Region Debates High Court Activity

[Jahka]

NES's arguement is that a pure one side or the other region, would have to, one some level, exclude Raiders or Defenders. TNI doesn't have/allow defenders in the region, which creates a much less diverse foreign affairs discussion, though it does allow for some very good regional consensus on Foreign affairs. Mainly, the only major debate in TNI in FA, as far as I've ever been able to tell, is Colonies.

If Europeia went pure Defender, we couldn't let raiders in, or risk a turn to the other side by democracy.

TNI may value being raider more than being a democracy. Europeia does not. We have to be willing to accept that if the majority view of the region shifted then the policy would shift with it. That's kinda the point of valuing democracy.

Well to be fair, how well do you know TNI?

Not well. But if they sacrifice some of the main tenants of democracy in order to achieve a regional consensus on raiding (as Cerian claimed), then I think it's safe to say that they value raiding more than democracy.

Note in my post the use of "may" to suggest that they may not.

 

[Christopher Bishop]

TNI just doesn't like the FRA and UDL. I can name one or two members on our forum that prescribe to defender idealogy. We aren't that attractive to defenders though.

 

[Kylia Quilor]

NES's arguement is that a pure one side or the other region, would have to, one some level, exclude Raiders or Defenders. TNI doesn't have/allow defenders in the region, which creates a much less diverse foreign affairs discussion, though it does allow for some very good regional consensus on Foreign affairs. Mainly, the only major debate in TNI in FA, as far as I've ever been able to tell, is Colonies.

If Europeia went pure Defender, we couldn't let raiders in, or risk a turn to the other side by democracy.

TNI may value being raider more than being a democracy. Europeia does not. We have to be willing to accept that if the majority view of the region shifted then the policy would shift with it. That's kinda the point of valuing democracy.

Well to be fair, how well do you know TNI?

Not well. But if they sacrifice some of the main tenants of democracy in order to achieve a regional consensus on raiding (as Cerian claimed), then I think it's safe to say that they value raiding more than democracy.

Note in my post the use of "may" to suggest that they may not.

They don't sacrifice any tenants of democracy. They restrict immigration. I don't agree with NES that that is anti-democratic.

@Chris: The Hostile Foreign Affiliations Act includes just about every defender org of any signifigance as of when it was written, and then some.

 

[Christopher Bishop]

Yes, but that doesn't mean all member have the same views. There is at least one member who was formerly part of TITO. The law only limits who can come in unless they choose TNI priority over the region they were part of, if it is defender oriented.

 

[Rach]

TITO is really awesome, if I was a defender... that's where I'd want to be a defender with. They have a lot of cool members.

 

[PhDre]

I recall a time when we realized that military force could and should be used not for our amusement but only to empower our Foreign Affairs. That was a democratically instilled vision that would have been best for Europeia. This "we tag raid with two or three WA nations because it's fun" argument is small minded. I'd like to see an Europeia which can effectively defend legitimate governments and which is free to take aggressive actions when they are in our interests. I just don't see subjugating native interests (or rights) as in Europeia's long term strategic interest. Nor do I see voting against protecting natives from griefers in the World Assembly as consistent with Europeia's best interests. I'm going to ignore most of the patriotic stuff coming from NES because it's mostly irrelevant. This is not primarily about 'the wishes of external forces,' it's precisely the exersize of protected speech by Europeian citizens wishing to challenge the mindset of certain citizens that natives are not significant, that griefing is not 'dickish,' that moderation in raiding is (or should be) the minimum standard that citizens tolerate from our military force.

 

[Rach]

Sometimes I feel that PhDre is living in another world because he seems to pretend disagree a lot with Europeia yet in the end is saying the same thing that most people do including myself. I don't think anyone is saying that our military shouldn't defend our friends and allies (like we have done in TSP and Balder) and the majority feel that the military should be moderate (which it is).

