R&R-UINE Announcement

[IYIyTh]

[quote name='Piratemonkey530' timestamp='1307660132' post='2728195']
Maybe they should have. But that's our alliances responsibilty not anyone elses. If anything, RnR should have put some interest or something on the reps and not full out attack UINE. It was rather barbaric.
[/quote]

I think you're missing the point. After 6 months it became R&R's problem, because [b]you[/b] made it R&R's problem.

No if's, and's, or but's. Keve was your leader, and over the 6 month period no restitution was payed and your are now paying the price for your leaders incompetence.
You are just as responsible because you allowed this individual to lead you and by doing so ceded individual [i]"sovereignty[/i]," (I apologize, I had to do it,) to your alliance leader whom you entrusted with all affairs of your alliance.
Your unwillingness or inability to remove him is no one's problem but your own.

Barbaric. Two-three days of war for 6 months of putting up with incompetence? You're lucky R&R is a generous alliance and you're still not at war.

You can attempt to take solace while the peanut gallery contemplates whether the terms were excessive, well deserved, or fair,

but don't let that confuse you: Whether the war was warranted or not is not a point of debate: that lies solely at the feet and blame of UINE.

Everything after is a direct result of UINE's failure to initially establish reps in an appropriate matter within 6 months,
after deadlines were continuously extended and graciously let slide over a long period of time and even your allies' intervention numerous times
where you broke your promises to pay your debt fell through.

Edited June 9, 2011 by IYIyTh

[Bob Ilyani]

[quote name='IYIyTh' timestamp='1307662210' post='2728229']Your unwillingness or inability to remove him is no one's problem but your own.
[/quote]
So that makes it RnR's problem? I can understand the rationale behind going to war (I supported the action myself) but I fail to see how UINE's internal issues are jusification for doing what has been done. Was any other term aside from the reps actually necessary?

[Lusitan]

[quote name='Bob Ilyani' timestamp='1307663783' post='2728245']
So that makes it RnR's problem? I can understand the rationale behind going to war (I supported the action myself) but I fail to see how UINE's internal issues are jusification for doing what has been done. Was any other term aside from the reps actually necessary?
[/quote]

It became RnR's problem when it affected UINE's commitment of reparation payment.

[IYIyTh]

[quote name='Bob Ilyani' timestamp='1307663783' post='2728245']
So that makes it RnR's problem? I can understand the rationale behind going to war (I supported the action myself) but I fail to see how UINE's internal issues are jusification for doing what has been done. Was any other term aside from the reps actually necessary?
[/quote]

One has to ask whether those internal issues were the actual cause of the war.

It is clear that UINE certainly agrees with R&R's assessment of the actual cause, only the manner of how it should occur in the future.

My personal opinion is quite irrellivant in that I'm not a party to this conflict, I only observe that both parties to it agreed (certainly, UINE did by aquiescing to these terms and in their statements only arguing semantics of how Keve's removal should occur,) to all of the terms provided.


Who am I to infringe on either's right to determine their own cessation of hostilities ?

(Also, it's R&R.)

Edited June 10, 2011 by IYIyTh

[Bob Ilyani]

[quote name='Lusitan' timestamp='1307664319' post='2728254']
It became RnR's problem when it affected UINE's commitment of reparation payment.
[/quote]
And it stopped being their problem as soon as the reps section of the peace terms was agreed upon. Seriously, it's not like Keve is going to come back and haunt RnR after the terms are concluded. If anything, he'd never want anything to do with them again. So what, then, is RnR's rationale for their terms? They should learn the good old saying from our friend Napoleon: "Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake."

[Bob Ilyani]

[quote name='IYIyTh' timestamp='1307664609' post='2728256']
One has to ask whether those internal issues were the actual cause of the war.

It is clear that UINE certainly agrees with R&R's assessment of the actual cause, only the manner of how it should occur in the future.

