iamwalrus

I don't see why such criticism should be given out the THL. They knew that they were fighting a losing battle with the amount of alliances piled on them. It was the wise thing to do. All I can say is that I am glad that our prayers have been answered for a quick peace and that not too much blood has been shed.

We in NEAT have NOT and will NEVER forget the people who destroyed our original community. This war is not fought for any side, but rather The International. They were in no place at the time of our first war to come to our defense, and the main fault lies on OBR who withdrew their protection of our alliance. The International is the reason we are able to be in existence today, after we were forced to disband. We are long time friends with many members in that alliance and because of that ALONE we will fight for them. The International knows our dislike of many alliances who they are tied to through the web, and that is for us to sort out. We in NEAT also recognize that the health of The International is important to the health of NEAT. We are unified in this world of corruption. Like my post states: We are fighting to honor a treaty and to preserve a friendship we hold close, but we do not blindly accept this war for the furthering of a political power structure. White Chocolate is correct, if we did agree completely with our "side" of the war, (Like we did with the NEW war), we would have made a public statement about it. You should also recognize that we have not contacted you for support in this war (SC). That is for a reason. Finally, I must state that because of the nature of our alliance, these statements are of my own. Each member may agree or disagree, but I do not speak as an official stance. Our official stance is what I posted....We fight for The International. We pray for peace, IAMWalrus

[img]http://obeygiant.com/images/2008/10/caution.jpg[/img] [img]http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/1759/neatflagaquaflower.jpg[/img] [b]NEAT Declares war on The Hanseatic League[/b] We Nations Empowered Against Totalitarianism have entered this war in defense of The International and according to our Treaty of the Two Commanders with The International. We wish The Hanseatic League best of luck and we pray for a quick peace. [b]Signed[/b] [i]NEAT General Assembly[/i]

[quote name='PrinceArutha' timestamp='1292173541' post='2537381'] beating on your chest and calling a large group of alliances on planet bob "rapists and plunderers" is not a good way to make friends and get them on your side. I have personally never spoken with you and would be willing to bet you haven't spoken to many of the alliances you have named. If you have a genuine beef with Nueva Vida or the alliances in question then I suggest you go talk to them. Name calling and chest thumping on the owf has never been a smart move. Might I suggest rethinking your analogy? Also, @ ThePansy, hello. Thats all. [/quote] I am not trying to get anyone "on my side". I am rather saying it how it is. RED's nations were raped for tech, land, money, fun, whatever it may be. I did nothing but follow the MDP trail starting with SWATLand. If you don't like what came up, then change it. If you don't care, then I don't care. In this world where there are so many entangling treaties, lines are going to be drawn at some point and it is very clear that those directly connected to SWATland, BoS and OTS are on the side of aggressive bullying.

[quote name='Grendel' timestamp='1292100745' post='2536718'] My statement above my [ooc]....[/ooc] was IC commentary There is no right or wrong there is only living with the consequences of your choices. By the way much of what you stated in your first post could be considered OOC just as easily as most of what I said. [/quote] If this is true then why do alliances try and give a CB and why are CB's critiqued?

[quote name='Grendel' timestamp='1292100523' post='2536710'] Okay I'll make it simple for you, your in game reality of what is right or wrong means nothing to anyone else in game unless you have the ability to sway or force someone in game to agree with you. So far you are failing in that effort. [ooc]I play the game for the sake of the game there is no right or wrong there is the game and how I play it.[/ooc] [/quote] Well then please stay out of this forum and discussion as it is for IC commentary. I don't care if you play OOC only, but this is not the place.

[quote name='The Pansy' timestamp='1292100011' post='2536704'] He wasn't getting any less respect as you put it, he made a bad choice in original alliance, he himself did something to change that, you helped facilitate that, so congratulations, again, it doesn't prove you saved him from leaving planet Bob So if The International were drawn into conflict to defend an ally, and then counter declared, you would not have helped them? [/quote] He was getting less respect based on the fact that SWATLand knew that there would be no severe consequences. Why didn't SWAT attack someone from a larger more capable alliance? Its because he at least respects their military power. In which case he just proves he is a bully and a coward. Also, if The International were attacked unprovoked then we would come to their defense, if they were attacked because they were making offensive actions, then we would assist according to our treaty which states, "NEAT and The International recognize that at times wars can be justified and are sometimes necessary when fought for the common good and protection of the innocent. In these circumstances both alliances are to be in communication with one another about their potential military conflicts and if determined appropriate a joint aggressive military operation may be conducted." However, I can say for a fact that in this particular war which I have brought up, NEAT would have not been fighting on the side of Swatland.

