Invader/Defender Organizations

[Leukenstein]

Hi,

Old gameplayer here who is looking to get back into military matters on Nationstates. Invader, defender, I don't have a preference right now.

[Valrifell]

DEN and The Black Hawks are the primary raider groups at this particular moment in time, my own region, The New Inquisition is rebuilding, and while we don't have a military yet, there will be one as soon as everything else settles.

To be perfectly honest, I don't know enough about Defenderdom to list their orgs.

EDIT: Fixed broken region tag,

[King Nephmir II]

If you're more into stealth raiding and casual invasions/operations, consider joining us in Auralia. We also have some higher speed operations regularly, so it's not all slow paced all the time. If you want more details first, feel free to send me a telegram, and I'll answer it as soon as I can.

[Zaolat]

Osiris has the Sekhmet Legion for Raiding as well.

The FRA, Spiritus, Lazarus LLA, The Rejected Realms RRA for defending.

[Luxdonia]

Invader:
DEN
The Black Hawks
Lone Wolves United
The Land of Kings and Emperors
Auralia
British Isles
Crimson Dawn

Defender:
Lazarus
Tajitu
The Rejected Realms
Spiritus

Independent:
The North Pacific
The East Pacific
The South Pacific
Sanctum

[Valrifell]

LKE and BI are Independents, as Imperialism is a branch of Independentism.

[Benevolent Thomas]

for defenders there is the The United Defenders League, The FRA, Lazarus' Lazarene Liberation Army, The Spiritus Defense Forces, 10000 Islands Treaty Organization (TITO), the Renegade Islands Alliance Special Forces, the Texas Defense Forces, Taijitu Citizens Militia, The Rejected Realms Army, Wintreath has a defender organization, but I'm too stupid to pronounce it let alone spell it, Peoples Federation of Qandaristan defends too, and I believe Equinox may have a defender guild there that's trying to develop.

[Zaolat]

Invader:
DEN
The Black Hawks
Lone Wolves United
The Land of Kings and Emperors
Auralia
British Isles
Crimson Dawn

Defender:
Lazarus
Tajitu
The Rejected Realms
Spiritus

Independent:
The North Pacific
The East Pacific
The South Pacific
Sanctum

No.

[Luxdonia]

Invader:
DEN
The Black Hawks
Lone Wolves United
The Land of Kings and Emperors
Auralia
British Isles
Crimson Dawn

Defender:
Lazarus
Tajitu
The Rejected Realms
Spiritus

Independent:
The North Pacific
The East Pacific
The South Pacific
Sanctum

No.

I believe I am correct, Zaolat. Care to point out any errors in my list?

[The Silver Sentinel]

No.

I believe I am correct, Zaolat. Care to point out any errors in my list?

For one The South Pacific is not independent. They are flat our raiders at this point. You also forgot TITO, The Texas Defense Forces, The UDL, The RIA for defenders. I would figure with your intimate knowledge of gameplay you would not make such egregious errors, but alas I am once again disappointed.

[Klaus Devestatorie]

I believe I am correct, Zaolat. Care to point out any errors in my list?

For one The South Pacific is not independent. They are flat our raiders at this point.

Do we have to go through the active choice =/= fixed ideology debate in every other thread?

[Tancerlo]

LKE and BI are Independents, as Imperialism is a branch of Independentism.

To be fair, the LKE is tagged as invader. I imagine that informed where he placed it.

[Drop Your Pants]

Hi,

Old gameplayer here who is looking to get back into military matters on Nationstates. Invader, defender, I don't have a preference right now.

Old GPers know the groups around or know how to find out. So what was your original nation?

[Trick Shot]

Invader:
DEN
The Black Hawks
Lone Wolves United
The Land of Kings and Emperors
Auralia
British Isles
Crimson Dawn

Defender:
Lazarus
Tajitu
The Rejected Realms
Spiritus

Independent:
The North Pacific
The East Pacific
The South Pacific
Sanctum

Besides the other obvious errors, you forget to list the Osiran Sekhmet Legion. This is disappointing considering you listed every other GCR that has an active military.

[Vandoosa]

Invader:
DEN
The Black Hawks
Lone Wolves United
The Land of Kings and Emperors
Auralia
British Isles
Crimson Dawn

Defender:
Lazarus
Tajitu
The Rejected Realms
Spiritus

Independent:
The North Pacific
The East Pacific
The South Pacific
Sanctum

Besides the other obvious errors, you forget to list the Osiran Sekhmet Legion. This is disappointing considering you listed every other GCR that has an active military.

I keep forgetting to apply for Osiris military thingy.. Maybe soon! So I have something to do after doing the other thing I am doing!

[United RussoAsia]

TWP has an active military, something like a glorious 4 members, but we do.

The Reef Hounds are a thing, as well.

