Proportionality: reps and the new NPO myth that we are "as bad as them."

[Alterego]

Its not a myth, $7 billion, 300k tech and an alliance wide 2 week beating on top of the 2 months of war already fought...nuf said.

[mykep]

The reps are not punishment, the taking of banking nations out of peacemode is not punishment either. Karma does not 'punish' or 'reward' anyone. The concepts of good and bad don't exist here. For example, gravity is one of the laws of the universe, and if you jumped off a building and killed yourself, we wouldn't say that gravity was punishing you. Karma is not punishment or retribution but simply an extended expression or consequence of natural acts.

You did something you get it in return.

[Balkan Banania]

The reps are not punishment, the taking of banking nations out of peacemode is not punishment either. Karma does not 'punish' or 'reward' anyone. The concepts of good and bad don't exist here. For example, gravity is one of the laws of the universe, and if you jumped off a building and killed yourself, we wouldn't say that gravity was punishing you. Karma is not punishment or retribution but simply an extended expression or consequence of natural acts.

You did something you get it in return.

This is getting ridiculous, since GWI all great wars are a matter of action and reaction. Specifically GWI: the really despicable IC attack on Rysonia by a LUE member (with the approval of some LUEsers at least) resulted to a war where LUE, the one viewed responsible for the IC attack was not punished, for this reason the GWII came to conclude the Karmic response towards LUE. The same can be said for GWII and III as the betrayal by GATO and Legion during GWI was just asking for a Karmic response. So form your side of view every Great War and every term is justified as it is a Karmic event, you did something you get it in return.

In my opinion, as we play a political simulator game, every Great War is about claiming and redistributing power, the one ongoing included, while for PR reasons the moral card comes in play to justify the terms, to convince the unsuspected and/or to irritate the opponents (this is really working ) so please lets leave the Karma thing out of the threads concerning this war, and if possible future wars also.

[Kristospherein]

Excellent read. I expect it won't do much because they have already set their minds to the fact that Karma are the bad guys.

An informative post to those with an open mind.

Yes. Yes they are the bad guys when they offer reps like the ones they offered. Before that, they were definitely not "bad guys."

[Yggdrazil]

The reps are not punishment, the taking of banking nations out of peacemode is not punishment either. Karma does not 'punish' or 'reward' anyone. The concepts of good and bad don't exist here. For example, gravity is one of the laws of the universe, and if you jumped off a building and killed yourself, we wouldn't say that gravity was punishing you. Karma is not punishment or retribution but simply an extended expression or consequence of natural acts.

You did something you get it in return.

You can not suspend gravity but you have no qualms about suspending logic.To equate Karma's action where choices can be made, with a natural law ( you cannot alter the result after jumping) makes you look silly.

Edited June 17, 2009 by Yggdrazil

[NoFish]

Yes. Yes they are the bad guys when they offer reps like the ones they offered. Before that, they were definitely not "bad guys."

So if we're the bad guys for imposing stiff reps, what does that make you for disbanding alliances, imposing viceroys, forcing charter re-writes, limiting nukes indefinitely, decomming wonders and kicking out and (E/P)ZIing government members? "The Worse Guys" doesn't even really seem to cover it.

I feel kind of sorry for you lot because you're just so bad at this, let me give you a tip in how to properly ask for better terms:

Wrong way: "BAAWW! These terms are too harsh! We don't deserve this! You guys are evil for doing this to us! You guys are just giving us these terms because you don't want us to accept them! You guys are all hypocrites for not giving us white peace!"

Right way: "We're sorry; what we did was wrong. If you would please just come down a bit on these reps we'll try to make amends and promise we'll never ever trouble you again."

No one's going to feel guilty about doing things to you that are not nearly as bad as what you've done in the past. Just drop your whole indignant ranting act and try to give us a reason to want to let you off easy.

[enderland]

Which is about 8.5x less then these terms.

Whats the value of an alliance?

Not much apparently.

[loannes]

Great read. I demand a sequel.

[ChairmanHal]

The unofficial association that would be eventually become Karma was first created a week or two before the war when NPO started to make aggressive moves and was simply a means of communication over the issues surrounding that aggression. Those aggressive moves eventually culminated in an attack on OV, ally of Vanguard, VE, and GOD. It was at that point that Karma was given it's name and became a war time coalition.

