iamwalrus

It is very NEAT to have Invicta a part of our bloc! Welcome

[quote name='Vespassianus' timestamp='1343321442' post='3015792'] Lol NEAT declared like 5 wars in the whole war. Peace is well deserved only if you actually fought. [/quote] There was also an issue of LOSS not bringing their big hitters out of peace mode. I was only able to fight two nations and bring them down to 50k NS (one was at 101k ns at the beginning). Only for them to turtle, and the rest of LOSS (at my range) sat in peace...So, I am where I started. Its all good though. It was a good fight. We are small alliance and we did what we can. Not saying we affected the war in any way, but we had fun and we joined in with some friends.

Welcome and good luck in your endeavors! Make sure to find friends in other alliances so that you can better protect yourself. Also, it is wise to make a flag, and a "constitution" of sorts. However, it is not necessary. Good luck and if you need advice, Nations Empowered Against Totalitarianism is here to help.

[quote name='Lord Fingolfin' timestamp='1343235333' post='3015131'] I don't particularly care if they got terms or not. I think they should have actually fought though, even Sparta put up a better show. They shielded themselves in peace-mode and basically didn't do much at all [/quote] They didn't do much at all? LOSS and GATO dropped a bit of NS.

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1343191744' post='3014793'] Become an autocracy. I never have to worry about collecting sigs, and it's wonderful. [/quote] Well, you could have a carefully crafted direct-democracy and be just as efficient. Its called respecting and trusting those you are in an alliance with.

NEAT had a pleasure fighting LOSS. Good luck to all.

SRA is hardly worth adding to the treaty web, or are you going to add all one man alliances?

What does this mean?

NEAT would like to wish LOSS a good fight. We hope that we can all have a little fun here.

[quote name='Pingu' timestamp='1341726287' post='3006508'] The question was not about who is 'at fault', Mr Walrus, but about aggressive and defensive wars. An aggressive war might be fought for very legitimate, even praiseworthy objectives. Doesn't often happen, but it might. Preventive war based upon solid evidence of a looming threat is legitimate. Pre-emptive war based upon solid evidence of an imminent threat is legitimate. Both might be understood as aggressive. Humanitarian intervention, for example to prevent genocide, could be seen as aggressive. So we have to be clear about what is being discussed here. [/quote] You bring up a fair point that sometimes war can arguably be used as a means to bring about Justice; however, that does not change the scenario that I presented. The fact is, Country A and Country D are still aggressors and still caused the large scale war through their initial actions of aggression. So, once we recognize that Country A and D are the aggressors, we can then move beyond that point of discussion and begin to evaluate whether the aggressive action was "just" in proportion to the damage caused by escalating the violence. I have changed the wording from "fault" to cause, in recognition of the negative connotation which detracts from the example.

So, let me get this scenerio correct. [b]Country A[/b] attacks sends in soldiers, tanks, navy and air force to attack [b]Country B[/b]. Shamelessly killing their innocent civilians and even drops an atomic bomb on their cities. [b]Country B[/b] sends out an urgent cry for help to its friends because [b]Country A[/b] is much larger and (obviously stronger, otherwise they wouldn't have attacked...unless you are [i]The Resistance[/i]. ) [b]Country C[/b] comes to help their friends in [b]Country B[/b] to protect their land and citizens. By doing so, they must send in troops to [b]Country A[/b] and force them to fight two fronts....thus combining their strength to try and fight off [b]Country A[/b] and defend [b]Country B.[/b] [b]Country A[/b] is pissed that they are no longer able to take the land, technology, money and women of [b]Country B[/b] because [b]Country C[/b] is now helping to defend [b]Country B[/b]. So they ask their friend [b]Country D[/b] to help them by attacking [b]Country C[/b], so they can continue to destroy [b]Country B. [/b] I believe it is very obvious that [b]Country A[/b] is the aggressor and [b]Country D[/b] is supporting the aggression. [b]Country B[/b] is the victim and [b]Country C[/b] came to assist the victim, and thus becomes a victim in the violence as well. In Digiterra, I can see why e-lawyering is done. Very few people want to see themselves as the aggressor (some take great pride in it in this game) and it is sometimes difficult to build a coalition as the aggressor. [i]Talk to Comrade Trotsky about why LSF did not get The Internationals support.[/i] However, it is very clear that Country A and Country D are the aggressors in this war, and the cause of the conflict. As Pingu points out, the aggression may be "just"; depending on the scenerio.

I did not know either well, but I did enjoy zzzptm's organization of the Bamako Conference. It is always sad to see members leave this world.

Shouldn't you add every alliance Umbrella is fighting?

[quote name='Iron Helix' timestamp='1341450525' post='3003701'] "War?! The time has come," the [b]Walrus said[/b] "To speak of other things Of shoes and ships and sealing wax Of cabbages and kings And why the sea is boiling hot And whether pigs have wings Calloo-Callay No war today! We're cabbages and kings" [/quote] I'll take 100 tech as royalty for using my quote.

Nice declaration. Send your nations into peace mode, don't declare any wars and then post a DoW.

[quote name='Rush Sykes' timestamp='1339649229' post='2982889'] What is needed to explain? NoR went to talk to LSF gov. LSF gov wouldnt talk. Add to that a gov member aiding the rogues with the refusal to talk.... seems a pretty clear indication to me that LSF was precipitating a war on NoR. [/quote] Seeing that LSF is a direct-democracy...which government did you speak to? They are anarchist...

