Secret Treaties

[Grendel]

CB are the declarers justification for war. That justification only needs to be valid to the declarer, no one else, nor is there any requirement to justify any war IMHO other then what is stated between opponents. Whether or not other nations or alliance want to critique a CB is irrelevant to the original justification other then what those criticizers want to do about it.

I have always found the e-lawyering of CBs hilarious.


[i]ahhh, typos[/i]

Edited December 11, 2010 by Grendel

[Believland]

[quote name='Captain Flinders' timestamp='1292096356' post='2536646']
That's right folks, we're first on the list. Clearly that means we are best.

Though I will go on the record as saying that this stupid little war that I care nothing for was not protected nor endorsed by Nordreich.
[/quote]

Hey now, don't ignore the fact that we brought together everyone.

Seriously, these type of things make me laugh.

Honestly, we defended BoS from any 3rd party alliance. If AzN wanted to attack BoS then we would have let them. Seriously, we're not evil, even if I like to play it.

Edited December 11, 2010 by Believland

[zzzptm]

Iamwalrus: You have insulted the honor of my alliance and my nation. I demand an apology from you.

[chefjoe]

Were still oppressing people somehow?

[lonewolfe2015]

Wow, even if our complete lack of interests here on Bob, we've somehow come to tick this guy off.

What annoys me is that for some reason people think those Valhallan fools deserve to be on top of us, pshhh, they wish.

PS: The jig is up, looks like yall will have to destroy us for these atrocities.

Edited December 11, 2010 by lonewolfe2015

[White Chocolate]

Interesting read, as always, iamwalrus. I didn't realize there was that much involved in this particular conflict.

Regarding the below:

[quote name='Grendel' timestamp='1292099368' post='2536690']
"Right" or "Wrong" is determined by what the individual nation and/or alliance set for themselves by force of resolve, diplomatic maneuverings and military military might. That is it, it really is that simple.
[/quote]

The fact that different leaders disagree on what is right and wrong does not mean that it is totally subjective.

[quote name='Grendel' timestamp='1292099368' post='2536690']
So ull up your pants and do what you think is right but do not preach to us.
[/quote]

Why not? This is a public forum. He can post [OOC: within the rules of admin] same as you. Don't listen. If you choose to pay attention, it's your own fault. Deal with it.

Edited December 11, 2010 by White Chocolate

[The Pansy]

[quote name='chefjoe' timestamp='1292108091' post='2536783']
Were still oppressing people somehow?


[/quote]
Yes, and dragging the good name of my alliance down with you, shame on you.

[Omniscient1]

[quote]The danger that this brings to the world of Digiterra is great. It shows that there are alliances out there who respect no one in this world, except those in their little corner. What happened was the rape and plunder of innocent nations and the protection of it by a whole treaty web. What we had was a structural act of violence which was endorsed and protected by these alliances: Nordreich, The Sweet Oblivion, The Dark Templar, Nueva Vida, Colossus, Ragnarok, Valhalla, Asgaard, League of Enlisted Gentlemen, Greenland Republic, The Brigade, Symphony, TOP, ViP, VE, NpO....and the list goes on. [/quote]

I understand what you mean by this, but you have to remember a lot of these alliances could have came to the defense of SJB. For instance ASG would have come in much quicker through their AzN treaty than through their treaty with NoR which I assume is why you listed them.

What you should be preaching against, instead of how evil the treaty web is, is how the system promotes not doing anything. Polar declared war on \m/ for reasons connected to \m/'s raid on FOA. That then ended up ruining Polar politically although it created one of the most interesting wars in recent history. We need more people standing up for what they preach not more canceled treaties.

