NationStates Jolt Archive


OOC: ATTN: Looking for Christian nation to fight

Sel Appa
21-08-2005, 19:12
I would like to arrange a war with a Christian nation. Sel Appa is atheist and does not like Christians. Our full army, including all reserves numbers around 25 million.
Doomingsland
21-08-2005, 20:07
I suppose you can fight me, I'm not involved in any wars at the moment. My nation's about as Christian as they get.
Siesatia
21-08-2005, 20:25
*Watches From Orbit*

Siesatia isn't an ally per say, or Sel Appa, but we are OOC Correspondants.
Kurona
21-08-2005, 20:57
The Priniplaity of Kuorna Decalres War on Sel Appa.
Kanami
21-08-2005, 21:10
:sniper: :mp5:

The Republic of Kanami:

We find your decleration of War an intursion of another nations sovergntey, and civil rights. One should be able to worship God in their own way, even if you DON'T belive. Which is why we with our Ally Kurona, will fight your attemption of the Slaughtering of A Chrstian Nation.

We Also Decalare War
Aust
21-08-2005, 21:18
OOC: have a go at Christs Own legion, a devoutly Christian nation. See my./his RP's.
Adamistaan
21-08-2005, 21:21
From: The United Soviet Socialists of Adamistaans foreign office

Message: The USSA does not beleive in religiously motivated conflics and deeply condems any nations involved in these wars. If so a USSA "peace keeping Battalion" will have to be sent to the point of conflict.
DaileyResurected
21-08-2005, 21:22
The People's Federation of DaileyResurected, Is not Openly Declareing War on Sel Appa.

But Our People are of the Former Nation of the Holy Empire Dailey and we will defend the rights of all Christian Nations. We will Suport any and all counter attacks with suplies and amunition.

Signed: Daileyian Minister of International Aid: Ben Gregory
Siesatia
22-08-2005, 12:35
Siesatia would like to remind all nations, that a declaration of war is not a violation of anyone's soveregnty. We might also remind many smaller nations, that, you're armies are much to small to contend with Sel Appan troops. Some nations might find their entire population to be below the Sel Appan Troop Number.

Siesatia currently has an active Military recruit rate of 3%, and our troops currently number 67,050,000. Most of these invested in the Space Navy.

We are dissapointed that some Earth nations cannot learn to coexist properly, and we will attack anyone who threatens the security of our colonies on earth.

OOC: *FF Tactics Advanced Judge Descends* Rules Today!: No Godmodding, No Wanking! Bonus Points for!: Wining the war without Nukes! and A Thread without flames!
Sel Appa
23-08-2005, 04:44
I am not asking for declarations of war. I am OOCly asking to see if any Christian nations would LIKE to fight. I am not declaring war on Christianity...yet.
Jagada
23-08-2005, 08:36
The Religious Commonwealth of Jagada is more than willing to fight you.
Amiro
23-08-2005, 08:50
Why not an Islamic nation? Why are athiest always against Christians and not Muslims. I would like to be persecuted for once. The Jews had the Nazis, the Christians have/had athiests sicne the early 1900's. Muslims only had the Jews for a bit...and not too much bloodshed.
Aust
23-08-2005, 09:17
Why not an Islamic nation? Why are athiest always against Christians and not Muslims. I would like to be persecuted for once. The Jews had the Nazis, the Christians have/had athiests sicne the early 1900's. Muslims only had the Jews for a bit...and not too much bloodshed.
OOC: What about the crusades, the muslims have the Christians.
Sel Appa
24-08-2005, 05:48
Why not an Islamic nation? Why are athiest always against Christians and not Muslims. I would like to be persecuted for once. The Jews had the Nazis, the Christians have/had athiests sicne the early 1900's. Muslims only had the Jews for a bit...and not too much bloodshed.
We are over 10% Muslim and consider them friendly people. Christians are very despised here. Only a few live in secluded areas, unless they were kicked out already.
BROJAS
24-08-2005, 08:01
FOREIGN MINISTRY DOCUMENT

To: The Christian Allies


My name is Count Von Sonam, and I am the Foreign Minister here in BROJAS. His Grace, EMPEROR ORANGE I, who is to be crowned at 10:00am today, has heard of the impending conflict and has commanded me to contact you. His Grace wishes it to be known that we are a christian and peaceful nation, and as such we cannot join the alliance, however, in the interests of neighbourly love, His Grace commands that Food, Medical Supplies and aid be made available should this War go ahead.

From: His Excellency Count Von Sonam
FOREIGN MINISTER TO HIS GRACE, EMPEROR ORANGE I
BROJAS
Nebarri_Prime
24-08-2005, 09:15
Why not an Islamic nation? Why are athiest always against Christians and not Muslims. I would like to be persecuted for once. The Jews had the Nazis, the Christians have/had athiests sicne the early 1900's. Muslims only had the Jews for a bit...and not too much bloodshed.

athiests don't like Christians, because unlike Muslims or Jews they keep asking anoying questions :p or atleast thats with me and my sister
Sel Appa
25-08-2005, 06:54
There Is No War Yet!!!! This Is An Ooc Planning!!!
The Celestial Swords
25-08-2005, 15:54
Mind if I'm FT?
Moronyicka
25-08-2005, 16:33
*tag*
Sel Appa
27-08-2005, 06:12
I'm starting a new thread.
Euroslavia
27-08-2005, 06:47
I'm starting a new thread.

