The United Imperial Armed Forces

[Venico]

BOMBs (Brotherhood of Malice Battalions) are being dropped in as we speak. o7

[Unibot III]

BOMBs (Brotherhood of Malice Battalions) are being dropped in as we speak. o7

Is that what we're calling Osiris troops now eh?

[Mahaj]

BOMBs (Brotherhood of Malice Battalions) are being dropped in as we speak. o7

Is that what we're calling Osiris troops now eh?

And look at the piler count. >.>

[Venico]

No Uni that's what my private forces are called that are flying a BoM flag =P

[Unibot III]

No Uni that's what my private forces are called that are flying a BoM flag =P

Can't knock a dude for trying.

[Chernihiv]

Statement from the signatory member regions if the Slavic Co-Operation Pact concerning the events in Slavia

This last major update, troops of the UIAF led a raid on Slavia, a signatory region of the Slavic Co-Operation Pact (SCOP), an alliance dedicated to furthering the Slavic empire in NS. Slavia, though once an FRA member, withdrew from the FRA upon signing the SCOP treaty (which primarily an imperialist treaty), although the embassy still stood, Slavia was not affiliated with the FRA at the time of the raid, and it is by a mere oversight that the embassy still stands. Furthermore, by raiding a fellow imperialist region the signatory members of the UIAF have severely damaged raider unity. Therefore, the SCOP formally requests the withdrawal of UIAF troops from Slavia. Should the UIAF choose to maintain it's occupation of Slavia, citizens of any and all UIAF member regions would become persona non grata in all regions which have signed the SCOP.

We look forward to further communication with you concerning this situation.

The Principality of Chernihiv, Foreign Minister of Poland Lithuania; on behalf of the governments of Poland Lithuania, Slavia, Poland, and Ukraine.

This Third of January, Year of Our Lord 2014.

[Mad Jack]

BOMBs (Brotherhood of Malice Battalions) are being dropped in as we speak. o7

Is that what we're calling Osiris troops now eh?

In the same way that UDL Merrymen are also SDF troopers, FRA rangers or LLA personnel.

No one from the defender world, except possibly TITO, has any leg to stand on when talking about organisational cross-over.

[Mahaj]

Is that what we're calling Osiris troops now eh?

In the same way that UDL Merrymen are also SDF troopers, FRA rangers or LLA personnel.

No one from the defender world, except possibly TITO, has any leg to stand on when talking about organisational cross-over.

Except the UDL didn't take over FRA, Spiritus, or Lazarus, whereas the Brotherhood of Malice did take over Osiris.

[LiamHerndon]

Statement from the signatory member regions if the Slavic Co-Operation Pact concerning the events in Slavia

This last major update, troops of the UIAF led a raid on Slavia, a signatory region of the Slavic Co-Operation Pact (SCOP), an alliance dedicated to furthering the Slavic empire in NS. Slavia, though once an FRA member, withdrew from the FRA upon signing the SCOP treaty (which primarily an imperialist treaty), although the embassy still stood, Slavia was not affiliated with the FRA at the time of the raid, and it is by a mere oversight that the embassy still stands. Furthermore, by raiding a fellow imperialist region the signatory members of the UIAF have severely damaged raider unity. Therefore, the SCOP formally requests the withdrawal of UIAF troops from Slavia. Should the UIAF choose to maintain it's occupation of Slavia, citizens of any and all UIAF member regions would become persona non grata in all regions which have signed the SCOP.

We look forward to further communication with you concerning this situation.

The Principality of Chernihiv, Foreign Minister of Poland Lithuania; on behalf of the governments of Poland Lithuania, Slavia, Slavya, Poland, and Ukraine.

This Third of January, Year of Our Lord 2014.

On behalf of Slavia, I would like to express my gratitude for this request.

[Whiskum]

This last major update, troops of the UIAF led a raid on Slavia, a signatory region of the Slavic Co-Operation Pact (SCOP), an alliance dedicated to furthering the Slavic empire in NS. Slavia, though once an FRA member, withdrew from the FRA upon signing the SCOP treaty (which primarily an imperialist treaty), although the embassy still stood, Slavia was not affiliated with the FRA at the time of the raid, and it is by a mere oversight that the embassy still stands. Furthermore, by raiding a fellow imperialist region the signatory members of the UIAF have severely damaged raider unity. Therefore, the SCOP formally requests the withdrawal of UIAF troops from Slavia. Should the UIAF choose to maintain it's occupation of Slavia, citizens of any and all UIAF member regions would become persona non grata in all regions which have signed the SCOP.

