GOON spy orders

[Mirreille]

[quote name='Andre27' timestamp='1285623631' post='2466275']
Gray area? I'd say it's a complete no-go zone. Forcing people to drop trades because their trading partner is at war? To my knowledge it's unprecedented in the history of planet bob. It directly violates a nations sovereignty to choose their trades.
[/quote]

At the alliance level maybe, but in the realm of newbies and the unaligned I am sure this has happened. I know this is purely anecdotal, but a long time ago during the war Ephriam Grey propagated against that collection of micros, I knew one of the micro nations involved, and he did indeed get ordered to drop his trades or be attacked. He decided to go to war to support the trade partner instead. Most of the nations involved in that are probably gone today, I lost track of that person shortly afterwards and I see he isn't around any more, but I would bet it has happened more then once.

[Andre27]

[quote name='Mirreille' timestamp='1285624419' post='2466296']

At the alliance level maybe, but in the realm of newbies and the unaligned I am sure this has happened. I know this is purely anecdotal, but a long time ago during the war Ephriam Grey propagated against that collection of micros, I knew one of the micro nations involved, and he did indeed get ordered to drop his trades or be attacked. He decided to go to war to support the trade partner instead. Most of the nations involved in that are probably gone today, I lost track of that person shortly afterwards and I see he isn't around any more, but I would bet it has happened more then once.
[/quote]

Even if it happened before, it doesn't make it any less distasteful and it should not be repeated.

[pezstar]

[quote name='Andre27' timestamp='1285624685' post='2466300']
Even if it happened before, it doesn't make it any less distasteful and it should not be repeated.
[/quote]

I can tell you with certainty that if anyone ever came to STA and demanded that we force a member to drop trades, we'd laugh in their face. The only situation in which we would consider it is if someone knowingly sent a uranium trade to a known rogue in order to facilitate the purchase of nuclear weapons. In that case, we'd have to talk about it and decide whether or not it's a precedent we'd be willing to start. This particular one is a slippery slope, as Andre pointed out. Having someone cancel a Uranium trade could easily turn into other trades.

[Rebel Virginia]

[quote name='JT Jag' timestamp='1285620733' post='2466226']
If, for instance (and this is entirely a theoretical) we found out that someone like Rebel Virginia were trading with one of our rogues, it would certainly be something worth intense scrutiny.
[/quote]
[color="#0000FF"]I really do have to wonder when you fellows will get over your obsession with me. Considering you've already accused and threatened me for trading with Methrage at least once since this has begun simply because he somehow found a uranium and aluminum trade.

Now, I really do hate for facts to get in the way, but as I politely explained to your leader, Methrage is sanctioned on brown, and I have not left the brown team for months. There is simply no possible way for me to trade with Methrage. But whatever. You must have your fantasies, and I must say that I am flattered to be singled out for special scrutiny by GOONS.[/color]

[JT Jag]

[quote name='Rebel Virginia' timestamp='1285625608' post='2466320']
[color="#0000FF"]I really do have to wonder when you fellows will get over your obsession with me. Considering you've already accused and threatened me for trading with Methrage at least once since this has begun simply because he somehow found a uranium and aluminum trade.

Now, I really do hate for facts to get in the way, but as I politely explained to your leader, Methrage is sanctioned on brown, and I have not left the brown team for months. There is simply no possible way for me to trade with Methrage. But whatever. You must have your fantasies, and I must say that I am flattered to be singled out for special scrutiny by GOONS.[/color]
[/quote]I wasn't accusing you anything, Rebel. I know you love us too much to do something like that.

[Beefspari]

[quote name='Andre27' timestamp='1285623631' post='2466275']
Gray area? I'd say it's a complete no-go zone. Forcing people to drop trades because their trading partner is at war? To my knowledge it's unprecedented in the history of planet bob. It directly violates a nations sovereignty to choose their trades. Sanctions are as far as the denial of trades should go. If a person has secured trades untouched my sanctions (secret trades and no team) then that should be the end of things. Using a willing trade as a CB against a person or even worse against an alliance, is distasteful.

What's next on the list, forcing people to change their government because some types of government provide increased espionage odds?
Perhaps the religion of a nation offends you, worthy CB against the alliance that nation is a member of. wouldn't you say?
Let's face it, it's a slippery slope when you try to deny nations their basic freedom of choice.

No exceptions. Freedom of choice for trades should be guaranteed no matter the circumstances.
[/quote]
Yeah, what's next? Saying people can't do tech deals with nuke rogues? Infringing upon their right to send people 4.5m/50t/2000s? How dare anyone!

