Crimson Guard Edict #5: Ultimatum to Internet Superheroes

[Aeternos Astramora]

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 they can, and the whole point of the Moldavi Doctrine announcement was to inform everybody that they are ready to use their oA/oD on anybody for any reason at anytime. It's not just like Argent's legal ability to use our sovereignty to declare war without any treaty obligations since, while it is our right, it is generally understood that we will not do so excepting extreme circumstances. NSO has the same right, but it is generally understood that they are not restricting themselves to only extreme cases, or else, what was the point of the doctrine?

[Jyrinx]

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.

Most of the flak is being directed at IS's handling of the situation, not really CG (although if I were CG I would've made sure to always had a protector at all times, and a powerful one at that).

Again, IS can do whatever they please, but it is hardly wrong for us as denizens of Digiterra to condemn them and state that their conduct is reprehensible. They can ignore us if they'd like, but alienating the world and completely ignoring PR has its own consequences.

[kulomascovia]

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.

I think that IS is losing face not because they attacked without a DoW but because they attacked an alliance without a CB (and as Sakura has implied, this is not a tech raid).

EDIT: Also, I don't think CG will lose face if it brings in allies with no treaty. They are justified in doing so because they are defending their alliance.

Edited August 20, 2009 by kulomascovia

[Locke]

Alright so who is TC?

All I could think of was The Coalition

You'd be right.

[Jyrinx]

But they can, and the whole point of the Moldavi Doctrine announcement was to inform everybody that they are ready to use their oA/oD on anybody for any reason at anytime. It's not just like Argent's legal ability to use our sovereignty to declare war without any treaty obligations since, while it is our right, it is generally understood that we will not do so excepting extreme circumstances. NSO has the same right, but it is generally understood that they are not restricting themselves to only extreme cases, or else, what was the point of the doctrine?

I am hesitant to appear to speak for NSO, but I thought the Doctrine's purpose was to set into motion discourse and thought to hopefully get Planet Bob as a whole to fully accept the principle of a universal, natural oA/oD and for other alliances to start exercising that natural right too.

NSO gov can comment on NSO's stance on this issue and the applicability of the doctrine to this situation for them. I just think it's silly for them to have to do that, but that's just me *shrugs*

Edited August 20, 2009 by Jyrinx

[This Charming Man]

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.

Telling me how to 'properly' follow a doctrine I signed is kind of a, well, dickish thing to do.

Edited August 20, 2009 by This Charming Man

[Jipps]

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.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

NSO has the same right, but it is generally understood that they are not restricting themselves to only extreme cases, or else, what was the point of the doctrine?

There pretty much was no point.

Alright so who is TC?

All I could think of was The Coalition

I echo this man's question.

Edit: Thank you Locke.

Edited August 20, 2009 by Jipps

[AnCapistan]

You'd be right.

Alright then I dont think they'll be much of a problem. While TC has around twice the strength of IS, IS has twice the nukes and a larger ANS. And if they are a problem well then IS can just call in here treaty partners if needed.

Good luck CG

[HeinousOne]

But they can, and the whole point of the Moldavi Doctrine announcement was to inform everybody that they are ready to use their oA/oD on anybody for any reason at anytime. It's not just like Argent's legal ability to use our sovereignty to declare war without any treaty obligations since, while it is our right, it is generally understood that we will not do so excepting extreme circumstances. NSO has the same right, but it is generally understood that they are not restricting themselves to only extreme cases, or else, what was the point of the doctrine?

You are dangerously close to walking the line of telling NSO that they are now responsible for policing all matters due to the Moldavi Doctrine. The Moldavi Doctrine is about showing that every alliance has that right and that they are not afraid to employ that right when They feel it necessary. You are seemingly trying to twist that into a Doctrine that makes NSO jump into any conflict whenever such comes into public discussion. If you are so inflamed about the situation then talk with your alliance and YOU do something about it instead of pointing at NSO and telling them to do something about it.

That is pretty weak.

[Locke]

I think that IS is losing face not because they attacked without a DoW but because they attacked an alliance without a CB (and as Sakura has implied, this is not a tech raid).

Honestly, not having a better CB than "because we want to" isn't as troublesome as trying to dress the war up as something it isn't. Yes, they are attacking CG nations and gaining tech. It's a tech raid in the most technical definition of the term. But it's also a coordinated attack upon multiple CG nations by multiple IS nations using an update blitz, complete with nuke spying and naval blockades-say what you will about CM's and air attacks removing tanks, fine, but there's no good justification for those in a proper tech raid-all of which smacks of the tactics of, guess what, an alliance war. And alliance wars should have an accompanying DoW, if not on the OWF then at least privately to members of CG. Something. Anything. At least not having a real CB isn't lying, unlike attempts to make this "just a tech raid."

[King DrunkWino]

Telling me how to 'properly' follow a doctrine I signed is kind of a, well, dickish thing to do.

How do you get there? You tell people that if they use CM's, air attacks, and spy ops in raids on certain nations, you're gonna go after them while at the same time using CM's, and air attacks in your own raids.

Do you see the hypocritical dickishness yet?

[tamerlane]

What kinds of mediocrity will this thread roll out with next?

[cookavich]

It is my sincere hope that this turns into another war where another pink alliance has to apologize for being tools. Those are great.

[Jipps]

You are dangerously close to walking the line of telling NSO that they are now responsible for policing all matters due to the Moldavi Doctrine. The Moldavi Doctrine is about showing that every alliance has that right and that they are not afraid to employ that right when They feel it necessary.

