Joe Izuzu

GOONS exercised an optional aggression clause to enter this war. 64Digits exercised an optional aggression clause to enter this war. Seems the same to me.

[quote name='tamerlane' timestamp='1296765580' post='2618058'] oDoAP gives no obligations, it just "legalizes" participation in war (which is hilarious to think that anyone would sign such a thing). [/quote] So exactly the same justification that GOONS has in this war. Thanks for pointing that out.

I believe that 64Digits is the sole remaining signatory of the Overlord's Protective Pact (OPP), which provides for an oDoAP in terms of 64Digits' obligations to TPF. So, yeah, they have a legitimate point of entry here.

I can appreciate that a conflict exists between your lack of support of DH's actions and the loyalty you feel you owe your treaty partner. I can also understand that demonstrating loyalty to your treaty partner won out over your disagreement with DH's actions. Welcome to the party and have fun. edit: corrected ambiguous wording

That's true, we did pay for a multitude of sins in Karma. It is unfortunate that we lost the receipt, since we are apparently being asked to pay for them again. *goes off to search his jacket pockets again

[quote name='neneko' timestamp='1296684842' post='2616608'] - NPO, 2011 You guys sure changed your tune quickly when you were no longer able to do this to others. I wonder how long it'll take to change back if you ever get any power again. [/quote] [quote name='scutterbug' timestamp='1296684874' post='2616610'] Bit rich coming from a pacifican. [/quote] My personal position is my personal position and it has remained constant. I guess that, just as I am not a good Francoist, I am also not a good inflicter of jackboot-on-the-throat tactics after an enemy has been defeated. I cannot guarantee that my own philosophy concerning the imposition of reparations will be followed by my alliance as a whole. I can only hope that is the case if we are ever in a scenario where we are the aggressors in a conflict. Obviously, that is not something I will have to worry about in this war, since nobody can claim that we are the aggressors.

Alliances that are aggressively attacked, or that honor defensive treaties, should never pay reps. Alliances that attack aggressively, whether as the instigator, or by activating aggression clauses, should never receive reps.

Congratulations on your treaty.

So you really believe that there is no difference between launching unprovoked aggressive attacks when you greatly outnumber the target and aggressively countering one of the aggressors? Both of those scenarios are exactly the same to you?

[quote name='Alterego' timestamp='1296600576' post='2615140'] Very clear, they did their work on you just fine. [/quote] Exactly what is your inference here?

[quote name='Alterego' timestamp='1296599858' post='2615121'] Would you agree with shattenmann that you are being curbstomped in a 4 v 1 but GOONSin 12 v 1 is only being "countered"? [/quote] I already posted my position with regard to GOONS. It would only be a curbstomp if the stomping continued after they sued for peace. If you are walking out down the street and you get jumped by 4 guys, that (potentially) is a curbstomp. If a burglar breaks into your house and refuses to leave, despite having the entire family start pounding him, that is not a curbstomp. However, if you follow him out to the street and continue to beat on him while he is running away, that would be. Clear enough?

[quote name='Alterego' timestamp='1296598755' post='2615084'] You're NPO your idea of a normal war is usually 12 v 1 in your favour. I dont expect you to understand nor do I care if you do.[/quote] You forget that I am new NPO, so my idea of a normal war is 15 v 1 against us. In this case, the 4 v 1 seems relatively mild.

[quote name='Alterego' timestamp='1296589747' post='2614899'] The DoWs were on GOONS not DH. The fighting is against GOONS not against DH. [/quote] This really doesn't make any sense, since they declared their aggressive war as a block. Are you trying to claim that GOONS is fighting on a separate front from the rest of DH and FAN? [quote name='Alterego' timestamp='1296589842' post='2614901'] Like I said curbstomp never had anything to to with justification until Schatt got involved in one. A curb stomp was always about numbers. [/quote] I can't speak for Schatt's former position, but as far as I am concerned there is absolutely nothing unethical about pounding on GOONS. They aggressively invaded an uninvolved alliance without any legitimate grievance; until they choose to withdraw they deserve to be pounded. I would agree that if they try to withdraw and are not allowed to do so, that would be a different story. [quote]You have made GOONS happy[/quote] Glad to be of service.