My personal opinion is quite irrellivant in that I'm not a party to this conflict, I only observe that both parties to it agreed (certainly, UINE did by aquiescing to these terms and in their statements only arguing semantics of how Keve's removal should occur,) to all of the terms provided.


Who am I to infringe on either's right to determine their own cessation of hostilities ?

(Also, it's R&R.)
[/quote]
Fair enough. That being said, if UINE was in agreement, they should have implemented the changes themselves instead of giving us the impression that they were rammed down their throats.

(my autocorrect has learned to insert RnR instead of R&R, so I always mistakenly stick with it. )

[SpacingOutMan]

[quote name='Bob Ilyani' timestamp='1307664804' post='2728260']
And it stopped being their problem as soon as the reps section of the peace terms was agreed upon.
[/quote]

They agreed on reparations 6 months ago and look where that got us.

[Azaghul]

I have somewhat mixed feelings about this. I don't think R&R's intentions were necessarily bad, and as they seem to just mandate what was going to be done anyway, in practice may be inconsequential. Though it isn't any fun to have things forced upon you, good or not. I don't like the precedent it sets. I'm a fan of the idea that people should be free to do as they wish as long as they are willing to live with the consequences. If you want a bad leader as your absolute leader that is your choice, as is your choice to accept getting caught up in it if they screw up and get your alliance rolled because of it.

These terms wouldn't be as bad if they weren't permanent. If it were an issue of Keve using his power to block reform, and these terms temporarily removed his absolute power and allowed the rest of the alliance the [i]chance[/i] to implement reforms, it wouldn't be so bad. But I'm not a fan of having reforms forced on people. If they [i]want[/i] to have Keve as their absolute leader after this, they should be allowed to.

As for the issue of sovereignty, it isn't a black and white issue. But the circumstances of this war, while justifying a short war, don't necessitate such a draconian intrusion into their internal affairs. That's not to say that it is never justified in any circumstance, but only very extreme circumstances.

For example the Gremlins example. The reformed Gremlins basically forced the effective destruction of the old Ramirus led government, infringing on their "sovereignty". They didn't have any "legal" right to do it. But as they had more people, the Ramirus led government was an inactive joke, and they weren't another alliance but a larger and much more respectable body of former members reclaiming the AA as a group of individuals, I supported it. That's the only example that I can really think of where such a draconian intrusion was justified. For alliances choosing their own leader, other alliances should be content to let them decide their own leaders and live with the consequences.


(OOC: It's a better approach for the game too, people can play how they wish, there are more wars, and bad leaders provide amusement for the rest of us).

Edited June 10, 2011 by Azaghul

[IYIyTh]

[quote name='SpacingOutMan' timestamp='1307665951' post='2728272']
They agreed on reparations 6 months ago and look where that got us.
[/quote]

Someone already took my reply

[Bob Ilyani]

[quote name='SpacingOutMan' timestamp='1307665951' post='2728272']
They agreed on reparations 6 months ago and look where that got us.
[/quote]
One would think that there is a difference between the ashamed new government of UINE (the ones who had just impeached their leader [b]on their own accord[/b], mind you) and the old autocrat who was now out of a job. Bit, I digress.

[IYIyTh]

[quote name='Bob Ilyani' timestamp='1307666645' post='2728278']
One would think that there is a difference between the ashamed new government of UINE (the ones who had just impeached their leader [b]on their own accord[/b], mind you) and the old autocrat who was now out of a job. Bit, I digress.
[/quote]

I don't know, there have been quite a few replies here from UINE's own government that would make me think otherwise.

(Also, he wasn't impeached until after the war began, and that process was never completed afaik, not that it's relevant. In fact, in their public channel someone said that they would only impeach him if there was to be a ceasefire at one point.)

Besides, fool me once every day for 6 months, shame on you...

Edited June 10, 2011 by IYIyTh

[Alex987]

[quote name='Bob Ilyani' timestamp='1307666645' post='2728278']
(the ones who had just impeached their leader [b]on their own accord[/b], mind you)
[/quote]

Really? Because the UINE government has stated that they only impeached keve as a result of war.

