Oranges

[quote name='suryanto tan' timestamp='1357822055' post='3073813'] Treaty says ...well just in case you will leave us when we need you, let us put it in writing because we still have doubt for each other. When there is no doubt, there is no need of treaty to tell you what you have to do, because we trust each other and believe they will make the right call. [/quote] Do your treaty allies know that you doubt them?

[quote name='Micheal Malone' timestamp='1357824168' post='3073824'] What you're saying... let me get this right... is that you cannot have friendship without having a treaty? And yes, the examples and things that you have stated say that NEW has no right to give Kaskus money, thereby saying your vision of the way the world works is the correct vision. The One Vision you might say... *rimshot* [/quote] No, I'm saying that a treaty which authorises such action legitimises wartime interalliance aid. There is no hidden meaning behind any of what I'm writing. If you read too deeply into things that aren't there, you're liable to fall into holes that don't exist. Let me ask you this, then. What if the tables had been reversed? What if it were the NPO that was aiding a non-allied alliance while they were at war. Would you be annoyed at this? If yes, well, double standards. If no, thank you for having unbiased principles, but you're still wrong.

[quote name='Micheal Malone' timestamp='1357823574' post='3073820'] Ahhh... Here we go. NPO begins the crusade to tell others how to run their foreign affairs. :V Look, I like you guys, I really do. I never thought for an instance though after all the blow-hard talk we've heard come out of your fearless leader that you'd... wait.... I think I have the perfect analogy. NPO is clearly in an abusive relationship with Kaskus and NEW. You want to teach NEW a lesson, so you're punching Kaskus all the while yelling "SEE WHAT YOU MADE ME DO??" And really... Brehon... man the heck up and quit turning your alliance into a snivelling bunch of yes men. [/quote] Telling others how to run their FA? I am doing no such thing. I am simply explaining how treaties work, because apparently that hasn't been made clear. I'm also pointing out the difference between legitimate and illegitimate action, using the current scenario as a case study. I am teaching, educating. The NPO is, if you had read the declaration of war, clearly sending a message to any and all parties that they need to refrain from aiding non-allied alliances who are engaged in war. We are doing this in support of our allies, the NSO. We are warning off anyone who would do as NEW did, drawing a line in the sand between acceptable and unacceptable, between legitimate and illegitimate, between order and chaos. Besides, it takes two sides for a successful aid transaction.

[quote name='suryanto tan' timestamp='1357822055' post='3073813'] Treaty is about obligation. Not about right. Treaty says you are obligated to do something for you partner. Treaty is not what grant you right to do something . Treaty says ...well just in case you will leave us when we need you, let us put it in writing. Because we still have doubt for each other. When there is no doubt, there is no need of treaty to tell you what you obligated to do. Make sense? [/quote] Yes, but aiding an alliance at war with another alliance is a clear case of support during wartime. Without the obligation formalised in a treaty, that is an unprovoked act of aggression. You may see a treaty as a sign of doubt, as being unnecessary if the bond is strong enough, but to the rest of the world it is legitimacy, it is [i]casus foederis[/i]. Without a treaty, providing aid to an alliance in wartime is an [b]illegitimate[/b] act. What you're essentially claiming is that it would be okay for any alliance, even non-allied alliances, to aid NSO, and you would not complain about that because "when there is no doubt, there is no need of treaty to tell you what you obligated to do". Right? After all, you cannot claim an exclusive principle for yourself and deny it to everyone else. Oh wait, you complained when SL aided NSO, despite them being allies, and 'obligated' to do so. Double standards much?

[quote name='MitchellBade' timestamp='1357820520' post='3073805'] And once again Kaskus brings another fail alliance crying to its big brother. Kudos Kaskus. [/quote] Yes, please ignore everything everyone has said. [quote name='suryanto tan' timestamp='1357820839' post='3073808'] Treaty outline the obligation one has for the other. It is not to be used to limit your right to do beyond what you obligated to. [/quote] Yes, if one has a treaty. Where's the Kaskus/NEW treaty?

[quote name='Hiro Nakara' timestamp='1357815842' post='3073791'] They are indeed lucky they have an ally that takes an ODoAP as serious as NPO does. I want NEW to call their bluff as well. [/quote] A man with a straight flush does not bluff. [quote name='Instr' timestamp='1357816067' post='3073792'] I am just saying it looks bad because you are shaking your fist at the wolf while hitting the donkey. If you really have a problem with NEW, why not just go declare on them instead? If this is supposed to be a veiled threat at NEW, why not actually make it veiled and use an excuse instead of looking ridiculous by attacking Kaskus, which is down to 600k NS at last check? [/quote] This question has been answered on the previous page. [quote name='Charles Stuart' timestamp='1357818083' post='3073796'] What about secret treaties? [/quote] Shhhh, you're giving away all the secrets!