[Onderkelkia]

LKE and BI are Independents, as Imperialism is a branch of Independentism.

To be fair, the LKE is tagged as invader. I imagine that informed where he placed it.

I can only provide the same explanation I offered back in February to Cormac, the only other person to have made this point since tags were introduced:

They voluntarily imposed the Invader tag on their region. Let's not quibble.

The invader tag is on the LKE (as it is on several other prominent Imperialist regions) because the purpose of tags is to show new members the range of activities which are carried out frequently in our region. We conduct a substantial number of offensive operations, so new members looking to invade within a wider package are able to take the opportunity up as part of the LKE armed forces. We are also tagged "Industrial", "Past Tech" and "Steampunk" to reflect the different types of role-play which take place on our forums; no one would characterise the LKE as a "Past Tech" region in consequence of this.

We do not regard the invader tag as attaching the LKE's affiliation to the Raider sphere. If we did regard it as such, we would not use it, as anyone with the slightest knowledge of the LKE's position on this issue - a position which has been maintained consistently since our founding in 2005 - would appreciate.

The presence of this tag has never led anyone to suggest that the LKE is an invader region before. If it had, we would have removed it to avoid confusion.

In light of the fact that this does appear to be causing confusion, among certain individuals at least, we will be reviewing the tag's continued use.

[Misley]

For the ideological raider-defender, there is the interregional navy, The Red Fleet, as well as regional armies such as Korean Peoples Army (North Korea) and Central Defense Agency (the Democratic Socialist Union).

These militaries focus on antifascist operations.

[Cora II]

Then there is cruel, horrible, barbaric, remote and isolated Cimmeria out there. Raider-aligned.

The region is a Facade.

[Siberian Districts]

I believe I am correct, Zaolat. Care to point out any errors in my list?

For one The South Pacific is not independent. They are flat our raiders at this point. You also forgot TITO, The Texas Defense Forces, The UDL, The RIA for defenders. I would figure with your intimate knowledge of gameplay you would not make such egregious errors, but alas I am once again disappointed.

Yeah, no. The SPSF is indeed independent. I'd appreciate it if you didn't make such comments without knowing about our workings.

[Xoriet]

For one The South Pacific is not independent. They are flat our raiders at this point. You also forgot TITO, The Texas Defense Forces, The UDL, The RIA for defenders. I would figure with your intimate knowledge of gameplay you would not make such egregious errors, but alas I am once again disappointed.

Yeah, no. The SPSF is indeed independent. I'd appreciate it if you didn't make such comments without knowing about our workings.

He's probably referring to the fact that you guys seem to only ever raid. To be fair, people used to regularly call EPSA "defender" because we seemed to only ever defend. It's not an insult. It's just how you're perceived based on your activities.

[Trick Shot]

Yeah, no. The SPSF is indeed independent. I'd appreciate it if you didn't make such comments without knowing about our workings.

He's probably referring to the fact that you guys seem to only ever raid. To be fair, people used to regularly call EPSA "defender" because we seemed to only ever defend. It's not an insult. It's just how you're perceived based on your activities.

True. It seemed whenever the Legion raids I get "You are setting in stone that the Sekhmet Legion is raider, eh?" but it is overlooked the occasional liberation or two that we do. /jack

It is all about image.

[Xoriet]

The main factor about "independence" is that it is nearly impossible to be labeled exclusively by that name.

NPA was considered basically raider for a while because they raided more often than not. EPSA was considered basically defender for a while because we defended regularly, despite stating clearly that we operate under the sole authority of TEP and the concept of regionalism. The Sekhmet Legion is definitely considered raider by now. ERN is considered raider by many as well despite promoting independence. SPSF's reputation is up in the air at this point, but many of your members seem to lean raider publicly.

It's easier for people who see the game in black and white terms as far as R/D is concerned to label independents something they can consider under definite terms.

"Independent" allegiance is often associated with raiding, when the term is based on the definition insisted on by NES and Unibot. You'll have to get used to being called something other than "independent" by people who have solid alignment themselves. Maintaining a balance between raiding and defending while operating under the banner of regional sovereignty and the concept of neutrality/independence is extremely difficult. Furthermore, the opportunity to work equally with raiders and defenders depends on how trustworthy you are considered by either or both sides. If you give either or both a reason to distrust you, you will not have the opportunity to work as a partner rather than as a convenient support.

What you do with your independent military is what you are classified as in general terms.

It is simpler overall to operate under a definite alignment such as raider or defender, really. Otherwise what you really are is subject to perception and image.

[Ever-Wandering Souls]

The Black Hawks r best classy ebul raider org mwahaha *highfive*

>>Can Confirm

[Onderkelkia]

What you do with your independent military is what you are classified as in general terms.

It is simpler overall to operate under a definite alignment such as raider or defender, really. Otherwise what you really are is subject to perception and image.