Edit: Page 10, scroll down approximately halfway. Look for Reghar73's post, he quotes me and says that they only impeached keve after being forced by the peace agreements.

Edited June 10, 2011 by Alex987

[HeroofTime55]

[quote name='Piratemonkey530' timestamp='1307659953' post='2728192']
We didn't change our charter because the person who writes the new charter is the emperor and our emperor, keve, was pretty busy. The rest of the government does not have the authority to overrun Keve and write out the charter.
[/quote]
If he was too busy, he should have stepped aside.

If he refused to step aside, he should have been couped.

Simple as that.

[Duckz3]

I say good riddance, Get Keve out of there.

Edited June 10, 2011 by Duckz3

[SpacingOutMan]

[quote name='HeroofTime55' timestamp='1307670575' post='2728312']
If he was too busy, he should have stepped aside.

If he refused to step aside, he should have been couped.

Simple as that.
[/quote]

Admin damn it. You all have me agreeing with Hero on this point. All of this !@#$%^&* could have been prevented by UINE if their leadership wasn't too incompetent (Keve ala).

[CzarBomba]

[quote name='Azaghul' timestamp='1307666002' post='2728274']
I have somewhat mixed feelings about this. I don't think R&R's intentions were necessarily bad, and as they seem to just mandate what was going to be done anyway, in practice may be inconsequential. Though it isn't any fun to have things forced upon you, good or not. I don't like the precedent it sets. I'm a fan of the idea that people should be free to do as they wish as long as they are willing to live with the consequences. If you want a bad leader as your absolute leader that is your choice, as is your choice to accept getting caught up in it if they screw up and get your alliance rolled because of it.

These terms wouldn't be as bad if they weren't permanent. If it were an issue of Keve using his power to block reform, and these terms temporarily removed his absolute power and allowed the rest of the alliance the [i]chance[/i] to implement reforms, it wouldn't be so bad. But I'm not a fan of having reforms forced on people. If they [i]want[/i] to have Keve as their absolute leader after this, they should be allowed to.

As for the issue of sovereignty, it isn't a black and white issue. But the circumstances of this war, while justifying a short war, don't necessitate such a draconian intrusion into their internal affairs. That's not to say that it is never justified in any circumstance, but only very extreme circumstances.

For example the Gremlins example. The reformed Gremlins basically forced the effective destruction of the old Ramirus led government, infringing on their "sovereignty". They didn't have any "legal" right to do it. But as they had more people, the Ramirus led government was an inactive joke, and they weren't another alliance but a larger and much more respectable body of former members reclaiming the AA as a group of individuals, I supported it. That's the only example that I can really think of where such a draconian intrusion was justified. For alliances choosing their own leader, other alliances should be content to let them decide their own leaders and live with the consequences.


(OOC: It's a better approach for the game too, people can play how they wish, there are more wars, and bad leaders provide amusement for the rest of us).
[/quote]

This post hits the nail on the head.

Perhaps R&R had good intentions and truly do want to see improvement from UINE; I don't doubt that. I certainly don't think the terms were given with the intent of R&R establishing closer relations with UINE, or to expand their own influence within them. They simply wanted a conclusion to an issue that had been sitting unresolved for an exorbitant amount of time. They were completely justified in declaring on UINE. They did the right thing in stopping their protectorate from being jerked around.

However, NOBODY wants to be told how they should or should not run their alliance. Period. The end. It defeats the purpose of even having an alliance. A change in alliance policy should always be done internally, as said changes should reflect the opinions of that alliance's membership. It's one of the few things that actually allows alliances to be separate and unique from each other.

