A New Plan and Direction for Defence

mcmasterdonia

mcmasterdonia

Just like a queef in the wind, so is life
-
-
-
TNP Nation
McMasterdonia
To all Citizens of The North Pacific,

First off I would like to introduce myself as the new Minister for Defence in the Government of Delegate Blue Wolf II . I thank the Delegate for nominating me to this position.

Since starting on Nationstates I have tried to be an active contributor to the region and its government. As such I thank the delegate for the opportunity to serve this region further. I pledge to do so, according to my oath and to the best of my ability.

The North Pacific Government has great plans, goals and aspirations for defence. We plan to encourage greater involvement from our citizenry by making defence, and the military a centrepoint of our agenda.

The Delegate and myself will take the coming days to refine and iron out certain aspects of our Defence Agenda, before announcing a comprehensive plan to you all. This plan is likely to involve some hidden gems in unlikely places and exciting things for us all to look forward to, and get involved in.

As I understand it, some have little faith giving the upcoming Delegate elections. Much can be achieved in the time we have, and I plan to do all I can to carry out our agenda.

I strongly encourage you all to suggest new ideas and contribute to the new Defence Ministry Agenda in any way you feel you can. Feel free to do this, by posting on this forum, or by contacting myself by telegram or PM.

Thank-you for reading, and I hope to hear from you soon.

The Kingdom of McMasterdonia

Defence Minister
 
I have a great deal of hope in this new appointment and I welcome the return of the North Pacific Army. However I would also like to point out I have encountered nothing but passive resistance from the Admin team in setting up areas for the NPA and masking for its members. Repeated requests have been either passed over, over looked, or given to some other Admin who then promptly takes no action at all. I am very disturbed by this and hope it is not a trend that will continue as I would like to see the NPA hosted here, as it should be, and not on its own private forum.
 
I have already explained to you Blue Wolf what the issue is. I have no idea where Eluvatar has been since the 8th of April, and I have no direct knowledge of how he has planned to place any areas being used by a Delegate in his revamped forum areas. Surely you can start a thread or two in your own area for now while we find out what is going on with Elu.
 
I would like to applaud this move by the Minister of Defence and the Delegate to restart our regional defence and I look forward to more information about plans for the NPA. I would also like to offer any assistance that I can give to the Minister and the Delegate.
 
I have still not even been masked as a member of the cabinet.

Thank you for the positive feedback Felasia, I will be sure to contact you in coming days.
 
The plan is to establish a military capable or responding to all security threats. Once we have some members signing up, we will hold a conference that only members can see, to debate the militaries goals and aims.
 
Would it create a problem if I'm unable to actually participate in military operation that requires a movement of WA from this region due to my membership in the Security Council? I'm interest in helping in anyway that I can, but I also have an obligation as SC member.
 
I understand your obligations with the security council, and appreciate your ongoing interest in The North Pacific Army. In my opinion, the answer is no, it does not affect the role you can play in the military. We need people from all backgrounds that can work in many different fields.

I don't believe that BW will be planning on moving his WA nation in military action, so i am sure you can contribute in other ways. Your influence would no doubt be an asset for an internal threat (hence your security council membership).

I am currently in the process of writing laws/rules that would apply to the military, if you are interested in giving me assistance on that front, it would be much appreciated.
 
mcmasterdonia:
Once we have some members signing up, we will hold a conference that only members can see, to debate the militaries goals and aims.
Click to expand...
Shouldn't that be decided by the region? Not just the army.. surely it would bad for our army to start deciding it's own policy? In the Global South, subordination of the army to the government is the source of many struggles for democracy and civilianisation (a government not run by the military).
 
The oath of office for all members of the military, requires that we respect the laws of the region and its government. We are in the process of formulating military laws and codes of conduct to cement this. I have no desire to challenge democracy, or the government in power at the time.

By debating goals and aims, I was more meaning debating the strong views that people have towards raiding vs defending. It makes sense that military members be involved in this discussion, as they are the ones who will be carrying it out.

The North Pacific Army is about promoting our security, not challenging it. Overthrowing our regional government, is not on the agenda.
 
OK. I have asked the delegate for his view on this, just to clarify things. As i am an unelected official, and want to ensure I am getting the governments view across accurately: After conversing with Blue Wolf, we are of the view that the regional assembly should not have any role in The North Pacific Army.

In my opinion, the matter that the convention will discuss is they type of army we want it to be. Not the type of actions we are going to carry out. i.e. we are not going to decide if we want to immediately invade the South Pacific (a random example only). The convention is more about canvasing opinion from our members, if that makes sense (i hope i am not repeating myself).

I don't feel that taking places such as warzones, for training purposes or whatever, should be a part of the Regional Assembly Agenda agenda. This would publicise things, and undermine the confidential nature of military operations to an extent. If the military decides to raid or defend somewhere of significance, having it for all to see in the regional assembly would be very unwise.