A proportion of raiders (depending on their level of understanding) and an even greater share of defenders (owing to idealistic defenders' inherent objection to any form of offensive military action) will always classify any region which engages in military activity according to their own criteria. However, what really makes you "subject to perception and image" is bowing down to their criteria, because this surrenders the right to define your own foreign policy.

Independence is not hard to grasp; it merely requires looking beyond the sheer nonsense that a region's alignment is defined by which type of military operation it most commonly performs. A region's alignment is determined by its objectives, allies and enemies, not its proportion of raids to defences. Categorisation within a particular tradition such as 'independent' or 'raider' is something even wider than that, based on a region's external and internal attributes (e.g., the LKE is a very different type of place to The Black Hawks, so it misrepresents their nature to shoehorn them into the same category).

The raider tradition is about being a region, usually structured on a military chain of command, which exists primarily to raid for fun. That is what a raider region is. It is very easy indeed to distinguish regions like Europeia from that; if people choose not to differentiate, it's not because it's too difficult. If you want to get to grips with what a region is, categorising every region that invades more than it defends as part of the raider sphere is simply inaccurate.

The principles of Independence (as a tradition) are articulated clearly in the Independent Manifesto; I've placed it in the spoiler below:

The Independent Manifesto


We, the undersigned governments; cognizant of our shared identity as Independent regions; committed to elaborating and clarifying the common elements that characterize Independence; and determined to promoted our shared ideals and objectives in the NationStates world; do hereby affirm:

Identity

I. An Independent region is characterized by its emphasis on a strong and vibrant internal community and a political system that encourages stability, participation and growth. Regional life and identity are driven primarily by the political and cultural elements of the region, and not by a focus on military activity for its own sake.

II. An Independent region rejects the Raider/Defender dichotomy and does not take a position in the middle of the spectrum. An Independent region instead identifies separate, more complex and nuanced, interests for their community, which do not fit in the Raider/Defender dichotomy, such as: maximizing regional activity and stability; increasing the region’s influence and impact in the interregional stage; developing strong ties with like-minded communities and regions; and protecting the sovereignty of friendly and aligned regions.

III. An Imperialist region is functionally also an Independent region in terms of possessing the characteristics outlined in this statement. However, Imperialist regions have additional characteristics that do not apply to all Independent regions, and Independent and Imperialist regions have had at periods separate historical traditions, despite sharing common origins.

Diplomacy

IV. An Independent region adopts a pragmatic approach towards diplomacy. An Independent region’s diplomacy is not guided by dogmatism or intransigence. The ultimate objective of an Independent region’s diplomacy is to maximize utility for the region, as defined by the regional interests. Therefore, the fundamental principle of an Independent region’s foreign policy is the rational evaluation of decisions on an issue-by-issue basis, based on how they serve the regional interests.

V. An Independent region has a vested interest in pursuing an active and prolific foreign policy, staying at the forefront of the interregional diplomatic scene. An Independent region does not a priori or universally favor neutral or moderate positions, and does not shy away from engaging in interregional events.

VI. An Independent region is not averse to collaborating with Raider, Defender, or other regions that do not subscribe to the Independent ideology. Such collaboration can exist on the basis of shared mutually beneficial interests, and on the condition that the other parties will acknowledge and respect the Independent region’s freedom to act in any capacity its self-interests dictate, and will not try to impose their own ideology on the Independent region.

Military

VII. An Independent military is an instrument of foreign policy, at the disposal of the government of the Independent region. An Independent region is not averse to using its Independent military, and does not recognize any external and universal moralistic elements as dictating the use of its Independent military. Rather, an Independent region employs its Independent military in order to effect the military objectives dictated by the region’s diplomatic interests, and in any way necessary to achieve these objectives. This includes offensive, defensive, reinforcement, or refounding operations.

VIII. An Independent military does not a priori and universally take a position against any type of military operations for external moralistic reasons, nor does it commit to conducting a single type of military operations for its own sake. Furthermore, an Independent military is not under any burden to try to balance the amount of operations of different kinds. Rather, decisions and guidelines on the types of military operations an Independent military may execute are adopted on the basis of regional interests and can be reevaluated on a case-specific basis.

IX. An Independent region has a vested interest in maintaining an active and versatile Independent military, capable of executing both offensive and defensive military operations. An Independent military endeavors to participate in military operations of all kinds that are appropriate for training purposes: missions representing realistic military conditions and which do not constitute hostilities against other gameplay regions.

I would echo its points that an independent region "has a vested interest in pursuing an active and prolific foreign policy", i.e. independence has nothing to do with neutrality, and that "an Independent military is not under any burden to try to balance the amount of operations of different kinds". It is all about a region forging its own foreign policy and military activity according to its own needs, rather than based on the expectations of the raider-defender divide.