Belgium Conquered!

[Rachel Anumia]

I think it's disingenuous of the FRA to say that it went into Valhalla out of a belief in defending. It invaded Suffolk after Suffolk entered in a mutually agreed with Empires of Earth. The FRA remained in the region despite the natives asking the FRA to leave and stating that it had an agreement with Empires of Earth. It's behaviour seems driven more by an agenda against the Four Realms, Europeia and region building in general than it's stated "moral" obligations.

[The Murtunian Tribes]

I think it's disingenuous of the FRA to say that it went into Valhalla out of a belief in defending. It invaded Suffolk after Suffolk entered in a mutually agreed with Empires of Earth. The FRA remained in the region despite the natives asking the FRA to leave and stating that it had an agreement with Empires of Earth. It's behaviour seems driven more by an agenda against the Four Realms, Europeia and region building in general than it's stated "moral" obligations.

So?

[Frattastan]

TNI recognised in January 2007 that it had lost practical control of Valhalla, probably for good, but that does not change the fact that once TNI has asserted claim over a region, violating that claim breaches TNI's sovereignty, whether or not you accept TNI's claims of sovereignty.

You just have a claim to it, with little or no foundation.
Good luck persuading anyone that it's yours without being laughed at.

However, TNI has consistently selected targets with the aim of causing maximum damage to the FRA.

When somebody tells me that TNI has invaded a region I don't think "maximum damage to the FRA", I think "I don't want another one of those overblown, fake, empty propaganda pieces".

Attempting to destroy Free Thought? The LKE were retaliating to the flag offence and occupying the region (partially due to the massive FRA attempt to stop us on the original update battle), with the intention of possibly staying permanently (by doing so making it part of the Empire), that is not the same thing as outright destruction.

The LKE imposed a secret password and didn't share it with the original population. This practice, under the old rules, was considered griefing.
(The fact that old rules don't apply anymore doesn't mean this still isn't griefing. It's just that it's not punishable).

Griefing a region because it has mocked somebody's flag is a move that makes you look like ... (I'll give you a hint. It rhymes with bricks).

The LKE's Imperial Eagle is not to be mocked, as it is a representation of our region's ideology and prowess.

I think the LKE will have some problems living and interacting in a world of pluralism and diversity, then.

However, my point was that originally Free Thought was simply raided. It was only after the natives escalated the situation that The LKE extended its territory to include Free Thought.

An unnecessary and disproportionate reaction. Not like I was expecting anything better from you.

By seeking to revive a region rather than simply starting on afresh, TNI was (unnecessarily) attempting to repair a decaying ruin rather than beginning a new region which would be easier for TNI to control. TNI sacrificed some of its interests in order to achieve an altruistic ideal which one of form of imperialism espouses.

Yes. Still, this is not altruism.
Altruism = unselfish concern for the welfare of the others.
TNI's action wouldn't have contributed to the welfare of anyone but TNI Empire itself. Developing a region isn't an altruistic action, unless the region is developed for somebody else. Which isn't your case. So, please, don't try to label your imperialism as something that isn't.

Since you brought it up again, I'll talk one last time about Hong Kong.

Das Corporate Headquarters:
Corporate Conservative - 86 nations

Senior Corporations:
[...]
Hong Kong - 9 nations
[...]

For those of you who don't know CC, yes, a Corporation is a colony, subordinate to the Corporate Headquarters.

It was a hard battle fought that no one knew about. It was a secret battle, driven by Corporate Conservative's anger at the free market capital of the world being taken over by the radical left Illuminati. To ensure victory without publicity, several spies were sent to the communist empire of Illuminati. Simultaneously, watchers looked over Hong Kong for suspicious activity at the update time. When the day finally came, the brave spirits of ASEISENHERZ quickly refounded the region Hong Kong before any socialist militant from Illuminati could click the left mouse button. Now it has been free from centralized economic control, and remains the free market capital of the world!

-Rephias

http://www.freewebs.com/corporateconservative/

Hong Kong, the one GB&I fought a war against, was raided by Illuminati and griefed, but the refound was snatched by CC.
Since then it has been a colony of theirs.