We look forward to further communication with you concerning this situation.

The Principality of Chernihiv, Foreign Minister of Poland Lithuania; on behalf of the governments of Poland Lithuania, Slavia, Slavya, Poland, and Ukraine.

This Third of January, Year of Our Lord 2014.

If you had any genuine conception of imperialism, you would not issue statements justifying your actions with reference to 'raider unity'.

Slavia joined the FRA on 2nd December 2013. Since that time, we are aware there has been confusion and debate within the region over whether to stay in the FRA, leading to a desire to leave the FRA being formally expressed. At no point was there any unequivocal withdrawal from and denunciation of the FRA on the part of Slavia, while the region continued to be listed in the FRA's public membership list and retained an embassy with the FRA.

It is therefore very clear that the breaking off of ties between the two organisations was never actually realised, though naturally now we have invaded it is in the interests of the FRA and Slavia to exaggerate any split, so forgive me if I do not take claims Slavia had nothing to do with the FRA at face value.

A region which joined the FRA last month is not a region which has any claim to being treated as if it is part of the imperialist sphere.

There will be no withdrawal and the occupation of this FRA region will continue.

[Cormac A Stark]

Furthermore, by raiding a fellow imperialist region the signatory members of the UIAF have severely damaged raider unity.

I have to hand it to you, it's pretty ballsy to make an appeal to raider unity for a region that was an FRA member region a matter of weeks (days? hours? right this minute? does anyone actually know?), not months ago. Has Slavia even raided since leaving the FRA? When exactly did Slavia leave the FRA?

I can appreciate the fine art of side switching, believe me, but I at least raided something before asking other raiders to consider me a raider again and there are probably some who still don't -- I don't think you're going to find too many raiders who think UIAF invading Slavia is a violation of raider unity. And as Onder said, this is all a moot point anyway as the UIAF is an alliance of imperialist regions that don't necessarily adhere to raider unity under all circumstances. They have their own independent military interests, and occupying a region whose status in the FRA is ambiguous at best is certainly one of those interests given that they're at war with the FRA.

[Bolgary]

We didn't raid anyone after leaving FRA. Liberated Greece and that was that. Infact, we left FRA because we thought it would look like a raid, thus be kicked out. In reality, we left FRA for Fuck all.

[The North Polish Union]

This last major update, troops of the UIAF led a raid on Slavia, a signatory region of the Slavic Co-Operation Pact (SCOP), an alliance dedicated to furthering the Slavic empire in NS. Slavia, though once an FRA member, withdrew from the FRA upon signing the SCOP treaty (which primarily an imperialist treaty), although the embassy still stood, Slavia was not affiliated with the FRA at the time of the raid, and it is by a mere oversight that the embassy still stands. Furthermore, by raiding a fellow imperialist region the signatory members of the UIAF have severely damaged raider unity. Therefore, the SCOP formally requests the withdrawal of UIAF troops from Slavia. Should the UIAF choose to maintain it's occupation of Slavia, citizens of any and all UIAF member regions would become persona non grata in all regions which have signed the SCOP.

We look forward to further communication with you concerning this situation.

The Principality of Chernihiv, Foreign Minister of Poland Lithuania; on behalf of the governments of Poland Lithuania, Slavia, Slavya, Poland, and Ukraine.

This Third of January, Year of Our Lord 2014.

If you had any genuine conception of imperialism, you would not issue statements justifying your actions with reference to 'raider unity'.

Slavia joined the FRA on 2nd December 2013. Since that time, we are aware there has been confusion and debate within the region over whether to stay in the FRA, leading to a desire to leave the FRA being formally expressed. At no point was there any unequivocal withdrawal from and denunciation of the FRA on the part of Slavia, while the region continued to be listed in the FRA's public membership list and retained an embassy with the FRA.

It is therefore very clear that the breaking off of ties between the two organisations was never actually realised, though naturally now we have invaded it is in the interests of the FRA and Slavia to exaggerate any split, so forgive me if I do not take claims Slavia had nothing to do with the FRA at face value.

