Ragnarok Declaration of War

[Keres]

[quote name='Viking' timestamp='1281730005' post='2414717']
This could have been prevented right then if NSO didn't have a policy outside the boundaries of what all alliances on both sides of the web consider normal.
[/quote]

Shhh, you'll get them going on a hissy fit about being "unique" and how noone REALLY understands them...

[shilo]

[quote name='Viking' timestamp='1281730005' post='2414717']
NSO is the only alliance I know of that lets in nations with active wars. You aren't suggesting that common diplomacy measures were discarded, you're asking RoK to bend the normal rules of diplomacy because NSO is a special snowflake.

This could have been prevented right then if NSO didn't have a policy outside the boundaries of what all alliances on both sides of the web consider normal.
[/quote]
Afaik, it's nothing unusual at all to let in nations at war and help them sort it out, especially when the ingame information available shows that someone is defending themselves.
It's unusual to attack a nation in an alliance after you simply informed the government of that alliance that aiding that nation will mean war, instead of first coming to the government and laying out your reasons for wanting to attack that nation, see on whether the alliance either condones your attacks and kicks that nation out or offers other means of compensating for the faults of that nation, or whether the alliance supports what the nation in question did and thus is looking for a conflict.

Only bullies don't explain themselves to others because they know it's not necessary to get what they want, diplomacy has nothing to do with it. But maybe we simply come from different corners of the planet.
Any alliance would lose sovereignty if a third party could simple go ahead and say "aid your member and you are at war", if you have any respect for the sovereignty of an alliance, you give them time to settle this internally. And oh, that might even mean more than evening to update.


Of course, if you really dislike an alliance, and consider it a bonus to maybe start up a war with more than one other alliance you really don't like by attacking this alliance, then naturally taking your time, giving that alliance time to resolve the issue in a way that both allows time for due process and respects its sovereignty, and then still likely gets you solved the supposed only existing problem, that one nation, of course you wouldn't do that.
You would go ahead and "inform" a government member of said alliance that aiding one of its members when you attack that nation is a crime in your opinion and a clear casus belli, with naturally no other way out but start an all out war right away.

Edited August 13, 2010 by shilo

[R&R-Viking]

No, seriously. It's not that common to admit someone with active wars regardless of the circumstances. I've been here four years and that is pretty much a constant. You work out the issues on behalf of the applicant before admission, admittance before solution has historically led to problems. That's why they make "XXX Applicant" alliance affiliations.

Edited August 13, 2010 by Viking

[HeroofTime55]

[quote name='Viking' timestamp='1281733172' post='2414782']
No, seriously. It's not that common to admit someone with active wars regardless of the circumstances. I've been here four years and that is pretty much a constant. You work out the issues on behalf of the applicant before admission, admittance before solution has historically led to problems. That's why they make "XXX Applicant" alliance affiliations.
[/quote]The irony is that the same bunch of folks criticizing this policy today are, in general, the ones who hailed it when it was initially implemented.

Funny how standards change.

[chris8967]

[quote name='Vol Navy' timestamp='1281387565' post='2408311']
I am curious as to how a 4k ns nation was supposed to be able to pay back large amounts of money while under attack and not being allowed any aid?
[/quote]

NSO refused to pay any reps, all NSO had to do was cut him loose (as he was a rogue on the run when they excepted him, hence the reason MHA rejected him), pay the reps for him (which means all hostilities end), or keep him and let him take his punishment and help him rebuild after. NSO opted to send him aid instead, even though Hoo told them several times that if they sent the rogue aid it would be considered an act of war on Rok, as one of our members had declared on the rogue in defense of TENE.

[Van Hoo III]

[quote name='chris8967' timestamp='1281733693' post='2414801']
NSO refused to pay any reps, all NSO had to do was cut him loose (as he was a rogue on the run when they excepted him, hence the reason MHA rejected him), pay the reps for him (which means all hostilities end), or keep him and let him take his punishment and help him rebuild after. NSO opted to send him aid instead, even though Hoo told them several times that if they sent the rogue aid it would be considered an act of war on Rok, as one of our members had declared on the rogue in defense of TENE.
[/quote]


It is also important to note that the logs indicate that we were willing to cease attacks should a rep agreement be in place. Up to this point, Sedrick had refused to pay reps.

