee, as it is these areas where decisions can need to be taken very quickly and there is no time to consult the whole of Congress. Having a dedicated representative for Defence and FA means the Govt can ‘talk to Congress’ when under time pressure by simply consulting one person, whether that be the chair of the committee or the Speaker.
Does this sound like he is trying to give the speaker powers over our defence and foreign affairs without gaining congressional support? And what if the chair of this committee and the speaker are of the same party, will that one party now controls foreign affairs?
Comments
🙂
"Should we be worried about our Speaker"
Always, no matter who sits in the char
slightly lol'ed
who chose the members of the Congressional Standards Committee?
"We will hopefully be able to get PPs of the main parties onboard with this, so that they will hopefully have acceptance of these rules as a requirement for running for Congress. " - Adrastos
Don't you think this should have been done before trying to impose this?
Personally, I worry that that these committees are simply ways of channelling power and information to a limited few that are nominated by the Speaker who was been voted in by the biggest party.
voted btw 🙂
1. absolutely
2. don't know a thing about current British internal affairs
*This person is not an eUK citizen
"Does this sound like he is trying to give the speaker powers over our defence and foreign affairs without gaining congressional support?"
- No. The purpose of having singular representatives for Congress on Defence and Foreign Affairs is if the CP or Govt ministers need to talk to Congress before making important decisions when they need to be taken quickly. In the past CPs have complained they haven't had the time to consult congress when making quick decisions (because it takes time for 40 people to talk and have a vote).
The purpose of having a dedicated Congressional Representative on FA and Defence (the Chair of that committee) is to provide another expert person who the Govt can talk to, and take questions and advice from when making quick decisions.
As for the Speaker or anyone else gaining 'power' over our Foreign Policy, this cannot be the case- as all important FA and Defence decisions (NEs, MPPs, Donation laws) have to pass through a vote of the whole of Congress, it's a game mechanic.
"And what if the chair of this committee and the speaker are of the same party, will that one party now controls foreign affairs?"
- Again, no. Nobody can 'control' Foreign Affairs within Congress- and it's not like this committee system has given any powers to the Speaker or the Chair to make decisions on Foreign Policy, that still rests with Congress as a whole.
I don't know enough about the ingame mechanics and political systems to form my own opinion, hence I asked that question as by reading other people's thoughts I can learn and understand and then form my own opinion. Thank you for taking the time out to answer these points for me.
No problem, anytime o7
[removed]
The committees are there to appear to be doing something whilst doing absolutely nothing
Got a one party system in place for foreign affairs already.
Airstrike Moldova? Seriously with Finland a bit of a problem right now? They will just attack while we attack Moldova. While we SHOULD be able to take them out...we lost a lot of battles on our own lands against them. Somehow.
It takes a while to gather the resources for an airstrike then you have the vote and it also doesn't have to be started at a specific time from what I have gathered. But I agree that at the moment Finland should be our main priority at the time of writing we hadn't properly engaged Finland. And we u have taken some screenshots from a few of our battles and I see the same pattern forming, in a lot of battles our division 1 and 2 win while our division 3 and 4's lose although I will say what on atleast one occasion I have seen them turn it around. However the rw in scotland I think it was our divisions 3 and 4 basically no showed