Users browsing this thread:

Resentine · 02-13-2016, 03:34 PM

(02-13-2016, 03:33 PM)Belschaft Wrote: So you have a smaller campaign sticker?

You know what they say, "Go big or go home."

I'll cook one up. Paint.net, AWAY!!! *Flies into the sun*

An eye for an eye just makes the whole world go blind.
~Mahatma Gandhi

RP-Government Information

Army Ops

Resentine · 02-13-2016, 03:42 PM

Here we go, the smaller Campaign stickers!

Smaller sticker

Smallest Sticker

An eye for an eye just makes the whole world go blind.
~Mahatma Gandhi

RP-Government Information

Army Ops

**Belschaft** · 02-13-2016, 03:49 PM

I need something even smaller or my sig will look ridiculous....

_{Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making}
^{Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator}

PREVIOUS ROLES

Resentine · 02-13-2016, 03:56 PM

(02-13-2016, 03:49 PM)Belschaft Wrote: I need something even smaller or my sig will look ridiculous....

The Belschaft Sticker

An eye for an eye just makes the whole world go blind.
~Mahatma Gandhi

RP-Government Information

Army Ops

Omega · 02-14-2016, 07:16 PM

How would you work with the MoFA to insure we are not compromising diplomatic interests due to SPSF actions?

Above all else, I hope to be a decent person.
Has Been
What's Next?

CoA: August 2016-January 2017
Minister of Foreign Affairs: October 2019-June 2020, October 2020- February 2021

Resentine · 02-14-2016, 07:28 PM

(02-14-2016, 07:16 PM)Omega Wrote: How would you work with the MoFA to insure we are not compromising diplomatic interests due to SPSF actions?

Well, that would both rely on the views of both myself and the MoFA, of which I am an independent. With that out of the way, I'd probably need to consult with the MoFA about certain regions before operations, however, this would be somewhat difficult depending on the MoFA's personal views. This is not to suggest I have a hateful opinion of either Defenderists or Raiders, it's just a matter of operational security that cannot be compromised. That's sort of the big difficulty with ops, especially when it comes to Foreign Policy. It's hard to consult the right people(like the MoFA) without compromising ops. I'd certainly try to though.

An eye for an eye just makes the whole world go blind.
~Mahatma Gandhi

RP-Government Information

Army Ops

Zak6858 · 02-15-2016, 03:17 AM

Do you intend to betray anyone else because they did one thing wrong?

I am Zadiner/Zak. Part of Assembly, some other stuff, Founder of some other region.
Hey, I have a bunch of issues. You don't need to care.
Emoji of the week: :dodgy:

Drugged Monkeys · 02-15-2016, 07:48 AM

Would you care to explain to the citizens of TSP why you changed your vote in regards to Belschaft's Security Threat Removal?

Semi-Unretired

~~Cormac~~ · 02-15-2016, 08:52 AM

(02-15-2016, 07:48 AM)Drugged Monkeys Wrote: Would you care to explain to the citizens of TSP why you changed your vote in regards to Belschaft's Security Threat Removal?

Additionally, Resentine, should this matter end up before the Cabinet, should we expect that your vote will remain against overturning Belschaft's security threat designation, if elected Minister of the Army?

Resentine · 02-15-2016, 12:09 PM

(02-15-2016, 07:48 AM)Drugged Monkeys Wrote: Would you care to explain to the citizens of TSP why you changed your vote in regards to Belschaft's Security Threat Removal?

(02-15-2016, 08:52 AM)Cormac Wrote: Additionally, Resentine, should this matter end up before the Cabinet, should we expect that your vote will remain against overturning Belschaft's security threat designation, if elected Minister of the Army?

Alright. Gonna try to kill two birds with one stone here, so, bear with me:

It was not an easy choice to make. I hate the idea that I had to make that choice, but, I did, and I've got to answer for that. I voted not because I felt Belschaft was a security threat, but, because I didn't feel that it was the right time to make that decision. Bel's a good guy and I trust him as much as I trust my guys in SPSF, but, now was not the right time to be making that decision. Having elections and making that choice are two things that don't mix well together, because that leads to charged emotions and cropped up personal disputes that have no place in the discussion, which is exactly what happened. I don't feel good about making that choice, but, I feel like I did make the right one. I can say that if I get elected and into Cabinet, it will be the FIRST discussion that the new Cabinet has, and I will be in support of Belschaft. And if I don't get elected and Cabinet does nothing with it, I will bring it back to the Assembly. I don't feel good about making that choice, but, a choice was made nonetheless, and I stand by what I chose this time around. It was wrong to take the decision of Belschaft's ST status right before elections, and put everyone in a poor position.

So, there's my explanation and yes, my vote will change if a new vote popped up. But it was wrong to make the decision of the ST now, and I stand by that. It wasn't fair to put anyone in that position right before elections, be it Bel or any other citizen. The vote should've happened earlier or after elections.

An eye for an eye just makes the whole world go blind.
~Mahatma Gandhi

RP-Government Information

Army Ops

(This post was last modified: 02-15-2016, 12:09 PM by Resentine.)