As I troll

[eyriq]

Great OP, TPF should have fessed up, they didn't, and thus we have this war. That ironically does not mean that the war is justified, as obviously the effectiveness of said scheme was nil and there were several courses of action available for the securing of Athens' and Roks' integrity besides such aggressive action. The fact that such aggressive action was taken then points to a deeper purpose than simply securing one's integrity from TPF, and perhaps it is this deeper purpose that justifies the war. Unfortunately we are not privy to said deeper purpose, or at least not the peanut gallery, and so we can only judge the war's justification based on the presented CB, which as stated does not justify the war.

Edited: I meant were not where

Edited December 30, 2009 by eyriq

[The Feather]

When discussing spies, we must also look to the CDT-TNWO war. Although in this case, the spies were heralded and the spied upon were attacked.

[lebubu]

So, what you are saying is that you are smug and style yourself superior to people on this board? Ah, cool.

MKers are nothing, if not smug and superior to the rest of you.

[WarriorConcept]

Unfortunately we are not privy to said deeper purpose, or at least not the peanut gallery, and so we can only judge the war's justification based on the presented CB, which as stated does not justify the war.

Edited: I meant were not where

Naturally this comes down to personal opinion, but as you've seen there are supporters of both sides in this case. Plenty of people support the CB and consider it valid while plenty also do not. This has been the case since Planet Bob came into being and making an opinionated statement seem like factual doesn't do the public justice.

[Bob Janova]

TPF was in the wrong for not disclosing these plans after the conclusion of the war.

In retrospect, it is possible to argue this (i.e. if they had done so, they would not be being attacked without diplomacy today). However, as the operation was over when TPF's peace negotiations were finalised (on the 3rd), they had no obligation to do so. Alliances don't send a list of all the spy-ops they've done, leaks of the other side's channels they've seen or sources for those leaks to the victors when they surrender – they just promise not to do any more, which TPF didn't.

Zero Hour was certainly in the wrong for taking so long to disclose and their treaty with Athens should be considered voided due to violating Article 4 of their protectorate agreement. While I am not going to weigh in on the rationale for waiting so long to disclose what had happened, the fact that Athenian/ZH relations up till December 24th were based upon a lie (well, rather an omission) should be more than enough reason for that to be dropped and actions be taken against ZH.

Definitely. It's very strange, unless there is an ulterior motive, that ZH still seem to be being protected instead of rolled, as they were just as much a part of the plan as TPF and just as guilty of concealing the plan for nearly 5 months.

I am not sure where I stand on the issue of attacking without warning.

It is a bad thing, for strategic as well as moral reasons. Morally, it is bad to attack someone without giving them a chance to explain themselves or show you where your mistake is – classic Hegemony, as well. And strategically, going to the target's allies and explaining why their ally is a bad alliance and deserves to be punished might well encourage them to suspend or cancel the treaty, or apply pressure to obtain a positive and non-violent resolution. Attacking without warning is likely to bring the treaty web down on you and your friends.

Edit:

However, NPO achieved peace on July 16th. ZH, NOT TPF, opted out of this operation on August 2. The is 17 full days of TPF sticking with this plan, even though they now KNEW they were not in an eternal war.

This is true, but I think it's fair to say that TPF had other things to worry about at that time. The fact is, by the time they got peace, the operation was terminated. We can go into what-ifs and statements of intent, but the fact is that after TPF left the Karma War – and surrendered to 'the forces of Karma' – they were no longer running a hostile operation.

Edited December 30, 2009 by Bob Janova

[eyriq]

Naturally this comes down to personal opinion, but as you've seen there are supporters of both sides in this case. Plenty of people support the CB and consider it valid while plenty also do not. This has been the case since Planet Bob came into being and making an opinionated statement seem like factual doesn't do the public justice.

I don't think this has to come down to opinion, which seems to imply that in this situation, based on the evidence, our reason should somehow fail us. The OP listed the evidence quite thoroughly and unbiasedly, so I won't go back through it. Looking at that evidence as presented there is no clear and present danger, there is no trigger that would set off a fight or flight response. So, seeing as there was no clear and present danger, which would justify Athens and Rok choosing the fight response, there is either more evidence needed to justify their reaction or we can state, using reason alone, that the reaction was not justified. I for one suspect that there is more to the picture that does indeed justify their response, but that it is not directly connected to the CB as stated against TPF.

[Rush Sykes]

This is true, but I think it's fair to say that TPF had other things to worry about at that time. The fact is, by the time they got peace, the operation was terminated. We can go into what-ifs and statements of intent, but the fact is that after TPF left the Karma War – and surrendered to 'the forces of Karma' – they were no longer running a hostile operation.