[quote name='Grendel' timestamp='1292099368' post='2536690'] Funny thing is there is no "right" or "wrong" in relationship to what individual nations and/or alliances do [given they work within the rules dictated to game mechanics]. "Right" or "Wrong" is determined by the individual nation and/or alliance set for themselves by force of resolve, diplomatic maneuverings and military military might. That is it, it really is that simple. If players want to play then play find your niche. IF you want to be the "hero" of the underdog be that hero but don't whine about what is happening. Pull up your pants and do what you think is right but do not preach to us. [/quote] It is easy to prove there is no morality in this world when you take your comments OOC. This is an analysis of this conflict IC. Therefore, I do not know what you mean by "Game Mechanics", "Players" finding a "niche". I do know that just because you say there is no "right or wrong" doesn't mean that is true. Just like me saying there is, doesn't make me any more true.

[quote name='Mathias' timestamp='1292098399' post='2536673'] [font="Georgia"]It's still not an issue. An alliance has the right to defend anyone they want. Just because it's inconvenient to you doesn't mean it's a global concern. To be honest, if I was the attention whoring type I probably would have aided/supported SWATland too, since it just warms my heart to see alliances as incompetent and ill-fit for survival as RED suffer. [/font] [/quote] I never said that alliances don't have the right to defend anyone they want. In fact, in The Common Struggle, I say just the opposite. It is the inherent right of all nations and alliances to defend whoever they want, that is what unifies us. I do not know what you are saying was "inconvenient for me"? Nothing was inconvenient for me. I also fail to see how a potential global conflict is not a global issue? While BoS and OTS had every right to throw their weight around (and that of their allies) it says a lot about the stewardship of those alliance's allies.. It also points out the fact that the next global conflict could be as simple as Swatland raiding the wrong Alliance.

[quote name='The Pansy' timestamp='1292098338' post='2536672'] 1) Tech Raiding isn't done on people who are "less valuable" its done on people who don't fit into your alliances ideals of an alliance 2) No you have not shown they would have left, in fact you have shown that one member came to a realisation that RED was not for him, and he would be finding new alliance 3) Your very own alliance would have been dragged in Via treaties, so are you suggesting your own members leave for a neutral alliance? [/quote] 1. Wars for tech are almost always declared on nations who are significantly weaker and "less valuable". It is done on people who don't fit into your ideals so that you can "justify" the action by saying "They aren't an alliance". However, once again this has nothing to do with the main issue of my post. 2. I can tell you that nations who are raided and receive no help or even a hope of help do leave the game. You can see this easily by looking at the war screen. I am glad I showed that this nation was competent because that is what I was trying to show. I think it proves the humanity of this nation regardless of being in what some might not consider an "alliance". I think it shows that he deserves the same respect and national dignity of others. 3. My alliance would not have been dragged into this conflict via treaties, because of the specific agreements we have with our treaty partners. (written in the agreements) I am not advocating alliances becoming neutral. Once again your reading comprehension in this particular matter is not treating you well. I am advocating for alliances to take a look at their treaty partners and to recognize that this conflict could have easily escalated in a matter of days if peace was not achieved all because of "secret" treaties. I want alliances to realize that they were connected to this small conflict and indirectly were endorsing it. What they do with that knowledge is up to them. We just need to be real about the situation.

[quote name='Mathias' timestamp='1292097873' post='2536667'] [font="Georgia"]The fact that RED is getting destroyed by a rogue is not a global concern. In fact, I think it's pretty funny.[/font] [/quote] You are right. The fact that RED was getting destroyed by a rogue was NOT a global concern; however, it became a global concern once BoS declared a secret treaty WITH that rogue AND OTS was going to honor and protect BoS and that treaty. That is the issue.

[quote name='Captain Flinders' timestamp='1292096356' post='2536646'] That's right folks, we're first on the list. Clearly that means we are best. Though I will go on the record as saying that this stupid little war that I care nothing for was not protected nor endorsed by Nordreich. [/quote] Hypothetically, if NEAT would have came to the assistance of Sajasabie by their request and OTS came to assist BoS and needed your help (to fight against our military superiority); you would not have assisted? *EDIT* My point is that by the acts of BoS and OTS; Swatland, a rogue not recognized by many alliances, was given protection and authority to conduct these violent acts.