A region which joined the FRA last month is not a region which has any claim to being treated as if it is part of the imperialist sphere.

There will be no withdrawal and the occupation of this FRA region will continue.

It is important to note that the bid for FRA membership was imposed on the community by a small but influential clique within Slavia. After Slavia joined the FRA, a significant portion of the population led a movement to withdraw the region from the FRA. Slavia was an FRA region for less than a month, leaving the organization on Christmas Eve. During the 20-some days that the region was actually an FRA member, only 2 or 3 people, from a region of about 70 nations, actually participated in FRA-led defense missions (or defense missions of any sort). Several members of Slavia (myself included) continued to raid regions. Diplomatically, there was never any formal tie between the FRA and the population of Slavia. The embassy should have been closed on Christmas Eve, the day of Slavia's formal departure from its (purely nominal) association with the FRA. Through what is probably an oversight, both on the part of Slavia and the FRA, the embassy remained standing, though formal ties were dissolved two weeks ago and a true association with the FRA never really existed.

Furthermore, in my position as Slavia's Minister of Foreign Affairs and, therefore, their SCOP representative, I will reiterate the SCOP's request for your withdrawal from what was erroneously labelled an "FRA member region."

[Whiskum]

It is important to note that the bid for FRA membership was imposed on the community by a small but influential clique within Slavia. After Slavia joined the FRA, a significant portion of the population led a movement to withdraw the region from the FRA.

We are well aware that the FRA operates through oligarchic elites and by manipulating largely ignorant regions. No one needs any convincing on that score.

However, understandable native discontent about FRA-aligned individuals usurping its foreign affairs does not change the fact that it joined the FRA and that joining the FRA can carry grave consequences.

Diplomatically, there was never any formal tie between the FRA and the population of Slavia.

This claim that Slavia's population never had any ties with the FRA amply illustrates the absurdity of this attempt to distance Slavia from the FRA.

Slavia joined the FRA only a month ago. How could its population have never had any formal tie with the FRA when the region was part of the FRA?

Even if we accept your interpretation of Slavia's membership status (which we do not), then it is common ground it was in the FRA. Your argument therefore appears to be not so much that Slavia was disconnected from the FRA so much as some people in Slavia were - but segments of regional populations, as opposed to regional governments, do not establish formal ties in any case - they were inherently tied to the FRA by being in an FRA region.

The embassy should have been closed on Christmas Eve, the day of Slavia's formal departure from its (purely nominal) association with the FRA. Through what is probably an oversight, both on the part of Slavia and the FRA, the embassy remained standing, though formal ties were dissolved two weeks ago and a true association with the FRA never really existed.

Now Slavia has been attacked for being in the FRA, you portray the failure of Slavia and the FRA to reflect Slavia's departure as being an oversight. What is clear tome is that throughout this period, including after Christmas Eve, when Slavia indicated it wished to leave, there was still uncertainty and discussion over Slavia's FRA status among members of both the FRA and Slavia. This created a period of confusion and debate. During this period, whether we look at the FRA's public member list or Slavia's embassy with the FRA, no actual changes were made to reverse the trappings of Slavia's FRA membership.That these steps were not taken shows that, for the outside world, practical ties such as they were remained in place whatever plans to leave there were.

Slavia joined the FRA a month ago and whatever plan it had to leave was not reflected publicly, so for any external observer had not been implemented. If Slavia wanted to leave, it should have been unequivocal about it, because joining the FRA alone is a very significant statement about a region's inter-regional position and one that leaves it vulnerable. It is now too late to unveil the fact you claim to have left the FRA to the world and Slavia is being made to face up to to the consequences of joining a group at war with UIAF regions. We will not withdraw from what was an FRA region until we invaded it.

[The North Polish Union]

It is important to note that the bid for FRA membership was imposed on the community by a small but influential clique within Slavia. After Slavia joined the FRA, a significant portion of the population led a movement to withdraw the region from the FRA.

We are well aware that the FRA operates through oligarchic elites and by manipulating largely ignorant regions. No one needs any convincing on that score.

However, understandable native discontent about FRA-aligned individuals usurping its foreign affairs does not change the fact that it joined the FRA and that joining the FRA can carry grave consequences.

