James Spanier

Good on you Lucius, long may peace reign. Congratulations to CLAWS on accomplishing your war goals.

As the successor state to Poison Clan I would assume Non Grata would indeed hold most of the remaining PC membership that remains.

The exchange I've read definitely does not read as 'just a prank bro'. JA's passionate attempt to justify it as a necessary response to CLAWS aggression also discredits the idea it wasn't serious. Maybe it wasn't a high energy effort, but it was definitely desired and not merely 'fluff'. Subjective on my part it may be to take that position. I'm unsure how Lucius could provide evidence to support he wasn't serious, which means it'd be his words against...his words. Who do you believe, past Lucius talking to someone who admits he thought at the time was a friend, or present Lucius scrambling to respond to accusations? Lucius's primary error was indeed giving TDE and the concept of an intel collection ring within his enemies the time of day, and this will hopefully serve as a valuable lesson.

Oh I didn't realize they were TIE protectorates, I'm with it now. Fair enough.

Could CLAWS have approached TIE to try for a diplomatic solution? You're right, it's not mechanically impossible. However a far more valuable question is what could possibly have been accomplished by tipping your hand on this matter? What are the historical examples I'm not aware of where an AA leader (not gov member, but leader) engaged in an attempt to establish a network intended for espionage (sorry HoT) in an AA, was caught, and diplomacy was used successfully to deal with it? I can't even imagine how the subject could be broached unless at least one of the involved parties was a protectorate, which fundamentally changes the dynamic.

I've never liked ghosting for raiding purposes. The antagonism cut both ways, and often the next one was justified by the existence of the previous one, with both sides fully aware all they were doing was spinning the wheel around and around, a little faster each time. Relative might can indeed determine if war is declared or not, however, situation does also determine if diplomacy is bothered with at all. Who do you suppose CLAWS would talk to and what about in this situation that wouldn't just result in war anyway?

But I live for engaging in discourse so janax has more opportunities to make appearances, even if they're just to tell me his reign was the best one. It's a service I provide to the masses.

A bit of an odd place to make that declaration but alright.

I mean that was my point, if the goal was simply war your could contrive that into a CB by accusing JA's not revealing this information as a war reason. Again I'll stake out the position that when it's the AA leader in question, there isn't much to talk about. I'm waiting for some of the older school individuals that we know lurk in the background to show up and post walls of text that make mine in this thread look like child's play. We already have janax posting here.

I mean, I'd say this CB is pretty middle of the road. Not attack on a protectorate with botched diplomacy tier but definitely ranking above the slew of wars that have fought over things like an AA/individual's disposition or mean things that were said. But I think we can all agree the most just war is the War on Communism CB. I mean they were pretty public about saying that TIE has requested they stay out. JA even spent a bunch of time laying the ground work for a counter-justification campaign, something only necessary if you plan to actually act. COBRAsphere is exactly the kind of group I'd picture when thinking of a one with the sentiment 'throw in for your allies right or wrong'. Though admittedly they also have a track record for strategic non-deployment as this isn't the first time, Kashmir was held out of a war that one time to avoid a larger conflict they believed was intended to target Polar. Coincidentally announced in a post by your very own Lord Hitchcock.

Where to begin with your projectionism. I'll humor you and avoid debating the merits of the CB in this response, though I have a feeling the only reason you wouldn't want to is because just about everyone involved (and a good few not involved) have conceded to the validity of the CB already. First off, your own contradiction that nobody cares while also going out of your way to repeatedly decry the CB as shoddy within this thread. By stating your opinion in the thread you've established that you care, at least enough to build your own narrative around it (and then share it). Good on you, contributing to the community and helping to stave off the ever looming entropy of inactivity. You should really be more willing to recognize your own input as part of the discussion. As for the the suggestion that two factions that have underlying tensions between them might want a fight with one another...I'm not sure why you think that it somehow makes or breaks the validity of the CB that eventually comes up. If Polar really wanted a fight with Argent and one of my members went and raided your nation, then when Buuyo DM'd me about it I told him to do something about it and blocked him, is that CB crap because Polar wanted the fight? Or because I implied I wanted it to happen? A CB is a CB, it stands (or doesn't) on its own merits. They can be fabricated or intentional sure, but they can also be (conveniently) valid. If you'd like to provide some reasoning for your stance on this particular CB and why it deserves a particular combination of descriptive words, by all means indulge. To the larger point that CLAWS just really wanted this fight and should have just said so, as far as I can tell that's not actively the case here. There were several incidents that nearly led to war before this involving CLAWS and COBRAsphere, however they were all resolved. This instance had no real opportunity for diplomatic recourse and war resulted. If CLAWS really wanted this fight they could have cited some dumb dual membership thing with DBDC or even the Kids Next Door and forced a war over that. So far as I can tell most of their issues are with COBRA, so they could have also extrapolated the 'we' Lucius used in the logs to mean COBRA and opened a front with them. They could even use JA admitting he got the same sort of message from TDE as cause for war right now if that's all they wanted. Finally, if you yourself say we have to defend this, but also posit that nobody uninvolved cares, why would anyone involved then care enough to cater to your demand to meet you at your level of dumbing things down into their most basic forms? If anything that sounds like a you problem.

I mean that would have been more fitting in the first paragraph about wars with shaky CB's, but I didn't want it to get too long.

