Crimson Guard Edict #5: Ultimatum to Internet Superheroes

[Jyrinx]

Clearly the reason for the war, as illustrated by the in-game declerations, is "MAIM KILL BURN."

I'll admit, that made me chuckle.

[Jipps]

So as IS says, this is actually a tech raid. Funny way to raid, but then i would not know much about raiding anyways.

Hmm, also, how does one enter a war, without a treaty? And can anyone do it, if so inclined?

Here is hoping for a swift resolution to the issue.

You see that part in your alliances charter where it says your alliance is a sovereign alliance? Well part of your freedom as a sovereign alliance is the ability to declare war. You can indeed declare war on whoever you want. A treaty is merely a promise that it is going to happen, or at least it is supposed to be.

Hope that answers your questions.

[Locke]

So as IS says, this is actually a tech raid. Funny way to raid, but then i would not know much about raiding anyways.

Hmm, also, how does one enter a war, without a treaty? And can anyone do it, if so inclined?

Here is hoping for a swift resolution to the issue.

Sorry, but when has a treaty been a necessary thing to declare a war? I rather like Tyga's view on the matter best:

Exactly. As I mentioned earlier, an alliance's treaties are not a list of those they will exclusively defend, it is a list of those they have sworn to defend. Treaties are not designed to exclude all other actions not covered by a treaty.

Anyone can do it, if so inclined. If CG has friends that want to defend them in this matter, good for them.

EDIT: *shake fist @ Jipps*

Edited August 20, 2009 by Locke

[deSouza]

Yes what is a point of a treaty? I don't really know why anyone ever signs them when we can just attacking on will. Would you like to continue to degrade your alliance?

I dont think you realize that even if there is really a treaty, will is the only thing that determines if it will or not be enforced.

\

If that is "all you needed" than why have you not declared war with the support of these "friends" of yours. Its obvious by the fact of your post it was not all you needed and that you have come here to cry and try to gain the support of others. I for one don't respect alliances that cannot handle things on their own without having the support of "friends" that they have no treaties with. As others have said in the past, pop or get off the pot. Either declare war with these friends of yours or move on and get over it.

You ignore the fact that war was already declared by IS.

It is already going on.

[Alfred von Tirpitz]

Thanks Jipps, however i meant that question more in view of accepted FA behavior at large. You know something which folks are inclined to squeal about, about bands on wagons. Agreed, here CG is the smaller party so folks rushing to their defense would mayhaps be spared the squeals.

edit: Also thanks, Locke, i see you quoted Tyga, disarmed me effectively.

This post is now redundant.

Edited August 20, 2009 by Alfred von Tirpitz

[This Charming Man]

I'm sorry, but if that's your view as a signer of the bus doctrine, why should anyone treat that like it's not a piece of toilet paper?

And why should I treat anything you have signed as anything more than a piece of toilet paper?

Because the protection offered to you in your charter is enforced.

The protection of Pink nations under the Bus Doctrine will be enforced, that's why you shouldn't treat it like it's a piece of toilet paper. But this isn't about the Bus Doctrine, or even me. Let's get back on topic.

[Buds The Man]

Good sir, have you read anything posted in this topic at all? I think it became quite clear a couple of weeks ago when RV was "raided" with CMs and air strikes what the general Planet Bob community considers a tech raid to be and what the general planet bob community considers a war to be. Tech raids do not use CMs or air strikes. If someone is using CMs and air strikes, they are either a really noobish tech raider, or they aren't tech raiding. It's that simple. So yes, she is accusing them of either DoWing with out a declaration, or tech raiding an alliance improperly, both of which are worth of reps.

DAMN I have to agree with this guy. The world has now come to an end

Honestly perhaps IS should be educated in the manor they feel is proper as they attempted to do to CAN. While two wrongs dont make a right it would be LULZY. So they have put there hand in the fire, now its time for them to get burned. I wonder if the Lesson would sink in.

Good luck CG and yes its simply because I dont like IS and want to see them burn if i could figure a way in to this war personally I would be there in a heartbeat to show IS how a tech raid is really perfomed. Sorry Locke but this is my stance and not Valhallas on this .

Edited August 20, 2009 by Buds The Man

[Guffey]

So as IS says, this is actually a tech raid. Funny way to raid, but then i would not know much about raiding anyways.

