Justice For Traitors

[kerschbs]

If honesty was a characteristic that would be rewarded on Bob I am sure quite a few people could answer that. In your mad haste to scramble to the public stoning of the NPO you seem to have overlooked some rather obvious facts. Karma my fat Aunty.

HellAngel speaks of Gramlins style justice and if Gramlins=Karma, I would be far more comfortable, because I trust them to at least be responsible. Some of the others among you, not so much. Back stabbing scum calling other people cowards doesn't sit well with me. Most of you need to take a long hard look at yourselves and judge yourself by the very standards you seek to set.

Margrave, tactically you may well be right. Crushing the NPO makes perfect sense, beat them within an inch of their life, give them terms that beat the ones Polaris received, berate them, mock them, ridicule them... then I and many others will be coming for you, because you will be what you detested. Kicking any alliance repeatedly in the head is not good form and never will be. The thing that defines polite and honorable society (that which Karma preaches by their default official position) is how we treat everyone, not just those who it is convenient to do so.

Punishment, revenge, judgment, it all seems to make so much sense. I can tell you I didn't need a beating to learn a lesson and I certainly did not need to fund the tech spent in this war either. So now will the NPO fund the next war against whoever you cut from the herd next?

People have asked me repeatedly why I do not support Karma's cause, you need look no further than Margrave as a shining example of why. Having lived through the beating Polaris received, the crippling reps and the removal of well-loved and long serving members of our alliance, I was reminded of what I do not want to happen to others ever again. The funny thing is I didn't need the lesson, I was in an alliance that disbanded rather than accept the Hegemony and their stupid terms. Until Karma, as a whole, shows they intend to treat their prey with fairness and real justice then I will continue not to support the rubbish that gets posted here.

Whilst I have the greatest respect for both LiquidMercury and Archon, I am genuinely afraid that Pandora is out of the box and that not even their responsibility and good sense will control people seeking revenge for every slight over the past 3 years. I am encouraged by the terms issued and accepted so far, but we all know that Old Guard were largely protected by their Bloc mates on Karma's side. Lets see what happens when Valhalla, TPF, IRON and the NPO are offered terms. That is the chance to show I was wrong and I will gladly admit it if and when I am.

Here is AlmightyGrub's pro-tip. Let bygones be truly bygones when this war is over. Wipe the slate clean and start again, you will find it as refreshing as I did. It is funny when you talk to the other side, after the dust has settled, you find that most of the time you aren't really all that different.

If it is better to die on your feet than live on your knees, perhaps not forcing people to live on their knees will breed a different world?

Fantastic post.

[Gears of War]

Yes, but Karma has put itself in a bit of a spot here. They cannot place harsh terms on NPO or any of the others without being seen to be hypocritical. They cannot give out white peace either, for the reasons you have just given. They really have no option but to humiliate them, which, to be frank, is not working. NPO will bounce back after a few months solid building, courtosy of white peace, and then we shall be having this discussion all over again. In fact, amybe we shall grow that pile of dead bodies ever higher

I disagree with the bolded part. If a policeman has just finished giving a presentation to a school about avoiding violence and peaceful resolution and then on the way back to the police station is forced to shoot a criminal to prevent a murder, is he a hypocrite? I would say not.

Many Karma alliances have shown that they are merciful in victory when they could have easily imposed NPO-like terms, just look at the outcome of MK-UBD war. However this war is, or should be, about breaking the back of the bully of CN, and I have absolutely no problem imposing harsh terms to do that. And like in the example above I find no hypocrisy in saying that in general I am in favor of light merciful terms, but in this case when we are dealing with people who for years have delighting in curbstomping with the slightest provocation and then crippling their opponents with terms long after the war was over, I am in favor of harsh terms.

[RandomInterrupt]

Yes, but Karma has put itself in a bit of a spot here. They cannot place harsh terms on NPO or any of the others without being seen to be hypocritical. They cannot give out white peace either, for the reasons you have just given. They really have no option but to humiliate them, which, to be frank, is not working.

This is where you are wrong, and what prompted me and others to write in this topic. The only people who think that Karma is required to offer some sort of white peace are those who are 1. A part of the Hegemony (lol) or 2. Not paying attention to what the leaders and organizers of Karma have said and are doing. There simply is no requirement for the NPO to get out of this with a slap on the wrist. Perhaps that is what will happen, but if that is the case then it will be a failure on Karma's part, not something they are required to do.

