International Freedom Coalition (OOC, APPS TEMP CLOSED)

[Inyourfaceistan]

i have nothing to say right now...

But how else are we going to discuss enhancing trade between our countries with the implicit or explicit aim of reciprocal expansion of our iiwiki pages? Do we have to do it all OOCly?

And what if we don't bother with IIwiki?

[Singaporean Transhumans]

But how else are we going to discuss enhancing trade between our countries with the implicit or explicit aim of reciprocal expansion of our iiwiki pages? Do we have to do it all OOCly?

And what if we don't bother with IIwiki?

And what if we insist on gameside factbooks?

[Roski]

And what if we don't bother with IIwiki?

And what if we insist on gameside factbooks?

you would have to spend a lot of time on someone's nationstates page

fed's might think you're stalking

[Inyourfaceistan]

So what do you guys think of this: http://www.nationstates.net/nation=inyo ... /id=563211?

[The United Remnants of America]

So what do you guys think of this: http://www.nationstates.net/nation=inyo ... /id=563211?

Layman's version please?

[Greater Carloso]

So what do you guys think of this: http://www.nationstates.net/nation=inyo ... /id=563211?

I like it.

The third assumption in particular is of interest, as I am currently going by the same lines in a roleplay.

[The United Remnants of America]

So what do you guys think of this: http://www.nationstates.net/nation=inyo ... /id=563211?

I like it.

The third assumption in particular is of interest, as I am currently going by the same lines in a roleplay.

Yeah, I just read the bottom and figured it out. It makes sense. It's nice. Not the go-to of the URA, but respectable.

[Libraria and Ausitoria]

It doesn't really work (or make sense) when a nation's only feasible and effective defence is nuclear.

But how else are we going to discuss enhancing trade between our countries with the implicit or explicit aim of reciprocal expansion of our iiwiki pages? Do we have to do it all OOCly?

And what if we don't bother with IIwiki?

Then we can't interlink our nations much.

I'll be in touch, Flardania!

[Inyourfaceistan]

It doesn't really work (or make sense) when a nation's only feasible and effective defence is nuclear.

Well for one I even stated it only works against rational actors, not some crackpot psycho who will gladly usher in nuclear armageddon just because a plane carrying weapons got shot down.

And if a nation's only "feasible and effective" defense is nuclear weapons, then why are they funding/supplying proxies across the globe?

And what if we don't bother with IIwiki?

Then we can't interlink our nations much.

Too bad.

So what do you guys think of this: http://www.nationstates.net/nation=inyo ... /id=563211?

I like it.

The third assumption in particular is of interest, as I am currently going by the same lines in a roleplay.

Yeah I also realized that is the case in most roleplays...

[Libraria and Ausitoria]

There is nothing irrational or unreasonable about defending your nation and avoiding complete destruction with whatever weapons are necessary.

It is only crackpot psychos who would ignore the practicalities of deterrence.

[Inyourfaceistan]

There is nothing irrational or unreasonable about defending your nation and avoiding complete destruction with whatever weapons are necessary.

I didnt say anything about when said opposing nation was having its homeland threatened. Completely different situation.
This is in reference to when said opposing nation is trying to fund/equip proxy armies in your sphere of influence.

No sane nation is going to get themselves, their enemies and everyone associated with them glassed over a few skirmishes out over the oceans lol.

But on a different note I will be replying to the 8th summit soon. Mind if I go ahead and skip the whole arriving at the airport part?

[Libraria and Ausitoria]

Escalation happens - first you start with a single shot, then a missile, then a skirmish, then a battle, and before you know it one side is fighting for their survival.

But on a different note I will be replying to the 8th summit soon. Mind if I go ahead and skip the whole arriving at the airport part?

Ausitorian policy has evolved, since they don't recognize your continued membership - they'll order your plane to land on the other runway, where they have a seemingly identical set-up.

[Roski]

It is technically possible to have nuclear weapons as their only real defense, as long as their weapons are able to fire in a few minutes after the order is given.

[Inyourfaceistan]

Escalation happens - first you start with a single shot, then a missile, then a skirmish, then a battle, and before you know it one side is fighting for their survival.

Because one side backing down or the other side acheiving their goals definitely isn't a thing that could happen...

But on a different note I will be replying to the 8th summit soon. Mind if I go ahead and skip the whole arriving at the airport part?

Ausitorian policy has evolved, since they don't recognize your continued membership - they'll order your plane to land on the other runway, where they have a seemingly identical set-up.

Well never mind then. I was going to post that I was opening trade to Ausitoria, but if you want to ignore the result of electoral results of 3 resolutions/motions in the council then I guess not.

It is technically possible to have nuclear weapons as their only real defense, as long as their weapons are able to fire in a few minutes after the order is given.

I never said it wasn't possible.
But if you were said nation who apparently can only rely on n00ks for defense, would you really be setting about to kickstart the nuclear holocaust just because someone sunk a ship full of weapons that wasn't even in your waters?

