+- The South Pacific (https://tspforums.xyz)
+-- Forum: Hall of Historical Records (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-8.html)
+--- Forum: Archives (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-141.html)
+---- Forum: Fudgetopia Hall of Government (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-12.html)
+----- Forum: Assembly of the South Pacific (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-91.html)
+------ Forum: Private Halls of the Assembly (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-95.html)
+------ Thread: Article 9 Expansion (/thread-749.html)
RE: Article 9 Expansion - Tsunamy - 07-18-2014
Seriously Uni. No defenders are being attacked by this. They have not been and they aren't going to be.
We need to stop making straw men arguments from everything in the region.
RE: Article 9 Expansion - Belschaft - 07-18-2014
(07-18-2014, 06:25 PM)Unibot Wrote: Zero defender regions helped Milograd coup The South Pacific, Belschaft.100% of people who have couped this region in the last ten years have held the office of FRA Archancellor.
RE: Article 9 Expansion - Unibot - 07-18-2014
And in 100% of those incidents, the FRA has been against these coups - so why would even consider FRA in the same breath as TBH (who openly said "let's fuck shit up" in regards to our region) or TWP?
FRA's response to both of these coups has been supportive towards TSP. I should know: I was the Arch-Chancellor and I wrote the statement condemning the actions of Sedgistan.
I think you're trying to spin the discussion towards a red herring to ignore what a glaring mistake it is to not seek any sort of condemnatory response to The Black Hawks, The West Pacific or The Black Riders - who all played a pivotal role in the last coup and will likely play a pivotal role in the next one if they know there will be no political consequences for them because "Uncle Bel" has got them covered. *rolls his eyes*
(07-18-2014, 06:32 PM)Tsunamy Wrote: Seriously Uni. No defenders are being attacked by this. They have not been and they aren't going to be.
We need to stop making straw men arguments from everything in the region.
You've misunderstood everything I've said (largely because Belschaft has tried to stir the pot to ignore the clear mistake and bias here). I never said defenders are being attacked by a decision to not condemn The Black Hawks or such - we owe no diplomatic sanction against certain invader groups to defenders. That's our decision and a decision which has to be based on our interests and our security and our self-respect.
I'm just saying it's not a good thing here that we've got several regions which were complicit and involved in a coup of us and we didn't seek any sort of diplomatic sanctions against them. Now we have a legislative tool to do that with - surely we should try to do more to protect our region. -_-
RE: Article 9 Expansion - God-Emperor - 07-19-2014
I wouldn't say The West Pacific played a pivotal, or any, role.
RE: Article 9 Expansion - Ditortilla - 07-19-2014
At the risk of covering old ground
The Assembly and the governments of some other regions(you have not stated which ones) recognise the coalition as being the Government of TSP
I will concede that any region or organisation that has entered into an alliance or treaty with TSP also infers acceptence of this as a given
However it is clear from the material Unibot has provided that other regions and organisation do not necessarily accept that The Coalition is the only permissible Government
Most pertinant is the statement from TWP.
We do however, wish it to be clear that The West Pacific recognises the ingame authority of the sitting Delegate over an offsite government's attempt to control the Delegacy. Ingame NationStates is where regional authority lies, not in an offisite forum which is unrecognized by the game itself.
Whether we like it or not, this is a general tenet to many in NS, and a view that is adhered to in some corners of TSP itself.
Whilst the Coalition may rightfully claim to be the de facto government of TSP it is errobeous to state that it is universally recognised as its only conceivable legitimate government - are we to ban and expel anyone who has ever criticised the Coalition?
What Unibot would unleash with this proposal would effectively be a witchhunt against any who express disagreement with those currently in power, something which goes against the very core spirit of TSP
The other question is what would this acheive? Is TSP going to declare war on those who hold a different philosophy that jars with that of the Coalition? Are we to send our military into those regions that adhere to a different view, coup other GCR's?
There are many outside the Assembly and TSP that would welcome us adopting such a narrow policy.
"If you are not supporting the Coalition then you must be against it" would surely lead us into wider conflicts
RE: Article 9 Expansion - Unibot - 07-19-2014
Quote:I wouldn't say The West Pacific played a pivotal, or any, role.
I can see at least five endorsements provided by TWP's armed forces. At the time, Milograd (as "Pestarzt") was field commander of their armed forces - he resigned later due to time commitments. Shortly after the coup, Jakker (the person who posted TBH's statement calling to "fuck shit up" in TSP) was then made their new commander.
Quote:The other question is what would this acheive? Is TSP going to declare war on those who hold a different philosophy that jars with that of the Coalition?
If that philosophy is TSP's coupers should remain in power over TSP, we should consider legislative action, yes.
I did not say declare war - Article Nine is frankly more practical of a response than declaring war on anyone. We've already been to war with TWP once and it was useless.
Quote:""If you are not supporting the Coalition then you must be against it"
In general, "If you are not with us, you must be against us" is poor logic, because this assumes the dilemma poses only two responses.
However, if "you recognize our coalition" or "are against our coalition" is a binary dilemma. If you do not accept the legitimacy of our coalition then you are against our coalition. Our coalition survives on the strength and support of our citizens and the respect it receives from outsiders.
RE: Article 9 Expansion - God-Emperor - 07-19-2014
(07-19-2014, 01:09 PM)Unibot Wrote:Quote:I wouldn't say The West Pacific played a pivotal, or any, role.
I can see at least five endorsements provided by TWP's armed forces.
Any endorsements provided by members of TWPAF were provided by nations exercisin' their national sovereignty. As the commander at the time, TWPAF was deployed on refound operations, and any nations departing the region in support of those operations were encouraged to move to The South Pacific and endorse B&N. However, due to the opinions held by the guardians, TWPAF didn't redeploy to TSP in support of B&N or Carta.
RE: Article 9 Expansion - Unibot - 07-19-2014
(07-19-2014, 01:30 PM)God-Emperor Wrote:(07-19-2014, 01:09 PM)Unibot Wrote:Quote:I wouldn't say The West Pacific played a pivotal, or any, role.
I can see at least five endorsements provided by TWP's armed forces.
Any endorsements provided by members of TWPAF were provided by nations exercisin' their national sovereignty. As the commander at the time, TWPAF was deployed on refound operations, and any nations departing the region in support of those operations were encouraged to move to The South Pacific and endorse B&N. However, due to the opinions held by the guardians, TWPAF didn't redeploy to TSP in support of B&N or Carta.
This behavior is not supported by either (a) their diplomatic statement, (b) their actions.
I notice you ignored the note that TWPAF promoted both Carta and Jakker in leadership positions with the coup. *snorts*
RE: Article 9 Expansion - God-Emperor - 07-19-2014
The diplomatic statement distributed was simply a summary of the region's political philosophy, and any actions of residents was simply an application of that philosophy. Not all nations chose to apply that philosophy, and no one was penalized for that.
RE: Article 9 Expansion - Unibot - 07-19-2014
And the diplomatic statement, as expressed through the region's political "philosophy", called for the collapse of our government. Their literature was seditious and encouraged their citizens to rise up against our region.
We have the right and the justification to limit The West Pacific's presence in The South Pacific.