GOON spy orders

[Banksy]

[quote name='Bilrow' timestamp='1285470983' post='2464843']
Hmmm, unable to find NPO anywhere in my response, try again. So, what you are saying, is that as long as the majority of other people do it, it makes it acceptable?
[/quote]
Hardly, but it indicates the presence of some sort of international norm. If you are in the international minority then you can't claim that 'global law' is on your side.

[quote name='Bavaricar' timestamp='1285471123' post='2464847']
The decisions of a majority of senators are now "legally" binding on the others? [/quote]
Of course they are not, because there is no such thing as international law in CN. I was pointing out the discrepancies in the argument that the NPO's actions were backed by 'global law.'

[quote name='Earogema' timestamp='1285471426' post='2464852']
Eh? That doesn't make any sense.

Red decides that it wants nothing to do with a rogue. It isn't tied to GOONS/supportive of GOONS/or has anything to do with GOONS. It has no reason to sanction an individual who has declared war on GOONS. If GOONS can define an alliance as it sees fit, then Red can do the same and provide reasons for why that alliance isn't going to be sanctioned. Personally, I would never sanction a rogue. A rogue is already outnumbered 3v1 at least, usually 4v1 if he's smart, 6v1 if he's crazy.

Even if you invoke subjective alliance rules in regards to this whole thing, red has full right to not sanction anybody for any reason. It'll sour relations, but if they aren't somebody you're going to be even trying to get close to, I don't see the problem.
[/quote]
Red does have the power to not sanction anyone if they choose not to, no one would argue that. I agree that Red can choose to define an alliance any way they want to. But saying that some sort of 'objective' international law makes their actions legitimate is ridiculous.

[Bilrow]

[quote name='Banksy' timestamp='1285474666' post='2464888']
Hardly, but it indicates the presence of some sort of international norm. If you are in the international minority then you can't claim that 'global law' is on your side.


Of course they are not, because there is no such thing as international law in CN. I was pointing out the discrepancies in the argument that the NPO's actions were backed by 'global law.'


Red does have the power to not sanction anyone if they choose not to, no one would argue that. I agree that Red can choose to define an alliance any way they want to. But saying that some sort of 'objective' international law makes their actions legitimate is ridiculous.
[/quote]

I never argued that "global law" was on our side. That argument came from Beefspari

[quote]So what you're driving at is, you don't care what one alliance thinks, you do what the rest of the world believes. But when the rest of the world believes someone should be sanctioned, you say "What, just cause everyone else does it, NPO should too?" What a ludicrous contradiction.[/quote]

I would argue there is no global law on what constitutes an alliance. Some people believe that it's more than one nation in an alliance, others argue a higher number with other hurdles that have to be passed like being politically tied to another alliance.

You could even stretch the argument and say by default of the rules of this world (OOC: alliance affiliation in game) that to be an alliance only requires one nation with that affiliation. Course, I would disagree with that myself.

Edited September 26, 2010 by Bilrow

[Batallion]

Oh boy, red raiding safari is back because of this thread!

http://www.cybernations.net/search_wars.asp?search=267681&Extended=1

On Knights of Ni! at that

Edited September 26, 2010 by Batallion

[D34th]

Nice development.

[ChairmanHal]

[quote name='Choson' timestamp='1285472262' post='2464861']
If Red wants nothing to do with rogues, then they should sanction them instead of providing them with safe harbour. Not sanctioning them explicitly shows you condone the behavior of nuclear rogues.
[/quote]

Rogues as defined by GOONS, or rogues as defined by NPO?

Unless you can both agree on a reasonable definition, then your insistence that they are harboring rogues is moot.

[quote name='Batallion' timestamp='1285475863' post='2464903']
Oh boy, red raiding safari is back because of this thread!

http://www.cybernations.net/search_wars.asp?search=267681&Extended=1

On Knights of Ni! at that
[/quote]

Oh boy.

Edited September 26, 2010 by ChairmanHal

[TypoNinja]

[quote name='Baldr' timestamp='1285461231' post='2464713']
What you posted was not true. It doesn't matter what time you said it, what matters is whether it is true or not. It wasn't true. It isn't true. It's a lie that you and others keep repeating.
[/quote]

lol, except nobody is repeating it, It was pointed out to be wrong almost right away, and I corrected my self.

Keep beating the dead horse though. I hear if you beat it hard enough it twitches and gives the illusion of life.