It is not a poor attempt at a recruitment post. I put that info in there to show that those nations took steps to improve their security. Often times when discussing nations who are attacked for tech, the argument is they are nations who would not be valuable members any way. I am showing that these nations, if not helped would have left the game, but being helped and nurtured, they are on their way to becoming strong nations.

[img]http://obeygiant.com/images/2008/09/df19490d0d2c03a5cd2b88d966ef2c9b.jpg[/img] Greetings All Nations of Digiterra, I come before all of you today to once again give account of my perceptions of the current state of Digiterra, based on the recent events of SWATland and the alliance of Red Elite Defence (RED). I thank all of you for your time. In my last written article "The Common Struggle"(http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=91379), I stated this: [quote=The Common Struggle]In Digiterra there is at least one universal truth: every nation seeks survival. Survival is the common goal of every nation in this game. In pursuit of this common goal, it is universally accepted and understood that each nation has a irrevocable right to defend their own nation. Survival in its true form is an inherently good thing. Nations in pursuit of survival will do what is best for their citizens which in turn is best for their nation. In pursuit of survival, nations avoid war because of the unforeseeable consequences which may lead to the destruction of their nation. It is in this pursuit of survival that all nations are One. We all have different governments, religions, currency and resources but we are all equal in the sense that we all are working towards the betterment of the lives of our citizens and the growth of our nations.[/quote] From this viewpoint and the contents found within, I will give my analysis of this most recent war which I am dubbing: [b]"The War of Rogues"[/b]. [b] On November 29th 2010[/b] Swatland declared war on the alliance RED with the CB, "The Red Elite Defence is the lucky victim this time". If you notice the word usage you will see the word "Victim". The definition of victim, as taken from Dictionary. com states, "a person who is deceived or cheated, as by his or her own emotions or ignorance, by the dishonesty of others, or by some impersonal agency." The nations in RED were cheated of their National Dignity by the sudden and unprovoked attack by Swatland. The use of the word victim by Swatland leads me to believe that Swatland knew very much that his actions were not considered morally sound. It seems to lead me to believe that Swatland knew that these nations were innocent and did not DESERVE the war which was brought upon them, but rather he was going to take advantage of their ignorance and seemingly weak defenses. As the war continued on and the nations of RED were being destroyed, I contacted these nations with inquiries about their war. The messages I received were as so: [quote]To: IAMWalrus From: President Perm Date: 12/5/2010 8:51:47 PM Subject: RE: War Message: I am trying my best, as for the alliance there as been no help from them. I am on my own. Once this is over I am finding a new Alliance. We can talk more about this. thanks again. [/quote] [quote]To: IAMWalrus From: President Perm Date: 12/6/2010 8:06:55 AM Subject: RE: War Message: IAMWalrus: I am not going to give up the battle. He hit with a strong blow. I am down to less then 500 soldiers and under 20 tanks. I am going to try and keep the battle going but, if some form of help doesn't come soon it is all but over. [/quote] These messages show that his nation was active and doing his best to defend his citizens; however, he was unfortunately caught at a time when his alliance was becoming more inactive. This is the perfect example of a competent national leader doing his best to protect his people, but falling victim to an irrational and dangerous leader. [b]On December 4th, 2010[/b] Sajasabie declared war on Swatland. This is their CB, " Ladies and Gentlemen of Planet Bob, Sajasabie has always concerned itself with the maltreatment of small nations, most recently we've seen a DoW from the alliance Cat Land on Red Elite Defence. Sure, Sajasabie has nothing to do with these two alliances, however, seeing as RED and any of it's allies(?) have failed to protect RED's attacked members, to the point of letting one nation receive nuclear attacks from SWATLand, we decided we'd do something about it. The unprovoked attacking, both in conventional warfare and nuclear warfare, on nations that don't have nuclear capabilities or sufficient NS to be able to put up a counter-attack is, in our opinion, wrong. Sajasabie hereby declares war on SWATLand for their use of nuclear weapons on a non-nuclear nation." In this declaration we see that Sajasabie recognizes that they had no previous connection with the nations in RED, but they also recognized the atrocity which was taken place. They heard the cry of the poor nations who were being attacked, and it was not merely the fact that they were being attacked for no reason, but particularly the fact that they were being attacked by nuclear weapons when they were unarmed themselves. The gravity of the violence called to their hearts and their nations prepare for war. This is the kind of act which was outlined in "The Common Struggle" as one of the most honorable and courageous acts a nation can make for another. They risked the security of their nations for the defense of another. They sacrificed the potential of their survival to insure the survival of another. Such acts are rare in Digiterra. What happens next will mark a dark period in Digiterra. [b] On December 5th, 2010[/b] the Brotherhood of Steel declared war on Sajasabie with the following CB, "The Brotherhood of Steel hereby declares war on the alliance of Sajasabie for their unjustified attacks upon our allies, Cat Land." Quickly, everyone reading this scurries to find the documents to show this "treaty" between Catland and BoS. Sajasabie and their protector Amazon Nation I can only imagine are wondering curiously as to where BoS even came from. As the situation begins to reveal itself more fully it is found out that there was no written treaty, but rather it was verbal and no made public. The Order of The Sword (OTS) then quickly stated that they would protect BoS from any attacks in defense of Sajasabie (except Amazon Nation). Thus, they brought in their full support of this defense of the Aggressor, and they brought all of their allies into the this engagement as well. Now, let us pause a moment. The danger that this brings to the world of Digiterra is great. It shows that there are alliances out there who respect no one in this world, except those in their little corner. What happened was the rape and plunder of innocent nations and the protection of it by a whole treaty web. What we had was a structural act of violence which was endorsed and protected by these alliances: Nordreich, The Sweet Oblivion, The Dark Templar, Nueva Vida, Colossus, Ragnarok, Valhalla, Asgaard, League of Enlisted Gentlemen, Greenland Republic, The Brigade, Symphony, TOP, ViP, VE, NpO....and the list goes on. If you did not like this situation and found it repulsive, it is time to check your treaties and check your alliances moral standing. Next time, this war won't end so soon. From this outcome, two nations from RED now reside in Radix Omnium Malorum Avaritia, and alliance which is protected by NEAT and is a safe haven for all young nations seeking safety. Peace to all and have a good day, IAMWalrus

