CONDEMN THE RED FLEET

[Aurennian Aristocratic Empire]

RECOGNIZING the Red Fleet as one of the most notorious raiders in the history of NationStates,

ACKNOWLEDGING the occupation of more than 50 formerly sovereign regions by the Red Fleet, including:

Kolovo, that was invaded solely for being tagged "Fascist";

The Chud Fjords, that was invaded solely for having their leader named Duce;

DISGUSTED by the insolent lies, the Red Fleet gives out to the international community, including:
- claiming all their raids to be "liberations";
- claiming to have "liberated" (you already know what does their term "liberation" mean) League of Anti Socialist States from National SOCIALISM, thus claiming, that League of Anti Socialist States used to be a socialist region, before the raid of the Red Fleet, that contradicts both the name of the victim and common sense;
- claiming to fight only against fascists, despite their occupation of Conservative Empire, The Japanese Empire and Libertarian Anarchists, that were never fascist regions,

HORRIFIED by the fact, that the Red Fleet tends to pursue, haunt and oppress independent nations, such as Navorgska, whom the Red Fleet has robbed of three regions:
The Navorgskan Imperium;
Navorgskan Imperium;
Der Imperium,

DISDAINED by the efforts of the Red Fleet to spread both ideological and class hatred and intolerance (towards nationalists, liberals, monarchists, aristocracy, clergy and employers), that is used as an "ideological explanations" to all their raids,

UNDERSTANDING that that efforts to spread hatred and intolerance led to the destruction and occupation of many free regions, including a multi-ideological region AnCapSSFR,

AWARE of the plans the Red Fleet to Occupy NationStates,

CONCLUDING, that the the Red Fleet has done more actions worth of Condemnation, than the already condemned the Black Riders,

HEREBY CONDEMNS the Red Fleet.

[New Kryftland]

RECOGNIZING the Red Fleet as one of the most notorious raiders in the history of NationStates

We raid and defend. In fact we are currently helping to defend Anne Frank.

- claiming to fight only against fascists, despite their occupation of Conservative Empire, The Japanese Empire and Libertarian Anarchists, that were never fascist regions

No we don't claim to only fight fascism, although we do have a strong anti-fascist ethos.
All three example regions were captured from Libertatem. Libertatem carries out a "war on communism", and are a threat to The Red Fleet and the wider leftist community; therefore we make no apology for countering their threat.

DISDAINED by the efforts of the Red Fleet to spread both ideological and class hatred and intolerance (towards nationalists, liberals, monarchists, aristocracy, clergy and employers), that is used as an "ideological explanations" to all their raids

No hate . Class struggle, google it. We are not tolerant of oppression or exploitation.

AWARE of the plans the Red Fleet to Occupy NationStates

There's no conspiracy to occupy nationstates. That region was named after the occupy movement (google it), it was then captured by Libertatem, but is now free again.

[We Are Not the NSA]

RECOGNIZING the Red Fleet as one of the most notorious raiders in the history of NationStates,

Not the words I would us to describe them, and I would take out "of NationStates", as I believe it counts as a real world reference.

ACKNOWLEDGING the occupation of more than 50 formerly sovereign regions by the Red Fleet, including:

Kolovo, that was invaded solely for being tagged "Fascist";

The Chud Fjords, that was invaded solely for having their leader named Duce;

There should be an "and" in there, plus I think there should be more examples.

DISGUSTED by the insolent lies, the Red Fleet gives out to the international community, including:
- claiming all their raids to be "liberations";
- claiming to have "liberated" (you already know what does their term "liberation" mean) League of Anti Socialist States from National SOCIALISM, thus claiming, that League of Anti Socialist States used to be a socialist region, before the raid of the Red Fleet, that contradicts both the name of the victim and common sense;
- claiming to fight only against fascists, despite their occupation of Conservative Empire, The Japanese Empire and Libertarian Anarchists, that were never fascist regions,

You should just take the red part out. Also, the argument "there name says they are one thing, so it is impossible that they might not be that thing" is just ridiculous. Also I am not sure if you are aware of it but the "Nazi party" is short for the "National Socialist party" in real life, so that term does not make the region socialist.

