Special Prosecution

[Mogar]

7 minutes ago, Jesse End said:

 

I guess we're supposed to allow them to become big enough to take us down before we act on it.

 

We're doing this all wrong 

You'd be waiting at least 5 years for that to occur though, it's incredibly unrealistic to pretend as though it would be possible ever, I really don't get this line of thinking at all when the disparity is so high.

[The Big Bad]

2 hours ago, New Carnoly said:

If you wanted to attack us, just do it, don't make up this BS and pretend like you're justified in your actions. 

 

This is your chance to, redress those wrongs done to you by Polaris and restore your honour.  We are just helping you get what you voted for.  NADC voted for this war, they just though they would get to chose the time and place.  Maybe if you had some steady and reliable leadership you would not be in this mess. 

[Monster]

4 hours ago, Mogar said:

Just you know, out of curiousity here, mind enlightening the rest of us as to who would be making up this coalition to take down Oculus? Over here in reality it'd require several members of Oculus to be betraying Oculus in order for anything to occur, so this entire theory of some grandiose anti oculus coalition doesn't make a whole lot of sense unless you're insinuating that someone in your own house isn't loyal.

 I don't think it's really meant to mean the whole of Oculus would be taken down. Obviously some nations wouldn't be possible to fight. It would be feasible to pin down large portions of Oculus/Polar if a large enough coalition was assembled and that's the perceived intent. Given it appeared TTK perceived itself to have won via being difficult to keep down vs Maroon 3, a larger version of that could happen.

[MaineGOP]

27 minutes ago, Monster said:

 I don't think it's really meant to mean the whole of Oculus would be taken down. Obviously some nations wouldn't be possible to fight. It would be feasible to pin down large portions of Oculus/Polar if a large enough coalition was assembled and that's the perceived intent. Given it appeared TTK perceived itself to have won via being difficult to keep down vs Maroon 3, a larger version of that could happen.

 

 

The most truth in this statement is that people are upset that TTK did so well. Especially NG

[Neo Uruk]

5 hours ago, Noctis Lucis Caelum said:

(Assuming you're speaking of the old FCC SISTER Treaty)

nobody was. go away. 

[Neo Uruk]

16 minutes ago, MaineGOP said:

 

 

The most truth in this statement is that people are upset that TTK did so well. Especially NG

that's uh

 

that's not what he said at all tho :v

Edited August 11, 2017 by Neo Uruk

[MaineGOP]

3 minutes ago, Neo Uruk said:

nobody was. go away. 

 

Except, I literally was LOL

[Neo Uruk]

no. He said TTK perceived itself to have "won"

 

which is apparently true, given how much you all beat on about how upset NG is!

[The Big Bad]

15 minutes ago, MaineGOP said:

 

 

The most truth in this statement is that people are upset that TTK did so well. Especially NG

 

Maybe I missed it but, do you really think TTK did so well?  I mean I just assumed you were saying that for the usual propaganda.  I have just never heard that from anyone outside of TTK.  I mean sure you are not as bad as say Sparta but, you seem to have done pretty much any alliance would have done beyond they really terrible ones.

[MaineGOP]

Just now, The Big Bad said:

 

Maybe I missed it but, do you really think TTK did so well?  I mean I just assumed you were saying that for the usual propaganda.  I have just never heard that from anyone outside of TTK.  I mean sure you are not as bad as say Sparta but, you seem to have done pretty much any alliance would have done beyond they really terrible ones.

 

Are you counting NG as one of the terrible ones? Because from my understanding they couldn't bear the weight of the Knights!

[EaTeMuP]

This isn't about TTK.  This is about the NADC election mandate to return to Blue and break terms.

[The Zigur]

I like how Mogar's thinking always oscillates between two wavelengths:

 

*When the side he likes is losing... CN is dying, Oculus/treaty web is strangling the world, oh the disparity blah blah blah...

*When he feels he's stronger... your existence is a casus belli, I don't like you so I can roll you, might makes right blah blah...

 

For someone who makes such dramatic claims about other parties all the time, Mogar is the least principled alliance leader I can think of, constantly mixing govt policy with his personal likes and dislikes of people.

 

Edited August 11, 2017 by Immortan Junka

[Caladin]

9 minutes ago, EaTeMuP said:

This isn't about TTK.  This is about the NADC election mandate to return to Blue and break terms.

 

There is a slight issue here, however.