Well, I was just starting to have fun when you nuked my nation to hell!

I look forward to our future with LSF! Power to the people!

[center][img]http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/6365/romaflag.jpg[/img][/center] [quote][center][b]Union of the free (NEAT - ROMA Protectorate)[/b] [b]Article I - Sovereignty[/b] Nations Empowered Against Totalitarianism (henceforth known as NEAT) and Radix Omnium Malorum Avaritia (henceforth known as ROMA) are independent alliances and the decisions made by the nations of either alliance will not affect the latter alliance. [b]Article II - Protection[/b] NEAT recognizes the nations of the alliance ROMA as an alliance of free and independent nations, as a result the members of NEAT have agreed to strive to defend the members of ROMA against unwarranted attacks. With this protection it is hoped that the nations of ROMA will grow and prosper free from harm. [b] Article III - Non-Aggression[/b] ROMA is to consult NEAT for approval of any aggressive wars. In addition to that ROMA and NEAT are to resolve any issues between them peacefully. Nations in ROMA who violate this clause will not be warranted protection. [b]Article IV - Intelligence and Espionage[/b] If either ROMA or NEAT come into possession of intelligence that is important to the safety of the latter alliance they are to immediately forward the intelligence. Both alliances agree not to commit espionage against the other. [b]Signed for the NEAT:[/b] NEAT General Assembly [/center][/quote] As a clarification: We in NEAT recognize that there are currently no members under the AA ROMA. There will be shortly. We are just making this statement now. If you have any further questions, feel free to contact us at our forum, or just ask here.

I am happy that this Agreement has finally come to be! Glad to go public with our relationship...

Bump!