Being the aggressor, especially one without any valid grievance, certainly does limit your ability to claim that you are getting unjustly stomped. I think that intent also factors into the equation. I believe (and I sincerely hope that I am correct in that belief) that if GOONS simply offered to peace out and not reenter, they would be released. Not exactly a white peace, but close enough. I do not believe that the same terms would be offered by their side.

[quote name='Ellis' timestamp='1296382023' post='2610966'] Granted I haven't been a Pacifican for about six months, but I joined before Karma, and even then Francoism seemed like more of an RP thing, rather than something that we actually consulted for guidance. [/quote] I have never read Vlad's treatise on Francoism. Does that make me a bad Pacifican? Shoot, I hope the Praetorian Guard doesn't show up at my palace tonight......

[quote name='Kalasin' timestamp='1296381954' post='2610964'] Why not? Doesn't it simply indicate that MK is a competent (and war-ready) alliance? [/quote] LOL, it is perhaps a bit easier to be fully prepped when you are the ones declaring, don't you think?

[quote name='Cyber Nationz' timestamp='1296381479' post='2610955'] U shouldnt have had any reason to. Why the paranoia. And if you had the slightest hunch about somebody rolling you. why didnt you make a DoN on OWF. [i]Now because of you, innocent civilians of clueless nations of blind following alliances of NPO are suffering. [/i] [/quote] Why would we post a DoN? Where were our conflicting treaty obligations?

[quote name='Antoine Roquentin' timestamp='1296380565' post='2610938'] They didn't go preempt on Nueva Vida. NV attacked an alliance our end. I don't recall any of the same people decrying NSO for its treatyless entries in previous conflicts or the people who helped FAN in the last war. Like I said, NPO goes neutral definitively and we have no incentive to do it. [/quote] You can claim that they declared in support of "coalition war", but the fact remains that they had no treaty obligation that required them to hit NV. Whereas NV most certainly did have a treaty obligation to uphold. Also, given that "coalition war" is simply an excuse for any alliance on one "side" to hit any other alliance on the other, NPO taking precautions by sending nations into hippy was simply prudent. Even though we weren't on either side, there was tons of taunting going on about why we weren't declaring, despite the fact we had no legitimate point of entry.

As I have stated [url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=97592&view=findpost&p=2597205"][b]here[/b][/url], Sparta had gone preempt on NV without any treaty justification. So it was reasonable to take some precaution against a sneak attack. It was strictly defensive in case someone went postal on us. Which, of course, you did.

[quote name='Antoine Roquentin' timestamp='1296378425' post='2610899'] Your members were out in full force and it was clear you had some stake in the conflict at least from their perspective. [/quote] I was certainly vocal in my denouncement of VE's CB against Polar, mostly because of indignation at what I still perceive to be a rather enormous display of hypocrisy on their part. But NPO has no treaty with Polar and membership is certainly not unanimous in wanting to reestablish ties with them. I believe that ambivalence is shared by Polar as well. I personally have always liked Polar, but that is just me. I was a supporter of Grub's campaign against M, because I thought it was the morally correct thing to do. By the same token, I was certainly not a fan of his betrayal of TOP and Co. I guess I am a bad Francoist, but I try to be morally consistent.

[quote name='Crymson' timestamp='1296376656' post='2610869'] Grudges have nothing to do with how I feel about the NPO. I'm simply aware of the character of your alliance.[/quote] [quote]I was in your alliance for a long time, and I dealt with it as a member of allied government for even longer. I know that the lack of aggression in the relatively short period since you've been out of terms is a result of circumstances, not of changed character. Nice try. [/quote] You "know" the motivation for our lack of aggression because you have infallible insight into our thoughts and feelings. Nice. You must be the most amazing mentalist on Planet Bob. It is so comforting to know that someone who has the powers of The Amazing Kreskin is available when we have questions as to the true motivations of other alliances. Do you charge a flat fee for your services, or is it at an hourly rate?

It was pretty obvious that we weren't in war mode. After all, how many of our guys were in defcon 5 and minimal threat levels? Just about everybody. How many had maxed out military? Just about nobody. We had no orders to prep for combat. Would we have entered in order to honor our treaty obligations? I damn well hope so. But nobody except TIO was involved and their treaty is ODP and they hadn't requested our assistance.