CONCLUDING, that the the Red Fleet has done more actions worth of Condemnation, than the already condemned the Black Riders,

I wasn't going to comment on the rest, but then I saw this, so: No. Also, if you really, truly believe this, then it is "worthy of" not "worth of".

[Nephmir]

I have no problem against The Red Fleet myself, as they have a unique purpose separate from the Defender-Raider conflict which is what I like to encourage in NationStates, however I took a few minutes to edit the grammatical errors in the draft, as well as a couple style points:

RECOGNIZING The Red Fleet as one of the most notorious raiders in the history of NationStates,

ACKNOWLEDGING the occupation of more than 50 formerly sovereign regions by The Red Fleet, including, but not limited to:

• Kolovo, that which was invaded solely for being tagged "Fascist";
• The Chud Fjords, that which was invaded solely for having their leader named "Duce";

DISGUSTED by the insolent lies The Red Fleet gives out to the international community, including, but not limited to:

• Claiming all of their raids to be "liberations";
• Claiming to have "liberated" (you already know what does their term "liberation" mean) League of Anti Socialist States from National SOCIALISM, thus while claiming, that the League of Anti Socialist States used to be a socialist region before the raid of The Red Fleet, that which contradicts both the name of the victim and common sense;
• Claiming to fight only against fascists regions, despite their occupation of Conservative Empire, The Japanese Empire and Libertarian Anarchists,

HORRIFIED by the fact, that The Red Fleet tends to pursue, haunt, and oppress independent nations, such as Navorgska, whom The Red Fleet has robbed of three regions: The Navorgskan Imperium, Navorgskan Imperium, and Der Imperium,

DISDAINED by the efforts of The Red Fleet to spread both ideological and class hatred and intolerance (towards nationalists, liberals, monarchists, aristocracy, clergy, and employers), that is used as an "ideological explanations" to all justify their raids,

UNDERSTANDING that that efforts to spread hatred and intolerance led to the occupation and destruction and occupation of many free regions, including a multi-ideological region AnCapSSFR,

AWARE of the plans The Red Fleet to Occupy NationStates,

CONCLUDING, that the The Red Fleet has done more actions worthy of Condemnation, than the already condemned The Black Riders, a region already condemned by this council,

HEREBY CONDEMNS The Red Fleet.

[Republic of Minerva]

Full support, obviously. Although it does look a little bit unprofessional. Maybe you should give the reader more insight to why the regions were invaded in the first place?

I'd also condemn The Red Fleet for working with imperialistic regions like North Korea which steals regions like Slavya for exercising their freedom of speech.

[Misley]

I'd invite anyone considering supporting this to take a look at the poster's home region and its embassies and tell me they don't have a less-than-noble motivation for condemning The Red Fleet.

Besides, we're not a "notorious raider" by any stretch of the imagination. Most of the operations we've done over our history have been defensive.

[We Are Not the NSA]

I'd invite anyone considering supporting this to take a look at the poster's home region and its embassies and tell me they don't have a less-than-noble motivation for condemning The Red Fleet.

Besides, we're not a "notorious raider" by any stretch of the imagination. Most of the operations we've done over our history have been defensive.

I've actually looked, and it actually seems more counter offensive than defensive. If you restored the wfb you would be defenders, but you essentially just tag raid already tagged regions. I mean no disrespect by that, by the way, it is more effective than some of the terrible plans that defenders have used.

[Misley]

I've actually looked, and it actually seems more counter offensive than defensive. If you restored the wfb you would be defenders, but you essentially just tag raid already tagged regions. I mean no disrespect by that, by the way, it is more effective than some of the terrible plans that defenders have used.

We restored the WFE in Leninist Russia and Alliance Against Nazis in our defensive operations there. LR still has that WFE (although the founder has since returned and made a couple of changes), and we refounded AAN (with original WFE still present, albeit faded) because of its strategic importance as a late-updating region for Antifa use--I'm sure the comrades who founded AAN would be happy that their region could still serve a purpose in the antifascist fight years after they've moved on from the game.