Accidental Double Post

[quote name='Heinlander' timestamp='1283147251' post='2435546'] War is the imperative of man. Do you think that your self-deluded nobility can somehow overturn this reality? [/quote] Tell me what I have said which is false? Even in a structure in which you would prefer, the truths I speak about are prevalent. The only reason your alliance doesn't immediately attack any alliance you dislike is because of fear that your alliance would then be destroyed. (if they are a stronger alliance or have stronger allies). Thus, the want for survival acts as a check to your want of war. When we look at wars for tech, money or land it is easy to take advantage of those small nations because they are proven to be unaligned and thus your survival is mostly guaranteed. ( I say mostly because there are nations who have acted as "land mines" in the past.) All of Digiterra acts on this basis of survival. From this standpoint and common ground our morals (or lack there-of) are created. Thus, a CB can be seen as "just" or "folly" [quote name='Alfred von Tirpitz' timestamp='1283147719' post='2435550'] @ OP, just come out and say it. You wish for most of Planet Bob to become an unpopulated husk. With entire nations vanishing after extended periods of mind numbing same old same old. [/quote] With all the wars that have existed on Digiterra, the population has been in constant decline. Even in the parallel universe "TE" where war is constant, there are few amounts of nations. What I do know is this: There are young nations who have left this world because they had been destroyed before fully understanding the world. There are also two sanctioned alliances who are declared "neutral". Those alliances are NOT rotting away.

[quote name='Rextu' timestamp='1283327629' post='2438048'] You sir, are a liar. My nation and yours are far too small to generate $15 million. Perhaps you mean 15 thousand, a much more meager amount even to my nation. Your exaggeration by a thousandfold is a true example of your dishonesty and conceit. Furthermore, this is shown when you think I share your personality. I am simply offering kind advice on how to improve the effectiveness of your attacks. It is an easy way for you to be a better nation and not willing to learn is a sign of pure arrogance. [/quote] I made an honest mistake. I am used to SE so I think in millions not thousands. How can my attacks be any more effective? I use minimal deployment, aggressive attacks and receive full amounts of tech. Entering Defcon 1 would only become a hassle every time I go to collect taxes. To think I am an inexperienced player would be a folly. It is hard to take your "expertise" seriously when you are the one on the way to ZI.

Dear whoever the hell you are, Thank you for going rogue on one of our nations so that I can casually attack you and gain free tech. I was able to do this without entering any defcon that would hinder my collection of taxes. Thank you also for running two ground attacks on me which earned me an additional 15 million. Next time don't think of yourself to be so important that we would all enter defcon "!@#$ hit the fan" and panic that a small nation is attacking us. Reality check is that you are a tech raid that came to us. Peace