[doctorrodders]

Im not saying that they are required to let them off lightly, I am just saying that they cannot without looking hypocritical. There's a difference, and I REALLY hope that they decide to look hypocritical

[VIdiot the Great]

Im not saying that they are required to let them off lightly, I am just saying that they cannot without looking hypocritical. There's a difference, and I REALLY hope that they decide to look hypocritical

How is that black and white world you're living in?

Might want to think about upgrading to color, you're missing a lot.

Regards,

VI

[doctorrodders]

Oh Im finding Black and White quite nice at the moment, as its the colour of text, which is pretty much how everything in CN is got across

[Roadie]

The partners of Pacifica are my target here, not Pacifica itself. They are reaping the consequences of not being able to manipulate the political situation to their favor, and while their actions were wrong, I am specifically holding the CoC's feet to the fire for their cowardice.

Watch them try and become apart of the movement, HellAngel. They'll put on the clothes and look just like everyone else, they'll "convert" to the side of the angels, and when the time comes to stand against them again we won't be able to because they will be among us.

TL;DR: They'll try to take over again but use Karma and it's alliances as cover, all the while spouting the right key-words and pro-Karma phrases.

I kindly request that you read the log of this meeting everyone says was lead by MCXA to rally the treaty partners. When you do so, you will see that TPF didn't need any encouragement to fight.

Edited May 5, 2009 by Roadie

[Vilien]

I hold no love for Pacifica, and I am still angry for what they have done to so many people during their time at the top. But I am not so blinded by rage that I would forget what I'm fighting against. I will not turn from my commitment to justice. Revenge is not justice. Peace terms should be tough, but fair. Enough bloodlust.

[Khyber]

If honesty was a characteristic that would be rewarded on Bob I am sure quite a few people could answer that. In your mad haste to scramble to the public stoning of the NPO you seem to have overlooked some rather obvious facts. Karma my fat Aunty.

HellAngel speaks of Gramlins style justice and if Gramlins=Karma, I would be far more comfortable, because I trust them to at least be responsible. Some of the others among you, not so much. Back stabbing scum calling other people cowards doesn't sit well with me. Most of you need to take a long hard look at yourselves and judge yourself by the very standards you seek to set.

Margrave, tactically you may well be right. Crushing the NPO makes perfect sense, beat them within an inch of their life, give them terms that beat the ones Polaris received, berate them, mock them, ridicule them... then I and many others will be coming for you, because you will be what you detested. Kicking any alliance repeatedly in the head is not good form and never will be. The thing that defines polite and honorable society (that which Karma preaches by their default official position) is how we treat everyone, not just those who it is convenient to do so.

Punishment, revenge, judgment, it all seems to make so much sense. I can tell you I didn't need a beating to learn a lesson and I certainly did not need to fund the tech spent in this war either. So now will the NPO fund the next war against whoever you cut from the herd next?

People have asked me repeatedly why I do not support Karma's cause, you need look no further than Margrave as a shining example of why. Having lived through the beating Polaris received, the crippling reps and the removal of well-loved and long serving members of our alliance, I was reminded of what I do not want to happen to others ever again. The funny thing is I didn't need the lesson, I was in an alliance that disbanded rather than accept the Hegemony and their stupid terms. Until Karma, as a whole, shows they intend to treat their prey with fairness and real justice then I will continue not to support the rubbish that gets posted here.

Whilst I have the greatest respect for both LiquidMercury and Archon, I am genuinely afraid that Pandora is out of the box and that not even their responsibility and good sense will control people seeking revenge for every slight over the past 3 years. I am encouraged by the terms issued and accepted so far, but we all know that Old Guard were largely protected by their Bloc mates on Karma's side. Lets see what happens when Valhalla, TPF, IRON and the NPO are offered terms. That is the chance to show I was wrong and I will gladly admit it if and when I am.

Here is AlmightyGrub's pro-tip. Let bygones be truly bygones when this war is over. Wipe the slate clean and start again, you will find it as refreshing as I did. It is funny when you talk to the other side, after the dust has settled, you find that most of the time you aren't really all that different.