Edited August 13, 2010 by Van Hoo III

[chris8967]

[quote name='Ivan Moldavi' timestamp='1281715701' post='2414416']
Sedrick's mental capacity is not the issue however. The issue is whether or not spying constitutes an aggressive act and is a legitimate CB, in which case TENE is the aggressor, which would make every subsequent act by Sedrick defensive in nature, and therefore not a rogue but a sovereign nation defending itself.
[/quote]


You would be correct, except Sedrick spied first (which was a successful spy attack). He told TENE he was going to attack them and then spied on one of their members. Said TENE member then spied on Sedrick (which failed), then came the battle. Sedrick then ran to MHA for protection and MHA said "I don't think so", then he ran to NSO and they said "sure come on in, we don't care that your in a war or not". NSO was contacted and informed of what Sedrick had done and they didn't care. The rest is in the OP read it.

[shilo]

[quote name='Viking' timestamp='1281733172' post='2414782']
No, seriously. It's not that common to admit someone with active wars regardless of the circumstances. I've been here four years and that is pretty much a constant. You work out the issues on behalf of the applicant before admission, admittance before solution has historically led to problems. That's why they make "XXX Applicant" alliance affiliations.
[/quote]
I never said that this was a typical thing to do, or something that is always easy and without complications, just that it's not as unique as you said. I also don't deny the fact that the nation in question had those active wars, and that it was spied upon.
All I wonder is how quickly a very small, controllable issue that in some cases might not even be dealt with by the highest government level suddenly escalated into a full war.


Usually, when you want to deal with a member of another alliance for any past baggage, you first try to talk to the alliance in such a manner that after talking, you can deal with the nation without involving the other alliance. Saying "get out of my way or don't, I really don't care cause I am gonna do what I want anyways" isn't diplomacy, it's also not a fair warning. It's trying to intimidate, threatening, aggressive, bullying. Diplomacy doesn't fit in there.

And I am mentioning this because obviously there was previous baggage that had to be sorted out (I definitely agree here), if I were to handle that, I would present my case, and looking at the current situation, especially that part that can't be seen by anyone able enough to check spy and warscreens, but all the stuff that happened before, lay it out quite clearly with proof, and then ask "do you support those actions?", and I would then make sure the highest authority there is, not the one currently available, agrees with that course as well, and only once I got a final response, would I then go ahead and follow through with ingame actions.
Maybe I got this all wrong, and then I apologize, but to me it doesn't look like anyone waited for NSO to decide on the issue, but one simply "informed" NSO, rather blatantly, that anything but going out of RoKs way would mean war. And then went ahead and attacked the nation without ever trying to get NSO to kick that nation out [u]before[/u].

When you then judge Heft sending aid to that nation, obviously it wasn't smart, cause well... RoK is in the position to do what it wants and NSO ultimately is outgunned... it clearly looks like an attempt to solve a situation diplomatically where looking at the facts - RoK just declared war on NSO by attacking a member.
Usually at least, until NSO lets that nation go, that is what happens when you attack one of their members, or any other alliance. I think that responding with a nuclear first strike is actually more in line with what happened, sending aid imho is the message "ehm, I know you just declared war on us, and we don't stand a chance, but I gotta protect the very basics of the concept of any alliance - protecting its members from aggression - but I also want to still try to resolve this peacefully".


Calling this a clear CB - well... if you were looking for one, you got one there...

Edited August 13, 2010 by shilo

[HeroofTime55]

[quote name='chris8967' timestamp='1281734609' post='2414836']
You would be correct, except Sedrick spied first (which was a successful spy attack). He told TENE he was going to attack them and then spied on one of their members. Said TENE member then spied on Sedrick (which failed), then came the battle. Sedrick then ran to MHA for protection and MHA said "I don't think so", then he ran to NSO and they said "sure come on in, we don't care that your in a war or not". NSO was contacted and informed of what Sedrick had done and they didn't care. The rest is in the OP read it.
[/quote]Unless Sedrick admits to this, it is merely circumstantial, as Moldavi has said. It is not proof.