Which explains why I was talking to the leader of a Valhalla treaty partner in mid-March about when he though the war would start and was told perhaps a couple of weeks, the end of April at the outside...and that fact wouldn't be necessarily important, save for the fact that the individual is now a leader in Karma.

Please stop "the other big lie". It isn't relevant to whether or not NPO is guilty of genocide, owes reparations for past crimes, or is just a big meanie. Telling the truth doesn't reflect negatively on you.

Perhaps MK and the rest of C&G did come late to the party, so then what you are saying above is true as Obi Wan Kenobi would say, "from a certain point of view". It's not the entire history of the lead up to this war, not by a long shot.

[shahenshah]

Thank you for the interesting OP, Azaghul. With regards to the resulting discussion, I find myself amused by the duplicity of certain posters. When it comes to actions performed by Karma, they refuse to admit the validity of such factors as context, intent, and proportionality - arguing that all actions are equal. And yet, if this truly represents their philosophical position, how is it then that they managed to remain silent while those self same actions were being carried out by the NPO? The only logical conclusion at which one can arrive, is that their arguments are dishonest, driven solely by the desire to equate Karma with the NPO for propaganda purposes.

Funny thing how this can be easily turned around by simply switching the words at couple places.

[Chancellor Bismarck]

You've gotta be kidding me if you are trying to argue that Karma is in the right with all the reps. It's like "Batman", where Bruce Wayne tries to get revenge on his father's death, but he doesn't because that's not justice. Karma fails to realize that they just want revenge because they've gotten their poor feelings hurt over the years, and as consolation they want to "stick it to the man". The fact that they try to justify that simple fact is hilarious.

Do you expect me to feel sorry for you and all that you "went through"? I laugh in the faces of you hypocrites. You're just as bad as NPO was before. I was in GATO before, fought during GWII, and stayed afterwards, and I don't support your side whatsoever. I appealed to the NPO Senate after the war about the harshness of the reparations, and was laughed at, scorned, and made fun of by them, and I don't support your side whatsoever. You say that this is "payback" for all that they've done, and you attempt to justify it and exemplify yourselves as heroes. You're not heroes, you're hypocrites, and you're despicable.

Edited June 20, 2009 by Pacifism

[Azhrarn]

Not revenge, prevention. If revenge was being sought, the NPO would be ground into the dust and eradicated - forever. Reparations are simply one tool to help accomplish the goal of changing the balance of power between the NPO and various Karma alliances.

Edit. If the various Karma alliances are "despicable" for daring to ask reparations of the NPO for having lost an aggressive war, then what description is appropriate for the NPO, which has committed crimes orders of magnitudes greater?

Btw, I notice you're on the Red team, and your alliance seniority in M*A*S*H is only 2 days. What alliance were you in previously? Not the NPO by any chance?

Edited June 20, 2009 by Azhrarn

[Chancellor Bismarck]

Not revenge, prevention. If revenge was being sought, the NPO would be ground into the dust and eradicated - forever. Reparations are simply one tool to help accomplish the goal of changing the balance of power between the NPO and various Karma alliances.

While I agree with you to a point, I still maintain and am very sure that a main part behind the reparations was payback for the previous wars. The very name, "Karma", is basically 'what goes around comes around'. As stated in multiple posts around the forum, NPO is getting a heck of a lot higher reps because of what they have done in the past. In retrospect, IRON did not get near as many reparations as NPO, and IRON was extremely close to NPO's spot as #1. They were also very close allies, and always worked together in the past. They had nearly identical alliances, and had very near the same amounts of infrastructure, technology, and nations, and in some areas IRON even surpassed NPO. What's the difference between IRON and NPO, then, that grants them the exception from high reparations? It's not "proportional".

Edited June 20, 2009 by Pacifism

[Azhrarn]

The difference is that IRON followed, the NPO lead.

[Chancellor Bismarck]

The difference is that IRON followed, the NPO lead.

Not really. NPO may have been the figurehead publicly for the 1v, Continuum, and Initiative blocs, but they were definetly collectives, and each alliance was definetly involved. There's a reason that they were always uniform when one marched off to war, it's not like NPO just made whimsical decisions and the puppets followed.

[Azaghul]

Which explains why I was talking to the leader of a Valhalla treaty partner in mid-March about when he though the war would start and was told perhaps a couple of weeks, the end of April at the outside...and that fact wouldn't be necessarily important, save for the fact that the individual is now a leader in Karma.