[Sephiroth]

[quote name='iamwalrus' timestamp='1292100865' post='2536720']
If this is true then why do alliances try and give a CB and why are CB's critiqued?
[/quote]
They give a CB to try preventing uninvolved nations or alliances from coming to the assistance of the one attacked. If an alliance assists someone they don't have a treaty requiring them to them to act, then its treated as an aggressive war by allies of the alliance who started the initial war. If an alliance attacks other alliances without presenting a reason they would likely be attacked in response by alliances yet to be involved. If an alliance doesn't care about uninvolved alliances coming to the assistance of the one the are attacking, they don't need a very good CB, although having one is still a necessary part of winning a war.

[Ashoka the Great]

Sorry to be late to the party.

*ahem*

RED is a terrible alliance.

[Groucho Marx]

Reading this thread causes me to be proud in our choice of allies. Raiding RED was fun for me too.

[lanceman1972]

[quote name='Ashoka the Great' timestamp='1292112925' post='2536865']
Sorry to be late to the party.

*ahem*

RED is a terrible alliance.
[/quote]

+1

[Hereno]

Wait... so nations realized that they were in a bad alliance who could not/would not protect them, and so they left to join a real alliance who can actually get things done. What's the problem here again?

[zzzptm]

[quote name='iamwalrus' timestamp='1292095472' post='2536631']
The danger that this brings to the world of Digiterra is great. It shows that there are alliances out there who respect no one in this world, except those in their little corner. What happened was the rape and plunder of innocent nations and the protection of it by a whole treaty web. What we had was a structural act of violence which was endorsed and protected by these alliances: Nordreich, The Sweet Oblivion, The Dark Templar, [b]Nueva Vida[/b], Colossus, Ragnarok, Valhalla, Asgaard, League of Enlisted Gentlemen, Greenland Republic, The Brigade, Symphony, TOP, ViP, VE, NpO....and the list goes on.

[/quote]

I reiterate, [i]iamwalrus[/i], you have insulted my alliance and my nation. I demand an apology.

[White Chocolate]

[quote name='zzzptm' timestamp='1292127777' post='2537039']
I reiterate, [i]iamwalrus[/i], you have insulted my alliance and my nation. I demand an apology.
[/quote]

If people went around apologizing to everyone whenever someone felt hurt by what was said on OWF, there wouldn't be much room for anything else.

[zzzptm]

[quote name='White Chocolate' timestamp='1292129822' post='2537078']
If people went around apologizing to everyone whenever someone felt hurt by what was said on OWF, there wouldn't be much room for anything else. :P
[/quote]
Touche. :D

[PrinceArutha]

[quote name='iamwalrus' timestamp='1292095472' post='2536631']
[img]http://obeygiant.com/images/2008/09/df19490d0d2c03a5cd2b88d966ef2c9b.jpg[/img]

Greetings All Nations of Digiterra,

I come before all of you today to once again give account of my perceptions of the current state of Digiterra, based on the recent events of SWATland and the alliance of Red Elite Defence (RED). I thank all of you for your time.

In my last written article "The Common Struggle"(http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=91379), I stated this:



From this viewpoint and the contents found within, I will give my analysis of this most recent war which I am dubbing: [b]"The War of Rogues"[/b].
[b]
On November 29th 2010[/b] Swatland declared war on the alliance RED with the CB, "The Red Elite Defence is the lucky victim this time". If you notice the word usage you will see the word "Victim". The definition of victim, as taken from Dictionary. com states, "a person who is deceived or cheated, as by his or her own emotions or ignorance, by the dishonesty of others, or by some impersonal agency." The nations in RED were cheated of their National Dignity by the sudden and unprovoked attack by Swatland.

The use of the word victim by Swatland leads me to believe that Swatland knew very much that his actions were not considered morally sound. It seems to lead me to believe that Swatland knew that these nations were innocent and did not DESERVE the war which was brought upon them, but rather he was going to take advantage of their ignorance and seemingly weak defenses.

As the war continued on and the nations of RED were being destroyed, I contacted these nations with inquiries about their war. The messages I received were as so:






These messages show that his nation was active and doing his best to defend his citizens; however, he was unfortunately caught at a time when his alliance was becoming more inactive. This is the perfect example of a competent national leader doing his best to protect his people, but falling victim to an irrational and dangerous leader.