If it is better to die on your feet than live on your knees, perhaps not forcing people to live on their knees will breed a different world?

I haven't finished the thread yet, but so far this is what best mirrors my beliefs. Funny how there are so many that don't even want to be labled Karma due to actions and words being uttered by some involved on the side of Karma.

[RandomInterrupt]

Im not saying that they are required to let them off lightly, I am just saying that they cannot without looking hypocritical. There's a difference, and I REALLY hope that they decide to look hypocritical

And I am saying you are wrong. It would not be hypocritical at all. Hypocritical would be to demand excessively harsh terms, such a viceroyship for years, to the NPO and all the allies that went to her defense. THAT would by hypocrisy. However something like forcing the NPO to drop their military treaties and blocs, pay some reasonable reps, and commit to a change in leadership and FA attitude would be a rough (and quickly thought up) example of reps that would be effective and removing the threat that is the NPO and not at all be hypocrisy.

[bzelger]

Oh Im finding Black and White quite nice at the moment, as its the colour of text, which is pretty much how everything in CN is got across

Ah ha! I have you now! Just look at the color of my text!

Also, I am pleased to inform you that not everyone is so limited.

[doctorrodders]

Damn it! Foiled again! And ok, Im looking at expanding my horizons, and I would apreciate it if you could point out the huge shortcommings in my arguments in a nice way

[Lackistan]

Here is AlmightyGrub's pro-tip. Let bygones be truly bygones when this war is over.

This is a smart man, and this is a fantastic idea. CN really could use a cleansing of grudges, and now more then ever is the best time to do it.

[fupresti]

This is a smart man, and this is a fantastic idea. CN really could use a cleansing of grudges, and now more then ever is the best time to do it.

You think those in the Hegemony will merely walk away from this and forget about the beatdown they got? Please. That side is merely going to work harder to avenge this loss. The cycle will merely continue.

[Electron Sponge]

Some people wouldn't be happy unless Karma knocked all their foes all the way down to ZI and held them there for months on end, or crippled them with vengeful reparations designed to hamstring recovery. Others won't be happy unless there's a white peace for all alliances involved. I don't trust either group and neither should you. They both have the same goal in mind - dominance. One through using the same method as their enemies have used, the other through a quick recovery and then back to the old game plan with a few modifications.

There is no justice in overly harsh surrender terms and there is no justice in eternal war. There is also no justice in allowing an overly aggressive hyperpower with a history of manufacturing casus belli and a concurrent history of vindictive behavior from being able to easily rearm to wash, rinse and repeat the last 3 years of alliance politics. Justice isn't in the extremes. It is in the middle. What is a just peace? It is going to be one that no one is happy with, a compromise.

There will be a heavy price for NPO to pay for peace in any resolution I'd assume. IRON will likely continue to get the stuffing beat out of it for a little while longer and then get offered a sweetheart peace treaty due to back channel negotiations none of us will ever hear about.

Want to stop the cycle? A term in any NPO peace deal should be that they are not allowed to have any treaty greater than a nonaggression pact with any alliance in perpetuity, and they should be granted a blanket nonaggression pact with all alliances at war with them under those same terms. Take away their meat shield and NPO isn't so tough. They will still be able to defend themselves but they certainly won't be starting any more curbstomps.

Those of you saying to get rid of grudges need to stop breaking into my stash. That's grownup stuff and you obviously can't handle it. You might as well tell people to stop breathing.

[Vhalen]

You know, this might have become the best thread of the war so far, inasmuch as actual discussion goes. I didn't think so after the first few pages, but I stuck it out and was pleasantly surprised.

And I am saying you are wrong. It would not be hypocritical at all. Hypocritical would be to demand excessively harsh terms, such a viceroyship for years, to the NPO and all the allies that went to her defense. THAT would by hypocrisy. However something like forcing the NPO to drop their military treaties and blocs, pay some reasonable reps, and commit to a change in leadership and FA attitude would be a rough (and quickly thought up) example of reps that would be effective and removing the threat that is the NPO and not at all be hypocrisy.

This.