Of course, all this will have no importance for you, given your clever imperialist policy of accepting the benefits of Raider Unity (support from regions that aren't formally allied with you) while refusing the fact that other invaders shouldn't be attacked (though CC considered themselves to be beyond the R/D axis, much like you, they were in fact raiders). At least I'm quite amused that you spent so much forces on a puppet dump.
And of CC too. Never liked them.

[Whiskum]

You just have a claim to it, with little or no foundation.
Good luck persuading anyone that it's yours without being laughed at.

Fortunately, The New Inquisition does not submit its Empire to the FRA or anyone's approval. It is presumptuous of the FRA to believe it can determine which claims of sovereign empires have 'foundation' and which claims should be 'laughed' it, even using its military power to enforce this mindset (essentially what occurred with Valhalla). Whether or not the claim is acknowledged is immaterial to whether or not the FRA's actions were justified from our perspective. Whatever the FRA thinks of our claim, TNI sovereignty is sacrosanct and war has been the result of the FRA violating it.

When somebody tells me that TNI has invaded a region I don't think "maximum damage to the FRA", I think "I don't want another one of those overblown, fake, empty propaganda pieces".

You will appreciate TNI was not particularly relying on what you, currently the Chief of Defence for the FRA, personally 'think' of our invasions (or rather, how you choose to characterise them). Our announcements are aimed at a rather different audience than members of the FRA Cabinet. Furthermore, I did not say our targets caused maximum damage to the FRA. I stated that our targets were selected in order to cause the maximum damage to the FRA (in effect possible militarily), which the invasion of the only founderless and largest FRA region is a significant step towards achieving. Belgium was also a targeted selected as having a significant connection, historical (ALL) and present (UDL), to the organised defender world which TNI opposes.

The LKE imposed a secret password and didn't share it with the original population. This practice, under the old rules, was considered griefing.
(The fact that old rules don't apply anymore doesn't mean this still isn't griefing. It's just that it's not punishable).

Griefing a region because it has mocked somebody's flag is a move that makes you look like ... (I'll give you a hint. It rhymes with bricks).

Originally, the term you used, and the term I contested, was attempting to destroy Free Thought. Griefing, even under the definition you proffer, does not automatically mean region destruction. Simply because the definition you claim for griefing was in the old rules does not mean it is the appropriate definition within a world with the added constraint on raiding delegates of regional influence (especially as the current rules uses 'griefing' differently).

The FRA may name call about The LKE's operation in Free Thought, but evidently a significant proportion of the NationStates world at the time disagreed with the FRA: indeed, Secruity Council Resolution # 14 only passed by 2,896 votes to 2,832 votes (had various delegates not misunderstood the faulty timer at the time, the resolution would have been defeated). Ultimately, the majority of those voting rejected The LKE's sovereignty in Free Thought, but that bloc consisted mostly of defender and isolationist regions The LKE could not hope to convince. An equivalent number dissented. So the idea that The LKE's actions made The LKE 'look like' what you term 'pricks' cannot be agreed with if we consider those outside the FRA and defender sphere.

I think the LKE will have some problems living and interacting in a world of pluralism and diversity, then.

The LKE has been actively interacting within the NationStates world since mid-2006 and done so with a diverse set of players with a range of beliefs. During this time, it has had thriving relations with many regions. It has done this despite maintaining a rigid stance against the FRA and being protective of the symbols of its state, including its flag. These positions are not unreasonable but a natural cultural extension of The LKE's world view.

An unnecessary and disproportionate reaction. Not like I was expecting anything better from you.

The LKE is an imperialist region. If it is going to colonise regions involuntarily, are those regions with a record of mocking The LKE not more appropriate targets than random regions? Much like infringing our sovereignty, slurring The LKE has a price. Invading Free Thought for a second time showed this.

Yes. Still, this is not altruism.
Altruism = unselfish concern for the welfare of the others.
TNI's action wouldn't have contributed to the welfare of anyone but TNI Empire itself. Developing a region isn't an altruistic action, unless the region is developed for somebody else. Which isn't your case. So, please, don't try to label your imperialism as something that isn't.