The issue I have with this rebuttal, is that it is unacceptable to me, that in 17 days, they couldnt find a moment to say, "hey this doesnt need done anymore." I find it perfectly plausible that had it not been for the OOC falling out with ZH, that they fully intended to carry out this mission.

[WarriorConcept]

I don't think this has to come down to opinion, which seems to imply that in this situation, based on the evidence, our reason should somehow fail us. The OP listed the evidence quite thoroughly and unbiasedly, so I won't go back through it. Looking at that evidence as presented there is no clear and present danger, there is no trigger that would set off a fight or flight response. So, seeing as there was no clear and present danger, which would justify Athens and Rok choosing the fight response, there is either more evidence needed to justify their reaction or we can state, using reason alone, that the reaction was not justified. I for one suspect that there is more to the picture that does indeed justify their response, but that it is not directly connected to the CB as stated against TPF.

First off I'd like to say I appreciate your response as being well thought out and presented as such.

However I'd still have to disagree with you there that this isn't about opinion. Since through your post we're not arguing through the validity of the CB, but rather the action that Athens did to respond to and through on the CB I'll focus on that.

While yes the specific ring that was part of the CB seemed to have been done with at the time of the declaration, that doesn't necessarily discount the fact that there was no danger involved from the party that initiated such an operation when Athens felt the both of them had never been in a conflict, thus they would've felt they were the ones being singled out for some underlying malicious intent aimed at Athens themselves, not just restrained to the war.

As for other possible courses of actions, let's go down the other route that you wished Athens would have taken, that being diplomacy.

In the event that Athens had indeed gone to TPF in order to gain a diplomatic response for the actions that Athens feels was completely unjustified, where would that have led us? I believe from looking through the responses thus far from TPF and most of its own allies TPF would have told Athens that it was a non-issue and not submitted to any wrong doing as they have been doing thus far. In that event Athens, still feeling the acts in the CB against them were aimed at them personally which has been proven by all parties involved, would really have 2 options. Attack TPF or let them go.

Considering what I just mentioned Athens felt like about the CB, I'd wager to say they would not let them go and a war would have started much like the one they just declared on with the same evidence and arguments being upheld by both sides. Now what would be different in this scenario where they went the diplomatic route as opposed to the route they took which would've been inevitable in the other scenario? TPF would have had lots more time to hit peace mode and build up prior to a war, which only hurts Athens membership more in the long run.

Therefore from analyzing both scenarios I'd have to say Athens took the best option available to them for their membership based on all the information available to them and being able to quantify, rightly as proven so far by the arguments since the war kicked off, and took it.

[AirMe]

TPF held fast to the notion that they believed they were in a never-ending war.

Lucky for us that wasn't the ummmm, case.

Karma cat is purring somewhere.

Except for the fact that the leadership of the alliances fighting you, save PC, told you repeatedly that you could get out of the war at anytime you wanted too. Publicly and privately. Your argument doesn't hold water because of that fact.

[zzzptm]

Another fact that should be mentioned is that no formal state of war existed between TPF and Athens/RoK/Sparta. The Karma War was not one war, but a collection of many wars.

[kulomascovia]

In the event that Athens had indeed gone to TPF in order to gain a diplomatic response for the actions that Athens feels was completely unjustified, where would that have led us? I believe from looking through the responses thus far from TPF and most of its own allies TPF would have told Athens that it was a non-issue and not submitted to any wrong doing as they have been doing thus far. In that event Athens, still feeling the acts in the CB against them were aimed at them personally which has been proven by all parties involved, would really have 2 options. Attack TPF or let them go.

Considering what I just mentioned Athens felt like about the CB, I'd wager to say they would not let them go and a war would have started much like the one they just declared on with the same evidence and arguments being upheld by both sides. Now what would be different in this scenario where they went the diplomatic route as opposed to the route they took which would've been inevitable in the other scenario? TPF would have had lots more time to hit peace mode and build up prior to a war, which only hurts Athens membership more in the long run.

Well do you expect them to agree with you after Athens attacked them with no diplomatic contact? I mean, if anyone hits my alliance without any negotiations, I'd be pissed as well. And that would influence me to disagree with whatever they say, despite evidence that would suggest to the contrary. After Athens attacked TPF, tempers rose and people became polarized. I don't think it is wise to use this behavior as an indicator of how TPF would have behaved in the negotiations.

If Athens had simply presented their evidence to TPF, I don't see how TPF could have denied it. If you notice, most people (even TPF members and gov.) have already accepted the fact that TPF attempted to spy. After that, Athens can negotiate a fitting punishment for TPF (be it reps, military restrictions, apologies...etc). And if they had brought the issue to the public, they most probably would have found more support that you have now.