Vast, endless sums of tech/money reps (the "they should pay everyone back for the past years" vein of thought) or disbandment would just serve to breed anger and resentment. So far as that goes, I think a softer touch is wise. Generally speaking, most people regard the leaders to have been at fault, and the treaties and FA attitudes to have been among the major issues. Forcing changes in these areas seems both sensible and not overly draconian.

[Cirrus]

A term in any NPO peace deal should be that they are not allowed to have any treaty greater than a nonaggression pact with any alliance in perpetuity, and they should be granted a blanket nonaggression pact with all alliances at war with them under those same terms.

This is a very good suggestion.

[Ragashingo]

To be honest, NPO are not going to be hurt. If Karma does make them hurt, then they are seen as hyporcrites. BUT if they dont make NPO hurt, then NPO are going to bounce right back, and we shall have another war in, say, 4 months (taking all bets )

In all homesty, Karma, even though they are going to win the war, is going to lose indefnatly. Either that, or they will form a new NPO, and the rest of us shall overthrow them in 6 months (again, taking all bets. Good odds for 7 months)

Just my 2 cents

If what you say comes true will the world be better or worse for it?

[doctorrodders]

To be honest, not a lot of difference. It will be a world full of violence still, and great wars will come along with increasing regularity. Depends whether you like that sort of thing

[Ragashingo]

This is a very good suggestion.

Except it isn't, for two reasons.

1. I only trust a few treaties in the game and none of them were forced. A forced treaty is just as good as no treaty.

2. A NAP with everyone might as well be a NAP with no one. We've seen good examples of people getting stuck with treaties on both sides in this war. Either they went neutral or they dropped one side. A global NAP would be like that times ten.

[der_ko]

All of the core Hegemony needs to be thoroughly beaten up. I don't really care much about reps unless the enemy is purposely sitting in peace mode to avoid punishment. Those who sit in peace mode need to give up their tech as a substitute for not taking any damage in the war.

[Ragashingo]

To be honest, not a lot of difference. It will be a world full of violence still, and great wars will come along with increasing regularity. Depends whether you like that sort of thing

What about viceroyships, holding alliances down for multiple years, E/P ZIs, etc? I'm all for a violent world and great wars, but not the things the NPO promoted so often.

[Electron Sponge]

Except it isn't, for two reasons.

1. I only trust a few treaties in the game and none of them were forced. A forced treaty is just as good as no treaty.

2. A NAP with everyone might as well be a NAP with no one. We've seen good examples of people getting stuck with treaties on both sides in this war. Either they went neutral or they dropped one side. A global NAP would be like that times ten.

1. Who cares what you trust? Really. It doesn't matter who trusts what as long as it is enforced as policy by all signatories. You can sit off by yourself and mutter into your tinfoil breath mask/balaclava combo about how that blanket NAP is really a sham. The rest of us will enjoy our time free of NPO shenanigans.

2. That's only if there are other treaties conflicting. Since NPO wouldn't be allowed to have any other treaties but nonaggression pacts there would be no conflict of interest. There would also be no attacking them because people already said they wouldn't. We're declawing them and pulling out their fangs. They've been beating people over the heads with a gigantic collection of treaties for two and a half years and a lot of people are getting tired of the same old "NPO and friends 'catch' someone doing something wrong through mysterious, not thouroughly explained means, and curbstomp them" cycle that we've been stuck in.

All it takes for this to work would be for the leaders of the different alliances to actually support it, and not be a nattering nabob of negativism like Ragashingo here. The theory behind it is sound. If you don't let NPO swing around 80-100 million in other alliances' nation strength they aren't going to be quite so brave. They'll learn to behave or if they don't then we'll revisit this discussion and start to consider the more extreme options.

[bzelger]

I think that refusing to let them sign real treaties would be limiting their ability to play the game to a greater degree than I am comfortable with. It's sort of like when they PZI people and say "you can play the game without infrastructure, we're not stopping you."

There are sound defensive policies that are beyond the realm of sportsmanship.

[Electron Sponge]

I think that refusing to let them sign real treaties would be limiting their ability to play the game to a greater degree than I am comfortable with. It's sort of like when they PZI people and say "you can play the game without infrastructure, we're not stopping you."

There are sound defensive policies that are beyond the realm of sportsmanship.

That's nonsense, it's not 'sort of like' PZI at all.

It's not only not in the same ballpark, it's not even the same sport.