[b]On December 4th, 2010[/b] Sajasabie declared war on Swatland. This is their CB, " Ladies and Gentlemen of Planet Bob, Sajasabie has always concerned itself with the maltreatment of small nations, most recently we've seen a DoW from the alliance Cat Land on Red Elite Defence. Sure, Sajasabie has nothing to do with these two alliances, however, seeing as RED and any of it's allies(?) have failed to protect RED's attacked members, to the point of letting one nation receive nuclear attacks from SWATLand, we decided we'd do something about it. The unprovoked attacking, both in conventional warfare and nuclear warfare, on nations that don't have nuclear capabilities or sufficient NS to be able to put up a counter-attack is, in our opinion, wrong. Sajasabie hereby declares war on SWATLand for their use of nuclear weapons on a non-nuclear nation."

In this declaration we see that Sajasabie recognizes that they had no previous connection with the nations in RED, but they also recognized the atrocity which was taken place. They heard the cry of the poor nations who were being attacked, and it was not merely the fact that they were being attacked for no reason, but particularly the fact that they were being attacked by nuclear weapons when they were unarmed themselves. The gravity of the violence called to their hearts and their nations prepare for war. This is the kind of act which was outlined in "The Common Struggle" as one of the most honorable and courageous acts a nation can make for another. They risked the security of their nations for the defense of another. They sacrificed the potential of their survival to insure the survival of another. Such acts are rare in Digiterra.

What happens next will mark a dark period in Digiterra.

[b] On December 5th, 2010[/b] the Brotherhood of Steel declared war on Sajasabie with the following CB, "The Brotherhood of Steel hereby declares war on the alliance of Sajasabie for their unjustified attacks upon our allies, Cat Land." Quickly, everyone reading this scurries to find the documents to show this "treaty" between Catland and BoS. Sajasabie and their protector Amazon Nation I can only imagine are wondering curiously as to where BoS even came from. As the situation begins to reveal itself more fully it is found out that there was no written treaty, but rather it was verbal and no made public.

The Order of The Sword (OTS) then quickly stated that they would protect BoS from any attacks in defense of Sajasabie (except Amazon Nation). Thus, they brought in their full support of this defense of the Aggressor, and they brought all of their allies into the this engagement as well. Now, let us pause a moment.

The danger that this brings to the world of Digiterra is great. It shows that there are alliances out there who respect no one in this world, except those in their little corner. What happened was the rape and plunder of innocent nations and the protection of it by a whole treaty web. What we had was a structural act of violence which was endorsed and protected by these alliances: Nordreich, The Sweet Oblivion, The Dark Templar, Nueva Vida, Colossus, Ragnarok, Valhalla, Asgaard, League of Enlisted Gentlemen, Greenland Republic, The Brigade, Symphony, TOP, ViP, VE, NpO....and the list goes on.

If you did not like this situation and found it repulsive, it is time to check your treaties and check your alliances moral standing. Next time, this war won't end so soon.

From this outcome, two nations from RED now reside in Radix Omnium Malorum Avaritia, and alliance which is protected by NEAT and is a safe haven for all young nations seeking safety.

Peace to all and have a good day,
IAMWalrus
[/quote]

beating on your chest and calling a large group of alliances on planet bob "rapists and plunderers" is not a good way to make friends and get them on your side. I have personally never spoken with you and would be willing to bet you haven't spoken to many of the alliances you have named. If you have a genuine beef with Nueva Vida or the alliances in question then I suggest you go talk to them. Name calling and chest thumping on the owf has never been a smart move. Might I suggest rethinking your analogy?

Also, @ ThePansy, hello. Thats all.