Nevertheless, Slavia withdrew from the FRA, and therefore the consequences (positive or negative) of FRA membership should no longer have any bearing on Slavia.

Diplomatically, there was never any formal tie between the FRA and the population of Slavia.

This claim that Slavia's population never had any ties with the FRA amply illustrates the absurdity of this attempt to distance Slavia from the FRA.

Slavia joined the FRA only a month ago. How could its population have never had any formal tie with the FRA when the region was part of the FRA?

There is a difference between a small group of people who are not representative if the wider population of Slavia joining the FRA and the general population of Slavia itself joining the FRA. To my knowledge, at no time did the number of Slavia's citizens active in the FRA exceed three. Given that the number of citizens Slavia has exceeds three by approximately ten tomes, the general populace of Slavia did not have any connection to the FRA.

Furthermore, in the official vote to join the FRA (which was not announced to the general citizenry as it should have been) the motion passed by a 2-1 vote. In all other elections in Slavia's history, at least 10 people voted. Slavia's bid for FRA membership was not announced to the general populace until after it had concluded.

Even if we accept your interpretation of Slavia's membership status (which we do not), then it is common ground it was in the FRA. Your argument therefore appears to be not so much that Slavia was disconnected from the FRA so much as some people in Slavia were - but segments of regional populations, as opposed to regional governments, do not establish formal ties in any case - they were inherently tied to the FRA by being in an FRA region.

The key word being "were." Slavia is no longer an FRA member. This has been pointed out numerous times.

The embassy should have been closed on Christmas Eve, the day of Slavia's formal departure from its (purely nominal) association with the FRA. Through what is probably an oversight, both on the part of Slavia and the FRA, the embassy remained standing, though formal ties were dissolved two weeks ago and a true association with the FRA never really existed.

Now Slavia has been attacked for being in the FRA, you portray the failure of Slavia and the FRA to reflect Slavia's departure as being an oversight. What is clear tome is that throughout this period, including after Christmas Eve, when Slavia indicated it wished to leave, there was still uncertainty and discussion over Slavia's FRA status among members of both the FRA and Slavia. This created a period of confusion and debate. During this period, whether we look at the FRA's public member list or Slavia's embassy with the FRA, no actual changes were made to reverse the trappings of Slavia's FRA membership.That these steps were not taken shows that, for the outside world, practical ties such as they were remained in place whatever plans to leave there were.

There was little discussion or controversy in the part of Slavia. Even one of the members who had campaigned for FRA membership said that it had been a mistake to join. The decision to leave was announced on the FRA's forum, and a public announce was planned. Bolguria (now known as Bolgary) was, I believe, drafting an official announcement on our departure which would have nbeen posted in our embassy thread. Due to the holidays, he has not been able to finish this. Had this occurred at any other time of the year, our announcement would have been far more prompt.

Slavia joined the FRA a month ago and whatever plan it had to leave was not reflected publicly, so for any external observer had not been implemented. If Slavia wanted to leave, it should have been unequivocal about it, because joining the FRA alone is a very significant statement about a region's inter-regional position and one that leaves it vulnerable. It is now too late to unveil the fact you claim to have left the FRA to the world and Slavia is being made to face up to to the consequences of joining a group at war with UIAF regions. We will not withdraw from what was an FRA region until we invaded it.

The fact that the FRA administration had not changed their member list is a reflection of their desire to control their member regions and their inability to accept that one no longer wishes to be a member. The truth is that Slavia's withdrawal from the FRA was posted over 10 days ago in a public part of the forum, and it is failure on your part to observe this that has lead to this. I still brlieve that the fact that the embassy still was open was an oversight, you are of course free to disagree, but the fact remains that Slavia has not been an FRA member since December 24, 2013, rather than January 3, 2014 as you claim.

[Whiskum]

Nevertheless, Slavia withdrew from the FRA, and therefore the consequences (positive or negative) of FRA membership should no longer have any bearing on Slavia.

First, to claim that it withdrew from the FRA is a big stretch: all it did was talk about leaving and, according to you, planned to announce its departure to the world. Tangible signs of its membership in the FRA, namely its Embassy with the FRA and its listing in the FRA's list, continued after a wish to leave was expressed on Christmas Eve. Talking about leaving, without actually taking public steps to terminate membership, is not what we call withdrawal.