[quote name='Jgoods45' timestamp='1339649005' post='2982882'] You mean the one where NoR is defending themselves from wars launched upon them from various people on the LSF aa? [/quote] Explain the attacks on nations who neither attacked nor aided anyone attacking NoR?

Actions always speak louder than words...

Lurunin! I have missed you buddy. We got to catch up.

[center][img]http://img580.imageshack.us/img580/6796/brownflagheadertext.jpg[/img][/center] Greetings good nations of Digiterra! We, Nations Empowered Against Totalitarianism, are proud to announce that just 3 years ago we rose from death and formed the existence of NEAT v.2.0. We wish to take time this day to recognize those nations in NEAT who have worked hard to lay a strong foundation for Justice and Equality, some of which who are no longer with us. We also would like to thank our allies (you know who you are) who have stuck with us over the years and have supported our endeavors to bring an end to Totalitarianism in our world. The fight for Justice is never easy, but it is through little actions by seemingly inconsequential nations which combined bring about change. The struggle is not over, but today we celebrate our victory. The victory of good over evil. The victory of life over death. We also like to recognize and celebrate the LIFE of ALL nations this day. All nations of all alliances and all nations who live in this world without alliances. We believe that each nation holds the capacity to show Strength, Courage, Love and Compassion and it is our mission to Empower each nation in a way which brings out their fullest potential to love and care for one another. We leave you with our NEAT Idea and we invite you to join us on our forums for this celebration: http://z8.invisionfree.com/NEAT/index.php?showtopic=1406&st=0&#last [quote]"Civilization can only revive when there shall come into being in a number of individuals a new tone of mind, independent from the prevalent one among the crowds and in opposition to it; a tone of mind which will gradually win influence over the collective one, and in the end determine it's character. Only an ethical movement can rescue us from barbarism, and the ethical comes only into existence in individuals." - Albert Schweitzer Nations Empowered Against Totalitarianism (NEAT) is a collection of independent nations brought together for the purpose of peace, progress and the pursuit of a more just and ethical Digiterra. We in NEAT recognize the sovereign rights of every nation to be able to move freely and grow their nation in peace so long as they are causing no harm around them. Within our own alliance we recognize the equality of all our members. We secure this equality through the practice of direct-democracy. Each nation has a equal vote and is allowed to rise and fall on it's own merits. No nation will be found insignificant to another while participating in our community. In our pursuit of a more ethical Digiterra we will provide a new way of thinking, demonstrate a new example of economic growth and security, and we will reach out to those who are abused in order to provide a safe haven for all nations who wish to peacefully enjoy Digiterra. Lastly, we in NEAT value these three principles among our members: Honesty, Understanding, and Passion. With those traits we will grow strong as one and if or when we are faced with danger, we will prevail as one and in the light of justice. Peace and Love to all, Nations Empowered Against Totalitarianism[/quote]

Welcome UCoN!

[quote name='Hydian Way' timestamp='1330817244' post='2932736'] Regarding ODP vs MDP. If what the members of Arizona say ("We're really close.", "We'll defend each other even though it is an ODP.", etc) is true, it would make more sense to just have a well written non-chaining MDP. [b]You get the same result, defending each other when an war of aggression is launched, and the bonus of your pact having more teeth/legitimacy for public consumption.[/b] This is the bloc of "We love each other enough to talk about how we have each other's back, but not enough to even put ink on a non-chaining/limited* MDP". *As in you could even explicitly spell our articles regarding how the treaty is not valid if a member alliance spies, etc. Cover all the bases and have it downgrade to a NAP or something for the duration of wars resulting from such actions. [/quote] You are assuming that we want the public to be able to consume this. We have stated our bloc for public acknowledgment and now you all can interpret it as you want. What is important is how the alliances within the bloc develop our relationships and respond to our mutual ideals.

[quote name='Bordiga' timestamp='1330511153' post='2930576'] Congratulations to all alliances involved in this enterprise, particularly NEAT. People should stop making out that there is a contradiction or moral problem between communism and christianity. Both teach similar moral precepts- look out for the poor and needy, strive for peace before war, greed is bad, and so on. Christians who actually follow the teachings of Jesus would find more in common with a communist than with a conservative. And communists themselves should not be hostile to religion, unless they are seeking to establish a totalitarian police state that requires a monopoly on people's faith. As Marx said; [i]Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.[/i] [/quote] [b]This.[/b] Christianity and anarchism blends as well. Read about Dorothy Day. Anyway, I am glad to be in communion with all these cool alliances. I hope we can grow together stronger and bolder in our ideals. Peace.

[quote name='bcortell' timestamp='1325903382' post='2894433'] I don't recall any of them selling infra. They just got destroyed quickly and had to fight at the lower levels. [/quote] I thought I read a report on our forum about someone selling. Anyway, I was mainly talking from my perspective. Hoboage was a nation with 13k tech and 1.4 billion dollars, but he didn't even lob nukes for the most part. Would have loved to fight him. Instead he just turtled and sat there. Oh well, to each their own. I just know if I was on the receiving end (like I was a few years ago), I would have fought to the end and never surrendered.

[quote name='NoFish' timestamp='1325897293' post='2894389'] I can assure you that luck had very little to do with it. I'm not privy tot he specifics of the negotiations, but I do know we fought hard and VE are the best allies anyone could have. [/quote] You fought very hard? Your top tier was in peace-mode and a lot of other nations just turtled or sold infra until they got to the lower tier and then nuked non-nuclear nations. Thats fine if you want to fight that way, but I wouldn't consider it fighting hard.