Using my power to veto, I will refuse to impliment this option until the need arises. I doubt the Minister of the Military will be overridden with things to do for the first month. Such issues will most likely not arise until the late-Middle or early-Industrial Ages, so should we have them? Yes. Now? No.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Military Commanders
Collapse
X
-
SEE?! This is why we need a constitution, because there are corrupt people like TRIP in this world who make up stuff like veto power out of thin air!
My proposed "code of laws" will be posted for voting on tommorow, go here (2nd page) to discuss it.
The anti-constitutionalist are showing their true colors, which is blue and black.....
With a hint of red....*shudders* pure evil....
And this is only the beggining folks. Vote on a Code of Laws to stop this pathetic abuse!!!!
Comment
-
Originally posted by Timeline
btw: I voted no on the poll above, but it makes very little difference, the point is... we need laws that our prez and gov has to obey(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(") This is Bunny. Copy and paste bunny into your signature to help him gain world domination.
Comment
-
Unless there is a line somewhere about the Prez having the power of veto - there is no such power. If we must have on of these silly Constitutions, every line must be voted in by the ppl. No one-person-making-up-whole-Constitution nonsense.
We should regard the Ministers as the same as everyone else unless they have been given a power specifically.
And if this poll was still open I'd vote yes to this great idea. Military Commanders would be nominated/called for as and when the Supreme Military Commander is getting a little overworked, and would be retired with full honours when the SMC is ready to take on the full responsibility or the military situation has subsided.
Comment
Comment