[Schattenmann]

[quote name='JT Jag' timestamp='1285471568' post='2464854']
Can we all just cut it out with sanctiontalk? I mean really. At this point nothing's going to change anything, and it's fully within Red's right to set the precedent they have chosen to go with regarding these incidents. But, as those who are on the opposite side of the treaty web of my alliance are fond of saying about us, red should be prepared to stand up to the standards they have set for these incidents when those standards hit closer to home.
[/quote]

Red Dawn has been sanctioning rogues at the request of all sorts of alliances across the political spectrum for over a year. Red Dawn will continue to sanction rogues in the future. If GOONS and their allies decide that they're going to take their toys and go home because we're not sanctioning this one not-rogue, then that's their bad decision to make.

[JT Jag]

As long as your unique definition of what a rogue is remains constant and you sanction rogues (or not) accordingly, Schattenmann, I have no problem with Red Team's actions.

However, if Red Dawn should go back on these standards when it becomes more convenient for them, I'm afraid they will be liable to being named hypocrites, and you (as a Red Dawn leader) a hypocrite by extension.

"Hypocrite". This word has kept coming up lately, hasn't it?

[JT Jag]

Now, if you guys just came out now and admitted that you weren't sanctioning Methrage et al because it is politically expedient, then I would accept that too, as a senator is free to use their bully pulpit and powers as they see fit.

I somehow doubt you will do that though.

[Derwood1]

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1285479073' post='2464931']
Red Dawn has been sanctioning rogues at the request of all sorts of alliances across the political spectrum for over a year. Red Dawn will continue to sanction rogues in the future. If GOONS and their allies decide that they're going to take their toys and go home because we're not sanctioning this one not-rogue, then that's their bad decision to make.
[/quote]

Go on with your delusions, noted.

[Zombie Glaucon]

[quote name='Kalasin' timestamp='1285419824' post='2464233']
Nobody is afraid of you. We'd attack you in a heartbeat if you'd just provide us a casus belli.
[/quote]

Oh man, I can't pass this beauty up.

Just do it, pansies. I'm sure you can dig some grudge/slight up from your years of cowering.

[Schattenmann]

[quote name='Derwood1' timestamp='1285481377' post='2464955']
Go on with your delusions, noted.
[/quote]
What delusions? Government from VE have said "Good luck getting sanctions" and gov't and members of GOONS have said "good luck getting sanctions." Red Dawn has always and will always sanction true rogues without regard to the politics of the requesting party. Sanctions are a serious matter that require serious thought, and in this case the request didn't meet a very cut-and-dried definition of rogue.

At present, Red Dawn is sanctioning 5 rogues. Ironically, one of those rogues is Fordlandia, whose war screen is nothing but GOONS. How does that one figure into your narrative? I guess since everyone is saying we don't sanction nations that are attacking GOONS we should lift that one; I'm glad we've been been informed that that's the case. Oh, right, the fact of the matter is that we simply sanction rogues.

[Il Impero Romano]

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1285484056' post='2464982']
Government from VE have said "Good luck getting sanctions"
[/quote]

Not sure where you got that from, but we will continue to provide sanctions for those routine matters which fit normal criteria, just as we always have.

[citizenkane]

[quote name='Il Impero Romano' timestamp='1285485122' post='2464989']
Not sure where you got that from, but we will continue to provide sanctions for those routine matters which fit normal criteria, just as we always have.
[/quote]

Could this be yet [i]more[/i] mis-representation of facts from Mr Schattenmann?

[url="http://www.cybernations.net/search_wars.asp?search=144512&Extended=1"]A Rogue! Sanction him![/url]

[Schattenmann]

[quote name='Il Impero Romano' timestamp='1285485122' post='2464989']
Not sure where you got that from, but we will continue to provide sanctions for those routine matters which fit normal criteria, just as we always have.
[/quote]
I'm glad to hear that, and everyone can expect the same from Red Dawn. But perhaps you should let Typo and Goldie know what's up:
[quote name='TypoNinja' timestamp='1285394328' post='2464036']
NPO should be more worried about the standard, and pray they never need a sanction in the future from GOONS or any of their allies.

There is a reason things like sanctioning nuclear rogues has always been apolitical, its a can of worms no sane person wants to open.
[/quote]


[quote name='goldielax25' timestamp='1285394620' post='2464040']
I have to completely agree with Typo. If people on the red team want to politicize sanctions, then they will have a hard time securing them themselves in the future should they be raided.
[/quote]

[quote name='TypoNinja' timestamp='1285396888' post='2464066']
You misunderstand, when I say apolitical I mean motivations.

Much like the hundred and one other random CN diplomatic incidents that make up the day to day work in whatever an alliance calls their foreign affairs branch there are certain tasks that one is always helpful and forth coming with, for the simple reason that you want to be able to get the same courtesy in return later.

Nuclear rogues, non-nuclear rogues, ghosts, unauthorized wars, tech deals that keep going after a war stats, delinquent tech deals, ect. The countless mundane tasks that make up alliance FA are typically dealt with without regard to AA, even if its your worst enemy/bitter rival.

