Imperial Decree - New Polar Order

[Confusion]

o/ Polaris

Doing it right since 2008.

jk

I love ya

Good Luck guys teach \m/ a lesson they truly deserve it.

[Beauty]

Excuse me, even if saying something about Grub was the reason for war, Insults against the government polaris is STILL a valid Casus Belli. So either way, blue tanks are rolling on pink ones.

Also lol, 69th page, cute.

[UberSpion]

So I wonder if this is all really about "They are different" not the status quo...etc

[chairmanR]

Oh man, 69 pages overnight. Can I get a tl;dr? version?

[Penkala]

So was it ever really answered why they declared on \m/ in particular?

Was it to protect the community?

today I stand concerned that too few actually care at all about our community and what it needs to survive and with it, us.

If so, why not attack any of the others?

Was it because they maintained their actions were fine afterward? Because Athens did that too.

Are you attacking them because they flipped you off? Is that why?

Just help me understand here. I really, really do want to know.

[Mergerberger II]

Look, if MK attacked NSO tomorrow, you would be a bit more than pissed about it. Especially if we did so on account of some insults and a morality issue. Hell, we already fling !@#$ back and forth between us, we're half way there.

They aren't our friend and we don't like them, why should we think twice about it amirite?

You're comparing apples to oranges. While I am not in Polar government and my words are not absolute truth, and I do not know the exact details of the exchange between our alliances, I am led to believe that there was, indeed, an exchange of words between Polaris and Ragnarok detailing what would happen and saying that it, indeed was going to occur. Ragnarok was informed ahead of time and I have never known Grub to really care what allies think of things that he feels so strongly about.

Basically, if NSO shot racist slurs at you and then you informed us ahead of time, and you attack them, we have the right to be frustrated, as I've already said, but at the same time we should be understanding and knowledgeable of the fact that you are a sovereign alliance and our protests, if they are nothing more than 'they're our allies, they're alright', should not be enough to deter you. If we make a legitimate argument, and you understand and acknowledge said argument, then I would expect you to reconsider your actions and see if diplomacy won't work again, but in this case it didn't.

[Krunk the Great]

Oh man, 69 pages overnight. Can I get a tl;dr? version?

tl;dr

People don't like Polaris warring against M

Polaris and her allies claim to have a valid CB

M and her allies claim that Polaris does not and is being a bully.

[Ludacrism2]

Do your thing, NpO.

o/NpO

[delendum]

Then I think that you ought to be talking to \m/, who showed a deliberate disrespect for Polaris, as Grub has already stated, instead of Polar, who is retaliating for that disrespect shown by \m/ to us.

You are right, they were complete !@#$%s about the way they handled themselves and I'm really not trying to argument anything in their favor. I really don't like them or care about them. What is also true however is you were the ones who went in an started making demands, even though the whole raiding issue had been resolved. I'm not saying that pardons them from being !@#$%s to you, but hey, who asked you to go and threaten them, especially when you knew they were allied to your allies?

I'll mark both approaches as wrong: you for making it your business on a whim, them for being complete morons about it.

You just went that extra step forward and put RoK in the !@#$tiest of situations anyway. In this case, hurt ego > being allied to RoK.

[Angrator]

Look, if MK attacked NSO tomorrow, you would be a bit more than pissed about it. Especially if we did so on account of some insults and a morality issue. Hell, we already fling !@#$ back and forth between us, we're half way there.

They aren't our friend and we don't like them, why should we think twice about it amirite?

No one is telling you what to do, so go ahead and do what you have to. But the reason you are getting zero sympathy from everyone is because you seem to think there are zero consequences for general asshattery and stupidity.

[Mergerberger II]

So was it ever really answered why they declared on \m/ in particular?

Was it to protect the community?

If so, why not attack any of the others?

Was it because they maintained their actions were fine afterward? Because Athens did that too.

Are you attacking them because they flipped you off? Is that why?

Just help me understand here. I really, really do want to know.

It was because of this sentence right here as I understand it,

Yesterday diplomacy failed. Diplomacy can not be conducted when one party offers to expose his genitals repeatedly, diplomacy can not be conducted when one side resorts to the use of racist, offensive and degrading language to describe the other and diplomacy can not be attempted when neither side is prepared to concede anything at all.

[Krunk the Great]

Especially when M showed that they were not interested in apologizing for the actions of their members

[Beauty]

So was it ever really answered why they declared on \m/ in particular?

Was it to protect the community?

If so, why not attack any of the others?

Was it because they maintained their actions were fine afterward? Because Athens did that too.

Are you attacking them because they flipped you off? Is that why?