For instance we have members/delegates of other regions in our assembly, if we decide to take a warzone that they hold, having the vote in the assembly would certainly undermine confidentiality and the surprise nature of the attack.

Not to mention in the case of an emergency, or a rogue delegate, it would be impractical for a regional assembly session to debate the militaries response.

I hope I have answered your question, i have endeavoured to be as direct as possible.

Edited: To reflect the Governments Official position.
 
Because one side will hurt the region's reputation and associate The North Pacific with wanton, unwarranted invasion and other will not. R/D is a divisive practice, it should be decided by the community, not just the army.

I'm not saying you need to do a vote on "Should we raid here?" or "Should we defend here?"

I'm saying a vote that says: We grant the Army to do this general practice, this and this notwithstanding this, this and this. Aye: 10, Nay:5.

Perhaps the army could discuss what they'd like to do and have a note-taker formulate a policy for the RA to vote on?

Blue Wolf Edit: Ahhrg! Stupid buttons! I meant "quote" not "edit"! >_< Sorry about that!
 
As a feeder, The North Pacific belongs to a different paradigm Unibot. TNP sits above the pointless userite squabbles over "invaders" and "defenders" and the North Pacific Army should take whatever military action is required to protect and promote the regional interests of TNP.
 
Haor Chall:
As a feeder, The North Pacific belongs to a different paradigm Unibot. TNP sits above the pointless userite squabbles over "invaders" and "defenders" and the North Pacific Army should take whatever military action is required to protect and promote the regional interests of TNP.
Click to expand...
Perhaps the people should have a chance at defining what those regional interests are? They're not self-evident.

I understand most feeder armies don't get involve with UCRs, but it sounds to me like the delegate is intending this to be an army active in UCRs ... so perhaps we shouldn't just assume having our name associated with wanton invasions is something in our region interests? That's a pretty hasty assumption.
 
As is assuming that the army is going to be randomly invading all over the place creating a bad name for itself. Lets not jump to radical conclusions, before people have had their say.

I am unconvinced that the Regional Assembly needs to be involved, due to the confidentiality and security reasons i mentioned above. For now lets focus on getting new members to join the military, we will then have the convention and discuss such things.
 
unibot:
Haor Chall:
As a feeder, The North Pacific belongs to a different paradigm Unibot. TNP sits above the pointless userite squabbles over "invaders" and "defenders" and the North Pacific Army should take whatever military action is required to protect and promote the regional interests of TNP.
Click to expand...
Perhaps the people should have a chance at defining what those regional interests are? They're not self-evident.

I understand most feeder armies don't get involve with UCRs, but it sounds to me like the delegate is intending this to be an army active in UCRs ... so perhaps we shouldn't just assume having our name associated with wanton invasions is something in our region interests? That's a pretty hasty assumption.
Click to expand...
That is a different question from the one you originally were posing, and has a different answer. However it does read like you are still working from a number of significant underlying assumptions, which are once again invalid outside of the framework of "invader/defenderism" that you belong to.

I don't expect, and certainly wouldn't support, a campaign of random and "wanton" invasions by the NPA but then again, nothing from the MoD or the Delegate suggests that is going to happen.

To answer your point though, the formation of that kind of policy does lie with the Delegate (and his appointed Ministers, etc). It is approved by the Regional Assembly on the basis that the Delegate will usually have put forward his views during the campaign and once elected will have a mandate to enact that policy. And of course, in terms of substantive relations with other regions (alliances, treaties) the Regional Assembly also has a say.
 
The Assembly can absolutely limit the discretion of the executive however. For instance, given a treaty ratified by the RA the executive is bound to abide by it -- the Peace deal we had with Gatesville for a while under this constitution had such a function, until Gatesville invalidated it. Similarly the Azure Alliance bound our military policy as well. A law may have the same effect.
 
I don't expect, and certainly wouldn't support, a campaign of random and "wanton" invasions by the NPA but then again, nothing from the MoD or the Delegate suggests that is going to happen.
Click to expand...

Well, both the MoD and Delegate talked about how raiding and defending was going to be discussed.. so it sounded as if the Army was going to be entering into that paradigm; if so, a good proportion of raids are totally unjustified and "wanton" -- not a great source of pride for the region.

To answer your point though, the formation of that kind of policy does lie with the Delegate (and his appointed Ministers, etc). It is approved by the Regional Assembly on the basis that the Delegate will usually have put forward his views during the campaign and once elected will have a mandate to enact that policy. And of course, in terms of substantive relations with other regions (alliances, treaties) the Regional Assembly also has a say.
Click to expand...

That sort of inflexible model for executive control amounts to a lot of recalls and divisive conflicts between the people and their leader.. but not a lot of solutions and compromises.
 
mcmasterdonia:
I understand your obligations with the security council, and appreciate your ongoing interest in The North Pacific Army. In my opinion, the answer is no, it does not affect the role you can play in the military. We need people from all backgrounds that can work in many different fields...
Click to expand...
Which is why you might consider establishing a 'Yoemanry' organization of nations which are influential and work withing the context of defending TNP.
 