[Keres]

[quote name='HeroofTime55' timestamp='1281735156' post='2414851']
Unless Sedrick admits to this, it is merely circumstantial, as Moldavi has said. It is not proof.
[/quote]

Oh yeah, unless this guy admits to stealing a million bucks it never happened... silly us for forgeting this important law of the universe

[HeroofTime55]

[quote name='Deathistan' timestamp='1281735342' post='2414856']
Oh yeah, unless this guy admits to stealing a million bucks it never happened... silly us for forgeting this important law of the universe
[/quote]Nice, uh, straw man? Again? Is there like a scoreboard over where you are, where the guy who makes the most straw man arguments wins?

[b]There is no proof.[/b] Zero. Not just the lack of an admission, but the lack of any other form of proof.

[Keres]

[quote name='HeroofTime55' timestamp='1281736901' post='2414896']
Nice, uh, straw man? Again? Is there like a scoreboard over where you are, where the guy who makes the most straw man arguments wins?

[b]There is no proof.[/b] Zero. Not just the lack of an admission, but the lack of any other form of proof.
[/quote]

You really dont know that, y'know why? there is no proof that there is no proof... but there really IS proof that proves what he did... you're just not getting it... I hope it wasnt your "anti drug"

[tamerlane]

[quote name='Deathistan' timestamp='1281737233' post='2414902']
You really dont know that, y'know why? there is no proof that there is no proof... but there really IS proof that proves what he did... you're just not getting it... I hope it wasnt your "anti drug"
[/quote]


O.K. This has gone too far. I can't live on this planet anymore.

**blasts off**

Edited August 13, 2010 by tamerlane

[Jrenster]

[quote name='Deathistan' timestamp='1281737233' post='2414902']
You really dont know that, y'know why? there is no proof that there is no proof... but there really IS proof that proves what he did... you're just not getting it... I hope it wasnt your "anti drug"
[/quote]

You just !@#$@#$ blew my mind.

[Merrie Melodies]

[quote name='Deathistan' timestamp='1281737233' post='2414902']
You really dont know that, y'know why? there is no proof that there is no proof... but there really IS proof that proves what he did... you're just not getting it... I hope it wasnt your "anti drug"
[/quote]
There are known knowns, there are known unknowns, but there are also unknown unknowns.
In regards to this thread, the absence of evidence does not prove the evidence of absence.

[Merrie Melodies]

[quote name='HeroofTime55' timestamp='1281735156' post='2414851']
Unless Sedrick admits to this, it is merely circumstantial, as Moldavi has said. It is not proof.
[/quote]
Let's just cut to the chase, NSO is getting an $@! kicking, none of your sniveling will change that fact.

[D34th]

[quote name='Merrie Melodies' timestamp='1281737669' post='2414914']
Let's just cut to the chase, NSO is getting an $@! kicking, none of your sniveling will change that fact.
[/quote]

This man speaks the truth, the only thing that NSO really can do now is learn with their mistakes, create a better admission process and avoid to give CBs for people who will not hesitate in take it.

[HeroofTime55]

[quote name='Merrie Melodies' timestamp='1281737669' post='2414914']
Let's just cut to the chase, NSO is getting an $@! kicking, none of your sniveling will change that fact.
[/quote]Yes, but it would be nice if RoK would just admit to that instead of trying to hide behind a weak excuse for their actions. I mean, they threw their protectorate into harms way just to have this little war, they wanted it that bad.

[Merrie Melodies]

[quote name='Ivan Moldavi' timestamp='1281722604' post='2414547']
This is hilarious. You keep spouting about the stubbornness of the NSO while defending the position of an alliance that went to war over $6mil in aid after NSO requested evidence from the aggressors (RoK) to substantiate their claims.

To date RoK has not provided one shread of evidence that indicates Sedrick was a rogue nation instead of what the facts support, which is that it is an aggrevied nation that was acting in self defense. Perhaps his response to the spying was too much. Perhaps he shouldn't have launched the attacks even though he had an established and proven CB. Perhaps he shouldn't have applied to NSO while doing so.