Hmm, also, how does one enter a war, without a treaty? And can anyone do it, if so inclined?

Here is hoping for a swift resolution to the issue.

one enters a war without a treaty by having freinds that will support you despite not having a treaty. Then attacking the alliance attacking them. Its actually quite simple.

Anyone can do if so inclined i believe. Avalon will enter a war if our friends are attacked, and we deem they are on the just and honorable side. We don't need a treaty to attack.

[Gn0xious Jr]

With Tech Raiding, I think 2 GAs and peace is enough... especially when you're looking to get some tech (and possibly some cash) with no retaliation... spying, using navy blockades, firing CMs and doing air-raids is just overkill for a Tech Raid, in my opinion.

If this is how IS raids, then there are only a few options that I see...

CG takes peace and rebuilds, no reps

IS pays reps, CG takes peace and rebuilds

CG declares war on IS for the act of aggression (spying, blockades, CMs, air-raids)

Either way good luck to all involved.

[Jyrinx]

You see that part in your alliances charter where it says your alliance is a sovereign alliance? Well part of your freedom as a sovereign alliance is the ability to declare war. You can indeed declare war on whoever you want. A treaty is merely a promise that it is going to happen, or at least it is supposed to be.

Hope that answers your questions.

I highly doubt anybody is saying that IS does not have the right to declare war (if they are saying that, then I missed it). But declaring war on CG without just cause is still a poor show and should be condemned.

If IS doesn't care what we as the world community think, then they may ignore us at their pleasure (or peril).

[Aeternos Astramora]

I hope IS gets a beatdown for this. The Coalition? Perhaps those without treaty ties, NSO comes to mind? I know NSO has a disdain for my pink alliances.

[King DrunkWino]

And why should I treat anything you have signed as anything more than a piece of toilet paper?

Because the protection offered to you in your charter is enforced.

What you're saying is "I honestly don't care enough about the doctrine to follow it's own definition of a tech raid and I signed the thing," and that people should do what you say and not as you do or else.

Kind of a, well, dickish way to go about it.

[Puppet Master]

You ignore the fact that war was already declared by IS.

It is already going on.

This made me chuckle.

Therefore, my ultimatum to Internet Superheroes is as follows: pay us 105m in reps or face retribution from Crimson Guard and her friends.

If war is already declared than have your friends attack IS and start fighting back and make them pay reps. You are not going to get an alliance to agree to pay reps when they are WINNING the "war". Until these friends come out and the fireworks starts all I see here is an alliance that got attacked and is losing and has come to find public support by crying to the larger masses. Maybe if you had signed treaties with these "friends" of your you would not even be in this situation.

[Buds The Man]

I highly doubt anybody is saying that IS does not have the right to declare war (if they are saying that, then I missed it). But declaring war on CG without just cause is still a poor show and should be condemned.

If IS doesn't care what we as the world community think, then they may ignore us at their pleasure (or peril).

If they are going to declare then declare dont claim its a tech raid and blow it off. Spying of anykind has been considered an act of war not an act of raiding, CMs and air attacks are not needed in a tech raid. If IS wanted to declare war, do it, post a DOW for the LULZ what ever. I believe some may be outraged but not nearly to the extent that they are now. I have no problem with a CB of We dont like you so take this. Its honest and better than many CBs ive seen in my time here on Bob.

[Poobah]

Please, NSO, excuse me if I'm speaking out of turn here, but I don't think they published the doctrine in order that they become Cyberverse World Police. It's really grinding on me that every war that pops up someone has to mention the possibility of NSO fighting for all that is just.

Good luck in achieving what you deserve Crimson Guard. I doubt it will be easy though.

I don't expect NSO to become the world police. What I see is an unjust war and an opportunity for Ivan to invoke this doctrine if he so chooses.

[Kroknia]

Good luck deSouza. Sad day to be pink(I remember when we were lolpink, but lolpink stood for something). Sad day to see Xander go further into his already declining reputation.

[deSouza]

If war is already declared than have your friends attack IS and start fighting back and make them pay reps. You are not going to get an alliance to agree to pay reps when they are WINNING the "war". Until these friends come out and the fireworks starts all I see here is an alliance that got attacked and is losing and has come to find public support by crying to the larger masses. Maybe if you had signed treaties with these "friends" of your you would not even be in this situation.