I agree that that trades are iffy, but if someone is sanctioned and another involved party intentionally provides them with uranium for the express purpose of giving them nukes, that's very questionable. It's no better than sending them cash so they can afford nukes. It could be innocent or accidental, but that's not part of the scenario I'm talking about.

You making it into a hyperbole doesn't mean it's impossible for someone to intentionally assist someone with the purpose of helping them cause more damage. The only slippery slope is that you're extending the situation far beyond reasonable limits. Providing aluminum to an old trade partner because you need resources isn't the same thing as providing uranium to a nuke rogue that was sanctioned so he can buy nukes.

[Andre27]

[quote name='Beefspari' timestamp='1285627952' post='2466363']
The only slippery slope is that you're extending the situation far beyond reasonable limits. Providing aluminum to an old trade partner because you need resources isn't the same thing as providing uranium to a nuke rogue that was sanctioned so he can buy nukes.
[/quote]

Anything that goes beyond sanctions is "beyond reasonable limits". You claim there's a difference between trading because you need resources and supplying uranium, there isn't.

So uranium is needed for nukes, what if you want to drain his war chest faster by denying resources beyond the reach of sanctions? Aluminium lowers aircraft cost: Deny that resource. Lead lowers the cost of nukes and CM: Deny that resource. Iron, Oil, Pigs, Rubber all decrease your opponents bills. Deny those resources.

You see that there is no difference between Uranium and other resources.
Using a willing trade beyond the reach of sanctions as a CB is reaching, trying to see how far the community will go. Well, this is a bridge too far. Don't go there.

[ktarthan]

[quote name='Andre27' timestamp='1285630085' post='2466389']
Anything that goes beyond sanctions is "beyond reasonable limits". You claim there's a difference between trading because you need resources and supplying uranium, there isn't.

So uranium is needed for nukes, what if you want to drain his war chest faster by denying resources beyond the reach of sanctions? Aluminium lowers aircraft cost: Deny that resource. Lead lowers the cost of nukes and CM: Deny that resource. Iron, Oil, Pigs, Rubber all decrease your opponents bills. Deny those resources.

You see that there is no difference between Uranium and other resources.
Using a willing trade beyond the reach of sanctions as a CB is reaching, trying to see how far the community will go. Well, this is a bridge too far. Don't go there.
[/quote]
I think it is the disproportionate amount of damage that nukes can accomplish, and the fact that Uranium is the yes/no binary switch that allows or denies you the ability to purchase them.

Making his collections smaller and raising his bills does not eliminate his warchest. Making his military cost more does not prevent him from using it, etc.

Personally, I believe that due to the nature of trade agreements there are nearly zero cases where it would be "okay" to force a nation to stop a trade, although I can definitely see bribery being attempted in some. That being said, I don't think that intentionally providing a uranium trade to a nuke rogue is "okay" for any reason other than being ignorant of the situation.

Edited September 27, 2010 by ktarthan

[Ellis]

[quote name='Andre27' timestamp='1285630085' post='2466389']
Anything that goes beyond sanctions is "beyond reasonable limits". You claim there's a difference between trading because you need resources and supplying uranium, there isn't.

So uranium is needed for nukes, what if you want to drain his war chest faster by denying resources beyond the reach of sanctions? Aluminium lowers aircraft cost: Deny that resource. Lead lowers the cost of nukes and CM: Deny that resource. Iron, Oil, Pigs, Rubber all decrease your opponents bills. Deny those resources.

You see that there is no difference between Uranium and other resources.
Using a willing trade beyond the reach of sanctions as a CB is reaching, trying to see how far the community will go. Well, this is a bridge too far. Don't go there.
[/quote]

Pretty much what ktarthan said, the fact that uranium allows nukes, which are so much more damaging than pretty much anything else distinguishes it from any other resource. If someone provides a uranium trade knowing full well that it's going to allow a rogue to nuke, that's as bad or worse than aiding them, especially if the rogue is fighting non-nuclear nations.

[Biazt]

[quote name='Rebel Virginia' timestamp='1285625608' post='2466320']
[color="#0000FF"]I really do have to wonder when you fellows will get over your obsession with me. Considering you've already accused and threatened me for trading with Methrage at least once since this has begun simply because he somehow found a uranium and aluminum trade.

Now, I really do hate for facts to get in the way, but as I politely explained to your leader, Methrage is sanctioned on brown, and I have not left the brown team for months. There is simply no possible way for me to trade with Methrage. But whatever. You must have your fantasies, and I must say that I am flattered to be singled out for special scrutiny by GOONS.[/color]
[/quote]
No one is accusing you of trading with Methrage right now. We're only talking about you because you're the perfect example of what we're talking about since you've traded uranium with Methrage in the past.

