by Shizensky » Fri Sep 16, 2016 2:06 pm
by Shizensky » Tue Sep 20, 2016 12:01 pm
"1. In the event of a region with either a current or historical tie to raiding of other regions in NationStates were to become a viable target for the Renegade Islands Alliance Special Forces, the serving Security Officer or the Chief Executive shall have the authority to give orders to move in a hostile manner, without the need for a declaration of war.
2. Should the RIASF capture a raider region with the aforementioned criteria, they shall be granted the ability to defend their holding and move towards efforts to solidify the region as a holding of Renegade Islands Alliance.
3. The efforts of this mission are to be held under the newly kindled ideology that Defender regions should not be limited to reactionary operations, but should strike back at those who willingly impose terror on those who cannot defend themselves."
by Luxdonia » Tue Sep 20, 2016 1:47 pm
by Deadeye Jack » Tue Sep 20, 2016 2:15 pm
Luxdonia wrote:ncredible. Another defender region getting rid of thei "morality" in yheir quest to completely wipe raiderism from doing the same thing that raiders: raid. How can you continue to call yourself a defender region when you are clearly not?
by Luxdonia » Tue Sep 20, 2016 2:29 pm
by All Good People » Tue Sep 20, 2016 2:31 pm
Luxdonia wrote:Incredible. Another defender region getting rid of thei "morality" in yheir quest to completely wipe raiderism from doing the same thing that raiders: raid. How can you continue to call yourself a defender region when you are clearly not?
by The Gipper » Tue Sep 20, 2016 2:45 pm
Luxdonia wrote:But if you raid, even in the slightest way, you're not defenders but instead should be classified as independents.
by Shizensky » Tue Sep 20, 2016 3:06 pm
The Gipper wrote:That's a silly definition, because that's make The Black Hawks and most raiders independents too.
All Good People wrote:That's an old debate within the defender community. There have always been those that believe in taking the fight directly to the raiders regions, as opposed to those that believe all raids are wrong. That debate flared up during the transition from the Constitutional ADN to the ADN Reloaded Charter once upon a time. Some members threatened to leave unless the organization maintained it's dedication against striking back at raiders regions.
There was also the Sons of Liberty defender group that targeted raiders holdings. Shiz might remember them too. (Historical note: An ADN official was secretly the leader of the Sons of Liberty).
Just saying, the two ideologies have existed within defenderism since the beginning. It's nothing new.
Luxdonia wrote:Incredible. Another defender region getting rid of thei "morality" in yheir quest to completely wipe raiderism from doing the same thing that raiders: raid. How can you continue to call yourself a defender region when you are clearly not?
by General Knot » Tue Sep 20, 2016 3:24 pm
Shizensky wrote:"1. In the event of a region with either a current or historical tie to raiding of other regions in NationStates were to become a viable target for the Renegade Islands Alliance Special Forces, the serving Security Officer or the Chief Executive shall have the authority to give orders to move in a hostile manner, without the need for a declaration of war.
Shizensky wrote:3. The efforts of this mission are to be held under the newly kindled ideology that Defender regions should not be limited to reactionary operations, but should strike back at those who willingly impose terror on those who cannot defend themselves."
by The Gipper » Tue Sep 20, 2016 3:25 pm
Unless they formed some sort of raider unity, and would defend other raider regions, like The Black Riders after Halc was deleted but before its modbomb. Or any raider region hit by you lot.
by Shizensky » Tue Sep 20, 2016 3:33 pm
General Knot wrote:I would ask who shall be appointed as the almighty one to arbitrarily decide what region possesses "either a current or historical tie to raiding of other regions in NationStates", but I don't think I'm going to get a sufficient response. Will it be regions that tag themselves as "invader"? Will it include any and all regions that engage or have engaged in raiding operations, such as all the relevant GCRs? They are perhaps much more viable to move against "in a hostile manner" given their founderless status than compared to, say, The Invaders.
General Knot wrote:This is almost verbatim to Eurosoviets' justification of why invader fora should be destroyed. I approve, to an extent.
The Gipper wrote:Unless they formed some sort of raider unity, and would defend other raider regions, like The Black Riders after Halc was deleted but before its modbomb. Or any raider region hit by you lot.
Raiders are not black and white either.
by Cormactopia II » Tue Sep 20, 2016 5:51 pm
Shizensky wrote:General Knot wrote:I would ask who shall be appointed as the almighty one to arbitrarily decide what region possesses "either a current or historical tie to raiding of other regions in NationStates", but I don't think I'm going to get a sufficient response. Will it be regions that tag themselves as "invader"? Will it include any and all regions that engage or have engaged in raiding operations, such as all the relevant GCRs? They are perhaps much more viable to move against "in a hostile manner" given their founderless status than compared to, say, The Invaders.
We're not going to bottle ourselves in by going into any specifics. We know the types of regions we'll be targeting and I don't see a need to be broadcasting that sort of information.
by Syberis » Tue Sep 20, 2016 6:11 pm
Cormactopia II wrote:Shizensky wrote:We're not going to bottle ourselves in by going into any specifics. We know the types of regions we'll be targeting and I don't see a need to be broadcasting that sort of information.
