Jump to content

Attacking POW


Unknown Smurf

Recommended Posts

Kaskus unfortunately has no ability to protects its PoWs and Die Linke apparently has plans to attack them. 

 

In this situation, how do you think an alliance in our position would best protect our PoWs? We have allowed them to move on,  but another wants to join our alliance. 

 

But of course that probably will not be enough because they are being threatened. 

 

 

[ooc]Original message is in spoilers because it is unrelated

 

[spoiler]To: the granat republic    From: Unknown Smurf    Date: 11/8/2013 11:55:43 AM


Subject: Apologies!

 

Message: Sorry I was unable to get on last night. I was devestated by the Redskins loss and proceeded to get black out drunk and completely forget about CN. 

I apologize for any casualties you may have missed out on due to this. [/spoiler]
[/ooc]

 

 

To: Unknown Smurf From: WitBlitz Date: 11/10/2013 12:28:37 AM

Subject: RE: Apologies!
Message: Cheers sure - Switched alliances -the old one had no co-ordination or structure - hence why big players sent elsewhere..tks

 

To: WitBlitz From: Unknown Smurf Date: 11/10/2013 1:04:33 AM

Subject: RE: Apologies!
Message: You want to fight for us? You must understand that while I love that you want to do that I am suspicious of your intentions .. No offense but I cannot tell you sensitive material because of your history; at least not for the duration of this war. If you just wish to end war then we can put you on a prisoner of war AA. If that is not what you wish then I can definitely hook you up with a fire team.

I believe you have no money. Is that correct?

 

 

I am curious as to how alliances have protected their POWs in the past and how you would recommend we best protect them. Also do you believe accepting a defector is unethical? 

 

EDIT: Proof LSF has plans to hit a POW:

 

<UnknownSmurf> Why do you need SL?
<Piley> about someone who surrendered to kaskus
<Piley> I was going to attack him but turns out his slots are full
<Piley> :(
-
>>>>>HOSTMASKREMOVED<<<<<<<
Piley on #lsf 
Piley using frozen.coldfront.net Welcome to Coldfront!
Piley End of /WHOIS list.
-
<UnknownSmurf> Attacking a POW is one of the highiest war crimes.
<Piley> no no no
<Piley> one of your men surrendered to kaskus
<Piley> around here we shoot traitors ;)
<Piley> kaskus pending
<UnknownSmurf> I am in Kaskus.
<Piley> LOL
<UnknownSmurf> I was just asking why you wanted SL. 
<Piley> This man is a traitor and will be shot
<UnknownSmurf> Are you LSF govt?
<Piley> LSF has no goverment
<snip>
Edited by Unknown Smurf
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it was one of their own that defected, let them waste their resources dealing with him (most people round up their deserters after the war instead). Otherwise those resources would be turned on your Kaskus alliancemates. Don't look a gift horse in the mouth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it was one of their own that defected, let them waste their resources dealing with him (most people round up their deserters after the war instead). Otherwise those resources would be turned on your Kaskus alliancemates. Don't look a gift horse in the mouth.

 

It was a SL guy that surrendered; and LSF that is talking about attacking him. 

 

EDIT: Also it makes other surrenders less likely to surrender if they are going to be hit just as hard if they do surrender. Surrendering is a means to exit war, is it not? 

Edited by Unknown Smurf
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was a SL guy that surrendered; and LSF that is talking about attacking him. 
 
EDIT: Also it makes other surrenders less likely to surrender if they are going to be hit just as hard if they do surrender. Surrendering is a means to exit war, is it not?

So you'll have to find another way to win the war you started then. You can't rely on people surrendering to you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems to me that this is a completely valid strategy. If you can't defend the defectors, perhaps they shouldn't be defecting.


POW camps -- created by an alliance to house their prisoners -- are artificial constructs of the alliance that created them. *You* gave your word to protect people from attack if they surrendered and changed their AA. It is your obligation to enforce your arbitrary creation.


-Craig

tl;dr: Cowards get what cowards deserve. No sympathy for deserters.

Edited by Comrade Craig
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd argue that defectors aren't worth the effort in the first place. Personally I'd rather conserve resources for those that matter - ie, my members and allies.

 

Way I see it you're just giving them an out for one situation. That out though may be rife with risks of its own (in this case retaliation by the enemy). Other than recommitting your resources to his defense - or assisting him with finding a home that can more safely harbor him - there's not much you can really do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have a senator sanctioning LSF nations on pink but have the audacity to post another thread whining about how you couldn't protect defecting scum from the consequences of their actions. Why must everything your alliance does have to be so fucking awful?

 

Your alliance was sanctioning us last war; you really don't have room to whine about that. And it was SWF that was sanctioned I believe; not 100% sure. Regardless noone in Kaskus govt authorized that sanction, but we're just not going to punish anyone for it. Just like your old alliance and all of SLs allies that are currently at war with us did in the last war. 

 

Get off your high horse. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems to me that this is a completely valid strategy. If you can't defend the defectors, perhaps they shouldn't be defecting.