Also I agree, FACTS

Edited September 28, 2010 by Biazt

[Rebel Virginia]

[quote name='Biazt' timestamp='1285639134' post='2466491']
No one is accusing you of trading with Methrage right now. We're only talking about you because you're the perfect example of what we're talking about since you've traded uranium with Methrage in the past.

Also I agree, FACTS
[/quote]
[color="#0000FF"]I would have logs of a pleasant little chat with Sardonic, where he told me to cancel my [nonexistent] trade with Methrage, or else. Unfortunately my client does not log, but rest assured, I am a man of truth. I wouldn't be saying this if it did not happen.[/color]

[Sephiroth]

[quote name='Ellis' timestamp='1285637288' post='2466475']
Pretty much what ktarthan said, the fact that uranium allows nukes, which are so much more damaging than pretty much anything else distinguishes it from any other resource. If someone provides a uranium trade knowing full well that it's going to allow a rogue to nuke, that's as bad or worse than aiding them, especially if the rogue is fighting non-nuclear nations.
[/quote]
We have more NS and nations than many recognized alliances out there, so I don't see how it would be allowing a rogue to nuke. Do I have a CB to declare on anyone trading uranium to GOONS or does me being on the smaller side in this war mean they should get help from everyone and me no help, aid, tech deals or trades? I'm putting up a fight against an alliance much larger than my own, why do so many people see a need to help GOONS in every way possible to try making them win regardless of lack of ability on the alliances part?

[Biazt]

[quote name='Rebel Virginia' timestamp='1285639290' post='2466495']
[color="#0000FF"]I would have logs of a pleasant little chat with Sardonic, where he told me to cancel my [nonexistent] trade with Methrage, or else. Unfortunately my client does not log, but rest assured, I am a man of truth. I wouldn't be saying this if it did not happen.[/color]
[/quote]
Unfortunate but luckily I am kind and forgiving. All of your sins are forgiven.

[eejack]

[quote name='JT Jag' timestamp='1285623872' post='2466283']
Personal freedom extends to arm's length, and an argument could be made that by supplying uranium to a rogue that nation is repressing our freedom to develop as we see fit.
[/quote]
The ability to repress people through might to expand your definition of personal freedom?

Does this mean that you believe that all uranium ( and lead for the obvious military advantages ) carrying nations need vet their trades with you? Should they carry a signifying mark, perhaps a star, on them to make them readily identifiable. Perhaps you wish to just number them and put them into a place where you might oversee their development, lest they become a threat to your personal freedoms?

I can see your point - because one never knows when one of these rackish villians might leap out from behind a tree - these singular nations bearing ill will for all of planet bob. Control of the evil resources is the only way to be ABSOLUTELY safe.

[quote]If I am ever really in power, the destruction of the Rogues will be my first and most important job. As soon as I have power, I shall have gallows after gallows erected, for example, as many of them as traffic allows. Then the Rogues will be hanged one after another, and they will stay hanging until they stink. They will stay hanging as long as hygienically possible. As soon as they are untied, then the next group will follow and that will continue until the last Rogue is exterminated. Exactly the same procedure will be followed for those that give comfort to the Rogue. They will be marched onto the gallows until their stench is removed from our air, until it is at last safe.[/quote]
Ah....Freedom!

[Beefspari]

[quote name='Methrage' timestamp='1285639348' post='2466496']
Do I have a CB to declare on anyone trading uranium to GOONS
[/quote]
Absolutely. Yes. Please do this. In fact you said you'd consider sanctioning an act of war, and I posted the list of ~100 alliances you'd have to go through to be truthful to that claim, but you conveniently ignored it.

[Sigrun Vapneir]

[quote name='Beefspari' timestamp='1285640792' post='2466516']
Absolutely. Yes. Please do this. In fact you said you'd consider sanctioning an act of war, and I posted the list of ~100 alliances you'd have to go through to be truthful to that claim, but you conveniently ignored it.
[/quote]

An act of war in isolation is a cb, but there is no obligation for the offended to declare war over it.

[Bavaricar]

Sigrun, you have good timing. I've lately been curious if the Confederatio Aesir might ever be given peace terms that would be reasonable to you?

It relates to this thread since it [i]appears[/i] from a distance that you are being run from Planet Bob in much the same way the goons&co want to get rid of Methrage and Jim.

Just curious since alliances like the [s]goons[/s] [font="Comic Sans MS"]goons[/font], [s]genmay [/s]umbrella and [s]LUE [/s]MK used to cry so about running alliances from the planet, but that same sentiment is nonexistent at the national level.