If Slavia had left the FRA, then it should not have continued its embassy with the FRA and it should not have continued to be listed as an FRA member-region. Moreover, it should have (in the same way it announced its entry to the FRA) announced its departure. In fact, it merely said it wanted to leave the FRA without actually leaving in the FRA. It now seeks to portray talking about leaving the FRA as actually leaving now it has been attacked for being FRA.

Second, if we accept for the sake of argument Slavia left the FRA, then that hardly compensates for having joined the FRA in the first place. You joined a month ago. This is not historic. Joining the FRA is a major statement of your position from the perspective of those regions which are at war with the FRA - if Slavia had left by denouncing and attacking the FRA in protest, then that might be a different matter, but quite frankly allegedly slipping out quietly, while still maintaining all the trappings of FRA membership, essentially trying to have it both ways, does not begin to cut it as far as absolving Slavia goes.

There is a difference between a small group of people who are not representative if the wider population of Slavia joining the FRA and the general population of Slavia itself joining the FRA. To my knowledge, at no time did the number of Slavia's citizens active in the FRA exceed three. Given that the number of citizens Slavia has exceeds three by approximately ten tomes, the general populace of Slavia did not have any connection to the FRA.

Furthermore, in the official vote to join the FRA (which was not announced to the general citizenry as it should have been) the motion passed by a 2-1 vote. In all other elections in Slavia's history, at least 10 people voted. Slavia's bid for FRA membership was not announced to the general populace until after it had concluded.

If that minority controls the government of Slavia and admits Slavia to the FRA, then they control the inter-regional position of Slavia and of course that reflects on the region as a whole. If other members of Slavia did not which to be part of an FRA region, then they should have left Slavia - if they chose to prioritise staying in Slavia over leaving the FRA, then they made a choice that FRA membership is acceptable and have to face the consequences of that.

The FRA is an inter-regional alliance. It is an alliance of regions. It is not like the UDL which is an individual member body. It has a central body and institutions, which individuals can get involved in, but it is the regions as much that central body which TNI and the LKE have declared war upon.

The mere fact that FRA membership was contentious, even a very contentious within Slavia, does not change the fact the region as a whole joined the FRA due, not just those who became involved in the central FRA forums. As far as we are concerned being part of an FRA region makes you part of the FRA.

The key word being "were." Slavia is no longer an FRA member. This has been pointed out numerous times.

Let us review what I said:

Even if we accept your interpretation of Slavia's membership status (which we do not), then it is common ground it was in the FRA. Your argument therefore appears to be not so much that Slavia was disconnected from the FRA so much as some people in Slavia were - but segments of regional populations, as opposed to regional governments, do not establish formal ties in any case - they were inherently tied to the FRA by being in an FRA region.

I have emboldened the key words which clarify that the use of 'were' refers to your view, not ours.

The fact that the FRA administration had not changed their member list is a reflection of their desire to control their member regions and their inability to accept that one no longer wishes to be a member. The truth is that Slavia's withdrawal from the FRA was posted over 10 days ago in a public part of the forum, and it is failure on your part to observe this that has lead to this. I still brlieve that the fact that the embassy still was open was an oversight, you are of course free to disagree, but the fact remains that Slavia has not been an FRA member since December 24, 2013, rather than January 3, 2014 as you claim.

No, what has led to this invasion is the fact that Slavia joined the FRA. Moreover, it has not in any meaningful sense left the FRA.

Since having joined the FRA, it indicated its intention to withdraw without actually taking any steps to remove itself from the FRA, for instance it has failed to withdraw the FRA embassy and it has not made any external announcement on leaving the FRA, as it did when it joined.

Likewise, the FRA had not removed Slavia from its membership list. Bolguria, one of Slavia's regional representatives, remains grouped as an Assembly Member at the FRA, affording Slavia the privileges of an FRA region, and he last logged in there earlier today.

Before it was invaded, Slavia failed to distance itself from the FRA. Similarly, the FRA failed to alter its records and accesses to reflect Slavia leaving.

None of this suggests Slavia left the FRA in any practical sense. Therefore we do not recognise Slavia as having left the FRA prior to our invasion.