Sel Appa: You need to reduce your sig to 8 lines. Right now, its way too big.
Siesatia
29-08-2005, 03:28
heh, sorta like the time I had about 20 lines in my sig.

Sel, maybe you would like to fight Euroslavia?
Germanische Zustande
29-08-2005, 03:29
I'll fight you. I've got a military numbering around 200 million...
Germanische Zustande
29-08-2005, 03:32
Why not an Islamic nation? Why are athiest always against Christians and not Muslims. I would like to be persecuted for once. The Jews had the Nazis, the Christians have/had athiests sicne the early 1900's. Muslims only had the Jews for a bit...and not too much bloodshed.

Um... Christians were persecuted from about 32 A.D. to 300 A.D. ( I think). We have also been persecuted by Asians, back in the days of early missions trips, as well as persecuted by Muslims during the Islamic Empire, and today by Islamic Sharia Law Extremist Nations.
Serapindal
29-08-2005, 03:32
Is this MT? If so, a 200 million man nation is easily considered GOD-MODING.

If it's not MT, I'm not playing. I hate FT with all my heart. It's just a personal thing.
Germanische Zustande
29-08-2005, 03:33
Is this MT? If so, a 200 million man nation is easily considered GOD-MODING.

If it's not MT, I'm not playing. I hate FT with all my heart. It's just a personal thing.

I'm FT, and my population is 3.081 Billion. I can easily have a military of 200 million. I try to stay below 10% of the population.
Serapindal
29-08-2005, 03:38
I'm FT, and my population is 3.081 Billion. I can easily have a military of 200 million. I try to stay below 10% of the population.

NOW, FOR ARMY SIZE:
The size and composition of armies is one of the most misunderstood, yet most widely used aspects of Nationstates. This is not helped by the fact that a number of well-meaning individuals have, in previous stickies, noted that you could maintain up to 5% of your nation in your military. This is not true. While you can have 5% of your population in the military, this is only really acceptable in times of war. Outside of that, it should be much smaller. In fact, you can count the number of nations with better than 2% of their population in their military on one hand, and at least one of those is a nation that just came out of a major war. Of the others, only one (North Korea) does not face the immediate threat of hostile action by militaristic neighbors. Do note, however, that most statistics only cover active armed forces, and reserve and militia (aka Territorial Defense, Border Guard, National Guard, etc) are not included. However, most of the nations with prohibitively large armies don’t quite have the reserve and militia strength of the larger modern nations, so the number gives a good idea of the combat power. Another thing to note is that the vast majority of nations with proportionately large armies are ones with low populations, often under 10 million, and these nations have larger neighbors that threaten them, thus necessitating such measures. Larger nations do not need such big armies because they have the population base to recruit a respectable army without taking too much.
Now, I’d give some good info on reserves and militia, but that’s not easy to dig up on most nations, and as stated, those that have large active forces tend to be a bit light on the militia and reserves. However, I do have some good info on the USSR, the US, and China, from just after the end of the Cold War. The numbers can be seen here.

Soviet Union in 1992:
Population: 285 million
Active Military: 2.804 million (0.984%)
Reserve Military: 4.315 million (1.514%)
Total: 7.115 million (2.509%)

USA in 1992:
Population: 253 million
Active Military: 2.052 million (0.811%)
Reserve Military: 1.28 million (0.506%)
National Guard: 0.617 million (0.244%)
Civilian Employees: 0.865 million (0.342%)
Total: 4.804 million (1.899%), 3.939 million (1.557%) w/o civs

China in 1992
Population: 1144 million
Active Military: 3 million (0.262%)
Reserve Military: 1 million (0.087%)
Militia: 10 million (0.874%)
Total: 14 million (1.224%)

As you can see, even the nations with the largest militaries had little more than 1-2.5% of their population in the total military. Even at its peak, the active force was less than 1%. Also, that 2.5% total military was enough to run the USSR into the ground, though that owes more than a little bit to poor management and leadership. Still, a clear trend exists, and that is that the militaries of larger nations, and those of nations that have more modern ones, tend to be smaller, while those of poor-under developed nations tend to be bigger. But remember, those bigger armies have less training and poorer equipment, and will be decimated by the smaller forces in open battle.