From my beatdown side of things, I'm not pleased watching nations I've warred go inactive and slip from the face of Planet Bob. Nations like ours have much more spirit than most of those we face it seems, but we also see a bigger picture than warring without any reasonable resolution or realistic end.

Edited September 28, 2010 by Bavaricar

[Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz]

[quote name='EEjack' timestamp='1285640787' post='2466515']
The ability to repress people through might to expand your definition of personal freedom?

Does this mean that you believe that all uranium ( and lead for the obvious military advantages ) carrying nations need vet their trades with you? Should they carry a signifying mark, perhaps a star, on them to make them readily identifiable. Perhaps you wish to just number them and put them into a place where you might oversee their development, lest they become a threat to your personal freedoms?

I can see your point - because one never knows when one of these rackish villians might leap out from behind a tree - these singular nations bearing ill will for all of planet bob. Control of the evil resources is the only way to be ABSOLUTELY safe.


Ah....Freedom!
[/quote]
And there's the Godwin for the thread. Nice

[JT Jag]

[quote name='Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz' timestamp='1285643651' post='2466548']
And there's the Godwin for the thread. Nice
[/quote]Yeah we can pretty much close up shop now.

[Sigrun Vapneir]

[quote name='Bavaricar' timestamp='1285643081' post='2466540']
Sigrun, you have good timing. I've lately been curious if the Confederatio Aesir might ever be given peace terms that would be reasonable to you?

It relates to this thread since it [i]appears[/i] from a distance that you are being run from Planet Bob in much the same way the goons&co want to get rid of Methrage and Jim. [/quote]

For now, I can only say "time will tell."

I see both parallels as well as the differences in the situations, but certainly the long inbred prejudice of planet bob that has lead to the twin terms 'rogue' and 'unaligned' to be used to justify inhumanity to an underclass of ever-expanding scope is a common thread. To me a 'rogue' or 'unaligned' entity was always simply one that could not be reasoned with, as was argued earlier in this thread. To others, however, it is simply an excuse to justify atrocity. And to yet others, a trigger to evoke a passive state.

However I am not looking for help with my opponents. Obviously we have some pretty serious differences, and obviously given the numerical advantage they hold it would be a stretch to forecast my own victory. But there is an ancient sufi proverb, 'maybe the <beep> horse can fly'...

The point is, other than abusing team sanctions (which sucks, not because it hurt me in the slightest, but because it hurt other innocent nations whose rulers werent as capable and active as I) and this one random ally that may have decided to show up on his own, and the constant refrain of 'rogue' which is insulting and annoying and seems to prevent them from thinking rationally about my proposals, they havent done anything too bad. Lately.

We've even had polite discussions about the possibility of peace.

Unfortunately we ultimately had an irreconcilable gulf between the positions each considered reasonable, and so for now it appears they do not intend to quit throwing themselves futily on fortified Æsir positions anytime soon. Whether or how long before they shall tire of self-immolation is not for I to say.

At any rate, they have been willing to discuss things with me by in-game PM and on coldfront, standard channels so far as I am concerned, and even though we havent come to any agreement, I am happy to report they have never told me I would have to sign up for another <bleeeeeeep> forum account before they would talk to me, or suggested any other essentially unconscionable or otherworldly terms, so that's something to their credit at least.

[Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz]

[quote name='JT Jag' timestamp='1285645957' post='2466582']
Yeah we can pretty much close up shop now.
[/quote]
Ayup. Apparently GOONS are as bad as genocidal German ultra-nationalists - who'da thunk it?

[JT Jag]

[quote name='Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz' timestamp='1285647656' post='2466607']
Ayup. Apparently GOONS are as bad as genocidal German ultra-nationalists - who'da thunk it?
[/quote]I could make a joke about Nordreich here, but that would be tasteless and I am better than that.

[TypoNinja]

[quote name='JT Jag' timestamp='1285647790' post='2466608']
I could make a joke about Nordreich here, but that would be tasteless and I am better than that.
[/quote]

No No, please do. I thought the point of the thread was to see how low we could sink?

[Baldr]

[quote name='JT Jag' timestamp='1285623872' post='2466283']
Personal freedom extends to arm's length, and an argument could be made that by supplying uranium to a rogue that nation is repressing our freedom to develop as we see fit.
[/quote]

So GOONS can attack anyone they want, all is good. Someone else trades with a nation GOONS doesn't like, and it's repressing your freedom?

You never cease to amuse.

[Biazt]

[quote name='Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz' timestamp='1285643651' post='2466548']
And there's the Godwin for the thread. Nice
[/quote]
Well, it seems we've hit rock bottom.

And it's GLORIOUS