[Albul]

To start off, let me introduce myself. I am Albul, the current Minister of Defence in Slavia. Perhaps I am a lamb in a crowd of lions, but perhaps I am not. I simply wish to correct any misunderstandings out there. I, too, regret Slavia's membership in the FRA, though I am one of the people who helped bring it to the FRA in the first place, the reason being that a former delegate announced Slavia's defensive position in the past (only God knows why). Being a man familiar with gameplay, I knew all the big dogs out there (so to speak) and found that the FRA seemed the least corrupt and thus the most prestigious organization out there. Ever since, we have made small steps to joining the FRA. To put it simply, he made a demand and I followed through with it.

The same man who wanted us to join the FRA was the same man who suddenly wanted to take Greece and leave the FRA. In the end, all came out as a big failure.

First, to claim that it withdrew from the FRA is a big stretch: all it did was talk about leaving and, according to you, planned to announce its departure to the world. Tangible signs of its membership in the FRA, namely its Embassy with the FRA and its listing in the FRA's list, continued after a wish to leave was expressed on Christmas Eve. Talking about leaving, without actually taking public steps to terminate membership, is not what we call withdrawal.

If Slavia had left the FRA, then it should not have continued its embassy with the FRA and it should not have continued to be listed as an FRA member-region. Moreover, it should have (in the same way it announced its entry to the FRA) announced its departure. In fact, it merely said it wanted to leave the FRA without actually leaving in the FRA. It now seeks to portray talking about leaving the FRA as actually leaving now it has been attacked for being FRA.

While I agree that we should have taken steps sooner (drop the embassy, make a public post, and actually leave the FRA ), I doubt that even that would have saved us from the immense raid. Also, I do not see Slavia in the FRA membership list and the embassy closed, of course, due to the invasion.

If that minority controls the government of Slavia and admits Slavia to the FRA, then they control the inter-regional position of Slavia and of course that reflects on the region as a whole. If other members of Slavia did not which to be part of an FRA region, then they should have left Slavia - if they chose to prioritise staying in Slavia over leaving the FRA, then they made a choice that FRA membership is acceptable and have to face the consequences of that.

...

The mere fact that FRA membership was contentious, even a very contentious issue within Slavia, does not change the fact the region as a whole joined the FRA due, not just those who became involved in the central FRA forums. As far as we are concerned being part of an FRA region makes you part of the FRA.

Perhaps being in an FRA region makes you a part of the FRA, but must you also invade the raiders within our region? Ever since we joined the FRA, there has been a movement to get us out (myself included). Our region is somewhat of a democracy. If you don't like something in the government, then you have the power to change it. In the end, we left the FRA, since we no longer show any signs of FRA membership. Joining the FRA is a sad mark in Slavia's history, as it showed the corruption in the government (the bill to join the FRA passed by a 2-1 vote). Now that we no longer have a government, I personally made sure to have our membership status fixed. We are NOT in the FRA.

Furthermore, by raiding a fellow imperialist region the signatory members of the UIAF have severely damaged raider unity.

I have to hand it to you, it's pretty ballsy to make an appeal to raider unity for a region that was an FRA member region a matter of weeks (days? hours? right this minute? does anyone actually know?), not months ago. Has Slavia even raided since leaving the FRA? When exactly did Slavia leave the FRA?

I can appreciate the fine art of side switching, believe me, but I at least raided something before asking other raiders to consider me a raider again and there are probably some who still don't -- I don't think you're going to find too many raiders who think UIAF invading Slavia is a violation of raider unity. And as Onder said, this is all a moot point anyway as the UIAF is an alliance of imperialist regions that don't necessarily adhere to raider unity under all circumstances. They have their own independent military interests, and occupying a region whose status in the FRA is ambiguous at best is certainly one of those interests given that they're at war with the FRA.

We were in the FRA for 22 days. Upon leaving we tried to liberate/take Greece and Warzone Africa. While we should have gone for other targets, we really could not raid much else, since the Black Riders have invaded nearly every founderless region out there. To invade a founderless region that was also invaded by the Black Riders would be a violation of Raider Unity. Thus, if we were to invade a Black Riders region for the sake of being raiders, then we couldn't make appeals to Raider Unity, since we have raided a region that belonged to raiders.