Just help me understand here. I really, really do want to know.

Basically, all thats going on is "ATHENS RAIDED KON AND THEY DIDNT GET ROLLED, POLARIS JUST WANTS TO KILL \m/ BECAUSE POLARIS IS EVIL AND THERE TAKING OVER PLANENT BOB AND THERE GOING TO NUKE THE MOON AND EAT PLUTO"

For chists sakes dont you people understand Athens took the diplomatic route, and appologized. When diplomatically approached, Athens handled it with diplomacy. When whoever else tech raided whoever, They used DIPLOMACY. When \m/ was approached, There diplomacy was to insult the government of Polaris, Which is a VALID casus belli aswell. So all in all, They have a VALID casus belli in more than one way. Basically all thats being said is Polaris attacked \m/ because of there name, Get over it. If Polaris didnt like the people in \m/ or \m/... RAD and IS would have disbanded last week or whenever this "new" \m/ was made. IS and RAD were hated by practically everyone anyways so they made \m/ because people USED to like \m/. Now they've given \m/ a bad name.

[pezstar]

There is no written obligation, but it's one of the most basic things you could ask from an ally. Out of respect for you as an ally, they could at least try their best to prevent it from happening. This is especially the case when the only reason you want to attack an ally of an ally is because your ego needs reassurance.

Delendum, I'd just like to preface what I am about to say with a statement that I have a huge amount of love and respect for MK, as allies, friends, and as an alliance. I also like you quite a bit. That said, you're here talking about respect for allies, and I'm really not seeing it coming from you, or MK as a whole lately on these boards. There are quite a few quiet shows behind the scenes, and those are much appreciated, but you're sitting here publicly bashing NpO, who IS your ally, and you know that STA will stand by Polar, and we're your ally too. While you're obviously always welcome to voice your opinion, do you really have to be so "Screw you" about it?

Both STA and MK are placed in an awkward position here, and Archon and I spoke at length about that earlier today. I feel that we walked away from that conversation knowing that each of our alliances holds the other in extremely high regard, and we're each well aware of the others positions on this matter. I'm concerned, however, about the public beating NpO is getting here from you folks today. You're allies. Friends. It's incredibly easy to support them by saying "Well, I don't agree with you, but best of luck." and then go say what you need to say to them in private. I've heard a lot of things about fracturing "this side" with this action. You are just as responsible for that by publicly burning bridges when those bridges simply did not need to be burnt in this way. Friends don't behave this way in public.

I'm reminded of the celebration that occurred publicly from MK when our treaties with NSO were canceled. We were really sad about that cancellation. I don't know. Maybe I'm just from the old school. This is not how allies should behave to one another.

[chairmanR]

tl;dr

People don't like Polaris warring against M

Polaris and her allies claim to have a valid CB

M and her allies claim that Polaris does not and is being a bully.

Thank you.

[Ejayrazz]

Follow your heart, Polaris. I do not see this as a bully-like move, I see this as an alliance fed up with another's actions. The reason this game is dull is because of the technical nonsense. If I was as pissed as NpO over \m/'s actions, maybe I'd do the same.

People these days somehow believe you only can DoW for: Spying, defensive activation, or whatever. Polaris doesn't like \m/'s actions in being 'bullies' so they are acting on it, as well as their general asshattery. (In their perspective) Diplomacy these days is far better than that in the old days, hence warring and political stagnation has taken effect. People have the right to declare by whatever means possible.

People cry for war, but when they get it, they cry about it. The irony.

Edited January 21, 2010 by Ejayrazz

[TECUMSEH]

Excellent post, pezstar. Rational, cogent sentiments.

[Joe Kremlin]

NpO is doing something about it. Have fun.

[Joe Izuzu]

Delendum, I'd just like to preface what I am about to say with a statement that I have a huge amount of love and respect for MK, as allies, friends, and as an alliance. I also like you quite a bit. That said, you're here talking about respect for allies, and I'm really not seeing it coming from you, or MK as a whole lately on these boards. There are quite a few quiet shows behind the scenes, and those are much appreciated, but you're sitting here publicly bashing NpO, who IS your ally, and you know that STA will stand by Polar, and we're your ally too. While you're obviously always welcome to voice your opinion, do you really have to be so "Screw you" about it?

Both STA and MK are placed in an awkward position here, and Archon and I spoke at length about that earlier today. I feel that we walked away from that conversation knowing that each of our alliances holds the other in extremely high regard, and we're each well aware of the others positions on this matter. I'm concerned, however, about the public beating NpO is getting here from you folks today. You're allies. Friends. It's incredibly easy to support them by saying "Well, I don't agree with you, but best of luck." and then go say what you need to say to them in private. I've heard a lot of things about fracturing "this side" with this action. You are just as responsible for that by publicly burning bridges when those bridges simply did not need to be burnt in this way. Friends don't behave this way in public.