[quote name='Kryievla' timestamp='1282962472' post='2433395'] Power grants the means to do more than survive. It allows for unparalleled growth, access to even more power and material wealth to enrich the lives of our citizens, and additional protection for these same citizens. Not all those seeking power seek it through violent and destructive means, either. The ability to crush someone and the will to do so if necessary does not force a nation to go to war. In fact, I would argue that peace through superior firepower is a viable tactic.[/quote] Wealth, and economic growth are not the same as power. You are right, to thrive rather than survive is always good, but this is done through economic calculations and friendly barter among nations. When you begin to talk about power, you begin to talk about the structure of our society in which some rule over others. Power looks through the lens and sees others not as equals, but rather "can I destroy them, or can they destroy me?" [quote name='Kryievla' timestamp='1282962472' post='2433395'] War may not be universally accepted, but some do accept it. Are you asserting that nations rule over one another because some nations go to war? I am not sure I'm following this bit.[/quote] Like I stated above, there will always be nations that make better economic decisions than others, and hence not all nations will be equal in size. This happens also because there are always new nations appearing in the global world. Nations begin to rule over one another when they begin to aggressively assert their power over another nation. This is always done through war or the certain threat of war. [quote name='Kryievla' timestamp='1282962472' post='2433395'] Alliances inherently good? Some may do good things, but I find the assertion that all alliances are inherently good because they represent some good things to be an odd one at best. I'd say in fact, some are downright evil. [/quote] Alliances are inherently good because the idea of an alliance is for it to be a place for like minded nations to come together for peace and economic growth. It is a haven where nations can be safe from those who are corrupted by greed and the pursuit of power. You are right that some alliances do horrible things. Those alliances do not take away the fact that alliances in general are inherently good, they are just a whole body of nations who have been corrupted by their passions. I would even say that within those "corrupt" alliances, there are a plethora of "good" nations. Mob mentality sets in, and fears are cast about that other alliances may be "out to get them". You also have young nations being brought into a world in which they only know what is presented to them and often times, the fear and destruction is loudest. [quote name='Kryievla' timestamp='1282962472' post='2433395'] A plea for nations to come together to fight raiding, is a plea for folks to band together to give you the 'power' to force your will on those that don't hold your views. It seems that you too are pursuing power. Are you then okay with the pursuit of power so long as it is used for your own ends?[/quote] The survival of other nations in no way gives me power over them. I have spoken about power earlier. I am also not calling on nations to seek out and destroy raiders, but I am calling on nations to defend the weak. Defend those that are being taken advantage of. It is not only my will that nations survive in this game. Almighty Admin gave life to nations in Digiterra and it is their right to defend it. The right to survival trumps all. There are some who fail to recognize the dignity of all nations and thus claim we breach their right when we defend the weaker nations, but we are merely securing their most basic right to life, given to them by Almighty Admin. We are not forcing the aggressor to do, or not to do anything. They have the free will to do what they please. This leads back to me early statement about nations refraining to make decisions of war because they see that it could backfire and lessen their chance to survival, which ultimately must be preserved in their minds. The logic that we are infringing on their right to be an aggressor by defending the weak would be like saying that all nations larger than myself are taking away my right to be the strongest in Digiterra. It just doesn't make sense. [quote name='Kryievla' timestamp='1282962472' post='2433395'] Why should we resist that temptation? Greed in and of itself is neither bad nor good. Greed is that which drives us to have more, to do better. When we have no desire for more, we become stagnant. We settle for mediocrity. How is that better or more noble than building a great empire, or having a first-rate army, or forging the strongest alliance?[/quote] Greed does not fuel the growth of my nation, nor does it fuel the growth of all nations. The want for my citizens to live more comfortable lives, to work less but make more money to secure a future for their children is a drive. The pursuit for better technologies to be used in the medical field to prolong life and lessen suffering is a drive for economic growth. Now, because we live in a world corrupted by power and propaganda that the destruction of the weak is ok, we nations who are smaller must also worry about our security. We must build strong militaries and maintain a nuclear arsenal, but that ultimately is detrimental to our citizens economy. Our money would be better spent elsewhere. It is possible to thrive economically, and not pursue power. The GPA is a good example of this as well as TDO. [quote name='Kryievla' timestamp='1282962472' post='2433395'] As for rights, you have whatever [i]rights[/i] can be secured by force of arms. No more, and no less.[/quote] Almight Admin gave us the right to life. No one can take that away from us. That right IS however infringed upon when nations think they have more dignity than others or deserve more tech, money or land at the expense of the weak. [quote name='Kryievla' timestamp='1282962472' post='2433395'] I take offense to the thought that you can speak for every ruler on the planet, labeling those who don't subscribe to your point of view as 'corrupt', 'unjust', or 'oppressive'. I find the idea that we must all live under one point of view (YOUR point) to be absolutely criminal. Furthermore, should any Volsungans be found preaching this nonsense, they will be tried as dissidents, then publicly beheaded. Also, there is an alliance for those who wish such a society, where they can build their empires in peace. The fact that not every nation on Planet Bob has moved to that supposed Utopia leads me to think that your assumption of what 'everyone but a corrupt few' wants is off the mark.[/quote] I am only offering my observations. I know about the right to life given to us by Almighty Admin because he has given me that gift and I cherish it. I also know he has given you that gift. With that gift we have free will, sadly we have chosen to live in a world in which the "rule of the land" is known as "might makes right". That mentality is oppressive and authoritarian. It ignores the dignity of smaller nations which was given to them by Almighty Admin. He created us all equally, for no nation was created with 4999 infrastructure and 300 tech. We all started equally. There are also many reasons nations don't join Utopia, and you can not assume that those who don't desire war. Some don't wish to have Utopia labeled upon them. Others may not have heard about it. To join an alliance is wise for defense, but to say that a nation only has dignity of they join an alliance is violent and disrespectful. [quote name='Kryievla' timestamp='1282962472' post='2433395'] I would like to see the smaller alliances take a more active role in the politics of our world, though. At last, there is something in this bit that we can agree on I find your alliance name to be ironic, considering this propaganda piece seeking to enforce your will on the rest of the 'verse. [/quote] Once again, this is not my will. Survival and life is Admin's will, for he gave it to us. I am also not taking those rights from anyone by pointing out my observations.