[AnCapistan]

[quote name='iamwalrus' timestamp='1292095472' post='2536631']
[b] On December 5th, 2010[/b] the Brotherhood of Steel declared war on Sajasabie with the following CB, "The Brotherhood of Steel hereby declares war on the alliance of Sajasabie for their unjustified attacks upon our allies, Cat Land." Quickly, everyone reading this scurries to find the documents to show this "treaty" between Catland and BoS. Sajasabie and their protector Amazon Nation I can only imagine are wondering curiously as to where BoS even came from. As the situation begins to reveal itself more fully it is found out that there was no written treaty, but rather it was verbal and no made public.
[/quote]

We explicitly told Sajasabie and AzN before our DoW that Cat Land was under our protection. We were ready to forgive and forget but they refused to peace out, as per standard convention.

Also I'm glad to have contributed to the rape and plunder of nations .

Also, we specifically were protecting Cat Land from those without a treaty. SJB [b]stated publicly[/b] they didn't have a treaty. Thus we protected Cat Land. If someone connected to RED via a treaty I wouldn't give a damn.

So get your facts straight before you start spewing your garbage all over here.

Edited December 12, 2010 by Mr Damsky

[White Chocolate]

[quote name='Mr Damsky' timestamp='1292178264' post='2537427']
We explicitly told Sajasabie and AzN before our DoW that Cat Land was under our protection. We were ready to forgive and forget but they refused to peace out, as per standard convention.

Also I'm glad to have contributed to the rape and plunder of nations .

Also, we specifically were protecting Cat Land from those without a treaty. SJB [b]stated publicly[/b] they didn't have a treaty. Thus we protected Cat Land. If someone connected to RED via a treaty I wouldn't give a damn.

So get your facts straight before you start spewing your garbage all over here.
[/quote]

I'm not sure exactly what facts he has wrong. I reread both the OP and your comments and you didn't say anything that contradicted what iamwalrus is saying. Provide a link to where you announce that your protecting Cat Land.

In fact, now that I look back at the public posts leading up to this, Cat Land specifically said no treaties are involved:

[quote name='SWAT128' timestamp='1290762284' post='2523744']
I have grown tired of just sitting back and waiting for someone to do something, and I know others have as well. Here is your chance to do something about it and possibly cure some boredom while you're at it. I do not guarantee that this will end well for anyone that joins me, but I do guarantee we'll have some fun on our way down.
Also no treaties because treaty web
[/quote]

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=95092&st=0&p=2523744&hl=catland&fromsearch=1&#entry2523744

and then the "alliance" of Cat Land (two people, if I recall correctly - an alliance by MY standards but I'm generally on the ultra liberal end of that debate) declared war on a non-nuclear nation and announced that here:
http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=95206&st=0&p=2526391&hl=catland&fromsearch=1&#entry2526391

Look, I get that there has been a long period of peace by the standards of Planet Bob. I also am not saying that individual leaders can't decide to start their own groups and declare war if they wish. However, either one has the protection of another group or one doesn't.

From the perspective of someone just looking at what is public here, it VERY much appears that SWAT128 got antsy, decided to go out in the wild world of non-aligned, made a big deal about it on OWF in the process, attacked a small group and then got more than expected in return and either asked for help or got it unasked.

You know - if I were leadership in Sajasabie and AzN, I'd be annoyed and might not want to agree to peace either. Unless I see something else not posted, looks like standard convention (considering Cat Land said NO treaties are involved in public before any of this happened) supports Sajasabie and AzN.

In any case, I can see the OP's point. IF this incident created any sort of international buzz at all beyond those groups directly involved, then if I were a leader of a group who could have gotten pulled in, I'd take a close look at my alliances treaty situation. That's a great deal of power over what one's alliance does or does not do being handed over to one little bored "alliance."

Edited December 12, 2010 by White Chocolate

[wickedj]

[quote name='iamwalrus' timestamp='1292098029' post='2536668']
You are right. The fact that RED was getting destroyed by a rogue was NOT a global concern; however, it became a global concern once BoS declared a secret treaty WITH that rogue AND OTS was going to honor and protect BoS and that treaty.