Its a simple extension of the golden rule, do unto others and you would have them do unto you. You treat generously because by doing so you become entitled to expect the same treatment later in return, and of course its only a matter of time until you do require a reciprocal service. You'll have a rogue you want sanctioned, you'll have some idiot member who declared a war he shouldn't have, you'll have some deadbeat member who ditched a tech deal, ect.

By attempting to politicize any of these processes you open the floodgates to people deciding that since you weren't nice about it to them or their friends they don't have to be nice to you about it anymore either. This helps nobody, nuclear rogues come from and target all alliances regardless of position on the web. I'm sure NPO thinks its hilarious now to be able to tweak GOONS over a nuclear rogue, but will it be funny when the next time they have someone nuking them they can't get the support they want?
[/quote]

You can understand my dismay at these comments from officials in a senate-holding alliance that is allied to GOONS. They leave little room for uncertainty in their connotations.

Edited September 26, 2010 by Schattenmann

[Baldr]

[quote name='Biazt' timestamp='1285464024' post='2464735']
I'm not sure what everyone is crying about here. [/quote]

It's mostly GOONS crying because they have a war with a small alliance and they want NPO to help them with that war.

[quote name='Biazt' timestamp='1285465859' post='2464763']
In other words, NPO would sanction him (a rogue) had the red raiding safari not existed. If you continue to claim that he's not a rogue then why would NPO have consented to sanction him otherwise?[/quote]

If you treated NPO decently, perhaps they would be more amenable to your requests. But you go out of your way to treat them badly, so they aren't very interested in helping you. Seems pretty simple to me. You did the red raiding safari as a "In your face" thing, and now they are not interested in helping you with your war.

You are fighting 8 nations. Do you really need to cry for NPO to help you?

[quote name='TypoNinja' timestamp='1285477746' post='2464919']
lol, except nobody is repeating it, It was pointed out to be wrong almost right away, and I corrected my self.[/quote]

It's been repeated for over a year now, and you were still repeating it as of yesterday. Quit repeating it, and you'll quit getting called out on it.

[Il Impero Romano]

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1285486388' post='2464998']
I'm glad to hear that, and everyone can expect the same from Red Dawn. But perhaps you should let Typo and Goldie know what's up:

You can understand my dismay at these comments from officials in a senate-holding alliance that is allied to GOONS. They leave little room for uncertainty in their connotations.
[/quote]

I believe my colleagues were speaking more in general terms rather than "this is what VE will be doing from here on out" (also, Typo isn't gov, and the call on sanctions is mine as Lord). Either way, while some may personally frown upon the seeming politicization of sanctions from your end of the world right now, I can assure you that we will continue to grant sanctions without political considerations coming into play.

Edited September 26, 2010 by Il Impero Romano

[WorldConqueror]

[quote name='Il Impero Romano' timestamp='1285486842' post='2465003']
I believe my colleagues were speaking more in general terms rather than "this is what VE will be doing from here on out" (also, Typo isn't gov, and the call on sanctions is mine as Lord). Either way, while some may personally frown upon the seeming politicization of sanctions from your end of the world right now, I can assure you that we will continue to grant sanctions without political considerations coming into play.
[/quote]


I know you guys get your jollies by demonising us, but trying to paint this as 'politicization of sanctions' is ridiculous. Red Dawn conferred on the matter, and after deliberation decided not to grant the sanction, due to it being seen as a conflict between 2 alliances, GOONS and KN. A conflict which Red Dawn did not want to involve itself in by sanctioning one side. Trying to force GOONS and apparently your definition of rogue on us to get your way is not going to work. Just because Red Dawn did not grant the request does not mean we did so because 'We don't like you GOONS '. The reasons for not granting the sanction, and indeed Cortath's opinion of GOONS, have been outlined in this very thread.

[Schattenmann]

[quote name='Il Impero Romano' timestamp='1285486842' post='2465003']
I believe my colleagues were speaking more in general terms rather than "this is what VE will be doing from here on out" (also, Typo isn't gov, and the call on sanctions is mine as Lord). Either way, while some may personally frown upon the seeming politicization of sanctions from your end of the world right now, I can assure you that we will continue to grant sanctions without political considerations coming into play.
[/quote]
I know that like NPO, CoJ and the rest of Red Dawn, you are capable of professional decisions and behavior without regard to personal grudges, so I take you at your word. I have provided logs in this thread showing Red Dawn's reasoning on its declination of the sanction request that date to September 6, and that that reasoning is that Methrage is an alliance leader at war using nukes, not a nuke rogue, and as such will not be sanctioned as a nuke rogue. Logs posted by GOONS are dated 17 days after the decision was made, and include reasons that were not material to the decision on the day it was [b]finalized[/b]. Furthermore, Jim is a sovereign nation (who was unaligned because a nation in his position has no need of an alliance) who may have committed an act of war by aiding Methrage, but is not a rogue. The only politicization of our decision is by log-dump grandstanding by the aggrieved party, which would have started any perceived politicization [i]themselves[/i] by provoking Red Dawn first. It's a good thing for them that Red Dawn is above such pettiness.

