Reason

Find it difficult to name this war Second Unjust War because it has no link to the original in my mind beyond \m/ and Polaris. Cluster#$%# seems much more colloquial and apt.

[quote name='supercoolyellow' date='04 March 2010 - 12:12 AM' timestamp='1267679740' post='2213415'] So how do you handle members of your alliance that cause internal drama? Does the challenge system help avoid internal drama at all? [/quote] From my point of view the answer is not really. This is because those people who are loose cannons can always challenge their superiors for their positions (with a few limits) if they feel they are capable of doing their job better.

[quote name='pezstar' date='03 March 2010 - 12:09 AM' timestamp='1267593156' post='2212306'] The Minnesota area. [/quote] Mind my terrible pun if I say this is a pretty sweet deal. *Ques drumset

Where on STA's border should I sneak in to smuggl- I mean, to illegally trad- I mean, TO NOT bring twinkies in any way, shape, or form?

[quote name='Lord Brendan' date='02 March 2010 - 09:41 PM' timestamp='1267584312' post='2212137'] Couldn't you have just done a re-vote? And were it not for the nuclear waste in the air of my nation, our environment would be impeccable. We have no garbage to save: Alzadar recycles. [/quote] He made a promise and he failed. The only way to keep his word was to step down. No re-vote, even if we had done it, would validate breaking one's word. I know, on cybernations, this type of thing doesn't mean very much but I personally thought it was very honourable for him. On top of that, he probably saved the alliance he cared about from much worse consequences. Of course, he's a self-styled prick, so I won't go further on that point . Well then keep your recycles out, good sir, we have no place for hippies in our dark Sith Empire.

[quote name='Lord Brendan' date='02 March 2010 - 09:31 PM' timestamp='1267583676' post='2212123'] Perhaps a loose definition of "we", but he [i]is[/i] government. I'm a little confused regarding "The promise was the will of his alliance". You people actually wanted your leader to back himself into a corner? [/quote] I am also government, but the statements by our leadership made it clear we had lost (as if it weren't obvious enough?). Personal opinions do not make the alliance's statements false. I pray that we never resort to judging alliances by the opinions of each member, but to each his own I suppose. I don't think you understand what I mean by the 'will of the alliance' implies. We voted not to surrender. Ivan said he'd fulfill that vote or he'd step down. We did not vote on the issue of 'how to force Ivan to resign' and I find it an insult on the part of our membership to say so. Please save your garbage for another alliance.

[quote name='Obiwan' date='02 March 2010 - 07:53 PM' timestamp='1267577791' post='2211970'] Semantics, foolish. Making the promise, foolish. Still violating the heart of that promise, a stain on your "snow white" character. "No surrender" leaves you with only two options, white peace or victory. Neither was achieved. No matter how you spin it. [/quote] There were no semantics. He said he would find white peace or step down. He failed to find white peace; he stepped down. The promise was the will of his alliance and it was completely reasonable and honourable. He never violated his promise, but he kept it by stepping down. We surrendered. Spinning it? Please show me where we claimed we have not lost the war. Now will you please stop jeering us from the peanut gallery, young Jedi? Failure, though obviously one of your strong suits, is not something useful when attempting to make an argument.

[quote name='lonewolfe2015' date='01 March 2010 - 06:38 PM' timestamp='1267486922' post='2210428'] People blame Sparta for taking reps on TOOL, when they declared on Sparta and lost, they weren't significant reps if other alliances involved hadn't taken reps as well and Sparta can't control other sovereign alliances, so take it up with the other alliances. People blame Sparta for not even having taken reps yet from TOP/IRON, why don't you wait to see what happens before condemning them? [/quote] I think taking reparations from TOOL was fine but to ask them from TOP/IRON would not be. I know, obviously, terms have not been finalised yet, but the fact that it was on the table suggested to me that the government in Sparta must have approved it. Still, I suppose we'll have to wait and see before making judgement as you said.

I would argue only the alliance that is attacked deserves reparations for their damages because they are the only ones who did not choose explicitly to engage in the conflict, thus their damages were unwanted. Sparta entered the war knowing it would expect damages for its actions and I would hold them morally responsible for those damages but I would not hold CnG responsible. Therefore, while I concur CnG should get reparations for their damages, I cannot say the same for Sparta.