[dvdcchn]

[quote name='Piratemonkey530' timestamp='1307660132' post='2728195']
Maybe they should have. But that's our alliances responsibilty not anyone elses. If anything, RnR should have put some interest or something on the reps and not full out attack UINE. It was rather barbaric.
[/quote]

interest on reps! your alliance had one extension and six months later still could not pay the original ammount, you say your government was clueless, ok fair enough, he was still emperor and he signed the check for your allaince, its a shame that it bounced and we had to collect. you call it barbaric, yet it was fine to treat AiD the way you did. show we refresh on your governments behavior in talks then, read the logs if you want to discuss barbarism.

your government made countless mistakes, and blaming it all on keve was great, yet the allaince is still accountable for its emporers actions. this attack did not come out of the blue, a deadline was set, extended, and set again, your government was informed of the severity of it, yet only smiled and nodded and passed the logs over to a missing in action emperor.

now it is lesson learned, your actions have consequences, patience is not indefinate, as well as you need a line of sucession. your governments behavior was hardley civil durring this tribuations, we just called your bluff.

the only winner here is Polaris, as they now have a prime group of tech farms.

[Beauty]

Peace is always good. Keve, Be careful

[Comrade Craig]

[quote name='CzarBomba' timestamp='1307676688' post='2728404']
However, NOBODY wants to be told how they should or should not run their alliance. Period. The end. It defeats the purpose of even having an alliance. A change in alliance policy should always be done internally, as said changes should reflect the opinions of that alliance's membership. It's one of the few things that actually allows alliances to be separate and unique from each other.
[/quote]

Let's all be honest here. UINE wasn't beaten into accepting these terms. The war had barely started and they practically tripped over themselves while rushing to find a way out. This was not a war-weary group of guys who agreed simply to make the onslaught stop. If this war had been allowed to go on for a couple of weeks, I can almost guarantee that the terms of surrender would have been much different. The fact that UINE rolled over before it even sustained a real beating necessitated these harsh terms of surrender.

And furthermore, alliances aren't owed an existence. "Sovereignty" is not some handout. It is earned by adherence to principle. People who are willing to sell out their comrades before a cycle of war even ends have no right to it. I've been to ZI. I wouldn't trade that experience away for a few levels of preserved infra.

Sovereignty is prize earned through sacrifice.

-Craig

[dvdcchn]

[quote name='Comrade Craig' timestamp='1307681524' post='2728443']
Let's all be honest here. UINE wasn't beaten into accepting these terms. The war had barely started and they practically tripped over themselves while rushing to find a way out. This was not a war-weary group of guys who agreed simply to make the onslaught stop. If this war had been allowed to go on for a couple of weeks, I can almost guarantee that the terms of surrender would have been much different. The fact that UINE rolled over before it even sustained a real beating necessitated these harsh terms of surrender.

And furthermore, alliances aren't owed an existence. "Sovereignty" is not some handout. It is earned by adherence to principle. People who are willing to sell out their comrades before a cycle of war even ends have no right to it. I've been to ZI. I wouldn't trade that experience away for a few levels of preserved infra.

Sovereignty is prize earned through sacrifice.

-Craig
[/quote]

Agreed Craig, well said. (also wow its been a long time)

[Piratemonkey530]

To make a short and sweet answer to all of you respectable men and/or women I would like to say that reps are now paid, keve is out of power, and a new charter has been written and elections are in progress. Playing the blame game won't help anyone anymore.

What UINE did was wrong. I do not doubt that. We made a mistake here and yes we are the bad guys. Maybe this war was precedented. In my eyes these terms are far from harsh. You all have been saying that it is our responsibility over our Emperor but clearly the old charter did not allow much room to resolve anything without him. So yes we have a new charter which is a great thing. We will have a new leader, which is a great thing. But keep in mind that R&R didn't force anything down our throat minus the Keve ordeal. Yes, if that was warranted or not is questionable but as UINE was in need of peace we must have accepted terms for the good of UINE and also for the good of R&R.

I hope R&R is happy with the terms being met and hope we can have more friendly relations in the future with our new government.