Another thing that many fail to take into consideration is the military spending per soldier. What I’m referring to is the amount spent, on average, per (active) soldier. Simply put, divide the military budget by the number of active soldiers, and you’ll have a figure to compare. It’s even better when you do this for the total military, but that’s harder to come by for RL nations. Naturally, the higher the number is, the better trained and equipped troops will tend to be. To put it into perspective, most nations will spend about $3000-$5000 per soldier, especially those with large armies. Some really poor nations can be incredibly low, and some nations will spend less than $500 per solder. An army at $20,000 per soldier might be well trained, well equipped, or moderately trained and equipped, and a decent modern army shouldn’t be less than $45-55,000 per solder. The truly advanced western nations go even further, and often have better than $100,000 per soldier, with the US topping the charts at just over $200,000, and the UK coming in second at $150,000. Now remember once again that these are the numbers that come from dividing the total military budget by the number of personnel in the active force. Massive reserves will mean that you’ll need much more to get the same level of training.


To put it all together, I suggest you take a look at my own nation. Do note that the stats here are not the current ones, but those that I plan to have after the war I’m in (assuming it ever gets resolved ).
Population: 3,423,589,118
Active Military: 15 million (0.44%)
Reserve Military: 15 million (0.44%)
Militia Corps: 15 million (0.44%)
Total: 45 million (1.31%)
GDP Per Capita: $49,472.54
GDP: $169,373,649,583,819.72 ($169+ trillion)
Budget: $12 trillion (7.1%)
Budget Per Active Soldier: $800,000 (!)
Budget Per Total Soldier: $266,666.67
Now, compared to the US, I have about 10 times the military they had in 1992. This isn’t exactly odd, as I’m still 13.5 times as big to begin with (and with a higher economy to boot). In addition, you can see that less than 40% of my forces are active, with the rest being reserve and militia. For the US, it’s the other way around, which explains the huge discrepancy between my spending for active troops and that of the US. However, when you factor in the total forces, I’m still at nearly two times the spending, per soldier as the US is currently. This means that I can afford to have my troops exceptionally well trained and equipped. The final note is that I actually have two three billion-plus nations that not only share a land-border with me, but wouldn’t mind invading if they thought they’d win, so there’s also a reason for a big army. Finally, my GDP has taken a slight dip because of previous overspending, and my people still live a lifestyle more in tune with a Powerhouse or low-end All-Consuming economy due to government spending.

One final note: when I list army size, I'm including all military personnel (and in some cases, civilian workers as well). The actual combat forces will be only a fraction of the total force.

From...

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=408855
Germanische Zustande
29-08-2005, 03:47
During WWII, the United States had a military numbering nearly 16 million, with a significantly smaller population than today.

Germany maintained an army of similar proportions for a decade or so, and likely would have continued to maintain this army if the supplies were available.

You see, rules do not always work. A nation at war, with a determined populous, and a very large military budget can maintain an army of substantial size proportionate to its population.

May I remind you of the Mongols? The Germanics? The Vikings? The Persians? The Babylonians? The Prussians? Bonaparte's Forces?

There are always exceptions. Always.

Secondly, our military maintains everything it needs itself. Foodstuffs, manufacturing, maintenance: All performed by the military. That cuts costs down considerably.

Anyway, my point is, we can do it, we have done it, and we will do it.
Serapindal
29-08-2005, 03:57
During WWII, the United States had a military numbering nearly 16 million, with a significantly smaller population than today.

Germany maintained an army of similar proportions for a decade or so, and likely would have continued to maintain this army if the supplies were available.

You see, rules do not always work. A nation at war, with a determined populous, and a very large military budget can maintain an army of substantial size proportionate to its population.

May I remind you of the Mongols? The Germanics? The Vikings? The Persians? The Babylonians? The Prussians? Bonaparte's Forces?

There are always exceptions. Always.

Secondly, our military maintains everything it needs itself. Foodstuffs, manufacturing, maintenance: All performed by the military. That cuts costs down considerably.

Anyway, my point is, we can do it, we have done it, and we will do it.

1. The U.S. Army wouldn't have been able to mantain such an army for long. The point is, YOU DON'T HAVE THAT MANY SUPPLIES.

2. Germany was desperate, and it was a dying last move. They didn't have another choice.

3. They only were able to mantain a millitary, because they STOLE supplies from everyone else, to barely mantain themselves.
SkyCapt
29-08-2005, 03:58
I'm willing to fight Sel Appa. We could have an Alliance: Christian Nations vs. Atheist and Muslim nations. :)
Germanische Zustande
29-08-2005, 04:02
1. The U.S. Army wouldn't have been able to mantain such an army for long. The point is, YOU DON'T HAVE THAT MANY SUPPLIES.

2. Germany was desperate, and it was a dying last move. They didn't have another choice.

3. They only were able to mantain a millitary, because they STOLE supplies from everyone else, to barely mantain themselves.

I have scanning stations that effectively 'watch' 2.7 trillion cubic lightyears of space. Within that there are between 400-500 billion solar systems. We have all the resources we want.

Our space is a 14,000 light year cube, by the way. And yes, we have sensors that advanced (gravometric, spectrometers, etc) and the capabilities to store that information.
Serapindal
29-08-2005, 04:08
Fine, whatever. I'm not going to go into this, because I'm not a FT person.