Jump to content

Nusantara Declaration


gantanX

Recommended Posts

A alliance signs a MADP then those they are allied to declares a war that is morally, ethically reprehensible; then you must issue a DOW and a cancellation on the OWF and fight for the duration of the cancellation clause and then seek Peace.You have then honored you word.To do less is morally,ethically reprehensible. To defend anyone not honoring their word is indefensible.

Edited by Yggdrazil
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You again?

Listen, I don't necessarily agree with their decision, Zenith always honors her treaties and looks at the relationship afterward, but I'm also the type that considers the relationship between two parties to be greater than the paper between them.

If I asked a close friend for help with something and they told me, "look, I would really like to help you, but I cannot in this instance here, it is against my principles." Then I would probably understand. I wouldn't be happy about it, and it would probably change the lever of friendship I had with them, but I wouldn't stop considering them a friend and start bashing them where ever I went. Would you? Of course not.

Sometimes, situations are beyond what was envisioned when the treaty was signed. To say: "You are either fighting by my side, or you are my enemy" is to needlessly alienate a group who may actually come to your aid in a different situation.

If they are truly against the actions that kicked off this war, then guaranteeing their neutrality is the best thing one could ask for in this situation.

If i were ever to lead an alliance, i would ensure that the people i sign treaties with would always be there no matter what. if that situation changed, then i agree the level of friendship does change. nowhere in my post do i say go around and bash them or whatever. i stated that you were wrong in regarding all treaties as not being signed in stone. the truth is, if NEW wishes to maintain their principals and refuses to fight for whatever reason, then they need to downgrade all their treaties to optional treaties. they can always use said option to enter a war on behalf of their friends, but this way, they don't ruin their rep as stalwart allies for backing out on obligatory treaties. especially when said treaties are not with Polaris but with others.

so, i have no clue what people are even talkin about when they state Polaris did not inform any allies as i am fairly certain they did. NEW is not allied directly to Polaris, so Polaris had no obligation to inform NEW.

These replies in this thread has been hilarious, if anyone actually knows NEW, you know they will back an ally no matter the odds (in almost all situations).

But why don't you guys step off your apparent moral high horse and look at the consequences for NEW. They are an alliance that plays the game as it should be, and that is as a game. They enjoy tech raiding and are never scared about shooting off a few nukes and in return taking some for a friend. But if NpO ends up winning this war, then Grub will take it as validation of him anointed the moral police chief. Who knows how he will try to dictate tech raiding in the future. So why would NEW help fight for a cause that a) they don't believe in and b) directly affects their game play in a negative way?

Knowing NEW I am sure they will be there to help their allies after this war, win or lose. By seeing the lack of NEWs allies posting in this thread I am sure they already know this, but NEWs allies should be good allies themselves and understand the complication that this has put NEW through. I am sure this is a one time occurrence of NEW not following their treaties to the T.

o/ NEW

considering that several allies of Polaris tech raid, i doubt it will change all that much from what it was prior to Karma. that is, tech raiding is okay so long as alliances at a certain number of members and above are not tech-raided. so, if Polaris wins, the only thing that will change is that alliances around 20+ members would not be raided. wow, again pretty much right back where it was. i also doubt NEW would be affected that much considering they do not raid alliances above a certain membership level anyways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You would be hailing this had your side not been the subject of this announcement.

That's wrong as I have always hailed NEW and they have always been on opposing sides in wars...treaties are meant to be upheld by honorable alliances per criteria in them...B-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, NEW, I have to admit I'm torn on this. On the one hand I like a lot of you guys and am happy to see you don't on the other side... On the other I don't very much like the prospect of seeing you go against your treaties. Hopefully there will be cancellations or downgrades forthcoming.

Edited by NoFish
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Curious point, but people did you maybe miss the fact that they did in fact talk to their allies in private before posting this?

I'll assume that they reached some kind of agreement with their MADP partner, who knows maybe TPF as a whole will sit this thing out (considering the amount of damage they took not even 3 weeks ago i wouldn't blame them). Aside from TPF they have MDPs with WAPA, TOOL and FEAR (if the wiki is up to date), personally i do not even know if those 3 will all end up on NpO's side...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have always liked you, NEW, and I always will. We may have our disagreements over some issues, but you're a good alliance and I can respect where you're coming from on this issue. I respect your stance and wish you luck with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is due to an issue with one of NEW's protectorates and is completely devoid of what is outlined in the OP. This NEW announcement was just for show and isn't the determining reason why they came out with this announcement.

They picked a personal grudge over their friendship with their treaty partners. Sorry to tell it how it is. I like you NEW, I don't like this stance.

Edited by The AUT
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Curious point, but people did you maybe miss the fact that they did in fact talk to their allies in private before posting this?

I'll assume that they reached some kind of agreement with their MADP partner, who knows maybe TPF as a whole will sit this thing out (considering the amount of damage they took not even 3 weeks ago i wouldn't blame them). Aside from TPF they have MDPs with WAPA, TOOL and FEAR (if the wiki is up to date), personally i do not even know if those 3 will all end up on NpO's side...

I can confirm that yes NEW did talk to us before posting this.

Perhaps it's curious that anyone who isn't from TPF, WAPA, TOOL or FEAR feels qualified to comment on the announcement.

