[Cheesecake_Marmalade]

You cannot bury your head in the sand, this is not about Troops in Mecca this is about fighting the threat of a world wide Muslim Caliphate. If we dont stand with our European and American Brothers then we are cupible in our own downfall. What do you think the Islamists will think of our Pagan rituals?

This is just fear-mongering. The "War on Terror" is really just an imperialist mission being carried out by the United States so that they can continue to commandeer oil in the Middle East, and protect their "national" (read: corporate) interests. If they were to simply leave the Middle East, the war would stop.

[Demosthenes]

This is just fear-mongering. The "War on Terror" is really just an imperialist mission being carried out by the United States so that they can continue to commandeer oil in the Middle East, and protect their "national" (read: corporate) interests. If they were to simply leave the Middle East, the war would stop.

AND...Uh...
That's all I got.

[MistyTiger]

I am willing to take your proposal for the Defense and Foreign ministries to jointly work towards nuclear disarmament. I am somewhat weary of nuclear proliferation abroad, though. We should be careful of entangling ourselves with imperialist interests.

I agree with this.

I also think that we should try to be as neutral as possible.

[Doomhammer]

- how should we position the RoP internationally?

Reasonably armed. Preferably a party to UN and other regional and global international organizations. We shouldn't shy away from a multilateral alliance with other developed, democratic countries.

- what kind of relations should we establish with the US and Europe as well as Africa, the Middle East, China, Africa and South America etc.?

In light of what I said above. Economic, social and technical cooperation must be maintained with everyone. We should take action in a manner that would guarantee our access to energy supplies and other natural resources: for this, I recommend being in close cooperation with the Gulf and the Caucuses. Moreover, we can strike a deal with Sub-Saharan Africa. In exchange for know-how, medicine, infrastructure and some employment, we can call "dibs" on their oil and metals. I hope that didn't sound too imperialistic.

- multiliteralism, and participation in the regional and international organisations

Yes.

- the issue of nuclear weapon and disarmament

A very limited number of arms for deterrence. "Yes" to power production and research.

- national security concerning 'terrorist' organisations and 'rogue' states

Embargoes and cooperation and counter-intelligence activities with allies (we totally need a NATO like thing).

[Oxymoron]

Why should we?

To defend against Missles obviously.

[Dave]

- how should we position the RoP internationally?

As others have said, armed neutrality. We should also pay lip service to what causes are popular at the moment, but doing nothing about them. For instance we should condemn the genocide in Darfur, but take no concrete actions to alleviate it. In fact, we should be hypocritical and pursue trade links with them.

- what kind of relations should we establish with the US and Europe as well as Africa, the Middle East, China, Africa and South America etc.?

The best possible with all parties. Where that conflicts, priority goes to the US and Europe who are obviously more important to us.

- multiliteralism, and participation in the regional and international organisations

Again, lip service.

- the issue of nuclear weapon and disarmament

We should be for disarmament but not do anything about.

- national security concerning 'terrorist' organisations and 'rogue' states

A restrictive immigration policy, especially concerning Musselmen, means no terrorist threat here. We should however, once again, pay lip service to fighting terrorism.

Someone brought up missile defense. I think it would be prudent to participate in America's missile defense scheme provided the following conditions are met, in this order:
[1]It doesn't cause Russia to target us (given our geography I don't think it would)
[2]It doesn't give America the ability to spy on us
[3]We get technology transfer from America
[4]It doesn't cost us anything

[Demosthenes]

- how should we position the RoP internationally?

Armed Neutrality. Except as I outlined in an earlier foreign policy proposal.

- what kind of relations should we establish with the US and Europe as well as Africa, the Middle East, China, Africa and South America etc.?

Neutral trading ties for essential goods among the majority. Closest ties to Scandanavia, China, Iran, and certain Latin American nations.

- what kind of relations should we establish with the US and Europe as well as Africa, the Middle East, China, Africa and South America etc.?

See above, with a wary eye on the US.

- multiliteralism, and participation in the regional and international organisations

Few and far between with an eye toward who really runs these international agencies. THe UN is as good a "feel-good" organization as any of them. No military alliances.

- the issue of nuclear weapon and disarmament

Disarmament but with an eye toward knowledge of the development of any possible weapon should we ever face overt attack again. In other words, we don't need to build them, but knowing how is a huge plus.

- national security concerning 'terrorist' organisations and 'rogue' states

When was the last time Scandanavians were bombed by muslims? Do what they do.

Someone brought up missile defense. I think it would be prudent to participate in America's missile defense scheme provided the following conditions are met, in this order:
[1]It doesn't cause Russia to target us (given our geography I don't think it would)
[2]It doesn't give America the ability to spy on us
[3]We get technology transfer from America
[4]It doesn't cost us anything

This isn't entirely without some merit ,particularly considering point three, and even more so if we could parlay that exchange into something like the maglev discussions going on elsewhere. But also, with a strong eye on number 1.

[Dave]

Neutral trading ties for essential goods among the majority. Closest ties to Scandanavia, China, Iran, and certain Latin American nations.

Are you kidding me? We are a European nation in the North Atlantic, and the national security of the United States and Western European nations depends on our being friendly to them. This doesn't mean we have to join NATO or anything like that, but cozying up to China and Iran excessively does not seem like a very good idea. What do China and Iran have to offer us in the first place? In fact, as an energy exporter Iran has nothing to offer us.