POW camps -- created by an alliance to house their prisoners -- are artificial constructs of the alliance that created them. *You* gave your word to protect people from attack if they surrendered and changed their AA. It is your obligation to enforce your arbitrary creation.


-Craig

tl;dr: Cowards get what cowards deserve. No sympathy for deserters.

 

Overall I have to agree with your point but what about allowing defectors/PoWs to join a neutral AA (or any AA that isn't at war). Would you consider that a valid protection of those nation(s)? 

 

I'd argue that defectors aren't worth the effort in the first place. Personally I'd rather conserve resources for those that matter - ie, my members and allies.

 

Way I see it you're just giving them an out for one situation. That out though may be rife with risks of its own (in this case retaliation by the enemy). Other than recommitting your resources to his defense - or assisting him with finding a home that can more safely harbor him - there's not much you can really do.

 

To a certain degree I would have to agree with you but in this situation we would actually be able to use him more effectively then he is currently being utilized by SL. He does have nukes, but no money. We could peace out our wars with him and since he has no offensive ones, he could slip in PM. We could aid bomb him, he builds up nukes/comes out prepared for war. Being blindsided he hasn't been able to do much. 

 

EDIT: What I mean to say is that defectors/POWs usually aren't worth the effort, but in this particular instance I would argue that he is.

 

 

So you'll have to find another way to win the war you started then. You can't rely on people surrendering to you.

 

While I understand your logic; I meant to pose the question in a broader sense. How can anyone protect their POWs? Even if someone is outnumbered, they could hypothetically attack POWs. If I recall correctly Legion did it in the Legion/Tetris war despite being outnumbered. 

Edited by Unknown Smurf
Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I understand your logic; I meant to pose the question in a broader sense. How can anyone protect their POWs? Even if someone is outnumbered, they could hypothetically attack POWs. If I recall correctly Legion did it in the Legion/Tetris war despite being outnumbered.

How can anyone protect their own affiliation let alone a second they create?

Also, Legion didn't attack any POWs in that war - but if they had of, if they wanted to attack their former members, I would have given them the thumbs up. Again, that's resources being directed away from the war effort. If you don't have the ability to put the effort to protect the defectors from the alliance they're defecting from then don't accept their surrender or send them off to some other alliance (and hope they don't come back).

If some other entirely unaffiliated or involved alliance came along attacking said POWs, then I'd agree with Manis.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We promise pows safety from attacks from our side only. If their own side wants to attack them then by all means let's let them waste their own time on their own traitors.

 

Attacking a pow in the middle of a war is pretty pathetic though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your alliance was sanctioning us last war; you really don't have room to whine about that. And it was SWF that was sanctioned I believe; not 100% sure. Regardless noone in Kaskus govt authorized that sanction, but we're just not going to punish anyone for it. Just like your old alliance and all of SLs allies that are currently at war with us did in the last war. 

 

Get off your high horse. 

 

I don't care what you do but I think it's hilarious that you're trying to play both sides of the field. You want the benefits of being able to be the "bad guys" and sanction at will, but you also want to be persecuted and win the PR battle by having mean ol' commies pick on you. It's rubbish and not a single person here buys it. If you can't take the heat, stop starting stupid wars over nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To a certain degree I would have to agree with you but in this situation we would actually be able to use him more effectively then he is currently being utilized by SL. He does have nukes, but no money. We could peace out our wars with him and since he has no offensive ones, he could slip in PM. We could aid bomb him, he builds up nukes/comes out prepared for war. Being blindsided he hasn't been able to do much. 

 

EDIT: What I mean to say is that defectors/POWs usually aren't worth the effort, but in this particular instance I would argue that he is.

 

what exactly is your question?

are you protecting POWs which should remain out of the conflict for the duration, or traitors?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
Your alliance was sanctioning us last war; you really don't have room to whine about that. And it was SWF that was sanctioned I believe; not 100% sure. Regardless noone in Kaskus govt authorized that sanction, but we're just not going to punish anyone for it. Just like your old alliance and all of SLs allies that are currently at war with us did in the last war. 
 
Get off your high horse. 

1 SWF and a few LSF nations. SPTR are allied to you and apparently kaskus asked bones to impose sanctions.
I claim this because their is no other logical explanation to the series of events i have witnessed.
Before war, pink sphere was peaceful. Just after the DoW by Die Linke in defence of SL, a pink senator sanctions Die linke nations. Then that senator moves to Kaskus AA and gets accepted (BONES is also involved in your Aid Bombing program).
After this, you want us to buy your 'not authorized by Kaskus govt' theory Smurf?

And what about those rape-joke messages your nations are circulating? Its rather funny that kaskus started this moral-discussion thread.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Secondly, you had asked the nation concerned to join the Kaskus AA and not a second AA created solely for PoWs, which is not conventional. This makes me doubt whether the nation was actually a PoW or a defector/side switcher who kaskus planned to use as a pawn against our combined forces by 'aid bombing' him as you had suggested in your subsequent posts.

Edited by Ronjoy Sholokhov
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...