All topics are on the table at this stage, and I will not rule things in or out.

I like your suggestion about a 'Yoemanry'. Although this would have to be within the strict context of the military leadership, so as to not encroach on the security council.

I take your suggestion on the other board on notice, Roman. You are right, organisation is very important, and I will address that as soon as possible.
 
unibot:
Because one side will hurt the region's reputation and associate The North Pacific with wanton, unwarranted invasion and other will not.
Click to expand...
Complete nonsense and as the former Commander of both the Emerald Legion of Lazarus and the Black Sheep Squadron of The West Pacific I can tell you first hand it is completely untrue. I'm sure you would hate to see the NPA engage in any raiding, Unibot, because you feel that all raiding is evil no matter how just and have expressed that opinion many, many times, its even mentioned in the UDL oath.

By that merit its also sort of plain that you would love to see the NPA to be solely Defender, because you think Defender armies are the greatest thing to ever walk the planet earth. However, many people do not express that extremest position and I feel that a mixed army is best, even if hard-core defenders like Unibot here decry it as "invader" because it does even the smallest amount of raiding and isn't purely defender. You can do a million liberation, but raid once, even for a just cause, and your the scum of humanity to people like that. I have no interest at all at even attempting to humor that viewpoint.
 
What's the difference between Raiding and Defending?

It depends upon which end of the stick one finds oneself. ;D


Years ago, back in my NPA days, I suggested that bashing an opponent where he lives was the way to go. If someone attacks you (initiates violence), then you hit them where they live. You make their lives total hell. But some didn't have the guts to follow that dictum because such a response was too much like 'raiding' as opposed to 'defending'.

Remember, the purpose of war is to render the enemy incapable of or unwilling to continue the fight. Once someone attacks TNP, we should kick them straight away right in the pills. It's just the legitimate response to aggression.

And raiding tactics as a means of self defense is the way to go. Fight fire with fire, or rather, swat the fly with a sledge hammer if you have one.
 
Blue Wolf II:
unibot:
Because one side will hurt the region's reputation and associate The North Pacific with wanton, unwarranted invasion and other will not.
Click to expand...
Complete nonsense and as the former Commander of both the Emerald Legion of Lazarus and the Black Sheep Squadron of The West Pacific I can tell you first hand it is completely untrue. I'm sure you would hate to see the NPA engage in any raiding, Unibot, because you feel that all raiding is evil no matter how just and have expressed that opinion many, many times, its even mentioned in the UDL oath.

By that merit its also sort of plain that you would love to see the NPA to be solely Defender, because you think Defender armies are the greatest thing to ever walk the planet earth. However, many people do not express that extremest position and I feel that a mixed army is best, even if hard-core defenders like Unibot here decry it as "invader" because it does even the smallest amount of raiding and isn't purely defender. You can do a million liberation, but raid once, even for a just cause, and your the scum of humanity to people like that. I have no interest at all at even attempting to humor that viewpoint.
Click to expand...
Well I don't really care if NPA goes defender or not, I run a big defender army that currently does a lot with minimal help from other organizations and TNPers can join it if they like. Although I think NPA would be more successful if it did "something" as opposed to being to just doing warzone training missions like the SPA.

I do think raiding is unconditionally bad and I don't think it can ever be "just" -- by definition, raiding is wanton, malicious and unnecessary. You must be mistaking "invasion" with "raiding". If the Army is going raider, I will leave. I don't see how it's in the region's interests to raid. The instances you referenced demonstrate that raiding does have a prolonged effect on a region's reputation -- still to this day, Lazarus and The West Pacific are considered "raider" regions which reflects on outsiders' opinion of it's internal integrity; even though Lazarus's former delegate was a defender for ages and The West Pacific was a former ADN region. Raiding is a difficult thing to shake off a region's reputation.

Romanoffia, I don't have a problem with justified war-related invasions (which aren't usually called "raids"), but that's a lot different than going around to any old UCR and raiding them.
 
*sighs* The North Pacific Army will do something. It is important that we assess things as a whole, without making these rule in/rule out judgements prematurely. The NPA will consider all options, and the like, on a case by case basis.

Generalities such as defending is better than raiding, or alternatively raiding is better than defending, will only limit the scope and ability of our army. Our numbers are growing, and I will open the military convention soon.
 
mcmasterdonia:
I am unconvinced that the Regional Assembly needs to be involved, due to the confidentiality and security reasons i mentioned above.
Click to expand...
Generally speaking - and specific treaties aside - the RA is not involved. The Delegate has broad powers to direct the military as he or she sees fit. If the RA wants to set up some kind of check on the Delegate's authority, they will need to enact legislation. Otherwise, the Delegate can and should call the shots.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top