I never said we were a defender, though, either. The Red Fleet doesn't sort well into the "Raider"/"Defender" dichotomy of gameplay. Like all of the militaries in the Left/Right sphere, we do a combination of both and the methods we (all) employ are not the same used by "purist" R/D players.

[We Are Not the NSA]

I've actually looked, and it actually seems more counter offensive than defensive. If you restored the wfb you would be defenders, but you essentially just tag raid already tagged regions. I mean no disrespect by that, by the way, it is more effective than some of the terrible plans that defenders have used.

We restored the WFE in Leninist Russia and Alliance Against Nazis in our defensive operations there. LR still has that WFE (although the founder has since returned and made a couple of changes), and we refounded AAN (with original WFE still present, albeit faded) because of its strategic importance as a late-updating region for Antifa use--I'm sure the comrades who founded AAN would be happy that their region could still serve a purpose in the antifascist fight years after they've moved on from the game.

I never said we were a defender, though, either. The Red Fleet doesn't sort well into the "Raider"/"Defender" dichotomy of gameplay. Like all of the militaries in the Left/Right sphere, we do a combination of both and the methods we (all) employ are not the same used by "purist" R/D players.

Okay. I always supported the Socialists more than the Fascists. I think I got you guys confused with a different group though.

[The Bruce]

While they've undertaken invader activities, from time to time, they'd have to do a whole lot more of it to be considered the 'most notorious raiders' of NationStates. They're one of those gray area groups that will find themselves opposed by defenders one day and fighting invaders the next.

They're closer to being traditional "imperialists" than most regions that claim the name, but in this case would be offended by the word "imperialist" due to their anti-imperialist doctrine. I seem to remember a few years ago (5-6) they claimed that 'right wing' themed regions were more likely to be invaders, as justification for invading conservative regions. This was extended to regions with embassies with conservative regions that had links to invader regions.

While their choice of politics in no way should give them a pass to invade peaceful regions, they are not destructive enough to warrant a condemnation. On the other hand, many of their actions are done without involving a swarm of various other invader groups, so they can be singled out more for their actions than many other invader groups can be.

[Casita]

HA!

Great work comrades!

retired TRF soldier

Autonomous Insurgent

[ForeStarnya]

Yeah, we'll take it - it means as much as any other comment/criticism/accusation leveled at TRF since its formation

Which is nothing whatsoever

What the OP and many others fail to realise us that TRF never accepted the narrow definitions that others imposed on the R/D game - we always had different sensibilities

The "Condemnation" device itself is a prime example of why we treat such conventions as ineffective and irrelevant - a successful one has no impact on the organisation being targeted in terms of limiting its scope or operations

PS you forgot to mention Pact of Steel

[Chester Pearson]

You realize condemning Antifa will serve a far greater purpose correct?

[Casita]

leave it to chester

[Redsward]

You realize condemning Antifa will serve a far greater purpose correct?

Most of the raider haters will actually go against that. They assisted in the capture of NAZI EUROPE. And the defender-wannabes are all trying to DESTROY RAIDERS! Mostly TBR, but still... they want to destroy raiders altogether.

[Naginii]

It's been said by me before, but generally these anti-raider condemn-memes are an epic waste of time.

Branding raiders with a condemnation just because they're "the most [insert adjectives here] raiders in all of NS", doesn't make them sweat, tremble in fear or reconsider their modus. Condemnation brandings just make them giggle like you've tickled them. It's meaningless to them as a sanction because it carries no significant consequence. It's meaningful to them because it becomes defacto WASC recognition for being effective raiders and getting under your skin. They'll wave this around as proof of how epic they are, thus legitimizing their status and brand. Even if they're not quite the threat the author wants or needs them to appear to be in order to get this passed.

So if this does nothing to the raider, who gains? While I note that a few of these have been defeated recently, it's still a point of record that calling-out a raider is the lowest of low-hanging legislative fruit, and the easiest way for someone to collect an author badge (given the climate and attitude), and build their own NS cred. Great, but hand too many of these out and you cripple their value — which isn't that significant anyway.