 

NADC were never under terms to not return to the Blue Team. Look at the original Peace Treaty; all it requires was for NADC to vacate the Blue Team, and in no way specifies they may not return.

 

Now, I don't know why Polaris didn't implement such terms when it appears they desired them, but that is Polaris' fault, not NADC's.

[The Zigur]

1 minute ago, Caladin said:

 

There is a slight issue here, however.

 

NADC were never under terms to not return to the Blue Team. Look at the original Peace Treaty; all it requires was for NADC to vacate the Blue Team, and in no way specifies they may not return.

 

Now, I don't know why Polaris didn't implement such terms when it appears they desired them, but that is Polaris' fault, not NADC's.

 

Logically if blue team drama was a valid Casus Belli to begin with (and acknowledged by NADC by signing the peace agreement to leave blue), then why wouldn't it be again? That's just splitting hairs.

[MaineGOP]

3 minutes ago, Immortan Junka said:

 

Logically if blue team drama was a valid Casus Belli to begin with (and acknowledged by NADC by signing the peace agreement to leave blue), then why wouldn't it be again? That's just splitting hairs.

 

If such is the case, then a promise to return in an election doesn't mean they didn't plan to address it with Oculus and negotiate for a return. It's still not a CB.

[The Zigur]

1 minute ago, MaineGOP said:

 

If such is the case, then a promise to return in an election doesn't mean they didn't plan to address it with Oculus and negotiate for a return. It's still not a CB.

 

What does negotiating with Oculus have to do with it? The terms were signed between Polar and NADC.

[MaineGOP]

Just now, Immortan Junka said:

 

What does negotiating with Oculus have to do with it? The terms were signed between Polar and NADC.

 

Fine negotiate with Polar, don't be obtuse and pedantic.

[Lord Hitchcock]

15 minutes ago, Caladin said:

 

There is a slight issue here, however.

 

NADC were never under terms to not return to the Blue Team. Look at the original Peace Treaty; all it requires was for NADC to vacate the Blue Team, and in no way specifies they may not return.

 

Now, I don't know why Polaris didn't implement such terms when it appears they desired them, but that is Polaris' fault, not NADC's.

 

This is political correctiveness.

 

The very fact that they were forced off blue doesn't require much common sense to comprehend that they are not welcomed back.

[Caladin]

3 minutes ago, Lord Hitchcock said:

 

This is political correctiveness.

 

The very fact that they were forced off blue doesn't require much common sense to comprehend that they are not welcomed back.

 

And yet Polaris chose not to include that as a term. They must have had their reasons back then, and they can't change it now because they wish they had chosen otherwise.

[Jesse End]

Just now, Caladin said:

 

And yet Polaris chose not to include that as a term. They must have had their reasons back then, and they can't change it now because they wish they had chosen otherwise.

 

They probably didn't think something so simple and obvious would need to be specified.

[Caladin]

Just now, Jesse End said:

 

They probably didn't think something so simple and obvious would need to be specified.

 

Perhaps.

 

Or perhaps they choose not to implement a period of banishment, as implementing a permanent one would seem tyrannical, and implementing a temporary one would give a clear date on which NADC could return, and went with neither, in an attempt to have their cake and eat it too.

 

Either way, they didn't include it, and as such NADC is clearly not in violation of the Peace Treaty as written.

[Auctor]

The campaign itself painted returning to blue as part of a revenge plan against Polar. Even if they believed themselves technically not to have broken terms, they certainly voted on what was considered by them to be an act of hostility.

[Lord Hitchcock]

15 minutes ago, Caladin said:

 

And yet Polaris chose not to include that as a term. They must have had their reasons back then, and they can't change it now because they wish they had chosen otherwise.

 

NADC campaigned on the grounds of returning to blue with the objective of knocking off two of Polar's senators. I see no reason why they should heed their passive peace seeking.

[MaineGOP]

33 minutes ago, Caladin said:

 

Perhaps.

 

Or perhaps they choose not to implement a period of banishment, as implementing a permanent one would seem tyrannical, and implementing a temporary one would give a clear date on which NADC could return, and went with neither, in an attempt to have their cake and eat it too.

 

Either way, they didn't include it, and as such NADC is clearly not in violation of the Peace Treaty as written.

 

 

is your alliance correct and up to date on here?

[berbers]

I feel like this is the equivalent of the US invading Fiji because one dude with a " Down with the USA" sign lives there.