I mean, I guess that's a possibility, doesn't change that by posting it's attributed to him. Even insincere, he's avoided making an ass out of himself replying to the DoW or in public Discord channels by twisting himself into a pretzel pretending he did nothing wrong. It would be extremely easy to rally the base, escalate the war, and deny the evidence. He has demonstrated annoyance at being caught and with the person that led to it, but that's a pretty natural reaction. I don't think CLAWS has set out in this war to disband TIE, not sure what else could be done that isn't already, so if TIE wants to set the groundwork for the eventual peace let them.

Even more to do so before the meat of the subject is already a matter of public record. That said, Lucius, I respect your ability to admit to wrongdoing (rather than bend over backwards to justify yourself as the innocent good guy) and to avoid promoting escalation over defending your own mistake. That says some good things about your character and I hope it works out for you.

Ah yes, we have such great historical CB's that started global wars as "Doom lmao", "For Dave!" (note that Dave's crime he was being "protected" from was espionage), and "Past grievances." To say nothing of conflicts that boil down to "you're toxic!" or smaller wars with great reasons like "you suck!" What if we look for wars where espionage was cited? In no particular order: PNU-Polar War (February 2013) - PNU uses Polar's guides. PB-NpO War (January 2011) - Polar accepts intel on VE. Great War III (March 2007) - GATO accused of spying on Pacifica and "harboring intentions of hostility." Karma War (April 2009) - OV accepts stolen screenshots. Legion-Tetris War (October 2011) - Tetris member reposts screenshots of Legion's forums. Legion-Valhalla War (August 2007) - Legion members spy on Valhalla. TPF War (December 2009) - Athens says TPF sent spies to Athens during Karma War. Eight Minute War (April 2009) - MK accuses UBD of espionage. Second Polar War (May 2006) - NAAC accused of spying on Pacifica. NPO-BDC War (July 2008) - BDC MoFA idles in Pacifican private IRC channels for a few hours. Citrus War (February 2006) - ODN spy self inserts into Pacifica. SOS Brigade-NsO War (June 2011) - NsO attempts espionage and poaching on SOS Brigade. Wolfpack War (March 2008) - Wolfpack accused of spying on IRON and one of their protectorates. These are ones I remembered or got just randomly clicking around on the wiki. Keep in mind, several of these wars happened merely on allegations, they didn't have clear screenies of gov members sponsoring this behavior. There are bound to be more examples, and as you see, they date all the way back to 2006. So can you please tell me when "back in the day" was?

I'm not going to bother quoting individual passages, but this idea that there would be any diplomatic approach to the cut and dry sponsoring of an espionage ring from the leader of an alliance is beyond obtuse. Who would you talk to? The alliance leader that did it? Why bother, their hostile intent was clear. You do not negotiate with the perpetrator, as they already made their move. There's no reason to go to their allies either, if you are not in control of TIE then you are irrelevant to this matter. TIE, through Lucius, was caught sponsoring an espionage ring. That's the beginning and end of it. War was the the only option. The actions of the Kids Next Door are irrelevant as well when you consider this was from TIE regardless of what other events occurred. TIE sponsored doing this at the same time your sphere was making an effort to smooth things over with RFI; you say you yourself were solicited for a similar cause at this same time, and instead of using it as a diplomatic chip to help your alleged cause you sat on it. TDE's running off to play with the Kids Next Door does not alter or absolve the fact that these things happened at all, even though you both would have known that this information would have been passed on when he made his intentions clear. Attempt to justify it as necessary all you want, you do nothing but admit then that attempts at moving relations from hostile to neutral were but a facade covering for these kinds of operations taking place. Which if that's the case, be not surprised from hereon out when RFI hears your words and takes them with all the substance they have here: hollow and meaningless. I had been a consistent voice of reason and tempered responses with the unending situations between COBRAsphere and RFI, something I personally offered in good faith to the constant annoyance of certain actors that might have preferred hard actions. So you can take the position that back door hostility was necessary during a time of reconciliation at your own peril, but all it does is prove those actors as correct and myself as wrong.

You know you made it when your personal flag becomes synonymous with your AA.

This is what we call a pro gamer move, espionage on a tier one can barely imagine.

Janax pls

I can't think of a better way to relieve pent up tensions!

On one hand, you stole my protest flag to use on the actual announcement. On the other hand, you used my protest flag on the actual announcement. I'll chalk that up to a victory. JOIN US NERDS.

I never even had a chance to buy any swords. ☹️

I'm sorry, which 'first point'? I don't recall saying they don't have an ideology in my first point, in fact I heavily implied there was one.

Saying you're not ideologically required to hit the biggest threat in the same sentence where you say your sphere always wanted to (and thus, did/do) because that's what you believe in no matter the cost just reinforces that it is in fact an ideological requirement. I can personally attest to that not being true on several individual alliance levels and at least one coalition scale level, if not two (it's been like eight years now), and that's just off the top of my head. Often times it really did boil down to, as you yourself said above, "defending our allies no matter the cost" even if that meant making politically questionable decisions. Decisions that further increased the external view that the sphere was unreliable with regards to being political assets. However they were viewed as reliable as a very specific kind of strategic asset: As implied above, yes. When you have a sphere that is uncompromising in moralism and will immediately swarm in exactly predictable ways, the only way to fit them into your interests it using them as cannon fodder (see: Equilibrium War) or as meat shields (see: Doom War). It also makes them targets tactically to summon their allies (again, see: Doom War, though it goes back to Dave War and before too), which coincides with being a strategic liability (per the above: politically questionable decisions).

I accept your apology.