Please stop "the other big lie". It isn't relevant to whether or not NPO is guilty of genocide, owes reparations for past crimes, or is just a big meanie. Telling the truth doesn't reflect negatively on you.

Perhaps MK and the rest of C&G did come late to the party, so then what you are saying above is true as Obi Wan Kenobi would say, "from a certain point of view". It's not the entire history of the lead up to this war, not by a long shot.

I was giving a history of Karma in particular, both its relatively informal and formal stages as a channel for communication a week or two before the war all the way up to a war time coalition.

Did people expect a war to happen eventually and have a rough outline of what the sides would be? Of course, it was quite clear that an independent side of the treaty web was emerging and a lot of people (correctly) expected that it wouldn't be left alone to live in peace. However in no way was there some kind of conspiracy or organized effort to make that happen.

[Azhrarn]

Not really. NPO may have been the figurehead publicly for the 1v, Continuum, and Initiative blocs, but they were definetly collectives, and each alliance was definetly involved. There's a reason that they were always uniform when one marched off to war, it's not like NPO just made whimsical decisions and the puppets followed.

I think the NPO might take issue with your characterization of them as "figureheads."

I also think your knowledge of history is severely lacking. Compare the pasts of IRON and the NPO.

Do you honestly behave, even for one moment, that posts such as yours are going to change anyone's minds?

From an earlier post in this thread:

Thank you for the interesting OP, Azaghul. With regards to the resulting discussion, I find myself amused by the duplicity of certain posters. When it comes to actions performed by Karma, they refuse to admit the validity of such factors as context, intent, and proportionality - arguing that all actions are equal. And yet, if this truly represents their philosophical position, how is it then that they managed to remain silent while those self same actions [nay, worse] were being carried out by the NPO? The only logical conclusion at which one can arrive, is that their arguments are dishonest, driven solely by the desire to equate Karma with the NPO for propaganda purposes.

Edited June 20, 2009 by Azhrarn

[Bob Janova]

Ah, Hal, about time you inserted your nonsensical rant into this thread as well. Although I see you have scaled back your ambitions to 'mid-March', which is almost correct – around the 23rd, when there was a significant danger of VE being attacked, representatives of some of the alliances that later became Karma came together to begin defensive plans. When the drama died out though those plans were left unfinished and the channels abandoned.

We've been told we were next since December 2007. Just because you heard things doesn't mean there were any plans being made; rumours are always circulated against supposed targets, usually by unaffiliated parties, and SF was clearly a semi-independent group on the web for a long time. Here is an image of the web on the 26th March:

... it doesn't take a rocket scientist to work out that SF, BLEU2 and C&G are likely to be targeted from that position.

Not only MK and C&G were 'late to the party', but also Citadel, FOK and MHA, at least. Your supposedly planned coalition would have been so small that any plans it made would have been ridiculous – and since I know that most of the leaders are not stupid, you are either making it up or you are taking things that were said in jest far too seriously.

Pacifism:

You're just as bad as NPO was before.

For the 517th time, look at the terms given to peripheral alliances in this war, and compare that to those in for example the GATO war (IAA, CSN, USN), or the NoV war (LUA). (Most of Continuum's attacks intimidated treaty partners of the target out of the war before it even started.)

(e: image link fixed)

Edited June 20, 2009 by Bob Janova

[Jipps]

Not revenge, prevention. If revenge was being sought, the NPO would be ground into the dust and eradicated - forever. Reparations are simply one tool to help accomplish the goal of changing the balance of power between the NPO and various Karma alliances.

Edit. If the various Karma alliances are "despicable" for daring to ask reparations of the NPO for having lost an aggressive war, then what description is appropriate for the NPO, which has committed crimes orders of magnitudes greater?

If the goal of reparations is prevention from power, what makes these reps any different from the reps NPO planted on GATO, MK, and others as prevention? You are using the ame exact logic NPO used in applying their terms.

At least the NPO was open about their harshness, Karma has tried to candy coat it into something good.

Thank you for the interesting OP, Azaghul. With regards to the resulting discussion, I find myself amused by the duplicity of certain posters. When it comes to actions performed by Karma, they refuse to admit the validity of such factors as context, intent, and proportionality - arguing that all actions are equal. And yet, if this truly represents their philosophical position, how is it then that they managed to remain silent while those self same actions [nay, worse] were being carried out by the NPO? The only logical conclusion at which one can arrive, is that their arguments are dishonest, driven solely by the desire to equate Karma with the NPO for propaganda purposes.