[Fantastico]

I like the honesty in the OP.

If you want to put your mind at ease a little regarding where you are stuck, just remind yourself how this would be different if the roles were reversed. I am not saying that makes it better in any deep sense, but it illuminates the true nature of who you are fighting, on the battlefield and rhetorically on these forums.

The only reason TPF and allies are attacking this CB is because that's what they always do. Those currently claiming "noCB" know darn well it would be a valid CB in their ways of looking at the world. You can be certain that were the shoe on the other foot they would have gone to war quickly, too.

One thing they would have done very differently, however, is they would have approached TPF's current allies before the war and either persuaded or bullied them into canceling their treaties with TPF ahead of time so there would be minimal cheering and dissent in these forums.

That's pretty much the only place your CB "failed," and I see that as a mark of your success in wanting to be better than them.

[kulomascovia]

And just for the record, I don't think "TPF spied during the war" and "We need to defend ourselves from TPF's aggression" are very good reasons to declare war. However, I do think that "TPF spied during the war and wouldn't rectify their mistakes" is a valid CB.

[youwish959]

Why is TPF supposed to have fessed up? Was that a part of their surrender terms?

[WarriorConcept]

Well do you expect them to agree with you after Athens attacked them with no diplomatic contact? I mean, if anyone hits my alliance without any negotiations, I'd be pissed as well. And that would influence me to disagree with whatever they say, despite evidence that would suggest to the contrary. After Athens attacked TPF, tempers rose and people became polarized. I don't think it is wise to use this behavior as an indicator of how TPF would have behaved in the negotiations.

If Athens had simply presented their evidence to TPF, I don't see how TPF could have denied it. If you notice, most people (even TPF members and gov.) have already accepted the fact that TPF attempted to spy. After that, Athens can negotiate a fitting punishment for TPF (be it reps, military restrictions, apologies...etc). And if they had brought the issue to the public, they most probably would have found more support that you have now.

Actually the discussion now is whether TPF would have accepted any form of reperations or anything during the negotiation process had Athens gone the diplomatic route first and the general consensus is yes. I'm not the type to disregard evidence when it's right in front of me however so I agree with the general consensus.

And yes I have noticed TPF have not called the evidence a farce, rather their argument seems to be that it was at war time and they felt their community was in danger, despite them having surrender terms available the whole time. That however further supports my argument that had Athens gone the diplomatic route TPF would have given the same response they are now and only simply have more time to prepare.

[WarriorConcept]

Why is TPF supposed to have fessed up? Was that a part of their surrender terms?

I hope you take the time to read all the posts thus far and note that none of TPF have denied the validity of any evidence presented thus far.

[Schattenmann]

While there are many cases of spying constituting, many of which supported by this war's biggest detractors, the only recorded cases of an alliance infiltrating another with the expressed purpose of wreaking havoc among that alliance's community are exclusively derived from FAN.

For the record, Vox Populi's infiltration of ODN (with an aim of legislative or executive infiltration) in the late stages of the Resistance were disclosed and all agents removed during the course of peace discussion with ODN (had talks failed, the infiltration would have continued). Terms of that peace included "All agents will be removed" and they were. Also, OcUK's infiltration of RoK during the noCB War is well-known and documented.

[potato]

For the record, Vox Populi's infiltration of ODN (with an aim of legislative or executive infiltration) in the late stages of the Resistance were disclosed and all agents removed during the course of peace discussion with ODN (had talks failed, the infiltration would have continued). Terms of that peace included "All agents will be removed" and they were. Also, OcUK's infiltration of RoK during the noCB War is well-known and documented.

So, what you're saying is that Vox spied, admitted to it to their opponents and got away with it? Then that OcUK spied, admitted to it to their opponents and got away with it? Man, that sounds like a jolly good idea! I wonder why TPF never thought about it... Is it because they actually never were at war with Athens? :iiam:

[youwish959]

I hope you take the time to read all the posts thus far and note that none of TPF have denied the validity of any evidence presented thus far.

I have noticed that. However, that's not what I'm talking about. Everyone keeps saying that they should have fessed up after the war was over, but I do not see a "fess-up" clause in the surrender document.

[Ejayrazz]

The war of interpretation.

That is what it comes down to.

[Cheshire]

The war of interpretation.

That is what it comes down to.

This.

As well, if i planned on shooting someone with another person, we argue and never talk again, and i don't shoot any but he goes to the police with evidence of it going to happen. He will get immunity or a lessor charge and i will still get conspiracy to commit murder.

[WarriorConcept]

I have noticed that. However, that's not what I'm talking about. Everyone keeps saying that they should have fessed up after the war was over, but I do not see a "fess-up" clause in the surrender document.