I'm reminded of the celebration that occurred publicly from MK when our treaties with NSO were canceled. We were really sad about that cancellation. I don't know. Maybe I'm just from the old school. This is not how allies should behave to one another.

This man is a gentleman. Well said, Pez.

[Mergerberger II]

You are right, they were complete !@#$%s about the way they handled themselves and I'm really not trying to argument anything in their favor. I really don't like them or care about them. What is also true however is you were the ones who went in an started making demands, even though the whole raiding issue had been resolved. I'm not saying that pardons them from being !@#$%s to you, but hey, who asked you to go and threaten them, especially when you knew they were allied to your allies?

Aye, we did make a situation out of it, and here we come into a different debate, one regarding righteousness and whether or not it is okay to tech raid an alliance, and then \m/ escalated it. We can have the debate about if it is okay to violate an alliance's sovereignty for tech elsewhere, however; I do not see this as the proper place for such an argument.

[Lord Brendan]

So this is what I've got for the whole situation:

• Sparta cancels their protectorate with FoA
  
• \m/, GOONS and PC raid FoA after their protectorate with Sparta expires
  
• The Corporation (an ally of \m/) steps in and offers protection to FoA
  
• At this point the situation is consider resolved by all those who were involved
  
• ???
  
• AlmightyGrub informs Ragnarok that he's going to do something about \m/'s tech raiding
  
• AlmightyGrub enters \m/'s channel, seeking "a solution". Neither side is willing to concede anything (what was being asked is still unclear)
  
• \m/ insults Grub
  
• \m/ posts a thread apologizing for the way they acted (albeit not the most sincere apology ever)
  
• The New Polar Order declares war on \m/
  
• 70-page thread
  

Anything to add?

[pezstar]

This man is a gentleman. Well said, Pez.

This man is also a woman! Holy crap! (thanks!)

[delendum]

You're comparing apples to oranges. While I am not in Polar government and my words are not absolute truth, and I do not know the exact details of the exchange between our alliances, I am led to believe that there was, indeed, an exchange of words between Polaris and Ragnarok detailing what would happen and saying that it, indeed was going to occur. Ragnarok was informed ahead of time and I have never known Grub to really care what allies think of things that he feels so strongly about.

Basically, if NSO shot racist slurs at you and then you informed us ahead of time, and you attack them, we have the right to be frustrated, as I've already said, but at the same time we should be understanding and knowledgeable of the fact that you are a sovereign alliance and our protests, if they are nothing more than 'they're our allies, they're alright', should not be enough to deter you. If we make a legitimate argument, and you understand and acknowledge said argument, then I would expect you to reconsider your actions and see if diplomacy won't work again, but in this case it didn't.

"I have never known Grub to really care what allies think of things that he feels so strongly". - I guess this is where we see things differently, we do care what our allies think, and we do expect the same in return, it's a matter of respect.

As for the whole racism bid, this was posted by a MK member in \m/'s apology thread. You might want to reflect on it sometime.

[OOC] As a minority I think it's absolutely disgusting how people play the racist card politically against other alliances. I've been idling in #\m/ for quite a while before their reformation, and some time after, and I haven't been offended by a single thing said in there.

You so-called "moralists" are a bunch of my idols and I hope you some day realize just how offensive you are being.[/OOC]

I think this is blown way out of proportion and this announcement should never have been made.

There is no love lost between us and the NSO, and in fact our government has went to great lengths to stop us from expressing ourselves too much on the matter, because they were yours and STA's allies. We have felt pretty strongly about them on more than one occasion.

[WarriorConcept]

It was because of this sentence right here as I understand it,

Yesterday diplomacy failed. Diplomacy can not be conducted when one party offers to expose his genitals repeatedly, diplomacy can not be conducted when one side resorts to the use of racist, offensive and degrading language to describe the other and diplomacy can not be attempted when neither side is prepared to concede anything at all.

What was the diplomacy for? From what I can tell it was NpO trying enforce their moralities on \m/, but you can clarify that I'm sure.

[Mathias]

I have never known Grub to really care what allies think of things that he feels so strongly about.

That's wrong. While you may not be obligated to respect the allies of your allies, it sure does make you a crappy treaty partner if you have no qualms about putting your allies in an awkward situation just because that the way you want things done. Treaty partners share a reciprocal relationship of mutual respect, and that makes you a !@#$ty ally if you feel fine violating that willy nilly.