Perhaps because, interpreting this executive order as broadly as it seems to want to be interpreted, Renegade Islands Alliance has essentially declared de facto war against all but one or two Feeders and Sinkers and a large number of user-created regions. The Pacific, The North Pacific, the South Pacific, The East Pacific, the West Pacific, Balder, and Osiris all have "either a current or historical tie to raiding of other regions in NationStates." Lazarus also has historical ties to raiding of other regions.
So, Shizensky, has Renegade Islands Alliance just declared de facto war against seven or eight Feeders and Sinkers, or not?
Overall, it's unfortunate, but unsurprising, to see Renegade Islands Alliance joining the Order of the Grey Wardens in abandoning defending in favor of joining the ranks of the counter-raiders.
Zaolat wrote:WHO THE F*** IS SYBERIS
by Shizensky » Tue Sep 20, 2016 6:27 pm
by Tim-Opolis » Tue Sep 20, 2016 6:32 pm
Cormactopia II wrote:Overall, it's unfortunate, but unsurprising, to see Renegade Islands Alliance joining the Order of the Grey Wardens in abandoning defending in favor of joining the ranks of the counter-raiders.
<Koth - 06/30/2020> I mean as far as GPers go, Tim is one of the most iconic
by Cormactopia II » Tue Sep 20, 2016 6:44 pm
Shizensky wrote:I find there is little incentive to try to explain the language of our law to parties who have an obvious interest in finding a fault in our actions. We are defenders, and so far the raiders have expressed the most concern over the words being used. Nothing surpising there.
Simply put, I'm not up to providing snippets that can be used to twist our words against us.
RIASF command understands the intent of the law. It's not my concern if the nation who oversaw DEN's last breath or an indivudual who picks a side based on poltical convenience - both former Grey Wardens themselves - feel the need for clarification.
Tim-Opolis wrote:Cormactopia II wrote:Overall, it's unfortunate, but unsurprising, to see Renegade Islands Alliance joining the Order of the Grey Wardens in abandoning defending in favor of joining the ranks of the counter-raiders.
Individuals more qualified than I have already spoken in this thread on the matter. This view has always been within defending, and some like myself have been documented advocates of it for quite a while now. Hell, TITO has never abandoned these principles, and I certainly see you still lumping them with the rest of defending. While the more modern Defender era has certainly seen sentiments like this kicked to the curb by ultra-moralist views from individuals such as Unibot, that does not negate the existence of this view. That it has seen resurgence finally is incredibly refreshing to say the least, and the widespread complaining from the invader-aligned sphere about that resurgence only confirms it's been needed.
by Lord Ravenclaw » Tue Sep 20, 2016 6:50 pm
by North East Somerset » Tue Sep 20, 2016 7:13 pm
"1. In the event of a region with either a current or historical tie to raiding of other regions in NationStates were to become a viable target for the Renegade Islands Alliance Special Forces, the serving Security Officer or the Chief Executive shall have the authority to give orders to move in a hostile manner, without the need for a declaration of war.
by Funkadelia » Tue Sep 20, 2016 7:14 pm
Cormactopia II wrote:Overall, it's unfortunate, but unsurprising, to see Renegade Islands Alliance joining the Order of the Grey Wardens in abandoning defending in favor of joining the ranks of the counter-raiders.
by Cormactopia II » Tue Sep 20, 2016 7:17 pm
Funkadelia wrote:Cormactopia II wrote:Overall, it's unfortunate, but unsurprising, to see Renegade Islands Alliance joining the Order of the Grey Wardens in abandoning defending in favor of joining the ranks of the counter-raiders.
Interesting that you mention that because Taijitu (while you were a citizen and a militia member there) and the Grey Wardens have advocated this policy for over a year.
Eluvatar, Myroria and I basically wrote the book for this.
by Funkadelia » Tue Sep 20, 2016 7:24 pm
by Cormactopia II » Tue Sep 20, 2016 7:27 pm
Funkadelia wrote:I'd rather not follow your attempt to threadjack this down a rabbit hole away from RIA.
by Red Dusk II » Wed Sep 21, 2016 7:57 am
Lord Ravenclaw wrote:By choosing to align yourselves fully with the Wardens and their ideology, does this mean that The North Pacific has to face the potential that RIASF may one day act against it in its own region, simply based on the fact that it raids?
From that very same question, I ask: does Kingdom of Alexandria, Europeia, Albion need fear the same? Does the Land of Kings and Emperors, The South Pacific, Unknown?
by Shizensky » Wed Sep 21, 2016 8:20 am
Cormactopia II wrote:Does it matter who's asking the question, when the question is whether you've just committed to potentially invading seven or eight of the nine Feeders and Sinkers? Your refusal to answer that question is pretty telling. Seems like every Feeder and Sinker but The Rejected Realms should be worried.
Your refusal to answer that question is pretty telling.
Lord Ravenclaw wrote:By choosing to align yourselves fully with the Wardens and their ideology, does this mean that The North Pacific has to face the potential that RIASF may one day act against it in its own region, simply based on the fact that it raids?
From that very same question, I ask: does Kingdom of Alexandria, Europeia, Albion need fear the same? Does the Land of Kings and Emperors, The South Pacific, Unknown?
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Geopolity
Advertisement