Tritonia

Happy Birthday, my friends. I'll miss you in my retirement. Fare well.

So long, Moridin.

Interesting how you misconstrue optimism as faithlessness.

[quote name='zzzptm' timestamp='1282968374' post='2433509'] Send a champion to fight my nation, one on one, ground attacks only. Show you have honor to back up your words, or I shall respect you less than an inbred toy dog breed that can do no more than bark in panic at the approach of a threat. [/quote] Alas, I am unable to participate in single combat with you. Would your thirst for honor be satisfied by the Trial of Long Knives?

[quote name='Bleh32' date='01 June 2010 - 10:15 AM' timestamp='1275405310' post='2319146'] I will not join an alliance. They are all the same and they all offer the same thing. I'd rather be attacked by people who are too lazy to get their own tech than have to join another BORING alliance. [/quote] Well, you can certainly do that. I'd respect that, sticking up for your independence and all. You could also join an alliance that's trying to do something about tech raiding and add your strength and passion to help counter the practice.

Regrettably the practice continues, though it's not as politically popular as it has been in the past.

I wouldn't have pegged opposition as anti-proliferation, but I like it. Edit: Statement amended after checking actual AA.

[quote name='ktarthan' date='05 April 2010 - 06:12 PM' timestamp='1270509158' post='2249677'] Sending aid to a raidee because they got raided is done primarily so they can build military and cause greater harm to the raider. I do not make any distinction between causing direct harm via war versus indirect harm via aid. [/quote] As a personal matter, I refrain from aiding nations at war because I do not support war. Any aid sent following the termination of the war is to be used for the purpose of reconstruction. But as I said, that's my individual policy. I presume it would ruffle no feathers.

[quote name='Xiphosis' date='05 April 2010 - 01:04 AM' timestamp='1270447433' post='2248774'] I greatly look forward to another clash with NEAT. Did you guys forget last time? [/quote] Aw shucks, Xiphosis, how could we forget? Here we were thinking you'd never ask us out again.

[quote name='Mr Damsky' date='04 April 2010 - 09:07 PM' timestamp='1270433260' post='2248206'] First off, there is a huge difference between bullying and attacking someone relatively at your strength, who has the ability to fight back and do damage, by yourself.[/quote] In a duel both parties accept prior to the actual engagement, one does not just lunge at somebody walking along the street. If you have a friend who's equally bored and wishes to skirmish, why not fight them instead of jumping some random nation? If I was a war nation, that's what I'd do.

[quote name='Mr Damsky' date='04 April 2010 - 04:47 PM' timestamp='1270417624' post='2247883'] What can a new nation who, odds are, does not know the methods of global communication or the history of alliances really need to take into account when choosing an alliance? [/quote] I would think taking into account the history of alliances to be rather important in a nation's decision on who to join. Your alliance is more than your AA, after all. I took the better portion of a week before I got anywhere near dealing with alliances.

I've been waiting for a treaty like this for years. Glad to be a part of it.

To my friends and allies, I realize that many of you fight not for one side or the other in this political rivalry. You fight for what you consider the defense of your allies and to protect the political integrity of your Alliances. This you will accomplish whether or not the history books say you won or lost. And while I regret that such a difficult time has come, I accept that you must follow your conscience, and I trust that you accept that I must follow mine. Tritonia will not, cannot, participate in this. In commitment to our national policy of pacifism, Tritonian peacekeepers have been dismissed from active duty and regulated to civilian aid and relief coordination for the duration of this conflict. It is not Tritonia's desire to see any harm befall any nation by our hand. Any nation that chooses Tritonia as one of its war fronts will not be met with opposition, but with quiet acceptance and patience. Here and now, I offer you peace on behalf of the nation of Tritonia. But should you choose to “war” with us, know that I shall not release your nation from that commitment. Our people will suffer the indignity of violence in the stead of another nation if it means that you will not further commit yourself to folly. As always, we hope for a swift end to the violence and a return to truth. May You Find Peace, Eric Bunker Director of Tritonia

Well, there's my lesson learned.

My highly abridged version is that the World Unity Treaty (which bound the aforementioned alliances into The Initiative) was the global hegemony about... oh... three or so revolutions ago. I would consider the Grand Global Alliance (Green), Federation of Armed Nations (Yellow), \m/ >_< \m/ (White), Goon Order Of Neutral Shoving (black), and later The Phoenix Federation to be the primary promoters of the culture that helped tech raiding become as widespread and accepted as it is. And as they were signatories of the WUT, they were not generally in a position to be challenged. Opinion began to swing back the other way after the WUT CIVIL WAR!!! (more popularly known as the Unjust War), and notably none of those five alliances are sanctioned anymore. Aye. I still miss the tales of a time when tech raiding wasn't a common practice. Hard to imagine nowadays.

I and my grey-team partner had our two-year anniversary in December.

NONE's formation was designed to check tech raiding's rampant success during the WUT. Several alliances had implemented raid culture that not only condoned but encouraged raiding, and any military response from the raided nation was swiftly met with filled war slots and a curb-stomp into submission. This was generally able to continue because the unaligned are- well- unaligned, and hence typically without diplomatic clout or military support. NONE's tactic was to create a military and diplomatic support group for similarly minded nations while maintaining unaligned status. This would, theoretically, create a guerrilla situation where there would be sporadic heavy resistance against raids when raiders would find themselves in a zero-sum game when met with an actual coordinated response. The idea was simply negative reinforcement on a global scale- if enough raiders lost at what is generally considered easy pickings, the activity would lose favor by reputation of being too risky. This plan inevitably failed based on two factors. In the first place, NONE was incapable of fighting back against anyone in the WUT (who were the prominant offenders) since WUT's strength greatly outnumbered NONE. And since WUT was the head of the allegorical dragon, little impact was made by filing away at the spikes on its tail. In the second place, it was mistakenly assumed that raiders raid for profit.

Congratulations on a successful Plan!

Not a fan of the name, but I guess you're here now. Good luck out there.

Farewell to our allies in DOC. We deeply appreciate having been kept abreast on the issue, and hope our small contribution towards easing the transition has helped in some way. Best wishes to everyone in their new homes.

Onward workers!

I hope peace returns to my old sphere soon.

Hey. Hey. I'm here. Sorry, I was busy moving my couch into the basement.

How bad do I want to get curb stomped? I'll propose: Ground Forces, CM, and Aircraft okay. No Nukes, Navy or Spies. Five Day Fight. If that's agreeable I'll see about getting it cleared by my alliance-mates.

Maybe me. Though I'm not sure you'd particularly enjoy fighting me since I haven't engaged in a conflict for over a year on principle, and I certainly can't match your 600%+ soldier efficiency. But other than that, what terms are proposed?