SENATE BILL: NATO Membership Reform Act (Law'd)

[bore]

Just to get the ball rolling, I'll propose an amendment based on shua's points:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Also, New Zealand was listed twice.

[bore]

Aye

[bore]

Aye,

If we do want to add New Zealand and whoever else, it seems to me that that should be a joint decision.

[bore]

Aye

Aye,

If we do want to add New Zealand and whoever else, it seems to me that that should be a joint decision.

Joint decision between the nation in question and the NAC, you mean?

Yeah, but also between the countries of the NAC.

[bore]

What is the benefit from expanding the alliance in this fashion? What is the vision for the alliance I suppose I am asking?

It could be that the more countries involved, the more manpower/weaponry/ bases etc the alliance has access to, so it would make it even more formidable. Though I think that Atlasia is so militarily advanced that it's not in any real danger from anyone, it could help the smaller nations. Also it would probably mean atlasia footing less of the bill in terms of operations, because it would make up less of the organisation.

[bore]

What is the benefit from expanding the alliance in this fashion? What is the vision for the alliance I suppose I am asking?

It could be that the more countries involved, the more manpower/weaponry/ bases etc the alliance has access to, so it would make it even more formidable. Though I think that Atlasia is so militarily advanced that it's not in any real danger from anyone, it could help the smaller nations. Also it would probably mean atlasia footing less of the bill in terms of operations, because it would make up less of the organisation.

Give me your opinion then, since you voted no. I am having trouble making up my mind here.


Also, shua, what is your opinion on this cost savings advocacy?

I wouldn't mind expanding NATO, but I don't like the 3rd section because I think that decision should be made by all of NATO, not us unilaterally making suggestions, when and if expanding it becomes an option.

[bore]

What is the benefit from expanding the alliance in this fashion? What is the vision for the alliance I suppose I am asking?

It could be that the more countries involved, the more manpower/weaponry/ bases etc the alliance has access to, so it would make it even more formidable. Though I think that Atlasia is so militarily advanced that it's not in any real danger from anyone, it could help the smaller nations. Also it would probably mean atlasia footing less of the bill in terms of operations, because it would make up less of the organisation.

Give me your opinion then, since you voted no. I am having trouble making up my mind here.


Also, shua, what is your opinion on this cost savings advocacy?

I wouldn't necessarily expect cost savings, given our treaty commitments would tend to promote a greater military presence in the affected regions.

I suppose it would depend exactly on the country that joined. But certainly some countries would provide more men and machinery for operations than they would need. So there could be a slight cost saving, not that that's the reason for doing this, though.

[bore]

Aye