Each alliance had representatives to the bloc; but the old government of the NpO misused the trust we all had in them to lead the bloc to war against NADC.
I don't think many will argue that Agora was not a failure, it started out with good intentions but collapsed when it became only a tertiary priority for the alliances involved. To simply overlook BLEU's transgressions in the NADC war and beyond is foolish, we decimated NADC and others for no good reason at all.
Do something about it posts already?
Buds hit the nail on the head in regards to responsibilities or other ideals. Those parties that formed or still form Karma haven't even had their chance to make a mark on the game, in time we'll see how the game evolves without a superbloc sitting in the middle of everything.
Hmm, that's an interesting point. I think though this is complicated by the fact that people seeking revenge will wait longer periods of time to take it, and will use their new membership in an alliance to protect themselves from a legitimate response.
So if you suspect a person is returning to the game to try and destroy you, you are within your rights to destroy them?
This seems like a very good argument for EZI, rather than against it.
The people questioning that particular term have already said they don't expect a resumption of the war. It seems like a badly worded term, as are several terms in this instrument of surrender.
The criticism on that term was not that we expect VE to use it as a excuse to go about ZI'ing MCXA nations at random, but that it was probably not realistically looked at before it was put in place. Most large alliances with 300+ members will tell you that demilitarization terms with many semi-active nations is difficult and reaching 90% compliance in a short period of time is simply not possible.