Wow first time in a while I've actually bothered posting anything. That said I wholeheartedly agree with this doctrine. It was view points and perspectives like this that Originally drew me to NPO back in '06 despite there current issues with the citrus war. I'll also admit that around page 10 of watching some of the more well known historical members of planet bob rephrase and repeat the same- and yes some times moronic- view points they have been for several years I realized that no one here is stating anything I can't really predict. By the way guys- that's sad your becoming intellectually morally and creatively stagnate. I'm not above the same failing but I work to learn and educate myself on almost everything I can to prevent that. I also keep my head from relocating into my posterior it really does help. That said there are some post I would like to address.
Should I point out that this issue is present with a mutual defense pact? If I go on the forums and post a declaration of war against someone stating a retaliatory strike for wars against my country then you have to decide where the first strike really cam from- the person declaring a retaliatory war, or there enemy who attacked because of repetitive affronts to there members? each war we start drags more people into a biased opinion if more people in charge of alliances were able to act like reasonable and intelligent beings driven by more then there emotions then Planet Bob would have suffered from significantly less wars. As it stands when someone looses a war most alliances rebuild and then as soon as they are a match or have enough allies higher up they start hunting for a reason to attack. Sometimes that reason is simply one rouge member or even a ghost attacking to stir the pot a little fast and splash some mischief over the sides. Moldavi is the first person to come to mind when I start thinking about skilled politicians- I've seen many of his devout enemies from a war joining the alliances he helped make great.
I'll refer you to the quote in my Sig on this. Everyone will believe he is in the right the person best able to defend his views writes the history. note the spelling of that word hisstory, it's called that for a reason I assure you if you could go back to any great war and talk to the looser they would tell you about their glorious success and the rightness of there goal they lost and the victor declared them unjust. Maybe there cause was maybe it wasn't they lost so they don't get a chance to write the story.
To this gentlemen- I suggest you study up on punctuation in words not just sentences, it lends your argument credibility when your writing seems like that of a learned individual, at time it also makes you look like an $@!.
I feel the need to Also point out that the NPO's actual decline didn't begin till after Moldavi had handed the reigns off to another. Not to speak ill of his successors they have done the best they could, but Ivan cast a long shadow and he had a lot of time to arrange matters to suit his needs as Emperor of the New Pacific Order. Yes the NPO has declined from it's once great power and recognition but to pin it on Ivan seems like the act of a scorned child. I recall that in the Thread he said goodbye less then a handful of individuals spoke ill of him and there were a few people that expressed regret about his departure despite having opposed him in many wars.
I have no doubt that like so many of his controversial and so called "grand standing" announcements this Doctrine will take root with many alliances as they see the wisdom and benefit of it.
If you've read this far through what I have to say- thank you you have more patience then many a saint.
