Imperial Decree from the New Pacific Order

[WorldConqueror]

Haha. All i have to say is Haha.

Wow, amazing response there. Thankyou.

Is that some threatening Zenith I see there? Someone needs to read their MDP web more closely.

If you are referring to me, then no, I was not threatening Zenith, I actually happen to like that alliance. I just have a problem with Rotavele's antics in this thread. If you could explain to me how any of my comments could be construed as threatening, I would appreciate it.

The rights I have are all the ones I have not voluntarily given to my alliance.

Yeah, I probably should have made that a bit clearer, what I meant was the only rights you have are those that you (and by extension your alliance) can defend, as well as those bestowed by Admin.

[pd73bassman]

I particularly like the fact that Lord Nightmare makes himself a multi during that video.

LordNightmare:

http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_d...ation_ID=293837

Said Multi created in video:

http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_d...ation_ID=306968

:lol: Not the sharpest knife in the drawer is he

[jer]

Really? Since when? The only rights you have are those you can defend.

Do you plan to attack the right of free speech? I'd love to know how. As far as I can tell for a ruler to have the ability to exercise it's right to free speech all it needs to do is to have an existing nation. If there is something you can do to prevent the existence of nations it'd be interesting to hear what it is.

Edited March 1, 2009 by Aimee Mann

[Ragashingo]

Yeah, I probably should have made that a bit clearer, what I meant was the only rights you have are those that you (and by extension your alliance) can defend, as well as those bestowed by Admin.

Sure some things can be withheld through the use of force but I doubt you'll have much luck taking away free speech.

[Vladimir]

Do you plan to attack the right of free speech? I'd love to know how. As far as I can tell for a ruler to have the ability to exercise it's right to free speech all it needs to do is to have an existing nation. If there is something you can do to prevent the existence of nations it'd be interesting to hear what it is.

This debate was settled two years ago: http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/The_Sla...national_Rights

[Ragashingo]

This debate was settled two years ago: http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/The_Sla...national_Rights

Heh. As always the fact that you wrote something on the issue means that it either has not been settled or has been settled in direct opposition to your point of view. Besides you're not even arguing the same thing as he is. Sure you can attack someone over what they say, but thats not the issue. The issue is your inability, even through war, to stop people from speaking.

Edited March 1, 2009 by Ragashingo

[jer]

This debate was settled two years ago: http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/The_Sla...national_Rights

Interesting article, although I take issue with this point:

At present there is absolutely nothing to prevent one from attacking another over something they said – they are not protected – and so the right of free speech cannot be said to exist. Likewise, if one creates an alliance, there is absolutely nothing to prevent another from immediately destroying it, and so no alliance can be said to have a right to existence.

Even with the most decimated and destroyed nation or alliance, one can still exist and one can still speak. There is nothing anyone can do to prevent expression or speech. They are basic rights and everyone is entitled to them for as long as they wish.

[Yubyubsan]

Your performance in this thread was quite ridiculous, I can only imagine how you have carried on in others.

Really? Since when? The only rights you have are those you can defend.

Not like you can take them away, either...

[Sancus]

I think it's safe to say that most of us in the community would expect a better example of leadership from a world leader. As a chief pastor of world stability and peace, I would hate to think that at no point in time did the radical approach of attempting diplomacy would ever cross the minds of our world leaders.

With all of NPO's options on the table - demanding reparations, demanding replacement of Jarhead leadership, installment of a viceroy, and all of those other things that NPO does with unmatched skill and finesse, it has instead decided to go straight to war. And what's worse? Having forgone all of the more responsible paths that a world leader would be expected to take, and acknowledging the fact that the threat that was being posed against the Order was not a threat at all, NPO has stood by its failure to set a good example for others to follow.

While others plot to take down the Order, it's important to note that until there's an actual threat and diplomacy has failed, military action is not warranted. We, the CN community know this, and had hoped that NPO of all alliances, would know this as well. From this point on, NPO has lost every bit of its credibility as a responsible alliance in the eyes of many. For many others, this has already happened long ago.

Cheers, NPO !! Enjoy your military victory. We're enjoying your political defeat.

Political defeat in the minds of the ignorant masses, or in this case few, is not a concern of ours.

[Windsor]

So let me get this straight before I continue.... since nobody can take away your right to say what you wish, then your speech is free, even though you can still suffer consequences for your free speech. Correct?

[Vladimir]

I didn't post the link to discuss the intricacies of its logic, it was simply to inform you of the error. If you want to discuss said intricacies then create a new thread and do so -- this isn't the place. That said, I'll address the two misunderstandings already noted before moving on.

Heh. As always the fact that you wrote something on the issue means that it either has not been settled or has been settled in direct opposition to your point of view. Besides you're not even arguing the same thing as he is. Sure you can attack someone over what they say, but thats not the issue. The issue is your inability, even through war, to stop people from speaking.

I wrote it two years ago, coincidently around the time that the matter was settled (it was something that came up every other day back then, and has since more or less disappeared to the dustbin of history (except for Vox's brief attempt to force a 'Bill of Rights' on us)). And it most certainly does address what he said: he is arguing that it is impossible to remove the right to free speech, while I am saying that the right to free speech doesn't exist in the first place.

Even with the most decimated and destroyed nation or alliance, one can still exist and one can still speak. There is nothing anyone can do to prevent expression or speech. They are basic rights and everyone is entitled to them for as long as they wish.

The point is that in order for something be be called a "right" you must be able to exorcize it freely and without fear (which is where things get messy) -- just because you are capable of doing something doesn't make it a right.

[Windsor]

Political defeat in the minds of the ignorant masses, or in this case few, is not a concern of ours.