I don't remember Greenland Republic speaking out when GPA or GATO were getting rolled, where was your outpour then? The fact is that almost all of the alliances on the Karma side of the war at some point supported the actions of NPO directly or indirectly. Please don't play the hypocrisy card when it runs true for both sides.

[Chancellor Bismarck]

I think the NPO might take issue with your characterization of them as "figureheads."

I also think your knowledge of history is severely lacking. Compare the pasts of IRON and the NPO.

Do you honestly behave, even for one moment, that posts such as yours are going to change anyone's minds?

From an earlier post in this thread:

I don't think the NPO will take issue with my characterization of them as figureheads at all. I don't know where you get that from.

I also don't believe my knowledge of history is severely lacking at all. You should go back and compare their pasts. You can only pull a few examples where they deviate over the past three years.

Your earlier post is also flawed. When NPO dealt out such harsh reps, everyone did speak out. You just entered the world a little late, and didn't pay attention apparently. You weren't around for the two real great wars, you were around for two skirmishes and this is the first real great war you've been a part of. Perhaps if you read my first post:

...I appealed to the NPO Senate after the war about the harshness of the reparations, and was laughed at, scorned, and made fun of by them, and I don't support your side whatsoever...

You would've gotten the idea that we were complaining and bickering about their peace settlements three years ago.

Edited June 20, 2009 by Pacifism

[shahenshah]

The fact is that almost all of the alliances on the Karma side of the war at some point supported the actions of NPO directly or indirectly. Please don't play the hypocrisy card when it runs true for both sides.

I've always wondered what is an answer to that, I was told if you fight for Karma, all your sins are washed clean.

[Jipps]

I've always wondered what is an answer to that, I was told if you fight for Karma, all your sins are washed clean.

Forgive me father Archon for I have sinned.

[Haflinger]

We've been told we were next since December 2007.

Do you still believe NPO was leading the push to make you "next" in December?

Although I see you have scaled back your ambitions to 'mid-March', which is almost correct – around the 23rd, when there was a significant danger of VE being attacked, representatives of some of the alliances that later became Karma came together to begin defensive plans.

lol

Around March 23rd, there was significant danger of VE getting itself killed attacking the International.

Or are you referring to the supposed plans by ODN and Legion to launch a preemptive strike on VE that exist only in Xiphosis' head?

The difference is that IRON followed, the NPO lead.

No, they didn't. Remarkably, IRON was responsible for all of its actions, including attacking both GOONS and the Polars.

[Azhrarn]

If the goal of reparations is prevention from power, what makes these reps any different from the reps NPO planted on GATO, MK, and others as prevention? You are using the ame exact logic NPO used in applying their terms.

I made a specific statement, and you turned it into a universal principle. Where did I ever say that the goal of reparations is always to delay the rebuilding of an alliance? In this case reparations are being used for that purpose, but in the past the NPO has used reparations for many different reasons, although never one as benign as this one. In the case of the Legion, GATO and FAN for example, reparations were used to simultaneously rebuild the NPO while further weakening the defeated alliances - in preparation for yet further warfare.

I don't remember Greenland Republic speaking out when GPA or GATO were getting rolled, where was your outpour then? The fact is that almost all of the alliances on the Karma side of the war at some point supported the actions of NPO directly or indirectly. Please don't play the hypocrisy card when it runs true for both sides.

I don't speak for GR, only for myself. And don't presume to know where I was or what I was doing while GPA and GATO were being rolled. Perhaps you'd care to answer your own question however. Were you speaking out when GPA, GATO or countless other alliances were being rolled by the NPO?

Edited June 21, 2009 by Azhrarn

[Azhrarn]

I also don't believe my knowledge of history is severely lacking at all. You should go back and compare their pasts. You can only pull a few examples where they deviate over the past three years.

Which of course is a great argument for IRON's independence.

Your earlier post is also flawed. When NPO dealt out such harsh reps, everyone did speak out.

Everyone? Somehow I doubt that.

Perhaps if you read my first post:

Perhaps if you answered my question. Have you ever been a Pacifican?

Edited June 21, 2009 by Azhrarn