[Libraria and Ausitoria]

Snarky.

Ausitorian policy has evolved, since they don't recognize your continued membership - they'll order your plane to land on the other runway, where they have a seemingly identical set-up.

Well never mind then. I was going to post that I was opening trade to Ausitoria, but if you want to ignore the result of electoral results of 3 resolutions/motions in the council then I guess not.

You couldn't possibly know in advance. As a matter of fact, the Ausitorian civil service would want to talk to your delegation - on a bilateral basis - before choosing whether to take them across the water.

As for resolutions, not a single resolution has been passed saying you are a member.

As for escalation, how exactly does your policy work when neither nation is willing to back down?



Answer: it doesn't...

(As our disagreements really ought to have demonstrated).

[Flardania]

Snarky.

Well never mind then. I was going to post that I was opening trade to Ausitoria, but if you want to ignore the result of electoral results of 3 resolutions/motions in the council then I guess not.

You couldn't possibly know in advance. As a matter of fact, the Ausitorian civil service would want to talk to your delegation - on a bilateral basis - before choosing whether to take them across the water.

As for resolutions, not a single resolution has been passed saying you are a member.

As for escalation, how exactly does your policy work when neither nation is willing to back down?



Answer: it doesn't...

(As our disagreements really ought to have demonstrated).

*Looks at conflicts all over the world post 1990, doesn't see the rapid chain reaction leading to the threat of nuclear weapons, shurgs and leaves conversation*

[Inyourfaceistan]

Well never mind then. I was going to post that I was opening trade to Ausitoria, but if you want to ignore the result of electoral results of 3 resolutions/motions in the council then I guess not.

You couldn't possibly know in advance. As a matter of fact, the Ausitorian civil service would want to talk to your delegation - on a bilateral basis - before choosing whether to take them across the water.

I'm talking OOC here. I have a bad feeling about this so I will choose not to participate.
And I'm OOCly pointing out I was going to open trade to you, and now I'm not.
Understand?

Oh and by the way you are still banned from the Sea of Juarez...

As for resolutions, not a single resolution has been passed saying you are a member.

- You tried to use unchecked executive powers to eject me; Resolution 3 nullified that action.
- Resolution 4 which sought to eject me failed.
- An impromptu motion to eject me also failed.

How am I not a member?

As for escalation, how exactly does your policy work when neither nation is willing to back down?

One side wins.

Either one side realizes they can't possibly protect their aide/support all they way into someone else's sphere of influence or the other side realizes their control wasn't as great as they expected and they cannot possibly destroy a capable margin of enemy material.

Answer: it doesn't...

It certainly doesn't shouldn't escalate to n00ks either.

*Looks at conflicts all over the world post 1990, doesn't see the rapid chain reaction leading to the threat of nuclear weapons, shurgs and leaves conversation*

Yeah.
That is basically what Torédo Doctrine is based off of.

[Libraria and Ausitoria]

We should certainly do an RP.

Probably something slightly slower paced and quieter. Something like this or this would be my choice.

Looks like you're about to have your chance...

Oh and by the way you are still banned from the Sea of Juarez...

I thought you'd abandoned that policy. Anyway, you haven't announced it, and Ausitorian ships are still passing through, whether you ban them or not.

As for resolutions, not a single resolution has been passed saying you are a member.

- You tried to use unchecked executive powers to eject me; Resolution 3 nullified that action.

Resolution 5 nullified Resolution 3.

And the failure to get something approved does not mean something has been disapproved.

How am I not a member?

Because you're obviously not trying to avoid starting a war against other alliance members.

Try again. (Actually don't, this is still really repetitive and really boring).

That is basically what Torédo Doctrine is based off of.

Why base foreign policy on only 26 years of history when you can base it off a century or more? Using the threat of force to encourage nations to compromise has been the cornerstone of most civilized nation's foreign policies for at least the past four hundred years.

*Looks at conflicts all over the world post 1990, doesn't see the rapid chain reaction leading to the threat of nuclear weapons, shurgs and leaves conversation*

That's because, in the real world, people have more sense, and don't actually attack each other. That's why diplomatic circles hit the roof when Russia invaded the Ukraine, and again when Turkey shot down a Russian airplane; and everybody (intelligent) worked hard behind the scenes to de-escalate.

That's the one thing that internet users in general lack: knowing when to step back and reach a compromise.

So, for learning purposes, I will demonstrate to you all exactly what happens when one side refuses to compromise, and drives the other side to an equal resolution.

Eventually, everybody will probably compromise, but this time another side can go first.

[Inyourfaceistan]

Oh and by the way you are still banned from the Sea of Juarez...

I thought you'd abandoned that policy. Anyway, you haven't announced it, and Ausitorian ships are still passing through, whether you ban them or not.

God mod.

