NSG Senate Coffee Shop [NSG Senate]

[Lemanrussland]

Again.

A large military, funded by nationalization and tariffs, is not "needed to secure this Nation from Assault". That is the core of the disagreement. If I believed we needed those kinds of measures to keep the nation secure and sovereign, I would back them (though I would prefer a temporary increase in taxes or borrowing, rather than the government basically taking over parts of the economy to fund it). It's not necessary, and would only act as a drag on the country's peace time economy.

So you would propose we abandon our defenses and rely upon foreign hands to ensure our stability and continued prospering?

Or do you prefer our Military being too weak to combat a possible invasion?

I need to know which of the mindsets i am engaging.

My attitude is that the national defense we have provisioned (or will soon be provisioning, see the National Security Act) is more than adequate. Nationalization of industries and high tariffs are wholly unnecessary and bad economics which will serve to impoverish our country.

[The Zeonic States]

So you would propose we abandon our defenses and rely upon foreign hands to ensure our stability and continued prospering?

Or do you prefer our Military being too weak to combat a possible invasion?

I need to know which of the mindsets i am engaging.

My attitude is that the national defense we have provisioned (or will soon be provisioning, see the National Security Act) is more than adequate. Nationalization of industries and high tariffs are wholly unnecessary and bad economics which will serve to impoverish our country.

I never got the thinking that our Military buying weaponry from Privately held interests was a needed factor in the Military; You think otherwise obviously but i will not weep for the loss of the Military Industrial complex.

And i believe the National Defenses to be wholly unadequate and is little more then a mere half measure; Likely to encourage enslaving our Nation to a foreign to Foreign Power for defense.

[Othelos]

So you would propose we abandon our defenses and rely upon foreign hands to ensure our stability and continued prospering?

Or do you prefer our Military being too weak to combat a possible invasion?

I need to know which of the mindsets i am engaging.

My attitude is that the national defense we have provisioned (or will soon be provisioning, see the National Security Act) is more than adequate. Nationalization of industries and high tariffs are wholly unnecessary and bad economics which will serve to impoverish our country.

Agreed.

[Grenartia]

In the immortal words of US President Eisenhower:

"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.
This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities. It is two electric power plants, each serving a town of 60,000 population. It is two fine, fully equipped hospitals. It is some fifty miles of concrete pavement. We pay for a single fighter with a half-million bushels of wheat. We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than 8,000 people. . . . This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron."

Granted, there are differences between our present situation, and the American situation. However, at its core, the message applies to ALL nations. I reject spending a penny more than is necessary for the protection of this nation, because that is money, material, and other resources that could be better used for the betterment of our nation. The resources necessary for a military supercomputer could instead be used to provide all of our citizens with internet access. The resources for a fort could be used to provide homes for the needy. I could go on, but I think I've made my point.

While I disagree with your alternate spending plan, and I would prefer savings to be spent on space programs and bases in Mars and Pluto, I strongly agree we must not spend a penny more in defence than what is absolutely vital to defend this nation from threats.

Actually, I support spending on the space program as well. There are very few positions I disagree with my party on. The space program is not one of them.

Guys, anyone else think we should join NATO?

I'm not sure about the rest of my party, but I'd support it.

[Great Nepal]

Ratification of North Atlantic Treaty
Urgency: Very High| Drafted by: Great Nepal| Co-sponsors: The Republic of Lanos, Unicario, Othelos, Grenartia, Rohamistan

This senate recognises need for international cooperation to keep international peace and maintain regional and interregional stability as well as to reduce international conflicts. Furthermore, this senate also recognises North Atlantic Treaty Organization (also referred to as "the organisation") to be one of the leading organisations for keeping international peace. Senate also recognises the inherent benefits associated with being party of an international mutual defence, military alliance. In recognition of this, and as a reply to NATO invitation to our nation this senate hereby passes following act by powers vested in it by the constitution and the people of this great nation.

Section 1: Ratification
This senate via act, by the powers vested in it ratifies "The North Atlantic Treaty" and all other treaties associated with it in good faith, and in their entirety without any reservations, exception or circumscription.

Section 2: Authorisation of Expenses
In order to provide for participation in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, this act recognises need for expenses which may arise from time to time to finance the share of the expenses of the Organization and all necessary salaries and expenses of the permanent representatives to the organisation. This act therefore provides discretionary spending of $500,000 per annum on matters associated with the organisation. This act further provides contingency funds of $100,000 per annum for matters associated with the organisation. This act however does nothing to prevent further spending by government through annual budget.

Section 3: Appointment of Permanent Representative
So as to ensure national interests are presented in the organisation, a senior ambassador along with team of appropriate team of permanent representatives will be appointed by president under advice and consent of the senate. All the permanent representatives will have rank equivalent to diplomat with exception of ambassador. Salaries and expenses of these representatives will be paid by the state. The term of senior ambassador and permanent representatives will not exceed period of six months, at end of which consent of senate must be requested again. Senate may at will, recall either ambassador or permanent representatives with normal majority.