The last point is that these guys are small in comparison to the bigger, major operators on the map right now. You brand this crew, and they take several-steps up the ladder quicker in JenGuvLand raider cred than they may have been able to do on the own.

Condemnation supports raiding. It's counterproductive to your intent and ultimate aims. Rethink this whole effort, and spare your energies for stuff that actually can make a real difference and matter in the gameplay for all players across the gamemap.

Or keep doing it. Raiding will love you for it.

[Misley]

You realize condemning Antifa will serve a far greater purpose correct?

Most of the raider haters will actually go against that. They assisted in the capture of NAZI EUROPE. And the defender-wannabes are all trying to DESTROY RAIDERS! Mostly TBR, but still... they want to destroy raiders altogether.

Don't pay Chester any mind. He's just got a stick up his ass when it comes to Antifa.

Branding raiders with a condemnation just because they're "the most [insert adjectives here] raiders in all of NS", doesn't make them sweat, tremble in fear or reconsider their modus. Condemnation brandings just make them giggle like you've tickled them. It's meaningless to them as a sanction because it carries no significant consequence. It's meaningful to them because it becomes defacto WASC recognition for being effective raiders and getting under your skin. They'll wave this around as proof of how epic they are, thus legitimizing their status and brand. Even if they're not quite the threat the author wants or needs them to appear to be in order to get this passed.

If anything, I'm a touch offended that this resolution focuses primarily on very old operations of the Fleet while ignoring the more recent activity we've had.

[Redsward]

If anything, I'm a touch offended that this resolution focuses primarily on very old operations of the Fleet while ignoring the more recent activity we've had.

True that. It's like condemning DEN for all THEIR old invasions. They disbanded a long time ago, and Gest decided to seal the region.

[Chester Pearson]

If anything, I'm a touch offended that this resolution focuses primarily on very old operations of the Fleet while ignoring the more recent activity we've had.

True that. It's like condemning DEN for all THEIR old invasions. They disbanded a long time ago, and Gest decided to seal the region.

God bless Redsward. If not not for them, we would never have our daily history lesson, or Black Rider boot licking....

[Redsward]

True that. It's like condemning DEN for all THEIR old invasions. They disbanded a long time ago, and Gest decided to seal the region.

God bless Redsward. If not not for them, we would never have our daily history lesson, or Black Rider boot licking....

But not necessarily the belief that they should be condemned. Jesus Christ...

I do get your point, though. Apparently TBR is the new Macedon.

[Naginii]

Nobody is the new Macedon. Or Franks.

That said, I'd prefer to see Defenders and those that support that side of the spectrum, take their ancient hatred for raiders and raiding out of the WASC and back onto the gamemap where it belongs.

[Redsward]

Nobody is the new Macedon. Or Franks.

That said, I'd prefer to see Defenders and those that support that side of the spectrum, take their ancient hatred for raiders and raiding out of the WASC and back onto the gamemap where it belongs.

TBR has so much hatred. Macedon HAD so much hatred. I think they were the reason why Topid created the Security Council.

[Chester Pearson]

Nobody is the new Macedon. Or Franks.

That said, I'd prefer to see Defenders and those that support that side of the spectrum, take their ancient hatred for raiders and raiding out of the WASC and back onto the gamemap where it belongs.

TBR has so much hatred. Macedon HAD so much hatred. I think they were the reason why Topid created the Security Council.

Topid was a game administrator?

[Naginii]

All good points, but you could also argue that those on the other side of the coin hate too. A lot. Which is one reason (not the only, I'll admit) why these sorts of proposals keep cropping-up.

Anyway, let's get out of the weeds and not jack the thread.

[Redsward]

TBR has so much hatred. Macedon HAD so much hatred. I think they were the reason why Topid created the Security Council.

Topid was a game administrator?

Actually, he didn't technically create it, but he was the one who came up with the idea, so Mahaj recognized him as the founder of the SC in Topid's commendation.

http://www.nationstates.net/page=WA_pas ... 2/start=97