I cannot speak for the other allies but can confirm that WAPA's friendship with NEW has not been in any way diminished by this. If anything, this is a brave stance that deserves increased respect. NEW seem to have a good grasp of the bigger picture. They know who is really "ruining the game".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is obviously your sovereign right. Good for you in taking a firm stance.

I do disagree with your overall assessment, but that is just my personal opinion.

I have never been chided by the New Polar Order for any of my internal governmental activities or policies and I tend to run things a bit close to the edge insofar as "community standards" are concerned, so I don't really consider this a moral crusade. How could I when I don't recognize the existance of morals in the Cyberverse?

I do see this as a natural consequence of one alliance doing something that another alliance, and indeed many alliances, disagree with, just as they did when Ni was attacked. If it is a government sponsored coordinated widespread attack on a whole alliance it really isn't a tech raid, at least in my opinion, it is a declaration of war. So, when an alliance declares war on another alliance there are sometimes consequences.

Not everyone believes that a piece of paper is necessary in order to take part in a conflict, or to start one. Indeed, most wars are started between parties that do not have treaties, as a very basic example of the premise, so why not acknowledge that other alliances can similarly declare upon one of the combatants without such documents? To me that is the essential right of every alliance.

I believe the New Polar Order felt it had the right to attack \m/, just as \m/ felt it had the right to attack FoA and then verbally assault the leader of Polar, perhaps not a contemporary casus belli but a traditional one, insofar as the Cyberverse is concerned, just the same. Every action illicits a possible reaction.

The NSO takes part in this war because we have a treaty with Polar and because I am a warmonger and I am tired of peace. No moral objectivity or judgement involved, I just want to roll tanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These replies in this thread has been hilarious, if anyone actually knows NEW, you know they will back an ally no matter the odds (in almost all situations).

But why don't you guys step off your apparent moral high horse and look at the consequences for NEW. They are an alliance that plays the game as it should be, and that is as a game. They enjoy tech raiding and are never scared about shooting off a few nukes and in return taking some for a friend. But if NpO ends up winning this war, then Grub will take it as validation of him anointed the moral police chief. Who knows how he will try to dictate tech raiding in the future. So why would NEW help fight for a cause that a) they don't believe in and b) directly affects their game play in a negative way?

Knowing NEW I am sure they will be there to help their allies after this war, win or lose. By seeing the lack of NEWs allies posting in this thread I am sure they already know this, but NEWs allies should be good allies themselves and understand the complication that this has put NEW through. I am sure this is a one time occurrence of NEW not following their treaties to the T.

o/ NEW

This is the truth, thank you for posting pooks :)

I don't agree with the path NEW has taken, but I understand it was not an easy choice, and not one NEW takes lightly. I kinda feel sad for them, having to sit and watch. :P

o/ NEW

Thank you very much for your understanding in this case my friend :)

I have always liked you, NEW, and I always will. We may have our disagreements over some issues, but you're a good alliance and I can respect where you're coming from on this issue. I respect your stance and wish you luck with it.

Thank you for your support My Lady, it is a heavy decision to be made.

I appreciate all of posts in this topic regardless any supports or critics. We also invite those who need some explanations to come to our irc channel and contact our top leaders to discuss about this matter.

I also want to say thank you for all of our allies and friends in all over the Bob for all supports or critics. We really appreciate it :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally hold nothing against NEW here. I'm sure they discussed this decision in private with the gov of all of their allies (including TOOL), and they wouldn't be publicly posting this without someone canceling a treaty unless everyone said "OK, we get it."

Am I disappointed that NEW won't be helping out in this war? A little. Do I hold it against them? No. It's this or be held as hypocrites for supporting the original CB by declaring on Polar's side when they have pretty liberal raiding standards themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If anyone has read NEWs' treaty with TPF, then you will see that they would only be obligated to attack with us if we requested it.

In the unlikely chance this thing gets big enough to involve little ole TPF, we aint gonna request it.

Furthermore, treaty obligations aside, NEW are raiders to their core. It would be inconsiderate of us to ask them to go against their personal beliefs regardless of whether or not they made this thread.

Some things are more important than the specific wording of a treaty and we understand it and respect NEW having the backbone to stand up and say it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NEWFlag.png

Nusantara Declaration

Falsehood is never so successful as when she baits her hook with truth, and no opinions so fatally mislead us, as those that are not wholly wrong - Charles Caleb Colton

Our stance about the current ongoing conflict had been conveyed in private to our allies, but we feel the need to announce it publicly.

Nusantara will not lend a hand to help a nation's poor attempt to police the world, nor will Nusantara help defending any alliances who get attacked for trying to support this carefully orchestrated pseudo-morality crusade, directly or indirectly.

We encourage our allies, alliances, and nation leaders of the world in general, to not put too much power on a single nation leader or you will be disappointed seeing that those powers you entrusted on him, being abused for satisfying personal ego and for settling down personal grudge, hidden under the false premise of restoring the moral of the community.

We understand if you must enter the war on that side, it is your choice, but understand that we won't be with you this time.

[ooc]

We believe we are all equal and a player should not have more say than the Admin Almighty Himself on how we should play this.

[/ooc]

Have a Nice Day

/s/

MahaPrabu - Cyrus0321

Mahapatih - gantanX

Fair stance, but you're a crappy ally.

Edited by kevin32891
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...