But, even with those "perhaps" it is very clear that RoK should not (not perhaps should not) have launched aggressive attacks against a member of another alliance without consulting them first. RoK should not have demanded NSO pay reps without providing evidence to back up their claims and RoK should not have gone to war with the NSO for their doing what any other alliance that actually cares about its membership would have done, which is support a member in the face of false accusations.

You and others can spout on and on about how Sedrick should have handled it or how Heft should have handled it but we are all addressing how RoK did handle it and it was a dismal attempt at diplomacy that did nothing but cause NSO and their own protectorate harm.

If [i]evidence[/i] (not conjecture or speculation) exists that proves Sedrick was a rogue then show it and I will shut up because then I will have no leg to stand on whatsoever. The facts are all that matter in this instance. You ask if Hoo is meant to be telepathic, well how about Heft? Was he supposed to [i]know[/i] that Sedrick was considered a rogue by RoK without them informing NSO before attacking? [b]Were NSO leaders supposed to psychicly know that RoK's claims are legitimate without evidence?[/b]

Give me a break.
[/quote]

In regards to the bolded, NSO may not have known about the validity of the claims against Sedrick but they damn well should have known if they sent him aid a $@! stomping was coming, Hoo told them as much. The big act of surprise and sniveling about lack of diplomacy cracks me up. Hoo told them outright prior too them aiding Sedrick.

[Merrie Melodies]

[quote name='HeroofTime55' timestamp='1281738320' post='2414927']
Yes, but it would be nice if RoK would just admit to that instead of trying to hide behind a weak excuse for their actions. I mean, they threw their protectorate into harms way just to have this little war, they wanted it that bad.
[/quote]
Didn't realize RoK had to explain anything to anyone except maybe their allies.

[shilo]

[quote name='Merrie Melodies' timestamp='1281738831' post='2414936']
Didn't realize RoK had to explain anything to anyone except maybe their allies.
[/quote]
They don't. They are at war with NSO. Any alliance can do whatever it wants as long as it got enough allies to back it up. That's all there's ever been to having "justification" in CN for any action, and that's all there will ever be.

[Wad of Lint]

[quote name='Merrie Melodies' timestamp='1281738331' post='2414928']
In regards to the bolded, NSO may not have known about the validity of the claims against Sedrick but they damn well should have known if they sent him aid a $@! stomping was coming, Hoo told them as much. The big act of surprise and sniveling about lack of diplomacy cracks me up. Hoo told them outright prior too them aiding Sedrick.
[/quote]

The "sniveling" Mr. Porky isn't in regards to the lack of diplomacy AFTER the aid, but BEFORE the attacks. Let's get that straight here and now.

[D34th]

[quote name='HeroofTime55' timestamp='1281738320' post='2414927']
Yes, but it would be nice if RoK would just admit to that instead of trying to hide behind a weak excuse for their actions. I mean, they threw their protectorate into harms way just to have this little war, they wanted it that bad.
[/quote]

There is no weak excuse, if someone says to you not help their enemy(doesn't matter who is right, sedrick is an enemy of ROK/TENE), don't do it or do but doesn't complain after that. "[i]When you complain , you advertise your own stupidity[/i]"

[WarriorConcept]

[quote name='Wad of Lint' timestamp='1281739119' post='2414946']
The "sniveling" Mr. Porky isn't in regards to the lack of diplomacy AFTER the aid, but BEFORE the attacks. Let's get that straight here and now.
[/quote]

Yes, aiding a member whom you should not have accepted because of his current war and after being warned that this would lead to a war is clearly a better form of diplomacy.

[HeroofTime55]

[quote name='shilo' timestamp='1281739044' post='2414943']
They don't. They are at war with NSO. Any alliance can do whatever it wants as long as it got enough allies to back it up. That's all there's ever been to having "justification" in CN for any action, and that's all there will ever be.
[/quote]So wonderful to see the "might makes right" argument resurface. How little things do change.