Thank you Mr. Moldavi for showing us all that we do indeed have the basic right to declare war whenever we want, we are no longer blinded by the shade of darkness that once covered our eyes of morality now that NSO has come to save us.

The fact that NSO feels its their responsibility to show us our own rights makes them look a lot like a world police.

[Comrade Goby]

Honestly, not having a better CB than "because we want to" isn't as troublesome as trying to dress the war up as something it isn't. Yes, they are attacking CG nations and gaining tech. It's a tech raid in the most technical definition of the term. But it's also a coordinated attack upon multiple CG nations by multiple IS nations using an update blitz, complete with nuke spying and naval blockades-say what you will about CM's and air attacks removing tanks, fine, but there's no good justification for those in a proper tech raid-all of which smacks of the tactics of, guess what, an alliance war. And alliance wars should have an accompanying DoW, if not on the OWF then at least privately to members of CG. Something. Anything. At least not having a real CB isn't lying, unlike attempts to make this "just a tech raid."

Sorry but I didn't realize it was CN law to inform the OWF that you are declaring a war.

[tamerlane]

Thank you Mr. Moldavi for showing us all that we do indeed have the basic right to declare war whenever we want, we are no longer blinded by the shade of darkness that once covered our eyes of morality now that NSO has come to save us.

The fact that NSO feels its their responsibility to show us our own rights makes them look a lot like a world police.

Actually, it makes those who still find it necessary to come here and baw about the legitimacy or illegitimacy of cbs look like a bunch of whiny pansies.

Edited August 20, 2009 by tamerlane

[HeinousOne]

Thank you Mr. Moldavi for showing us all that we do indeed have the basic right to declare war whenever we want, we are no longer blinded by the shade of darkness that once covered our eyes of morality now that NSO has come to save us.

The fact that NSO feels its their responsibility to show us our own rights makes them look a lot like a world police.

The fact that people are pointing at NSO to jump in to this fight while at the same time condemning this fight actually gives Moldavi's words credence. It just seems others are afraid to act upon their convictions. I havn't seen any NSO statements about this situation at all so I don't see why people are pointing to them publically and saying NSO should be involved.

I understand why you may not like the idea of the Unknown this adds to any equation put forth before starting a war and that you are going to make statements like the one above to try and undermine any such efforts but since when does making an announcement make you the world police? They simply stated what they believe in and what they believe all alliances have the right to do. So now you are saying that alliances cannot state their beliefs to others anymore?

That sounds to me like heavier policing then the Moldavi Doctrine.

[TehChron]

E-lawyering

Ha, E-laywers trying to dictate who's involved and who's not despite not being involved at all to begin with.

Thanks for the laugh.

Edited August 20, 2009 by Chron

[kulomascovia]

Honestly, not having a better CB than "because we want to" isn't as troublesome as trying to dress the war up as something it isn't. Yes, they are attacking CG nations and gaining tech. It's a tech raid in the most technical definition of the term. But it's also a coordinated attack upon multiple CG nations by multiple IS nations using an update blitz, complete with nuke spying and naval blockades-say what you will about CM's and air attacks removing tanks, fine, but there's no good justification for those in a proper tech raid-all of which smacks of the tactics of, guess what, an alliance war. And alliance wars should have an accompanying DoW, if not on the OWF then at least privately to members of CG. Something. Anything. At least not having a real CB isn't lying, unlike attempts to make this "just a tech raid."

Hmm. Yeah, I guess you're right. I thought of that first but then Sakura implied that this is not a tech raid:

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

Which pretty much clears up the whole issue about the attacks being a coordinated tech raid. So, I disregarded the argument that IS was claiming that this is a tech raid.

[AnCapistan]

The fact that NSO feels its their responsibility to show us our own rights makes them look a lot like a world police.

So what? They can do whatever they want. Are they not a sovereign entity?

Any alliance can declare on any other alliance for no reason at all and without any CB or treaty ties. Will they have to face the consequences? Yes, but they can still do it. (Look at what IS is doing right now)

OOC: Jeez NSO,people must really hate your guts for you to get dragged into every thread

Edited August 20, 2009 by Mr Damsky

[Locke]

Sorry but I didn't realize it was CN law to inform the OWF that you are declaring a war.

Not a law, just sort of a tradition and accepted norm. Just like it's an accepted norm that tech raids are to be carried out without unnecessary damage. Some norms should be done away with, but I don't see any reason for either of these to change.

[willirica]

OOC: Jeez NSO people must really hate your guts for you to get dragged into every thread

its okay we know they love us deep down

[Puppet Master]

Sorry but I didn't realize it was CN law to inform the OWF that you are declaring a war.

Its not, just like everyone has pointed out that there is no law against entering a war without treaty involvement.

SHOULD IS have posted a DoW? Yes

SHOULD CG handled this themselves without involving us who should "not be concerned"? Yes

SHOULD an alliance have a treaty signed before they support an alliance militarily? Yes

These are all things that should happen however they are not law, simply tradition. If nothing else, both parties should lose respect for not being able to handle this correctly.

[MagicalTrevor]

Why are people complaining that 2 rubbish alliances are blowing holes in eachother?

Edited August 20, 2009 by MagicalTrevor

[JazHayre]

Oh the drama!

IS in its usual attention seeking ways, hitting newer lows... Should we anticipate something new for tomorrow?!