An Announcement

[Vilien]

It'll be fun to see what happens when the NPO finally gets their peace terms.

Also I fail to see how morals are manifest in opportunists.

This is not opportunism. We are simply stabilizing the sphere.

[Blacky]

The Moldavi Doctrine is one of the policies of the New Pacific Order which I disagreed with most of all.

What arrogance? To say they could own a sphere of which there was a finite amount. To say that no other alliance could share the sphere or run a senator on the sphere. To say that as the sole alliance on the red sphere they had the power to attack any outside alliance using the justification that "you attacked a red nation".

It was one of many examples of their gross misuse of power. And now that the power is being taken away from them by the brave Karma warriors it's good to see the ideas behind this doctrine fading away.

[naamah]

I really dont care about the red sphere one way or another. That said alliances on red make for some good drama on both sides of the issue, so please carry on...

Edit: almost forgot the popcorn!

Edited June 10, 2009 by naamah

[RandomInterrupt]

This is not opportunism. We are simply stabilizing the sphere.

The fact that the NPO happens to have its hands tied in a global war has nothing to do with it then?

[jimbacher]

Yah, I gotta agree with this.

Not that I agree with the Moldavi Doctrine, but seriously, that is for NPO to decide and change, not you. And whether you say it is null and void or not, until NPO says otherwise, it still exist.

Have fun. B)

I'm gonna have to agree with this. Until I see that NPO has gotten terms(which they haven't unless I'm mistaken) which include this doctrine becoming null and void(which they would probably still accept), it doesn't mean squat.

[Vilien]

The fact that the NPO happens to have its hands tied in a global war has nothing to do with it then?

How can you question my motives? I act with only the stability of Cybernations at heart. The fact that the leading alliance on said sphere has no power to control it has nothing to do with this action.

[Kill Joy]

While I've never been a big fan of the Moldavi Doctrine, it will be interesting too see how this develops, especially seeing as there are several new red AAs. Tho IMO would have been a bit classier to "declare" the end of the MD after NPO got peace terms, where as now you are clearly attempting to take advantage of a situation while deeming moral superiority on the issue. As far as your DoE congrats and GL!

[Dogestan]

interesting.............................

[Coven]

How can you question my motives? I act with only the stability of Cybernations at heart. The fact that the leading alliance on said sphere has no power to control it has nothing to do with this action.

Oh, the irony.

Also, in terms that Pacifica would understand, do something about it.

[Vilien]

Oh, the irony.

It is ironic, but not in the way that you think.

[jimbacher]

How can you question my motives? I act with only the stability of Cybernations at heart. The fact that the leading alliance on said sphere has no power to control it has nothing to do with this action.

NPO acted with their version of the stability of Cybernations at heart too, and yet their are all these alliances questioning said motives . How dare somebody question your motives, that must be just as bad as getting beat on by 5000 nations.

[Coven]

Haha, seriously?

You say you didn't do this just because NPO is in a situation where they cannot stop you, you instead did it from the bottom of your heart. Yet earlier you blatantly said Also, in terms that Pacifica would understand, do something about it.

Yah, right, ok.

[Dan123123]

It is no one's right to implement a policy that suffocates the liberties of other men.

Define liberty.

-----

So, essentially, the Moralist Front wishes to replace one moral standard (that of the New Pacific Order) with some other as-of-yet undefined moral standard (that of this moralist front)? Despite claims to the contrary, the actions of this organization lend credence to this argument.

Ironically, your moral standard will benefit you, whereas the New Pacific Order's moral standard befitted them. I wonder how this moralist front will manage to enforce and uphold their ideals-- when they define them that is--. Ironically, this moralist front will need to use force to defend and uphold their ideals, yet it decries the use of force to impose 'unfair' doctrines.

Moralism has won a major victory. But we cannot rest easily, for such a sleep would be difficult indeed. We have acted in defense of these principles: self-determination, liberty, and honor; and we cannot let them out of our sight now. I vow now to defend these principles for which we have already fought so dearly. I ask the world to do the same.

Your moralism did not fight in this war. The vast majority of the alliances in this war were not fighting for this moral crusade, which is of course, as of now, is undefined in its goals. Most fought to defend their allies; others fought to usurp a powerful hegemony; others simply wanted to stake their claim in a global conflict. They fought for their morals, not the Moralist Front's morals. (I will concede their morals and the Moralist Fronts's may be similar or the same, but that cannot be known until after the proposed international conference).

This 'moralism' has yet to be defined. Therefore, it is an empty word.

More telling is this proposed international congress. Only those who wish to become full fledged members (and support this movement) of this organization may vote on its charter; clearly this organization wishes to impose some type of international standard on this planet (as evidenced by its decreeing the dissolution of the Moldavi Doctrine). The act of unilaterally declaring null the doctrines of foreign entities in the name of freedom[sic](despite having a minor role in creating the conditions that made this act possible) makes me question the true motivations of the creator of this moralist front. (A power play masked by moral righteousness-- inconceivable!) The Moralist Front has clearly shown a willingness to intervene in the affairs and policies of other alliances when the opportunity arises, regardless of their own role in creating those conditions. Good luck with that.

Edited June 10, 2009 by Dan123123

[Vilien]

Define liberty.

1. freedom from arbitrary or despotic government or control.