[Suchasmallthing]

If I may, your region appeared on the FRA membership list at the time of the invasion. By dissociating yourselves completely from them and other defenders, you probably lost your only chance of getting liberated before too much damage has been done . Tooo bad!

[Whiskum]

To start off, let me introduce myself. I am Albul, the current Minister of Defence in Slavia.

You are Albul, Slavia's regional representative to the FRA who announced its exit from the FRA in the following terms yesterday, after the invasion:

As a representative of Slavia an FRA member, we have decided that it is best to leave the FRA once and for all.

First, our region members feel some animosity with the FRA, since they feel no impact in being in the FRA... until now.

Our region recently became founderless and thus fell to the hands of merciless invaders due to our FRA membership, no matter how dubious it was.

For reasons previously stated in our other thread, Slavia hereby ends its membership and affiliation with the Founderless Regions Alliance.

1. If Slavia had unambiguously left the FRA prior to the invasion, you would not have made the above post resigning its FRA membership 'once and for all'.

2. Why did you have access as Slavia's regional representative to make that post if Slavia had already left the FRA?

3. The FRA Charter states:

vii) Signatories can leave the FRA if one of their official Regional Assembly representatives announces their resignation from the FRA directly to the Regional Assembly.

Slavia had previously notified the FRA that it wished to leave them, but only yesterday with the above post did it make an announcement 'directly to the Regional Assembly' as is clearly required.

Therefore, under terms of the FRA Charter, Slavia remained a member until your post yesterday.

Moreover, in practical terms, in terms of its two representatives remaining in the Regional Assembly, its retention of an embassy with the FRA, the failure to make any external announcement of its withdrawal and its continued inclusion on the FRA membership list, it also remained a member.

Also, I do not see Slavia in the FRA membership list and the embassy closed, of course, due to the invasion.

It is not in the in the FRA membership list now because it was edited by Frattastan yesterday: 'Last edited by Frattastan on Fri Jan 03, 2014 9:01 pm, edited 117 times in total.'

Before the invasion, Slavia was on the list, and you can see that for yourself with the benefit of a Google cache page.

As you point out, the FRA embassy is being closed because of the invasion. It remained intact before the invasion.

Joining the FRA is a sad mark in Slavia's history, as it showed the corruption in the government

Indeed, I concur with you entirely that joining the FRA was a grave act indeed and one which illustrates corruption in the region.

To conclude, in both legal and practical terms, Slavia's FRA membership continued until our invasion.

By definition a declaration of intent, without either legally leaving or taking practical steps to put that declaration into effect, is just that: a statement of intent rather than of action. The actual act of leaving the FRA occurred with your post there yesterday.

So let us hear no more of these crude attempts to rewrite history. You were a member of the FRA, and that is why you were invaded.

[SFBA wabbitslayah]

Because they didn't leave properly. This left the FRA confused if they wanted to leave or not, thus they hadn't removed embassies, etc.

Slavia was trying to leave regardless. That much is fact.

[Whiskum]

Because they didn't leave properly. This left the FRA confused if they wanted to leave or not, thus they hadn't removed embassies, etc.

Slavia was trying to leave regardless. That much is fact.

You say that 'Slavia trying to leave regardless' straight after you say that the FRA, on the same evidence, was 'confused if they wanted to leave or not'.

If the FRA was confused over whether they wanted to leave, then it cannot have been, at the time of the invasion, an established 'fact', 'regardless' of all circumstances, that they wanted to go before the point when we made clear to them the implications of being an FRA member in light of the ongoing wars.

Note that in their actual resignation statement, they expressly refer to their region having gone 'to the hands of merciless invaders due to our FRA membership,' as one of the causes of their departure. Our invasion has cleared up the ambiguity in the perspective of what was an official FRA region.

In any case point is utterly moot as far as we are concerned. It joined the FRA only a month ago. It remained an FRA region at the time of the invasion, having failed to either leave under the Charter or take practical steps to leave (e.g. removing the embassy, an external announcement, withdrawing its regional representatives). The fact is they only resigned from the FRA 'once and for all' after we invaded, by which point they ceased to be a sovereign entity. If it is an FRA region, then it is an enemy which we are at war with and that is that, hence why we invaded it and took it out of the FRA.

Membership of the FRA is simply something we do not tolerate. We have never done anything to indicate an intention to be lenient towards FRA regions.