[center][img]http://obeygiant.com/images/2008/11/peace_bomber_paper-copy-500x715.jpg[/img][/center] Fellow nations of Digiterra, I first want to thank you for your time and attention. I, Walrus, would like to provide my insight and knowledge about equality, responsibility, justice, forgiveness and sacrifice. In Digiterra there is at least one universal truth: every nation seeks survival. Survival is the common goal of every nation in this game. In pursuit of this common goal, it is universally accepted and understood that each nation has a irrevocable right to defend their own nation. Survival in its true form is an inherently good thing. Nations in pursuit of survival will do what is best for their citizens which in turn is best for their nation. In pursuit of survival, nations avoid war because of the unforeseeable consequences which may lead to the destruction of their nation. It is in this pursuit of survival that all nations are One. We all have different governments, religions, currency and resources but we are all equal in the sense that we all are working towards the betterment of the lives of our citizens and the growth of our nations. This pursuit of survival can however, become counter productive. We could go astray and many times when we think we are doing what is best for our survival, we actually are damaging our citizens lives and our nations as a whole. It is when we decide that growth is not quick enough or we envy our neighbors luxuries that our vision of survival is skewed. Greed and the pursuit of power become the main goal. Violence and destruction are then brought about. We then enter the realm of war. Wars are declared from nation to nation, alliance to alliance, alliance to nation and every now and again nation to alliance. When we enter this reality of war, we begin to separate ourselves from one another and the "Oneness" we had in our common struggle of survival. Some believe it is just to declare war on another nation to steal money, technology, or land only because they are stronger and able. Others see it as a blatant violation of a nations sovereignty. Thus, it is not a universally accepted "right" to kill other nations' innocent women and children for a measly technological advancement. What we do know is that it only happens because the nation who is the aggressor is able to commit such an act and even consider the act because it knows that it will get away with it and their pursuit of survival will not be at risk. Such an act can ONLY be made when there is a clear separation of those that have against those that don't. Thus, by the very act of these wars, nations begin to rule over one another and our "Oneness" is no longer acknowledged or accepted. This is not the end however, this is only the beginning. Once again, in search of the common goal (which is survival) and to successfully fulfill their irrevocable right to survival, nations begin to form alliances. They begin to seek ways to secure themselves from those who prey on the weak. Alliances are inherintly good. They are created to protect, aid, teach and develop nations. Alliances form strong closely knit relationships between nations all across Digiterra. However, some alliances are caught up in the struggle for power. They view those below them in strength as a "waste of resources" and would take any opportunity to devour their money, tech or land. An example of this is \m/'s declaration about GGA. There are other subtle examples seen throughout history of this occurring. We all know which wars were started with flimsy CB's. It is the responsibility of each nation to hold its alliance accountable and to resist the temptation of power and greed. It is the responsibility for each nation to hold their leaders accountable and to keep them focused on the common goal, rather than the goal of the power thirsty. This all starts with the act of war over tech. Does your alliance view this as fundamentally acceptable? If it does, why are their limitations on who you can attack? Do some nations deserve the right to survival more than others, particularly because they are associated with more nations? It is "just" to pursue survival and to grow peaceful relations with other nations and preserve the equal opportunity society in which we are created in. It is unjust to break the bonds of equality and to attack nations for power or to commit acts of greed. It is in the best interest of ALL nations for there to be a peacefull and equal society. It is only the corrupt few who benefit off of the blood of others. In pursuit of Justice, we must recognize what is good in ALL systems. Even in the systems in which we lable corrupt or oppressive. We must work with that "good" to foster more good and eventually create a "just" system out of the "unjust". Sometimes in pursuit of justice, nations sacrifice themselves for others. This offering of your nation for another in the name of justice is the greatest act of love for humanity which a nation can make. For, he is sacrificing his pursuit of the common goal, for the security of an innocent nations right to defend itself against the unjust oppressors. If these martyrs don't exist, power structures would go unchecked and the few will only get stronger and stronger and lose all respect of others. For, if no one is standing up for justice, why would they try to justify their acts of criminality? Today, I come before all of Digiterra to call upon those nations and alliances in the world who stand for justice to unite with one another. Let us protect our color spheres from wars against tech. Let us hold our alliances accountable for their actions. Let us call out those alliances who disregard diplomacy for the thirst of technology and blood. I also encourage all those micro-alliances out there to be active in global politics, don't be intimidated by the size of those around us. I ask all alliances to reflect on what their goals are in this world and if they are to secure the right to equality, join us against wars for tech. Peace and Love, IAMWalrus Nation Empowered Against Totalitarianism