[quote name='Jocko Homo' timestamp='1296373002' post='2610776'] Just saying that doesn't wipe away 4 years of your actions.[/quote] True enough, so we will fight. Then, when we kick your collective butts and then give you white peace, it will demonstrate that the change is real. (disclaimer: I am not NPO gov and cannot make any binding promises concerning terms we will offer to our defeated foes. However, I am a strong supporter of white peace in general and, given that I have already stated I hold no animosity toward FAN in this war, I would hope that white peace is what you would be given.) [quote]This pleases Future NPO Viceroy Homo. I will have much need for members of your caliber as I rebuild the NPO into an alliance worthy of it's self esteem. [/quote] I knew that your time in Pacifica, even under false pretenses, would make you want to return. You will have to pass the academy, of course, but since we are a meritocracy, you could work your way up the ladder.

[quote name='DogeWilliam' timestamp='1296369776' post='2610665'] You wear the flag. You follow the leader. That's kind of the point of being in an alliance. You are and always will be it's past and present. If TOP has done something wrong in the past, it is my duty to stand for them, even if I wasn't the alliance leader, or in the alliance at the time. You say you paid with Karma. I'm not MK or FAN, but it seems certain people you attacked in the past, multiple times I might add, don't think that it's over with Karma. And the outcome of the war will prove whether the majority of power was ok with the war or not. Hey NPO is an alliance, a flag, a continuum. It's one of the more storied and successful alliances in this game. If you don't feel like you should be fighting, leave it. If you stand by it, then stand by no matter the outcome. Though I don't think complaining will help. [/quote] That is a rather sanctimonious post coming from someone who said "and if anyone is going to try and refute me by saying TOP was allied with NPO at the time, I was on hiatus at the time so there!", smiley notwithstanding. I know exactly what the implications are of being in an alliance, the point I was making is that 1/2 of the people in NPO are "new blood". Those who claim that NPO hasn't changed seem to conveniently overlook that. They also ignore the fact that our government has changed, our policies have changed and our actions have changed. To continue to believe that all of the attitudes of the past remain constant in the present is simply myopic. We do not have the same mindset that was prevalent in 2006, 2007, 2008, or 2009. We are not living in the past, nor do we wish to. If my comment made you believe that I am not proud to be a Pacifican, then obviously I was unclear. I am very proud to be a Pacifican. NPO has been, is, and will be my home. I have been in NPO for significantly longer than you have been in TOP. I fought in Karma, I am fighting now, and I will fight in the future. NPO is the only alliance I will ever call home. It is my pleasure and my privilege to defend her and my great honor to be able to stand with my Comrades through adversity. And it makes me immeasurably proud to know that my Comrades will stand with me in the same way. We are family. Furthermore, pointing out that DH has no leg to stand on in terms of reasonable justification for their aggression is not complaining; it is simply stating the obvious.

[quote name='DogeWilliam' timestamp='1296368101' post='2610621'] You say evil. Are you thus admitting that you were evil, but not now? Is that what you mean? You have paid for your crimes of evilness and thus shouldn't be attacked? 1. Past actions are the best cbs in my book. 2. No one should be as naive to think you can't be attacked any time. This does not make the aggressor evil. 3. If people don't like it, they can do something about it. It seems the majority of people on planet bob are not on your side. This does not mean you have been struck by evil men. In fact the majority would be evil and well that doesn't jive. [/quote] NPO was tried, convicted and served it's sentence. So yes, with regard to any alliance that took part in the Karma conflict, we have paid. I have paid personally and I, as well as 1/2 the membership of NPO, were not even in NPO during the times that the transgressions occurred. Regardless, you cannot convict someone twice for the same offense. Past actions are the best CB? Even if those actions have already been avenged? How many times can you avenge a wrong before becoming the criminal yourself? Evil is not a term I would use. Unjustified, however, is. I would disagree that the majority of people on Bob are against us at this point in time. During Karma, certainly. But as a result of our efforts to change and demonstrate that we have changed, lots of people that used to hate us now may only be indifferent. And some of those that were indifferent may actually like us a bit. Regardless, the fact is that the majority of people did not launch a completely unprovoked attack on us. DH did. Are you saying that DH is the officially sanctioned voice of the people of Bob? If so, then it is time to move to a new universe, cause the people in this one have obviously lost their minds. As far as the move to peace mode is concerned, Sparta attacked NV with no treaty justification whatsoever. At that point, it certainly behooved NPO to take precautionary measures. And as it turned out, those measures were completely justified, since DH launched their completely unjustified aggressive war shortly thereafter.