Because then this whole mess would've been avoided. Instead they tried to start a clandestine operation against an alliance they weren't fighting on logic they were stuck in an eternal war when they had terms offered to them for a while.

[kulomascovia]

Actually the discussion now is whether TPF would have accepted any form of reparations or anything during the negotiation process had Athens gone the diplomatic route first and the general consensus is yes. I'm not the type to disregard evidence when it's right in front of me however so I agree with the general consensus.

And yes I have noticed TPF have not called the evidence a farce, rather their argument seems to be that it was at war time and they felt their community was in danger, despite them having surrender terms available the whole time. That however further supports my argument that had Athens gone the diplomatic route TPF would have given the same response they are now and only simply have more time to prepare.

I addressed TPF's current response in my previous post. Everyone is aggravated and short on temper because of the War. You can't gauge what TPF's reaction would have been if Athens took the matter to them diplomatically. Again, if someone takes an inherently hostile stand towards me, I would be inclined to reply with hostility. Declaring war on TPF did not make TPF more agreeable.

Had Athens taken the diplomatic route, TPF wouldn't have the support they have now if Athens had tried the diplomatic route and brought their issue to the public. I certainly wouldn't be criticizing Athens. Also, from what I can see, most people don't seem to be defending TPF's actions; as you mentioned in the other thread, most people are criticizing Athens for not opening negotiations.

[zzzptm]

What I would want to see more of is less berating of TPF's allies for not coming out and more diplomatic engagement with them. This should not be a war that expands beyond the current combatants.

[AlmightyGrub]

The matters surrounding this war are fairly simple, but once again the e-lawyers have emerged arguing the semantics of the situation until the essence of the arguments have focused merely on these peripheral issues.

If I could be extremely blunt, you all have a massive vested interest in the outcome of this war, and therefore you lack objectivity. Whilst this is largely always the case in these matters, the specific outcomes of a fully escalated war in this case lend a degree of seriousness to these matters that perhaps drive the arguments to a different level than normal.

My crystal ball shows very few possible outcomes from this war if TPF rallies a coalition to defend its actions. It is therefore prudent for TPF's allies to rinse and repeat their fairly hollow e-lawyering over and over in the hope that someone listens (to date you are not changing anyone's opinions) and for the Athens side of life to repeat their claims over and over in the hope that everyone eventually shuts up and let's it take its course. Which side is right depends only on your ''alliance'' to the cause at hand.

I will suggest strongly to you that the current situation sits firmly at the feet of the alliance that took aggressive action against another, contrary to the standards that we as a community have agreed on, and the outcome is therefore at the discretion of the aggrieved alliance/alliances. To cite the case of FAN, OcUK or even Vox in these matters is redundant. The reaction of one alliance does not validate or invalidate the actions of another. I would cite the Ursarkar Creed/NPO matters involving my alliance, I choose to respond as we did, however I would have been perfectly comfortable going to war as well, but it was a matter for me to decide. My decisions are mine to make when they effect my alliance, just as in these matters Athens and RoK hav decided their course of action.

What now remains to be done is quite simple. If you believe that TPF is being aggrieved, saddle up and ride with the wind towards the battle, saddle up and ride like the wind away from the battle with your infra in your backpack or mindlessly drone on creating as many conflicting threads as possible. I see number 3 being overused in this case, move on to one of the others please, the argument has distilled to two simple positions that can not be argued in circles for much longer.

I can assure you of some simple positions relating to the New Polar Order in these types of situations. If I found a plot to infiltrate my alliance, the decision to respond diplomatically would be mine and mine alone. If I decide that diplomacy is not appropriate then I will roll my tanks as hard and fast as possible and any arguments about attempting diplomacy will be met with firm derision.

Diplomacy is a powerful tool, so is war and both are legitimate options in matters concerning spying. The alliances involved made their decisions, they believe in their causes sufficiently to do so and as such they have the support of their allies. What remains to be seen here is whether the allies of TPF (and their allies allies), believe sufficiently.

I honestly believe this matter will be resolved fairly quickly if confined to the immediate alliances involved. I also believe that the ramifications of wider deployment will ensure a vastly different landscape and not necessarily one that most people will benefit from. Make your decisions wisely because the literal fate of the world is largely in everyone's hands right now.

For complete disclosure, the arguments of OWF have seldom influenced my decision, and in these matters my opinions on the validity of the CB or otherwise will not be tendered by me. It seems fairly simple however to acknowledge there is a dispute, both sides have a version of events, both are probably plausible. Both sides will argue their validity in the matter and at the end of the day there is a still a war. What really matters for everyone is who rolls and where. Choose wisely.

Edited December 30, 2009 by AlmightyGrub