Thrash Posted March 21, 2009 Report Share Posted March 21, 2009 (edited) Summary: The New World Order (NWO) requests consideration to establish a protective pact with the honorable and mighty GDA. The NWO proposes the terms below to the GDA and will consider any additional terms brought upon by the GDA to the Secretary of State.Article I: The NWO will agree to exclusively engage in technology (tech) deals at the rate of 3 million per 100 with the GDA at all times when requested by GDA and feasible to NWO. The NWO agrees in principle to organize said tech deals upon request to its Secretary of State via GDA forums and/or private messages. The NWO will give the GDA priority in its tech deals. Article II: The NWO agrees to without question or prejudice and at all times support the GDA in any military engagement or sanction against any nation or alliance foreign or domestic. Article III: The NWO agrees to allow full viewing access of its website to its GDA Ambassador which includes all NWO forums, sensitive government briefings and secure IRC communications site. Article IV: The NWO agrees without question or prejudice to follow all reasonable directives and instructions presented from the GDA. These directives shall be submitted to the NWO Secretary of State Article V: The GDA agrees to consider the NWO when feasible for its future tech deals Article VI: The GDA agrees to support the NWO diplomatically or militarily (as GDA deems fit) when it is attacked or threatened by larger alliances/nations. NWO will consult with GDA before entering into any treaties and before attempting to resolve any Foreign Affairs issues which may arise. As part of this support, the GDA agrees to allow NWO nations to place in all of its ‘about me’ section “Under Protection of the Global Democratic Alliance” Article VII: The GDA has the right to revoke this protection pact at any time and for any reason. Signed for GDA, Sippjyuice, President BacTalan, MoE Thrash, MoFA PopCap, MoIA Suzyland, MoR BastardofGod, MoD GDA Council GDA Senate Signed for NWO, Sickosmurfs Secretary of State, NWO tl;dr: An attack on NWO is an attack on GDA o/ GDA o/ NWO Looking forward to a long lasting friendship! Edited March 21, 2009 by Thrash Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balder Posted March 21, 2009 Report Share Posted March 21, 2009 This very honestly isn't meant to troll, but don't treaties usually have signatures? Anyhow, congratulations! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thrash Posted March 21, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 21, 2009 Yea, I caught the missing sigs right after posting.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auctor Posted March 21, 2009 Report Share Posted March 21, 2009 o/ GDA good choice in protectors, NWO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magister Agricolarum Posted March 21, 2009 Report Share Posted March 21, 2009 A refreshing lack of Terry Howard from this version of the New World Order. Good luck GDA and NWO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sippyjuice Posted March 21, 2009 Report Share Posted March 21, 2009 awesome protector if I do say so myself. o/ NWO o/ GDA! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balder Posted March 21, 2009 Report Share Posted March 21, 2009 There we go . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thrash Posted March 21, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 21, 2009 A refreshing lack of Terry Howard from this version of the New World Order. :lol: Now there's a name I haven't heard in a long time! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pu ali Posted March 21, 2009 Report Share Posted March 21, 2009 I look forward to our alliances working together Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sickosmurfs Posted March 21, 2009 Report Share Posted March 21, 2009 Thank you GDA for your continued support. We look forward to a long lasting and prosperous relationship. Cheers from all of us at the NWO! Sickosmurfs NWO Secretary of State Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Suttler Posted March 21, 2009 Report Share Posted March 21, 2009 Congrats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haflinger Posted March 21, 2009 Report Share Posted March 21, 2009 Nice name, guys. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=56...+world+order%22 /me headbangs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hizzy Posted March 21, 2009 Report Share Posted March 21, 2009 uhhh... is it just me, or does NWO have more of an obligation to protect GDA than vice versa? That's how this treaty reads anyways.... any clarification on this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackDragon Posted March 21, 2009 Report Share Posted March 21, 2009 So, only GDA can cancel it? Not NWO? BD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New Frontier Posted March 21, 2009 Report Share Posted March 21, 2009 This is one of the most peculiar protectorates I have ever read. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin McDonald Posted March 21, 2009 Report Share Posted March 21, 2009 uhhh... is it just me, or does NWO have more of an obligation to protect GDA than vice versa? That's how this treaty reads anyways.... any clarification on this? I also caught that. The way it's worded could leave NWO helpless in all sorts of situations, and doesn't leave a lot of room for NWO to help themselves. That said, I'm sure this treaty was signed with a good spirit in mind, and best of luck to both parties Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drai Posted March 21, 2009 Report Share Posted March 21, 2009 Best of luck to both signatories. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NuclearShawn Posted March 21, 2009 Report Share Posted March 21, 2009 (edited) This is rather sensible, despite some mentions of oddity. By coming to GDA for protection, NWO has requested their assistance. In return they have somewhat sworn fealty to GDA, while GDA has retained its complete autonomy, much in the way that is sensible for a larger alliance to have over a smaller one who has requested their protection. While it does read a bit lop-sidedly, that is a result of one alliance compensating for the risks it has undertaken by having a protectorate, while still giving the protectorate the chance to to request assistance and recieve benefits. Why on earth would a protecting alliance have any obligation to put both alliances on equal terms not of respect and honor, but of power? It's obvious where the power lies in most protectorates, and this one simply spells it out more blatantly then others. That said, best of luck to both of you Edited March 21, 2009 by NuclearShawn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New Frontier Posted March 21, 2009 Report Share Posted March 21, 2009 I think this is rather sensible, in fact. By coming to GDA for protection, NWO has requested their assistance. In return they have somewhat sworn fealty to GDA, while GDA has retained its complete autonomy, much in the way that is sensible for a larger alliance to have over a smaller one who has requested their protection.While it does read a bit lop-sidedly, that is a result of one alliance compensating for the risks it has undertaken by having a protectorate, while still giving the protectorate the chance to to request assistance and recieve benefits. Why on earth would a protecting alliance have any obligation to put both alliances on equal terms not of respect and honor, but of power? It's obvious where the power lies in most protectorates, and I think this one simply spells it out more blatantly then others. That said, best of luck to both of you I think many would rather leave their alliance unprotected than give up this much of their sovereignty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poobah Posted March 21, 2009 Report Share Posted March 21, 2009 Article VII: The GDA has the right to revoke this protection pact at any time and for any reason. This seems like the perfect way to get out of protecting an alliance if NWO is about toget rolled since there is no specified cancellation period. Regardless, good luck to both alliances Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hizzy Posted March 21, 2009 Report Share Posted March 21, 2009 I think many would rather leave their alliance unprotected than give up this much of their sovereignty. It's not so much of the sovereignty that caught my attention... it's just written in a way that pretty much removes all liability from GDA's end. Most protectorates full under some level of control of the protector, but at the same time it's the protector who's sticking his neck out for free (or, in most cases, for preferential tech deals). In this case, we have quite the opposite. I'm sure it was written in good faith, but the wording is pretty weird. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mergerberger II Posted March 21, 2009 Report Share Posted March 21, 2009 I have to say that after reading the treaty itself, I am in agreement with Hizzy. It would seem that the NWO owes the GDA more than the GDA owes the NWO. From what I can tell, the concluding two articles state that the GDA has merely the option of defending the New World Order, while in turn the New World Order has no option but to defend the GDA. It seems that the GDA has a say in how the NWO behaves in foreign affairs, as all protectors do and ought to have. However, this particular one also has a section where the NWO must come to the GDA before attempting to resolve any and all foreign affairs issues. From this, it seems that the GDA, if they wanted to, could simply come into the FA discussion about a rogue or some other nonsense which normally would not be an issue and say to the other alliance that the NWO intentionally orchestrated this attack in an attempt to bring down the third party alliance. From there, the GDA could cancel their protectorate and watch NWO get rolled. It is reminiscent of the United Socialist Alliance debacle... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hizzy Posted March 21, 2009 Report Share Posted March 21, 2009 From this, it seems that the GDA, if they wanted to, could simply come into the FA discussion about a rogue or some other nonsense which normally would not be an issue and say to the other alliance that the NWO intentionally orchestrated this attack in an attempt to bring down the third party alliance. From there, the GDA could cancel their protectorate and watch NWO get rolled. I actually can't see it playing out like that. Ya, there's a lot of wrong in the treaty, but all 3 alliances involved would have to be dumb as bricks for that to actually happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sickosmurfs Posted March 21, 2009 Report Share Posted March 21, 2009 This is rather sensible, despite some mentions of oddity. By coming to GDA for protection, NWO has requested their assistance. In return they have somewhat sworn fealty to GDA, while GDA has retained its complete autonomy, much in the way that is sensible for a larger alliance to have over a smaller one who has requested their protection.While it does read a bit lop-sidedly, that is a result of one alliance compensating for the risks it has undertaken by having a protectorate, while still giving the protectorate the chance to to request assistance and recieve benefits. Why on earth would a protecting alliance have any obligation to put both alliances on equal terms not of respect and honor, but of power? It's obvious where the power lies in most protectorates, and this one simply spells it out more blatantly then others. That said, best of luck to both of you Ya took the words out of my mouth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sickosmurfs Posted March 21, 2009 Report Share Posted March 21, 2009 I thank you all for your honest and forthright comments and words of encouragement. I wrote the draft myself and am always positive in the receipt of constructive suggestions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.