You don't have jack shit in my territorial waters unless we either RP'ed or I otherwise gave you permission (which I explicitly have not).
So unless Cuscatlan let you through the Martinez Canal or if you would care to start a thread trying to violate my waters then I am going to ingore that foolish claim...

http://www.nationstates.net/nation=inyo ... /id=103599

- You tried to use unchecked executive powers to eject me; Resolution 3 nullified that action.

Resolution 5 nullified Resolution 3.

And the failure to get something approved does not mean something has been disapproved.

Nowhere does Resolution 5 state your motion was justified, in fact it states the opposite when the council has quite obviously voted against expelling me not once but twice...

Let's not forget only 3 people voted on Resolution 5 and when I tried to discuss its points on the Council floor we instead got paranoid rabble about the "SACTO bloc" or some crap like that.

How am I not a member?

Because you're obviously not trying to avoid starting a war against other alliance members.

- It wasn't me who intervened on the opposite side of another IFC member in Whiteshore
- It's not me who thinks I have a right to other member's territorial sovereignty at a whim.

Next time, try using logic.

That is basically what Torédo Doctrine is based off of.

Why base foreign policy on only 26 years of history when you can base it off a century or more? Using the threat of force to encourage nations to compromise has been the cornerstone of most civilized nation's foreign policies for at least the past four hundred years.

What?
That literally is what I'm doing.
If you don't have the capabilities to further your operations halfway across the globe, the idea of "compromise" deteriorates faster than the elements on the lower right hand corner of the periodic table.

[Corsairs of the Islamic Meditterannian]

---

b-ismi-llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīmi

A great crime has been committed against the people Andulaisania, everyday the criminals of the IFC cross into the Mediterranean without first paying proper taxes to come into this place, the IFC nations are not native nor have they been friendly to certain nations in our region especially the Bashriyyans, Omarians and other like-minded nations.

The IFC has come illegally onto our territorial waters to support rouge states like Hatay which are have participated in war-crimes largely ignored by the IFC, it is by today both Insha'Allah and by Royal decree that we the newly formed Corsairs of Andulaisania and have hereby the right to stop any ships and detain the crew of said IFC nations.

Our Grand Mufti has issued a perfectly legitimate fatwa allowing this, it is not theft as it is in defense of our nation and territorial waters, we have the right to confiscate the goods for better use and we also have the right to put down via force if necessary any resistance to our nations government.

We are each paid 100 Gold Dinar for our job, and for each ship captured and we are uniformed mostly.

So beware the imperialists of the International Freedom Coalition, you never know when we may strike you!

---

[Shazbotdom]

We really need an IC thread for crap such as this guy issuing a Fatwa...

[The New Age Empire]

bump

[United States of Conner]

Any chance it's legal to write a resolution on the issue of Inyursta?

i.e.: this council, fed up with the constant bickering on the topic of the membership of Inyusta, hereby moves to
- nullify all specific resolution related to the issue, including but not limited to: resolution x, section y (and so on),
- Preserves/nullifies the membership of Inyursta

If it's legally possible (I don't know if it is), then I'll have it up within a couple of hours and maybe this godforsaken debate can go into the hole where it belongs.

[Guadalupador]

(Image)

---

b-ismi-llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīmi

A great crime has been committed against the people Andulaisania, everyday the criminals of the IFC cross into the Mediterranean without first paying proper taxes to come into this place, the IFC nations are not native nor have they been friendly to certain nations in our region especially the Bashriyyans, Omarians and other like-minded nations.

The IFC has come illegally onto our territorial waters to support rouge states like Hatay which are have participated in war-crimes largely ignored by the IFC, it is by today both Insha'Allah and by Royal decree that we the newly formed Corsairs of Andulaisania and have hereby the right to stop any ships and detain the crew of said IFC nations.

Our Grand Mufti has issued a perfectly legitimate fatwa allowing this, it is not theft as it is in defense of our nation and territorial waters, we have the right to confiscate the goods for better use and we also have the right to put down via force if necessary any resistance to our nations government.

We are each paid 100 Gold Dinar for our job, and for each ship captured and we are uniformed mostly.

So beware the imperialists of the International Freedom Coalition, you never know when we may strike you!

---

(Image)

okay.

[Libraria and Ausitoria]

Alas, Conner; if we get rid of all resolutions related to IYF, we have no resolutions, government, or council. Resolution 0 gives the council and government the power to function as necessary.

IYF, you stop God-modding. You don't get to interdict Ausitorian trade, unless you take IC action to stop it. And Cuscatlan abandoned the idea after behind-the-scenes lobbying.

No resolution has made any definitive comment on the legality of the government's application of Resolution 0/66/whatever to expel you.

IYF, alone amongst members, failed to provide any assurance they would avoid attacking another member nation during an earlier confrontation, and now it seems IYF wishes to attack Ausitorian shipping?

And stop muddling yourself with your nation.

It's the lower right hand end of the periodic table that disintegrates.

And your doctrine is never going to work until it allows for both sides using deterrence to force a compromise.

As for these pirates, that nation is almost certainly an OOCly motivated puppet and I'm ignoring it and recommend others do the same.