If TNI's actions in Valhalla were out of purely selfish concern for its own welfare then, you appear to be acknowledging that TNI's natural course of action would have been to found a region afresh. TNI did not derive a significant benefit, under your own arguments, from invading Valhalla instead of founding a region afresh. Thus seeking to revive Valhalla for the purposes of region development was not a decision taken out of concern for TNI's welfare: rather, it would have benefited the game as a whole by reviving a dead region and, despite not having their consent, if they had complied with TNI instructions to assume positions in TNI, the natives of Valhalla by reviving their dead region. Whether or not you view those actions as correct, the motives were altruistic by seeking to benefit the game and the natives in this respect at TNI's own expense.

Since you brought it up again, I'll talk one last time about Hong Kong.

Das Corporate Headquarters:
Corporate Conservative - 86 nations

Senior Corporations:
[...]
Hong Kong - 9 nations
[...]
For those of you who don't know CC, yes, a Corporation is a colony, subordinate to the Corporate Headquarters.

It was a hard battle fought that no one knew about. It was a secret battle, driven by Corporate Conservative's anger at the free market capital of the world being taken over by the radical left Illuminati. To ensure victory without publicity, several spies were sent to the communist empire of Illuminati. Simultaneously, watchers looked over Hong Kong for suspicious activity at the update time. When the day finally came, the brave spirits of ASEISENHERZ quickly refounded the region Hong Kong before any socialist militant from Illuminati could click the left mouse button. Now it has been free from centralized economic control, and remains the free market capital of the world!

-Rephias
http://www.freewebs.com/corporateconservative/

Hong Kong, the one GB&I fought a war against, was raided by Illuminati and griefed, but the refound was snatched by CC.
Since then it has been a colony of theirs.

Of course, all this will have no importance for you, given your clever imperialist policy of accepting the benefits of Raider Unity (support from regions that aren't formally allied with you) while refusing the fact that other invaders shouldn't be attacked (though CC considered themselves to be beyond the R/D axis, much like you, they were in fact raiders). At least I'm quite amused that you spent so much forces on a puppet dump.
And of CC too. Never liked them.

Corporate Conservative was dead by the time of TNI's action in Hong Kong in mid-2011, so to suggest CC was maintaining Hong Kong as a colony is wrong. However, as Hong Kong (even by your version of events) was deliberately refounded as a continuation of the region which existed originally and which GB&I fought a war against (by vote of its House of Commons), it was a representation of that region and thus TNI's action against Hong Kong on behalf of GB&I was justified. This continuation of the original region was not a CC colony at the time of the invasion. Corporate Conservative was a close ally of TNI and LKE in Pactium Imperium, the original group formed to combat the FRA following Valhalla, in December 2006. Indeed, Verak was destined to become Empress of The LKE at one point and had a role in its Defence Ministry. So the suggestion that we showed disrespect to CC's interests is inaccurate.

You are right that simply because a region is raider does not necessarily determine TNI's attitude to that region, but completely mischaracterise the implications of this position with the obvious intention of damaging TNI's relations with the raider world (renewing and compounding the offence of the FRA's earlier propaganda campaign on this issue). Our policy depends on whether or not that region has a relevant relationship with TNI: CC did and raider regions are all well-placed to have a good relationship with TNI. Those that we work with as strong partners are to all intents and purposes treated military allies, even where this clashes with other TNI's interests. It is unrealistic to suggest TNI would act against the stated property of such a region and we maintain we did not in Hong Kong (though our pre-existing alliance with GB&I would take precedence over duties to an inactive CC in any case, but the issue does not arise). Not being a raider region, TNI does not subscribe to ''Raider Unity' at all, in its good or bad form: we work with many regions, raider and non-raider, in military contexts without having a treaty. A treaty merely creates an entitlement to military support; mutual benefit and goodwill are sufficient to provide support in most circumstances (all circumstances essentially involving regular, close military partners). We don't attack our partners, but simply because a region is raider does not make it a partner, unless it has a relationship with TNI (which raider regions are in an advantageous position to have but do not automatically have). The raider world and TNI both stand to gain just as much from each other's cooperation. On the other hand, the entities which stand to lose out from this cooperation are the FRA and the UDL, hence why you have chosen to advance this line of attack. The Belgium raid is one of the most effective recent demonstrations of what TNI and raiders can achieve through cooperation in raiding.