Edited June 10, 2011 by Piratemonkey530

[CzarBomba]

[quote name='Comrade Craig' timestamp='1307681524' post='2728443']
Let's all be honest here. UINE wasn't beaten into accepting these terms. The war had barely started and they practically tripped over themselves while rushing to find a way out. This was not a war-weary group of guys who agreed simply to make the onslaught stop. If this war had been allowed to go on for a couple of weeks, I can almost guarantee that the terms of surrender would have been much different. The fact that UINE rolled over before it even sustained a real beating necessitated these harsh terms of surrender.

And furthermore, alliances aren't owed an existence. "Sovereignty" is not some handout. It is earned by adherence to principle. People who are willing to sell out their comrades before a cycle of war even ends have no right to it. I've been to ZI. I wouldn't trade that experience away for a few levels of preserved infra.

Sovereignty is prize earned through sacrifice.

-Craig
[/quote]
My point is if an alliance wants to fail, let them. What right (or care for that matter) do you have to stop it? Don't pretend like you're taking the high rode and trying to "help" them by imposing your will upon them. If they want to change they will do so. If they screw up they will pay the price, regardless of what policies they have. Don't turn this into an argument over "sovereignty". You are the one who brought that up. UINE lost their "sovereignty" the moment R&R declared war on them. The part of my post you did not quote showed my full support for this, so that is obviously not the issue. If you deny an alliance the right to make its own policies and decisions, then you deny them the right to an existence. This is not much different than imposing a viceroy. It accomplishes the same thing without the need of actually getting your hands dirty. This is where the issue lies.

The points you make are completely subjective. For example, we know nothing of each other (aside from a post or two). Do you feel the need to prove to me that you deserve your own "sovereignty"? I certainly don't feel I have anything to prove to the likes of you (no offense). Does this give us the right to impose our respective wills upon each other? How about to the point where we each instill our own respective policies upon each others' alliance? According to you it does. Suddenly, the principles my alliance's foundation are built on become yours, and yours become mine, thus defeating the purpose of either of our alliances existing.

And for the love of admin anyone who has ever attacked another nation stop giving lectures on the use of the word "sovereignty" and what it means (to them)!

Oh yeah and truly congrats on peace to both parties here! I have actually gained respect for both of your alliances through this endeavor. I just happen to think a fine line is being walked and have expressed my opinion on the matter. Good luck in the future all!

[Rush Sykes]

[quote name='Gibsonator21' timestamp='1307577728' post='2727389']
We'll just have to agree to disagree I guess. If it helps out the alliance, which everyone seems to agree it does, I see no problems with it.
[/quote]

With all due respect, there is a massive segment of people in this thread, that do not see these terms as "helping" UINE. They proved, already, that they had the ability to depose Keve any time they wanted to. How? If they didnt have that ability, already, then Keve would need to have signed these terms. So, your terms didnt help them at all, except for helping them to look like they had absolutely no backbone.

[Gibsonator21]

[quote name='Rush Sykes' timestamp='1307699947' post='2728531']
With all due respect, there is a massive segment of people in this thread, that do not see these terms as "helping" UINE. They proved, already, that they had the ability to depose Keve any time they wanted to. How? If they didnt have that ability, already, then Keve would need to have signed these terms. So, your terms didnt help them at all, except for helping them to look like they had absolutely no backbone.
[/quote]
There's also plenty of people who think the terms are helping them. Hence why in the post you quoted I said "agree to disagree" because neither of us were going to change our [u]opinions[/u]* on the matter.

And they're not my terms.

[size="1"]*They're opinions because, as of right now, no one can factually say these terms will help UINE or not; it's all speculation at this point[/size]

Edited June 10, 2011 by Gibsonator21

[Piratemonkey530]

[quote name='Gibsonator21' timestamp='1307704085' post='2728544']
There's also plenty of people who think the terms are helping them. Hence why in the post you quoted I said "agree to disagree" because neither of us were going to change our [u]opinions[/u]* on the matter.

And they're not my terms.

[size="1"]*They're opinions because, as of right now, no one can factually say these terms will help UINE or not; it's all speculation at this point[/size]
[/quote]
I agree with this. It's better to agree to disagree considering arguing will not help anyone any longer.