[quote name='Shinpah' date='01 March 2010 - 04:07 PM' timestamp='1267477836' post='2210235'] What an idiotic line; Sparta jumps in the war defending us and Athens against IRON and TOP, and when they're attacked and subsequently win against the people attacking them they've no right to reparations from the damage? [/quote] I am pretty sure he means Sparta demanding reparations from IRON and TOP: wars Sparta started against them. For more information, please see this: http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?app=blog&module=display&section=blog&blogid=196&showentry=1401 [quote] 3. TOP shall pay the following reparations: 25K tech to Sparta. 4. IRON shall pay the following reparations: 15K tech to Sparta. [/quote] It is true that Sparta has the right to impose terms as they see reasonable and TOP and IRON can refuse if they wish but his point, or so I insinuate, is that the aggressor in a war should not demand reparations of the defeated.

[quote name='Ying Yang Mafia' date='01 March 2010 - 01:42 PM' timestamp='1267469169' post='2210065'] If I am ever to be on the losing side, I will pay whatever reps are required of me. [/quote] There's no need for the empty posturing - you've already won. I will see how you and all the others act if the situation reverses and they are asked a large amount of reparations and make a judgement accordingly.

[quote name='Olaf Styke' date='01 March 2010 - 02:32 AM' timestamp='1267428934' post='2209710'] Here is the kicker: the onus is on the person MAKING the argument to prove it correct, not on the accused to prove it false. They didn't bother. Neither will I. By your logic, I think our arguments, mutually lacking proof, are equally valid and therefore this argument is null unless either one of us bothers to provide proof (though in reality, their failure to support their argument means it ceases to have any value whatsoever and I effectively win). I have no intention of doing so, seeing as the argument is null as is. [/quote] There, you answered my question after two pages of us throwing crap at one-another (no, really, I actually appreciate it). Now, I understand your point that you feel the onus lay on the OP to prove his point and I do not disagree, however, I also believe there is an onus on you to prove your point because I lack the information to make a full decision to believe you or not. I understand the OP's method was bad and he did not state his case well - thus I do not believe him - but I was wondering if you could show why you are correct so I will be inclined to believe you. Thank you.

[quote name='Olaf Styke' date='01 March 2010 - 02:15 AM' timestamp='1267427919' post='2209690'] Because I already answered it. Just because you made an accusation doesn't mean it's valid, we don't assume an argument is true if it has no proof. They've not provided sufficient proof, therefore I needn't provide any to refute it. I'm going to accuse you of being Almighty Grub because you play Cybernations, now go spend the next 20 minutes trying to prove to me you're not, and stop wasting my time. I'm going to ignore you now. [/quote] That is true, an accusation is not automatically valid because it is made. However, it is not false simply because it is made either. I told you that you provided no proof to show the claim is false. Therefore, I stated that I would like you to disprove the OP's accusation. I don't understand why you're playing semantics other than it seems like you're just trying to avoid my question which you still have not answered. @wilhelm: thank you. I will look it up. @wolfbain: that was the first decent rebuttal I've seen this entire thread. Thank you for at least arguing against the OP logically and not on fallacies.

[quote name='wilhelm the demented' date='01 March 2010 - 01:59 AM' timestamp='1267426959' post='2209671'] What's so simple is that those two things can speak for themselves. No one needs to tell you what we are doing, we don't need to defend our image because there is nothing to be ashamed of. As far as I'm concerned, everyone is capable of making an informed decision, (despite many examples to the contrary) all you have to do is be able to tell the difference between information and dribble. [/quote] That's great, but I am not a person who is in a position and knows enough about Sparta to know this automatically. I told Olaf that, as an outside observer, I wish he had responded to the OP's arguments so I could see he is right or wrong. Can you please show the evidence or the logic behind why they 'speak for themselves' or provide me somewhere to find it for myself. All I have wanted is to make a fair decision with relevant information but other members of your alliance in this thread have not bothered to even give me a shred of respect in attempting to ask for some.

[quote name='Olaf Styke' date='01 March 2010 - 02:01 AM' timestamp='1267427103' post='2209678'] So you told us that proving the conclusion was true would make the conclusion true... [/quote] Yes, I said that to prove you are right [b]you must prove it[/b] and you have failed to do so because you made no logical argument against the OP's implications. I am asking you to prove that Sparta's military record is not as poor as the OP suggests and that Sparta's foreign affairs have been honourable and not simply for the expedience of the moment. Why are you purposely avoiding this question?