[The Blaatschapen]

Belgium was also a targeted selected as having a significant connection, historical (ALL) and present (UDL), to the organised defender world which TNI opposes.

Belgium is not connected to the UDL. It's not a member of the UDL, and neither is anyone with an official function that represents the region.

[Whiskum]

Belgium was also a targeted selected as having a significant connection, historical (ALL) and present (UDL), to the organised defender world which TNI opposes.

Belgium is not connected to the UDL. It's not a member of the UDL, and neither is anyone with an official function that represents the region.

The UDL does not have member-regions in the conventional defender sense, so there is no suggestion it was connected in that way. Belgium does however have a significant number of UDL members within the native population, indeed almost in military terms a UDL standing army inside the region, keeping in with Belgium's defender tradition. Official links are not necessary for a significant connection to exist.

[Mahaj]

Belgium is not connected to the UDL. It's not a member of the UDL, and neither is anyone with an official function that represents the region.

The UDL does not have member-regions in the conventional defender sense, so there is no suggestion it was connected in that way. Belgium does however have a significant number of UDL members within the native population, indeed almost in military terms a UDL standing army inside the region, keeping in with Belgium's defender tradition. Official links are not necessary for a significant connection to exist.

Uh, no.

[Frattastan]

Whatever the FRA thinks of our claim, TNI sovereignty is sacrosanct and war has been the result of the FRA violating it.

The sovereignty of every region is sacrosanct and you've been infringing this for years, so you can't speak about it, sorry.

Whatever TNI thinks, violations and wars exist only in its unique mindset.
FRA didn't violate TNI sovereignty in Valhalla, because that region never belonged to you, no matter you say.
Valhalla belongs only to its natives. You can keep claiming it, if you wish and it makes you happy, but this doesn't change the fact.

Valhalla is not yours. Nor it has ever been.
I'm not sure you can even find someone who would reasonably support TNI's claim outside its treatied allies (of course, since they are bound to behave in a certain way). If you find it, let me know. You don't need to submit your claims to anyone for approval? Good.
Beware, however. Claims founded on unreasonable principles tend to be lost causes.

Originally, the term you used, and the term I contested, was attempting to destroy Free Thought. Griefing, even under the definition you proffer, does not automatically mean region destruction. Simply because the definition you claim for griefing was in the old rules does not mean it is the appropriate definition within a world with the added constraint on raiding delegates of regional influence (especially as the current rules uses 'griefing' differently).

My point remains.
You undertook an action that is widely condemned in the Nationstates community and for a reason that is so arbitrary that it even scares me a little

If TNI's actions in Valhalla were out of purely selfish concern for its own welfare then, you appear to be acknowledging that TNI's natural course of action would have been to found a region afresh.

No, actually. TNI was interested in owning a region named 'Valhalla'. Given that said region already existed, it had to be forcibly refounded first.
Regarding your claim that empire-building benefits the game, I completely dismiss it. Colonies tend to be dead wastelands, yours included, and attempts at developing a region in conditions of inequality are usually doomed to fail.

if they had complied with TNI instructions to assume positions in TNI

Seriously?
The practice of willingly complying in the hope of being 'spared' from a nasty fate such as ejection, while perhaps gaining some political advantage, is usually called collaborating or pulling a quisling and mostly regarded as an un-nice thing to do.
People naturally come to oppose -imposed- conditions (especially since it seems to me, they would do nothing but increase the legitimacy of your rule in the eyes of the outside world).

You can't invade and forcibly refound region (without any justification behind this action. or, at most, a silly one, which is even worse) and at the same time claim you're benefitting the whole world, or the native population itself. This old, paternalistic conception is long dead, as this duality cannot be accepted anymore.

Not being a raider region, TNI does not subscribe to ''Raider Unity' at all, in its good or bad form: we work with many regions, raider and non-raider, in military contexts without having a treaty. A treaty merely creates an entitlement to military support; mutual benefit and goodwill are sufficient to provide support in most circumstances (all circumstances essentially involving regular, close military partners). We don't attack our partners, but simply because a region is raider does not make it a partner, unless it has a relationship with TNI (which raider regions are in an advantageous position to have but do not automatically have).