2. freedom from external or foreign rule; independence.

3. freedom from control, interference, obligation, restriction, hampering conditions, etc.; power or right of doing, thinking, speaking, etc., according to choice.

So, essentially, the Moralist Front wishes to replace one moral standard (that of the New Pacific Order) with some other as-of-yet undefined moral standard (that of this moralist front)? Despite claims to the contrary, the actions of this organization lend credence to this argument.

Pacifica was not a moral standard, nor did it claim to be. The point of the Moralist Front is not to dictate a moral standard. It is to create an alliance that acts based on the simple principles of self-determination, liberty, and honor.

Ironically, your moral standard will benefit you, whereas the New Pacific Order's moral standard befitted them. I wonder how this moralist front will manage to enforce and uphold their ideals-- when they define them that is--. Ironically, this moralist front will need to use force to defend and uphold their ideals, yet it decries the use of force to impose 'unfair' doctrines.

I have yet to reap this intangible benefits that supposedly come from upholding a higher standard of action. I doubt that I ever will. It is far easier and far more convenient to act without regard to right and wrong.

Your moralism did not fight in this war. The vast majority of the alliances in this war were not fighting for this moral crusade, which is of course, as of now, is undefined in its goals. Most fought to defend their allies; others fought to usurp a powerful hegemony; others simply wanted to stake their claim in a global conflict. They fought for their morals, not the Moralist Front's morals. (I will concede their morals and the Moralist Fronts's may be similar or the same, but that cannot be known until after the proposed international conference).

I fought in this war, and I understand that a great number of people did so as well because they were tired of the curbstomp, the practices of permanent and eternal zero infrastructure, and the stifling of dissent in any form by Pacifica and her allies. I understand that not all people fought for the same reasons, and I do not expect all the Karma alliances to agree on every issue.

This 'moralism' has yet to be defined. Therefore, it is an empty word.

Read the original post, look for key principles, look them up in your preferred dictionary. Infer at will.

More telling is this proposed international congress. Only those who wish to become full fledged members (and support this movement) of this organization may vote on its charter; clearly this organization wishes to impose some type of international standard on this planet (as evidenced by its decreeing the dissolution of the Moldavi Doctrine). The act of unilaterally declaring null the doctrines of foreign entities in the name of freedom[sic](despite having a minor role in creating the conditions that made this act possible) makes me question the true motivations of the creator of this moralist front. (A power play masked by moral righteousness-- inconceivable!) The Moralist Front has clearly shown a willingness to intervene in the affairs and policies of other alliances when the opportunity arises, whether or not this front brought about the necessary conditions. Good luck with that.

This is not international in the sense of inter-alliance. There is no way to enforce an international standard of behavior, nor do I desire to. As has been said before, it is the job of every man to act according to his own conscience. When I see a violation of the rights of another, I will do the best that I can to right whatever wrongs have occured. The Moldavi Doctrine is an example of the consistent arrogance and "might makes right" bravado that is the New Pacific Order. I have had enough of it, and I have declared it to be null and void. This is simple enough.

As to the "power play" comment, I expect to gain nothing from this action. Upholding the dignity and rights of others is nothing to be ashamed of, and it is worthy in and of itself as a reason to act. I have chosen to do so.

[jer]

The fact that the NPO happens to have its hands tied in a global war has nothing to do with it then?

Trying this when the NPO is at full power would be signing your own death warrant... if you really want to succeed with such a project you have no choice but to wait until they are weakened. One man's opportunism and cowardice is another man's timing and strategy.

[Rebel Virginia]

The Moldavi Doctrine has been void since the noCB War. Ever hear of the Rebel Virginia Doctrine? Yes, that's right. I saved the world. Singlehandedly. With my single hand tied behind my back.

[Vilien]

The Moldavi Doctrine has been void since the noCB War. Ever hear of the Rebel Virginia Doctrine? Yes, that's right. I saved the world. Singlehandedly. With my single hand tied behind my back.

Would you care to provide a link to this announcement?

[King DrunkWino]

Would you care to provide a link to this announcement?

Here you go... http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=31199

[Vilien]

Well, looks like it's been done. It can't hurt to say it a second time, though.

[kingzog]

I HEREBY DECLARE that the Moldavi Doctrine is null and void.

The RV Doctrine aside, I beat you to it, and at a time when it was just a little bit more of a risk.

[willirica]

I dont mean to be harsh here vilien but are you !@#$@#$ kidding me???? After all that !@#$ you gave me for raiding red and how the NPO's doctrines must be respected?

[Master Hakai]

IT'S ALL OVER!!!

[Neo Uruk]

I dont mean to be harsh here vilien but are you !@#$@#$ kidding me???? After all that !@#$ you gave me for raiding red and how the NPO's doctrines must be respected?

I sense a RAAAAAAAAAAAGE argument coming on...

[Vilien]

I dont mean to be harsh here vilien but are you !@#$@#$ kidding me???? After all that !@#$ you gave me for raiding red and how the NPO's doctrines must be respected?

I gave you !@#$ for bragging about raiding an unaligned nation. Go back and read the thread again.

[Melchior]

Whatever makes your boat float. Unfortunately, unless forced to demolish that particular Doctrine upon exit from the current war, The New Pacific Order will demolish you once it has time to do so.