 

[PhDre]

And there's room in that moderation for more significant defending operations, greater emphasis on the foreign policy goal of raiding rather than "we don't need to justify raiding, we enjoy it because we aren't in UDL's pocket," and a return to the idea that we don't raid for the hell of it, but only when it advances a particular foreign policy agenda. I believe we do need to justify raiding, that there is 'in-game' morality and rules of engagement that regions (including Europeia) should adhere to, and I'd rather see Europeia either commit entirely to creating a military that exists solely to benefit a foreign policy agenda, or not have one at all. I'd ideally like to see an Europeia that recognizes our ideals of 'peace freedom and equality' aren't catchphrases but which inspire a concrete vision that nourishes native communities, excludes support of griefing regions entirely and even acts aggressively towards those regions that pose a threat to native communities, be they traditionally raider or defender organizations. I'd like to see a community where our concern is as much on preventing regions from grieving than on ensuring friends and allies do not join supranational defender organizations. That's not the Europeia we live in currently, or at least that's not the Europeia I see. Maybe we do live on different worlds.

 

[Rach]

I believe we do need to justify raiding

Need is a very strong word, don't you mean should (in your opinion)?

My response would simply be, justify to who?

 

[PhDre]

I believe we do need to justify raiding

Need is a very strong word, don't you mean should (in your opinion)?

My response would simply be, justify to who?

Need is probably a strong word - how about should. If we wish to project an image of Europeia that we apparently believe in, and praise in Europeia regularly, then I think we need to justify our actions to the inter-regional community. We should justify our actions to ourselves as well in order to ensure that we're being consistent, and we should to justify our actions to friends and allies so they're aware of the boundaries we place on certain kinds of military action. So yes, need is a strong word but I feel that failing to meet this standard unnecessarily weakens us and reduces our ability to act independently of the r/d axis when desired.

 

[Kylia Quilor]

Tag raiding is essential for training, and keeping a military force capable of being used when it is actually needed to assert foreign policy.

 

[Lethen]

Sometimes I feel that PhDre is living in another world because he seems to pretend disagree a lot with Europeia yet in the end is saying the same thing that most people do including myself.

As an aside, you've had this issue in the past before with people including myself (before our relationship soured, rotted, then biodegraded) - at a certain point, you need to realize there's some credence to the oft-repeated idea that you don't always articulate yourself as clearly as you may think.

Not saying most of us are that much better about it, but PhDre is one of our members (one of a few like Skizzy) who can articulate their thoughts so flawlessly into words.

 

[Skizzy Grey]

And there's room in that moderation for more significant defending operations, greater emphasis on the foreign policy goal of raiding rather than "we don't need to justify raiding, we enjoy it because we aren't in UDL's pocket," and a return to the idea that we don't raid for the hell of it, but only when it advances a particular foreign policy agenda. I believe we do need to justify raiding, that there is 'in-game' morality and rules of engagement that regions (including Europeia) should adhere to, and I'd rather see Europeia either commit entirely to creating a military that exists solely to benefit a foreign policy agenda, or not have one at all. I'd ideally like to see an Europeia that recognizes our ideals of 'peace freedom and equality' aren't catchphrases but which inspire a concrete vision that nourishes native communities, excludes support of griefing regions entirely and even acts aggressively towards those regions that pose a threat to native communities, be they traditionally raider or defender organizations. I'd like to see a community where our concern is as much on preventing regions from grieving than on ensuring friends and allies do not join supranational defender organizations. That's not the Europeia we live in currently, or at least that's not the Europeia I see. Maybe we do live on different worlds.

Our near-miss in Nazi Europe a few terms ago (we missed capturing the delegacy because one updater jumped late) was possible because we had spent a couple months building our independent action capability through tag raids and had supported raids by our allies in furtherance of their own objectives. Strategically significant operations are few and far between; the Navy needs regular, mundane activity so that it is ready to strike (in most cases, with allied support) when a strategic opportunity presents itself.

 

[Anumia]

Then, it turned into debates between select parties regarding the actions of United Defender League founder -- Unibot -- and what roles his organization may have played in influencing feeder regions.

I think that side argument is nothing but a distraction from the issue at hand - that tag raiding does nothing to benefit Europeia in the short or long term, yet we continue to tag raid for the sake of doing it.

You state that like a fact without any evidence or arguments to support it. It is useful for training, it is useful for competition, and it is useful for exposure.

Sometimes I feel that PhDre is living in another world because he seems to pretend disagree a lot with Europeia yet in the end is saying the same thing that most people do including myself.

If you want to fight a straw man, first you must build him.