I dont know how your alliance operates concerning warfare, but I usually only attack nations near update.

Makes sense you know.

Meanwhile, we could avoid all that pixel clashing with reps being paid.

Not that you are involved in any way, though, so it really does not concern you directly.

With saying this, I really have to go.

Catch up on this thread later.

[Jyrinx]

I hope IS gets a beatdown for this. The Coalition? Perhaps those without treaty ties, NSO comes to mind? I know NSO has a disdain for my pink alliances.

I think everyone missed the point with respect to the Moldavi Doctrine. The NSO is not the world's police force and they have no obligation to come in an fight for everyone that appears to be wronged. They reserve the right to activate a universal, natural oA/oD whenever they see fit due to their principles being at stake or due to what they see as being a just intervention. Whether or not they decide to do so is up to them, but they are not obligated to. People should stop asking if NSO will come to CG's defense; if they want to, they'll let everyone know.

But the bigger point here is that EVERY ALLIANCE has this universal, natural oA/oD that was set forth in the Moldavi Doctrine. If MK, The Legion, Sparta, TOP, TSO, Argent, <insert more random alliances here>, etc. feel that CG has been greatly wronged and that they should come to the defense of CG, they can. With that in mind, why are people in this thread constantly asking if the NSO will get involved? Why not MCXA? Or OBR? They're just as disconnected from the situation as NSO is.

[MCRABT]

I struggle to care about this situation, it is an alliances responsibility to offer it's members security whether it be from political backing, brute military force or both. If CG doesn't have the ability to defend itself it is it's own fault for not playing the game properly in which case it is responsible for this attack. If they do have the ability to defend themselves then they should just get on with it and flatten IS. Public diplomacy is useless.

Edited August 20, 2009 by MCRABT

[Heyman]

at OP: Hurrdurricane mis-spoke, I'd trust Sakura over him. Sakura is a triumvir with a brain and whatnot, comparable to any triumvir in a top alliance. If one of MHA's triumvirs told you they were tech raiding you, my guess is that you'd believe it. This is really nothing more than a tech raid.

OK! Let's trust Sakura!

[23:40] <Sakura> Do you think I did this for tech?

[Vizard]

Show no mercy Crimson Guard. o/

[Proko]

I have a question for Internet Superheroes regarding this situation:

What is the problem with refunding the tech you stole?

It never belonged to you until this coordinated strike against the Crimson Guard, and it had previously belonged to Crimson Guard. As far as I can possibly understand, the tech would still belong to Crimson Guard if not for this tech raid. I am beyond understanding why good-nature is not part of your diplomacy here; the tech is not yours, but you are not returning it. It is not honorable, nor is it just, and the total sum garnered by this expedition cannot be all that high.

Additionally, to the complaints that this thread exists and that Francesca took it public, I disagree, and believe a public thread when under unjustified attack to be a rather reasonable decision. I cannot say I would do any differently.

[rudekker]

Pink is immoral.

You go, CG.

[Puppet Master]

I dont know how your alliance operates concerning warfare, but I usually only attack nations near update.

Makes sense you know.

Meanwhile, we could avoid all that pixel clashing with reps being paid.

Not that you are involved in any way, though, so it really does not concern you directly.

With saying this, I really have to go.

Catch up on this thread later.

LOL this does not concern ANY of us. All this concerns is CG, IS, Rebel Virginia, and IS treaty partners. You forget that YOU in essence have no treaties to speak of and so none of us are involved in this situation yet you have come on here to make this a public matter to try to win public support. And again, why should they pay reps when they are winning the war? If you were winning than there would not be a problem and your post would be completely pointless. I don't know how your alliance operates concerning warfare, but you may actually try WINNING the war before demanding reps from the alliance.

On a lighter note, many of you have said that alliances don't need to have treaties to enter a war. This is 100% true, but i would like to also point out that alliances don't need to post a DoW to declare war on a nation or to do attacks. Is it the right and correct thing to do? Yes, but IS choose to not post a DoW and as such they are deserving of losing face in the international community. Just as CG is deserving of losing face in the international community for having made this post and having "alliances", which they have no treaties with, back them up and not being able to handle this matter themselves.

[AnCapistan]

Alright so who is TC?

All I could think of was The Coalition