National Military Organization Strategy

Good points Ian. We have a small population that should be able to be "unified" when it comes to the military. Of course you have some who won't join ( and here I am the head of a MU but it was left in my care and I am reluctant to give away something that was left for me to watch ) but the vast majority should join.

Much more visibility internationally if we all show up is very true. That can be a double edged sword if we "step on someones toes" like you say. They will know who to come after but we have dealt with that before. I think the benefits outweigh the risks in that case.

I would like to see some arguments for not having a national army.

Anyone?

- In Ireland's case at least it doesn't cost money to maintain the unit for the sake of keeping soldiers. Certainly better supplies etc. can be an incentive to join ANY unit, but that has nothing to do with the question of unified vs. indie.
- The tools for assessing/accessing leadership are built into the game mechanics in the form of regiment captain elections. If anything there are more opportunities to learn about strategy in a large unit than in a small unit. In a country the size of eIreland the truth is that those smaller units have no component of strategy/organization - they aren't really MU's they're just confused directionless banners - in this way those involved in those units aren't likely to gain real experience or be leaders in any meaningful sense.
- The idea of a national MU is usually that it's ultimately the responsibility of the MoD (as in the case of the IA). Given that, as long as the national security of eIreland has active and strong leaders the IA will to. At the point when eIreland has no good leaders then it's a moot discussion anyway.
- Again the essential argument for a national unit is independent of issues of supply which effect all units regardless of size. Communication is really the most prime issue here, and many IA members for example have nothing to do with supplies or communes - they're just there to hear the orders right from the horses mouth and to be in the action.
- One of the main ideas behind the IA is that it shouldn't be involved in politics. We have a whole political system to deal with political dynamics, the IA's only job is to protect the interests arrived at through that system, and to represent our nation.

One important point to take home here is that we AREN'T talking about a large scale unit. In eIreland we don't have the citizens for large scale, we're just talking about a scraping together enough citizens for one unit that's big enough to make any kind of mark internationally or in the defence and pursuit of our interests.

Well one of the many problems about individual MU's is that they can't be relied on to be coordinated with the MoD's orders. As you can see in America you have conflicting orders between the MoD and some of the MU's, in America the damage wasted by the bad coordination normally doesn't matter because they have much more from their other MU's. However, eIreland doesn't have anywhere near that power and so I feel that just for the coordination issue it is vital for that the amount of eIrish MU's to stay limited.

I think most points have been highlighted; Libertad was an interesting point, in some ways the ICA also fulfilled that role in the past, only problem with it was that we got some situations saw the independent MUs actively going against Irish interests (understand "Irish interests" was the disputed issue, but if you were to look back on those discussions there was alot of inconsistency in the arguing suggesting it was being argued for the sake of it/loyalty to the MU). Unsure if the trade-off was worth it, given that Irish governments would have to use that MU as a scapegoat, often not to the agreement of the MU, causing division in the community.

The arguments for coordination and effective use of resources are fairly concrete arguments for a national Army given Ireland's size and capability. But I've often found its the social factors rather than metagame factors which have been the main barrier to Ireland's military progress. I know most isolated opinions about our Army is that its a monoculture of obeying robots with no room for individuals to express themselves; nothing further from the truth as the membership holds the most diverse range of political views than any other MU, and the members know that but most other MUs are acting as 2nd tier political parties - perhaps unfair for the sample sizes, but if you look at ILP and Labour, you'd find it hard to find members LPA and ICA who weren't in those parties respectively. I think its very arguable the benefits of a national army for coordination and effective use of resources (metagame), but perhaps a more potent reason for a national army is to avoid the interference of political motivates with military objectives - that certainly plagued Ireland prior New Era.