[SFBA wabbitslayah]

Because they didn't leave properly. This left the FRA confused if they wanted to leave or not, thus they hadn't removed embassies, etc.

Slavia was trying to leave regardless. That much is fact.

You say that 'Slavia trying to leave regardless' straight after you say that the FRA, on the same evidence, was 'confused if they wanted to leave or not'.

If the FRA was confused over whether they wanted to leave, then it cannot have been, at the time of the invasion, an established 'fact', 'regardless' of all circumstances, that they wanted to go before the point when we made clear to them the implications of being an FRA member in light of the ongoing wars.

In any case point is utterly moot as far as we are concerned. It joined the FRA only a month ago. It remained an FRA region at the time of the invasion, having failed to either leave under the Charter or take practical steps to leave (e.g. removing the embassy, an external announcement, withdrawing its regional representatives). The fact is they only resigned from the FRA 'once and for all' after we invaded, by which point they ceased to be a sovereign entity. If it is an FRA region, then it is an enemy which we are at war with and that is that, hence why we invaded it and took it out of the FRA.

I'll explain a bit, the confusion was mostly in the irc channel. We had a member of Slavia in that channel, and from what we were told it seemed at first the majority of Slavia wanted to leave, but then that one member said they wanted to stay or something like that. That was just one guy, and he was giving mixed signals. So the FRA treated them as members until they left the correct way.

I don't have the logs for that. This is all I can recall.

I'm not arguing if it was legitimate of UIAF to invade the region or not, I don't really care. Just trying to give the information that I can remember. Do what you will.

[Whiskum]

You say that 'Slavia trying to leave regardless' straight after you say that the FRA, on the same evidence, was 'confused if they wanted to leave or not'.

If the FRA was confused over whether they wanted to leave, then it cannot have been, at the time of the invasion, an established 'fact', 'regardless' of all circumstances, that they wanted to go before the point when we made clear to them the implications of being an FRA member in light of the ongoing wars.

In any case point is utterly moot as far as we are concerned. It joined the FRA only a month ago. It remained an FRA region at the time of the invasion, having failed to either leave under the Charter or take practical steps to leave (e.g. removing the embassy, an external announcement, withdrawing its regional representatives). The fact is they only resigned from the FRA 'once and for all' after we invaded, by which point they ceased to be a sovereign entity. If it is an FRA region, then it is an enemy which we are at war with and that is that, hence why we invaded it and took it out of the FRA.

I'll explain a bit, the confusion was mostly in the irc channel. We had a member of Slavia in that channel, and from what we were told it seemed at first the majority of Slavia wanted to leave, but then that one member said they wanted to stay or something like that. That was just one guy, and he was giving mixed signals. So the FRA treated them as members until they left the correct way.

I don't have the logs for that. This is all I can recall.

I'm not arguing if it was legitimate of UIAF to invade the region or not, I don't really care. Just trying to give the information that I can remember. Do what you will.

Thank you for confirming that, as far as the FRA was concerned, Slavia was a member at the time we invaded it.

On this occasion the FRA's perception is in accordance with reality.

Once again we see the extent of the FRA's ineffectveness in taking either the military or diplomatic steps necessary to protect its member-regions.

Moreover, we learn that the FRA 'don't really care' about the invasion of what was, and they considered to be, one of their member regions at the time of invasion. Let the FRA's indifference to the plight of Slavia and, the invasion Slavia is suffering for joining them, be a lesson to prospective FRA members.

[Mahaj]

I think he was saying that he doesn't really care about whether you consider your invasion legitimate or not because nobody really cares about what the UIAF has to say on anything anywhere.

[Whiskum]

I think he was saying that he doesn't really care about whether you consider your invasion legitimate or not because nobody really cares about what the UIAF has to say on anything anywhere.

They expressly stated they were not 'arguing it was legitimate of UIAF to invade the region or not, I don't really care. '

That is not a statement about caring about whether the UIAF thinks it was legitimate, it is a statement about caring whether it was legitimate or not.

As for whether other people really care what the UIAF has to say about Slavia's FRA status, then the natives of Slavia care a lot, or else they would not have gone to the effort of claiming to have actually left the FRA before the invasion when that simply was not true, as the FRA has now confirmed to us.