Apparently not. When NPO actually decides to pick on someone at least HALF its size, that would be a bit more respected by a few of us. When's the last time that's happened, btw?

Edit: GPA doesn't count, LOL.

Edited March 1, 2009 by Windsor

[jer]

The point is that in order for something be be called a "right" you must be able to exorcize it freely and without fear (which is where things get messy) -- just because you are capable of doing something doesn't make it a right.

I am capable of speaking freely and without fear, as is any ruler in possession of a nation, so even by your own definition free speech exists.

But yes, I do not wish to de-rail this topic, so this will also be my last post in here. Good luck with the war.

[Suvorov]

Is that some threatening Zenith I see there? Someone needs to read their MDP web more closely.

I don't see us being threatened nor do I feel threatened in any way...

I have stated clearly that Rotavele's... er... strong opinion does not correspond with our position. If people have a problem with Zenith, please contact us at #zenith.

[youwish959]

Apparently not. When NPO actually decides to pick on someone at least HALF its size, that would be a bit more respected by a few of us. When's the last time that's happened, btw?

Edit: GPA doesn't count, LOL.

Perhaps people shouldnt $%&@ with the New Pacific Order unless they are willing to take these sorts of consequences.

[Cortath]

Apparently not. When NPO actually decides to pick on someone at least HALF its size, that would be a bit more respected by a few of us. When's the last time that's happened, btw?

Edit: GPA doesn't count, LOL.

Why?

We protect the Red Sphere. We protect the Red Sphere from 1 nation, from 10 nations, from 100 nations, from a thousand nations.

It doesn't help red nations who are being attacked if we have to "wait" for some marauding force to gain some nebulous critical mass.

Devildogs hurt red nations. We protect red nations. These people are Devildogs, and they want to come back.

May admin have mercy on their souls, for we shall have none.

[Bob Janova]

When NPO actually decides to pick on someone at least HALF its size, that would be a bit more respected by a few of us

NPO didn't pick this fight.

Also, there are only 5 alliances at least half their size, so you are wishing for a very boring world

[Vladimir]

Apparently not. When NPO actually decides to pick on someone at least HALF its size, that would be a bit more respected by a few of us. When's the last time that's happened, btw?

Edit: GPA doesn't count, LOL.

There only is one alliance that falls into that category. So really you're asking us, "when was the last time you attacked IRON?"

Historically, well, who else fell into that category recently, the NpO? Yeah, you wouldn't have made even more propaganda noises if we'd attacked them. MCXA? Another of our close allies. GPA? Oh, you excluded them. Erm... the Unjust Pact? Well, we didn't attack them and still get continual grief about it from your lot. I'm beginning to think you don't even want to like us. And that hurts me.

Maybe you're right. Maybe we should give complete impunity to every alliance that isn't IRON to attack us. Seems logical, and would give us more time to watch that IRON lot. They're up to something, I can feel it in my bones.

[Bob Janova]

Please, NPO, don't betray IRON?

:lol:

[Vladimir]

We make no promises. They're just so... orange. It sickens me.

Edited March 1, 2009 by Vladimir

[MCRABT]

Apparently not. When NPO actually decides to pick on someone at least HALF its size, that would be a bit more respected by a few of us. When's the last time that's happened, btw?

Edit: GPA doesn't count, LOL.

Why is size in anyway relevant to whether or not they deserve to be rolled? Are you suggesting that Jarheads should be exempt from the same social norms as everyone else simply because they are smaller? The fact of the matter is Jarheads were looking to actively harm Pacifica. It doesn't matter if they have the means to achieve it at this stage, the intent was there. Pacifica are well in their right to eliminate this threat before it becomes a substantiated problem.

It is widely accepted that it is the job of an alliance government to act in the best interest of the alliance. It would not be in the best interest of Pacifica for them to let this threat grow any larger, to allow them to do so would simply be allowing them to achieve the means of causing harm, which they have openly admitted is the purpose of their sudden influx to planet bob. Furthermore it would be a display of poor leadership not directed at preserving Pacifica's best interest.

The bottom line is if you intend to harm another alliance and get found out your are going to be punished severely for it. What really does hack me off is the morons that come into this thread and bash on Pacifica just because it is them. Your argument holds no weight and all you are displaying is a fundamental inability to understand basic reason. Either that or you are rejecting it for the simple purpose of being an ashat.

The second option seems more likely.

Edited March 1, 2009 by MCRABT

[shahenshah]

NPO has justification here, I don't know why people are crying. Read the OP and EJ's post slowly and carefully and then please comprehend it.

Which 'people' are crying? Its the same old lot that whines blindly every time you have 'NPO' mentioned somewhere in a thread . Thier Jarhead buddies will soon reach that level.

[bigwoody]

Apparently not. When NPO actually decides to pick on someone at least HALF its size, that would be a bit more respected by a few of us. When's the last time that's happened, btw?

Edit: GPA doesn't count, LOL.

Apparently you aren't kidding with the "a few of us" part, because everyone seems to be in agreement here, including the usual devil's advocates. Haven't seen this kind of universal agreement since the war on Golden Sabres.

[Jake Erics]

Apparently you aren't kidding with the "a few of us" part, because everyone seems to be in agreement here, including the usual devil's advocates. Haven't seen this kind of universal agreement since the war on Golden Sabres.

I thought you'd be sad to see such a young alliance rolled.

[Nintenderek]

Nintenderek etc... Why did you tell him?

Vox is ruining my fun, they have to be stopped.

Pssh. Take that: o/ Pacifica

Because Vox is merciful and I took mercy on his pathetic sense of sarcasm.