I am glad that VE acknowledges that it will weigh requests for sanction on real rogues by their merit and not by no-one-wins tactics. I am confident in assuring VE--and indeed every alliance--that Red Dawn will always consider each sanction request based on its merit as we always have. It's a tricky business saying I hope we can prove to VE and others our dedication to these ideals (since that requires someone roguing on them ) but you get the idea; do not let hyperbole and fear-mongering on anyone's part discourage you from speaking to us on these matters in the future.

[Il Impero Romano]

[quote name='WorldConqueror' timestamp='1285487480' post='2465005']


I know you guys get your jollies by demonising us, but trying to paint this as 'politicization of sanctions' is ridiculous. Red Dawn conferred on the matter, and after deliberation decided not to grant the sanction, due to it being seen as a conflict between 2 alliances, GOONS and KN. A conflict which Red Dawn did not want to involve itself in by sanctioning one side. Trying to force GOONS and apparently your definition of rogue on us to get your way is not going to work. Just because Red Dawn did not grant the request does not mean we did so because 'We don't like you GOONS '. The reasons for not granting the sanction, and indeed Cortath's opinion of GOONS, have been outlined in this very thread.
[/quote]

Please understand, I don't care enough to demonise your alliance, and I don't care enough about your denial of the sanction to delve any deeper than determining the issue on its face, which is an alleged politicization of sanctions. I used the phrase because thats the phrase at issue, and none of my post either was supporting it as truth or decrying it as false. I made absolutely no mention of the definition of a rogue, whether or not you like GOONS, etc. In short, I was speaking to something else entirely (i.e. a mistaken opinion that we would no longer sanction rogues at Red Dawn's request). There is no need for the little rolley eyes picture and whatnot, you simply responded in a way that had nothing at all to do with what I said.

Don't worry about it though, we all make mistakes

[mythicknight]

This is amusing.

Have fun Methrage.

[WorldConqueror]

[quote name='Il Impero Romano' timestamp='1285488137' post='2465009']
Please understand, I don't care enough to demonise your alliance, and I don't care enough about your denial of the sanction to delve any deeper than determining the issue on its face, which is an alleged politicization of sanctions. I used the phrase because thats the phrase at issue, and none of my post either was supporting it as truth or decrying it as false. I made absolutely no mention of the definition of a rogue, whether or not you like GOONS, etc. In short, I was speaking to something else entirely (i.e. a mistaken opinion that we would no longer sanction rogues at Red Dawn's request). There is no need for the little rolley eyes picture and whatnot, you simply responded in a way that had nothing at all to do with what I said.

Don't worry about it though, we all make mistakes
[/quote]
'Seeming' and 'alleged' have different connotations, especially in this instance. Your use of seeming implies you agree with the characterization of the RD refusal to sanction as politicization of sanctions, though you don't know all the details. The line 'I can assure you that we will continue to grant sanctions without political considerations coming into play.', implies that someone else is letting political considerations come into play.

I said 'You guys', which would imply VE as a whole, not you personally. My post was directly addressing the characterisation of denying sanctions as politicizing them, a characterisation you decided to parrot. RD's reasons for denial have been forward in this thread, yet you still choose to parrot that line.

I usually hate these arguments about language, but when an alliance leader in your position doesn't understand the subtleties of the language being used they become necessary.

[oinkoink12]

Guys just stop it.

NPO is playing it well, this is the first time that since we forced them NOT to own the red sphere it comes out handy for them.
They hired schattenmann the official hypnotic e-lawyer that makes you sleep everytime he types.
They do as they please, as they always have.

Nobody cares about the red sphere cause he has his trades on grey.
Walk on, nothing to see here except a big nukecloud.

[Ejayrazz]

[quote name='Choson' timestamp='1285473262' post='2464877']
Ever send that aid?
[/quote]
Why show balls when the Goons don't have them? You GOONS have no honor whatsoever.

Edited September 26, 2010 by Ejayrazz

[MikeCrotch]

[quote name='Ejayrazz' timestamp='1285507564' post='2465127']
Why show balls when the Goons don't have them. You GOONS have no honor whatsoever.
[/quote]

Oh noes, the nasty man said bad words about us :'( If I only we could be like the others and sit in the corner hugging our infrastructure while calling people cowards.