Debate Thread

[TheSensitiveNewAge]

Here's a question, when seeking good relations with other relations, to what extent should a diplomatic relationship go? There's talks of informal alliances, or just good terms, and what not. What should these ties entail? If nation x is banned in the Islands should it be banned from Canada? (This was the matter to the dissolution of the alliance between us and Texas.)

What about defender intelligence? Granted, TITO is outside a Delegat's jurisdiction, but I feel the Delegate should always be thinking about possible improvements for all areas of government.


Any particular regions we should be allies with?

[Hockeynutville]

An interesting question that contains many variables. I think it depends on the circumstances in which we would pursue these relations. If you are talking in friendly terms like we have with Canada, I think it'd be beneficial to establish these kind of diplomatic terms with as many regions as we can, or at least those who show an interest in the emissary system. I'm not sure exactly if we need to have formal alliances for any real purpose.

I think in a lot of ways, these alliances can be more harmful than beneficial. Alliances are more useful to smaller regions who need to band together with larger numbers for safety from invader organizations but ourselves and having our own strong defender organization , it really isn't that necessary. It puts stress between the two regions, especially during times of conflict. As for your region X situation, it is a real possibility and I think that any region should be allowed to chose which nations it allows and doesn't allow to inhabit it. Thus, rigid alliance policies can conflict with our own sense of values and in the end only serve to drive a wedge between two otherwise friendly regions.

As for defender intelligence, you might have to be more specific in what you ask about it. Do you mean in terms of sharing it with allied regions? If so, already we gain a great deal, or at least we did when TITO played a more prominent role in the invader vs defender conflict of information regarding recent invasions or attempted ones from other defender organizations. In my own opinion, defenders whether they are from the Rejected Realms or Pacific Defenders or TITO, in the end we all fight towards the same goal. We are all on the same side, fighting a mutual foe. Doesn't it only seem logical to share with these organizations, or in the case of your question, allied nations with defender organizations information regarding invader activity in the realm of Nationstates? The only possible thing that I might consider classified information towards other regions would be of undercover nations or for those of you who prefer it "spys" within invader organizations and that would simply be to protect the identity of such an individual. Other than that scenario, why wouldn't we share our intelligence, if not to benefit ourselves and relations with friendly regions, but to help liberate those who have fallen victim.

Summarizing in your final question, I don't know if we can honestly say there is one region out there that we should actively pursue an alliance with. In terms of friendly relations, the more friends we have, the more opportunities this region has to expand itself, not just in what we can learn from them but in our population as well. People who might be bored with their own regions would hear about us and may decide to look us up and see what we have to offer. I believe we have a great deal of opportunities and fun to offer nations of every kind. We have to break out from this "isolationism" that we have been labeled by other nations and become a much more connected part of the NS world. If you want to call it NS globalization, go right ahead, but the term is accurate. Once we get rid of these misconceptions other people have of us and establish relations with regions around NS, soon we will see an uprise in people, activity and the level of enjoyment that we experience logging into the 10KI and this forum.

The door is right ahead of us. All we have to do is step forward and open it. And as corny as it may sound, I would like to be a larger part in helping to turn the handle and bring the islands back to the level veterans of this region know it's capable of.

[Estayland]

I would say these alliances are more of a league of friendship. Swap ideas and give assistance when needed.

I dont think an issue like Texas is any cause for a dissolution. We shouldn't dictate what happens in another region. However, disagreements that are strong and/or frequent may then be cause of a reevaluation of the alliance.

[Goldenloser2241]

What I have spoke about as for relations abroad is exactly what I will strive to do. If elected I would work to have relations such as we have with Canada respectful, friendly relations without a formal alliance. The "ties" would entail the distribution of regional information between both regions which could provide both parties with ideas that will allow for growth and prosperous times.

For you second question on bannings. I believe in regions rights and I do not believe that we have any right to tell other regions who to ban and who not to. We do have an obligation to warn regional delegates, founders, or who ever might be incharge about nations that are invaders, known flame batters, ect.

On intellegence I will try to work with defender groups in order to get intellegence which should be no problem since we have done so before with ease. Pacific Defender's is an open defender's group that is always busy. We have worked with them in the past and I am more than sure that we can work with them now. We must first have active TO's in place.

[Gluuland]

I dont know how you can say "it's the delegates responsibility to deal with foreign affairs," and then say no to alliances...
This sound alot like putting your ear up to another region's door and "listening" to the good stuff, then waiving the bad....

I do not think we should give out alliances lightly, howver I do think we need alliances to expand. (as i have said before)

At the moment, we are a bit isolationist... This has been pointed out to us on several occasions, especially in the Embassies....

If i was to be approached by another region seeking an alliance, there would certainly be a period of discovery... How large is the region? How active? Would it be beneficial to the xki?What would they require from us

As delegate, I would also, however, put it up for vote like resolutions... Democracy is a useful tool for settling disputes.......

I disagree with banning nations banned from other regions unless they are a proven threat..... In those cases, it is a delegate's common sesnse and good judgement which would deal with that... I would, however, be open to formal appeals to any of my actions a delegate which would then be voted on in common...

[TheSensitiveNewAge]

As of late, there haven't been a lot of TITO missions, meaning not a lot of stars are being earned, preventing newer nations from running for the Delegacy.

What would people's thoughts about service credit as an alternative to stars be? Such as 3 weeks of focused recuirting equals an Immigration point or teaching two classes counts as an Education point?

This of course, is for after the Delegacy Election, no need to worry about competition.

[Hockeynutville]

It makes sense. In my candidacy thread, Sinn and I discussed about the lack of newer nations even running for the Senate let alone Delegate. Obviously we need to allow more opportunities to newer nations to play larger roles in the region. With TITO being currently dormant, it makes sense that there should be an alternate means other than 10 battlestars.

Perhaps an alternate means to the 10 battlestars could be government service. Lets say that in the good ol' days of TITO, it would be a good measure to have 10 battlestars in a month so maybe a worthwhile alternate could be a month of service in a government department, be it Labor, Education, Immigration or even being part of the Emissary system.

[Gluuland]

I believe that having 10 battle stars should remain compulsary to become delegate... Being delegate has responsibility, and having 10 TITO battle stars ensures that the candidate has been in TITO for a fair amount of time...

Perhaps we should imlement government credits as a standard for Senators? That way we would ensure that senatorial candidates have some experience...

[Estayland]

I am in favor of keeping the 10 battle star requirement for delegate. However, I think only UN membership should be required for everything else.

[Gluuland]

Thus, our current position...... But do you agree or disagree with having a new nation arrive in the xki and run for senator.... ?

[Estayland]

As long as he meets the current rules then I am not opposed.

[Goldenloser2241]

For every nations running for delegate the 10 battle star rule should apply. It shows a commitement to the region and a commitment to defense. As for the new nations running for a senate position like Estay said above me as long as that person meets the rules and standards in place I have no problem with that person running for the Senate.

[Estayland]

I would want my delegate to be around long enough to understand the happenings and culture of the region.

[Sinn Féin's Ireland]

I would agree with that. As for a senator position, i wouldnt have any problems with a completely new nation running. They have a right to run, and as a democratically elected gov't we should recognise that right. Delegate position requirements dont have to stay as they are forever. If TITO became dissolved even further then we would have to make concessions allowing a type of point system as suggested. It's innovative...