Section 4: Support for NATO operations
So as to facilitate support for NATO operations, this act sets up crisis response directive (CRD): This will provide assistance in civilian missions to NATO nation and shall work alongside assistance provided by Iceland. It shall engage with populace and governments as well as acting as mediator between two sides.

[The Republic of Lanos]

Scruffy: ^Second.

[Great Nepal]

Scruffy: ^Second.

Hurray, now we just need four more sponsors and we dont really need an army (well, not larger than Icelandish one anyway)!

[The Republic of Lanos]

Scruffy: ^Second.

Hurray, now we just need four more sponsors and we dont really need an army (well, not larger than Icelandish one anyway)!

Why not a small army anyways?

[Great Nepal]

Hurray, now we just need four more sponsors and we dont really need an army (well, not larger than Icelandish one anyway)!

Why not a small army anyways?

I wouldn't really mind small army, but we wont need it. Just be like Iceland.

[Unicario]

Guys, anyone else think we should join NATO?

YES, FOR, YES, YES YES YES YES YES!

[Great Nepal]

Guys, anyone else think we should join NATO?

YES, FOR, YES, YES YES YES YES YES!

Thank you senator, mind if I add you as co-sponsor for NATO bill?

[Othelos]

Can I co-sponsor?

[The Republic of Lanos]

Why not a small army anyways?

I wouldn't really mind small army, but we wont need it. Just be like Iceland.

Well if we were to engage in peacekeeping operations later, it would pay off to have an army, air force, navy, and a small marine force.

[Britcan]

Why not a small army anyways?

I wouldn't really mind small army, but we wont need it. Just be like Iceland.

I think we should have a military, even if we don't need it for self-defence. We should retain the capability to intervene in countries that are committing atrocities against innocent people.

[Greater Pokarnia]

Given as we haven't even really entered the world stage yet (we're not even in the UN), it isn't necessary to have a significantly large military. A small military will do just fine.

For that matter, I think we should keep from getting too involved in world affairs. Let's forge our own path.

[Unicario]

YES, FOR, YES, YES YES YES YES YES!

Thank you senator, mind if I add you as co-sponsor for NATO bill?

Da, definitely.

[Strykla]

I give a definitive maybe on NATO. If we are joining for the random benefits of doing so, then sure, but if we are joining NATO so we can let others defend our nation and be able to spend money on things other than defense, absolutely not. The US foreign policy is the only reason NATO exists, made after the Marshall Plan, and the US is the only credible military force in the entire organization. Were the US to decide to adopt an isolationist stance, and let other countries fend for themselves, then it has already been demonstrated that the European nations are, to be frank, shitty at performing military operations. It took several years for the European nations to agree on doing anything in the Balkans back in the early 90s, and even when they did their force was so hamstrung by regulations they were essentially unable to do anything.

As such, I believe that a powerful military is critical to our nation. More than providing defense, militaries are always a source of pride for nations; being not just a size able Mediterranean power, but a global power with which to reckon, would do wonders for national pride and global prestige.

[Maklohi Vai]

I am most certainly in favor of joining NATO. No co-sponsor on the bill, though.

[Great Nepal]

Can I co-sponsor?

Da, definitely.

Hurray, we just need two more supporters.

Well if we were to engage in peacekeeping operations later, it would pay off to have an army, air force, navy, and a small marine force.

We could give civilian assistance in peacekeeping operations, but let nations like US handle military one.

I wouldn't really mind small army, but we wont need it. Just be like Iceland.

I think we should have a military, even if we don't need it for self-defence. We should retain the capability to intervene in countries that are committing atrocities against innocent people.

I believe in such cases we can urge NATO to take action and hope they do.

[The Republic of Lanos]

Should we also adopt the various Geneva Conventions and Hague Conventions and adopt my current draft war crimes/crimes against humanity law?

[Great Nepal]

Should we also adopt the various Geneva Conventions and Hague Conventions and adopt my current draft war crimes/crimes against humanity law?

We could do that when we join UN...

[Britcan]

I think we should have a military, even if we don't need it for self-defence. We should retain the capability to intervene in countries that are committing atrocities against innocent people.

I believe in such cases we can urge NATO to take action and hope they do.

Ideally NATO would participate but I feel it is important to retain the capability to act alone in the event that the rest of NATO is unwilling to help.

[Great Nepal]

I believe in such cases we can urge NATO to take action and hope they do.

Ideally NATO would participate but I feel it is important to retain the capability to act alone in the event that the rest of NATO is unwilling to help.

If NATO isn't participating, such actions will be too expensive and will cost too much in lives. We can afford neither.

[The Republic of Lanos]

Should we also adopt the various Geneva Conventions and Hague Conventions and adopt my current draft war crimes/crimes against humanity law?

We could do that when we join UN...

I'll work on my war crimes bill and present either here or in a separate topic for drafting and revision.

[Britcan]

Ideally NATO would participate but I feel it is important to retain the capability to act alone in the event that the rest of NATO is unwilling to help.

If NATO isn't participating, such actions will be too expensive and will cost too much in lives. We can afford neither.

I'm not talking a full on invasion here, I'm talking about the sort of thing France did recently in Mali.