That is the issue.
[/quote]
oh lawdy a secret treaty :siren:

FAN has secret treaties. Gramlins have no treaties at one time. Fark doesnt announce their treaties. CoJ claims to have secret treaties.

Guess you better start taxing the above alliances, but first tell me which one so i can join and get in on some war

[iamwalrus]

[quote name='PrinceArutha' timestamp='1292173541' post='2537381']
beating on your chest and calling a large group of alliances on planet bob "rapists and plunderers" is not a good way to make friends and get them on your side. I have personally never spoken with you and would be willing to bet you haven't spoken to many of the alliances you have named. If you have a genuine beef with Nueva Vida or the alliances in question then I suggest you go talk to them. Name calling and chest thumping on the owf has never been a smart move. Might I suggest rethinking your analogy?

Also, @ ThePansy, hello. Thats all.
[/quote]


I am not trying to get anyone "on my side". I am rather saying it how it is. RED's nations were raped for tech, land, money, fun, whatever it may be. I did nothing but follow the MDP trail starting with SWATLand. If you don't like what came up, then change it. If you don't care, then I don't care.

In this world where there are so many entangling treaties, lines are going to be drawn at some point and it is very clear that those directly connected to SWATland, BoS and OTS are on the side of aggressive bullying.

[AnCapistan]

[quote name='White Chocolate' timestamp='1292188606' post='2537583']
Provide a link to where you announce that your protecting Cat Land.
[/quote]

There is none, our mistake we didn't expect attention whores to jump on him. As I just said. Like literally just said, we told SJB they were attacking a protected nation of ours, we expected them to peace out like anyone would once they just learned they attacked a protected nation. And, uh, they didn't.

[PrinceArutha]

[quote name='iamwalrus' timestamp='1292193817' post='2537648']
I am not trying to get anyone "on my side". I am rather saying it how it is. RED's nations were raped for tech, land, money, fun, whatever it may be. I did nothing but follow the MDP trail starting with SWATLand. If you don't like what came up, then change it. If you don't care, then I don't care.

In this world where there are so many entangling treaties, lines are going to be drawn at some point and it is very clear that those directly connected to SWATland, BoS and OTS are on the side of aggressive bullying.
[/quote]

NONE of Nueva Vida's Treaties chain and many of the other alliances you have accused of being "rapists and plunderers" do not have chaining treaties either. Your little issue is not our issue. Read the treaties before you start making claims.

[Believland]

Seriously. Even the treaty with NoR and TSO don't change nor would I ask for their assistance as it would be selfish. Not to mention, most of AzN's allies are our OTPs and by our treaty with NoR we can't attack them.

[White Chocolate]

[quote name='Mr Damsky' timestamp='1292195004' post='2537675']
There is none, our mistake we didn't expect attention whores to jump on him. As I just said. Like literally just said, we told SJB they were attacking a protected nation of ours, we expected them to peace out like anyone would once they just learned they attacked a protected nation. And, uh, they didn't.
[/quote]

My issue with this is that the 2 man alliance (and a lot of people arguing against the OP here would bring up the issue that it isn't really even an "alliance" IF this happened with someone less popular who attacked one of their friends) AA of Cat Land specifically said they didn't have any treaties on OWF.

Here:
http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=95092&st=0&p=2523744&hl=catland&fromsearch=1&#entry2523744

Either have a treaty or don't, but don't go making public announcements claiming there are no treaties involved when there are.

Oh, and of course there is the public declaration of war from the 2 man "alliance" later. Again - to each his own but then let the leader making the decision deal with the consequences of that decision.

About your comment below:
[quote name='Mr Damsky' timestamp='1292195004' post='2537675']
we didn't expect attention whores to jump on him.
[/quote]

Seriously, if anyone is being an "attention whore" (your words) in the whole situation, it's the person whose actions you're defending.