[quote name='Hiro Nakara' timestamp='1357811502' post='3073772'] Don't sit there and pretend to all that you had any or have and inclination to attack NEW. Because tbh most will see it for what it is, !@#$%^&*. You attacked because your little buddies can't do the job themselves. Which considering their banter of superior numbers and having it covered very early in the war, makes me laugh even harder. [/quote] You will believe what you believe, and no amount of proof will ever change that. You will stew in your delusions and fester in your misconceptions, and no argument will ever convince you. You see what you believe to be the truth, and will never be persuaded otherwise. You have your bias, and you are welcome to it. To inability to let go of the past indicates your obsessiveness. The inability to grasp reality indicates your insanity. The inability to accept the truth indicates your paranoia. If you have nought to offer but trolling, then be silent. Your words are a waste of bandwidth and your presence a misuse of processing power. Begone, I say, and let civilised discussion resume.

[quote name='Walshington' timestamp='1357808972' post='3073765'] Actually, they didn't. -snip- [/quote] You forget the initial reasonings behind the declaration of war. For example: "Therefore, from this moment onwards, any further attempts to meddle in such a manner - namely, any further aid sent to Kaskus - will be seen as an act of war against the New Pacific Order." It would not do for the NPO to declare a war to prevent escalation or expansion of a war, only for that very declaration to achieve the same effect. This declaration is, in effect, a line in the sand. It's an effort to contain the conflict, to warn of others who may see fit to act as NEW did. Warring NEW would simply be creating the chaos which they so desire.

[quote name='shirunei' timestamp='1357808169' post='3073762'] I must admit my admiration for the Pacifican Reeducation camps nowadays. You boys sure know how to make excellent yes men. [/quote] Yes sir I agree wholeheartedly with whatever you say, you're absolutely right. Baa baa.

[quote name='Micheal Malone' timestamp='1357806881' post='3073757'] To be honest here, I applaud NEW for aiding Kaskus. This just goes to show the bond the two alliances shared still exists. Let's be real. NEW has repeatedly backed Kaskus' antics. Using the "you don't have a treaty" line is horse dung. If NPO wanted to roll, they should have just rolled in, and against NEW who did the aid-bomb. It's sad that this world has resorted to "I'm not going to hit you because I want to trigger my treaties not yours". However, as sad as it is, let's get this war started. Quit walking around on eggshells and just throw blows. [/quote] If that bond still exists, it should have been formalised in a treaty. If we allow all agreements now to exist without formal announcement to Planet Bob, then why bother having treaties at all? Anyone could do anything they want, without fear of repercussion. Or, any alliance would be able to jump into any conflict without a legitimate casus belli. Chaos would ensue, the very same chaos which NEW evidently wants to propagate. The New Pacific [b]Order[/b] will always stand against the reality or attempt of chaos.

[quote name='Isaac MatthewII' timestamp='1357799861' post='3073693'] Usually it is a declaration of war from the person that is aiding. Not from the person that is already on the bad end of the stick in a war especially when both sides were aid bombed. This is obviously more than just about the aid. [/quote] "Usually". What makes you think that anything about this situation is business as usual? But sure, read more into this. And you can keep on reading while we roll over the enemy. Armchair warriors know no better.

[quote name='Isaac MatthewII' timestamp='1357797896' post='3073656'] AHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA oh my God this is the saddest thing. [/quote] What's sad about war in a game that revolves around war? What would be truly sad would be if we did not stand by our allies in the face of such transgression.

Locked and loaded. o/ Pacifica

Brehon

To all the people pointing out mistakes in the Blue Balls article, the info I used was from the CN Wiki. If it's wrong here, it's wrong there. Go fix it.

Congratulations to all the new government in ODN o/

o/ Menotah o/ Kaskus Congratulations guys

[quote]The President is the only one who reserves the right to amend this document, and [color="#FF0000"]most[/color] post it on the Forums announcements as well as OWF upon approval.[/quote] Oh, missed that one too. By the way, it says that only the President can amend the charter, and then has to post it up after approval. Approval from whom, might I ask? I see that the President is the overall leader, but what does that mean in real specific terms? Take NPO for example, where the Emperor is the sovereign authority and has direct and complete control over all facets of the alliance.

[quote]Ministers [color="#FF0000"]are the of the[/color] alliance, and basically help run the alliance with the President. [/quote] Grammarcheck your charters before you publish them. Otherwise, welcome and good luck

Here's to a lasting relationship! o/ GATO! o/ Pacifica!