When was the last time Scandanavians were bombed by muslims? Do what they do.

On the other hand, the have the same problems with Muslims that other countries in Europe do with issues like riots, crime, attacks on public services, poverty, no-go zones, and gang rapes of good European women. That's not the kind of terrorism the USA cares about but it certainly spreads terror.

[Cheesecake_Marmalade]

Oh yes, I'd also like to say that I agree with Dave on the issue of Muslim immigrants. The RoP is a primarily pagan nation and I'd like to keep it that way.

[Demosthenes]

Are you kidding me? We are a European nation in the North Atlantic, and the national security of the United States and Western European nations depends on our being friendly to them. This doesn't mean we have to join NATO or anything like that, but cozying up to China and Iran excessively does not seem like a very good idea. What do China and Iran have to offer us in the first place? In fact, as an energy exporter Iran has nothing to offer us.

Not at all. China has a large market as we are all aware, and naturally there are certain aspects-- Not all-- of their governace some in SN-RF naturally find interesting. Though we won't be importing anything drastic...of course.

Further, though we are not a majority, it is clear that a mandate exists among the voters of PoFo- given the combined votes supplied to both SN-RF and SLD, to go a new course, one where we don't always necessarily ask about the bottom line first, but seek a new direction for relations among the people.

What's wrong with Iran anyway? The non-existant and non-confirmed rumors of their nuclear weapons development? Remember what the US did to us? And yet you are so willing to buy into the same propaganda they use against them. I would think it would be quite natural for us to seek ties to those nations with similar experiences in their dealings with the west. Iran and Venzuela are rumored to be close to one another depite their both being oil exporters, I fail to see what that has to do with anything.

[Dave]

Not at all. China has a large market as we are all aware, and naturally there are certain aspects-- Not all-- of their governace some in SN-RF naturally find interesting. Though we won't be importing anything drastic...of course.

I agree on positive relations with China and want to pursue economic opportunities, but we can't cozy up to the point that the US gets disturbed. Our model here should be Franco-Chinese relations.

Further, though we are not a majority, it is clear that a mandate exists among the voters of PoFo- given the combined votes supplied to both SN-RF and SLD, to go a new course, one where we don't always necessarily ask about the bottom line first, but seek a new direction for relations among the people.

I thought overthrowing the last government indicated a desire for a new course.

What's wrong with Iran anyway?

Who said anything was wrong with them? They just don't have anything to offer us.

The non-existant and non-confirmed rumors of their nuclear weapons development?

Whether or not they are developing nuclear weapons is irrelevant to us.

Remember what the US did to us?

Yes, and your point? Pragmatism should be the order of the day.

And yet you are so willing to buy into the same propaganda they use against them.

Certainly not.

I would think it would be quite natural for us to seek ties to those nations with similar experiences in their dealings with the west.

We're part of the West.

Iran and Venzuela are rumored to be close to one another depite their both being oil exporters, I fail to see what that has to do with anything.

They're OPEC members and in an anti-American marriage of losers. We want to be winners, which means developing our industry. This means we want full access to US and European markets and technology. If we were an oil importing country cozying up to such countries could be useful since then we might get discounted oil, such as Cuba does.

[Demosthenes]

I agree on positive relations with China and want to pursue economic opportunities, but we can't cozy up to the point that the US gets disturbed. Our model here should be Franco-Chinese relations.

I don't have a problem with that.

Who said anything was wrong with them? They just don't have anything to offer us.

That's arbitrary. Befriending certain nations can be done for reasons beyond direct monetary gain.

Yes, and your point? Pragmatism should be the order of the day.

With a wary eye on not letting it happen again.

We're part of the West.

We're a marginal part of the west.

They're OPEC members and in an anti-American marriage of losers.

So?

We want to be winners, which means developing our industry. This means we want full access to US and European markets and technology.

Only in so much as this doesn't compromise our national soverignty. Access to tech and markets is nice, but not at the expense of...being so tied to the US and Europe that we may no longer function on our own economically. At least, in as much as that is possible today.

If we were an oil importing country cozying up to such countries could be useful since then we might get discounted oil, such as Cuba does

And yet cozying up to other oil exporters can have other added benefits such as driving up the price of exported oil, for instance.

[Dave]

That's arbitrary. Befriending certain nations can be done for reasons beyond direct monetary gain.

Other reasons would include security, technology, or perhaps a common culture. None of which Iran can offer us.

With a wary eye on not letting it happen again.

Absolutely, which is why we need to pursue armed neutrality.

We're a marginal part of the west.

Yes, because we have 21 million people and have been mismanaged, but we are none the less a completely Western nation.

So?

Point being they're just some chumpstain loser countries whining about America. Do we want to be whiners? Or do we want to be doers?

Only in so much as this doesn't compromise our national soverignty. Access to tech and markets is nice, but not at the expense of...being so tied to the US and Europe that we may no longer function on our own economically. At least, in as much as that is possible today.

Absolutely. That is why we must drive up our savings rate and pursue resource nationalism (within limits), so that we finance our own investments and control our natural resources.

And yet cozying up to other oil exporters can have other added benefits such as driving up the price of exported oil, for instance.

Getting the USA to bomb Iran would achieve that quite nicely.