The summary is: "we work with raiders, but this doesn't mean we're partners or that we will refrain from attacking them, if that will serve our future political interests."

I think the LKE will have some problems living and interacting in a world of pluralism and diversity, then.

The LKE has been actively interacting within the NationStates world since mid-2006 and done so with a diverse set of players with a range of beliefs. During this time, it has had thriving relations with many regions.

Probably many don't really understand what you stand for. This is the purpose of this thread.
To show the world what you really are. Keep digging that hole

[Vengeful Daylight]

I don't understand the importance of Belgium... Can someone explain it?

[Cromarty]

Secruity Council Resolution # 14 only passed by 2,896 votes to 2,832 votes (had various delegates not misunderstood the faulty timer at the time, the resolution would have been defeated).

Source?

[Cromarty]

I don't understand the importance of Belgium...

Belgium has like 3 members of the UDL in it (apparrently this constitutes a 'standing army in Belgium' the UDL has ) and once had FRA guys in there or something. TNI went to war with the FRA after the FRA liberated/invaded (depending on which side of this tedious debate you're on) a region named Valhalla, which TNI had originally invaded/taken to region build (again, depending on what side you're on, there is dispute over TNI's motivations in Valhalla).

This, allegedly, justifies TNI (who don't prescribe to 'raider unity' but still take advantage of it) invading Belgium, and then invading TRR for a few hours (they were beaten in endos within hours in TRR but kept the delegacy until the minor update, before which many regions, such as Europeia, ordered their troops to withdraw) to damage the FRA in some way. Whether the Belgium raid, and subsequent invasion of TRR (the only, it has been claimed, successful invasion of TRR with only military troops) damages the FRA or galvanises it, is yet to be seen.

[Crushing Our Enemies]

I don't understand the importance of Belgium...

Belgium has like 3 members of the UDL in it (apparrently this constitutes a 'standing army in Belgium' the UDL has ) and once had FRA guys in there or something. TNI went to war with the FRA after the FRA liberated/invaded (depending on which side of this tedious debate you're on) a region named Valhalla, which TNI had originally invaded/taken to region build (again, depending on what side you're on, there is dispute over TNI's motivations in Valhalla).

This, allegedly, justifies TNI (who don't prescribe to 'raider unity' but still take advantage of it) invading Belgium, and then invading TRR for a few hours (they were beaten in endos within hours in TRR but kept the delegacy until the minor update, before which many regions, such as Europeia, ordered their troops to withdraw) to damage the FRA in some way. Whether the Belgium raid, and subsequent invasion of TRR (the only, it has been claimed, successful invasion of TRR with only military troops) damages the FRA or galvanises it, is yet to be seen.

I had been skimming ever since everyone started going on about Valhalla. Thanks for the tl;dr.

[Cromarty]

Belgium has like 3 members of the UDL in it (apparrently this constitutes a 'standing army in Belgium' the UDL has ) and once had FRA guys in there or something. TNI went to war with the FRA after the FRA liberated/invaded (depending on which side of this tedious debate you're on) a region named Valhalla, which TNI had originally invaded/taken to region build (again, depending on what side you're on, there is dispute over TNI's motivations in Valhalla).

This, allegedly, justifies TNI (who don't prescribe to 'raider unity' but still take advantage of it) invading Belgium, and then invading TRR for a few hours (they were beaten in endos within hours in TRR but kept the delegacy until the minor update, before which many regions, such as Europeia, ordered their troops to withdraw) to damage the FRA in some way. Whether the Belgium raid, and subsequent invasion of TRR (the only, it has been claimed, successful invasion of TRR with only military troops) damages the FRA or galvanises it, is yet to be seen.

I had been skimming ever since everyone started going on about Valhalla. Thanks for the tl;dr.

Just call me tl:dr boy!

Worst. Superpower. Ever. <_<

[The Murtunian Tribes]

I don't understand the importance of Belgium...

Belgium has like 3 members of the UDL in it (apparrently this constitutes a 'standing army in Belgium' the UDL has ) and once had FRA guys in there or something. TNI went to war with the FRA after the FRA liberated/invaded (depending on which side of this tedious debate you're on) a region named Valhalla, which TNI had originally invaded/taken to region build (again, depending on what side you're on, there is dispute over TNI's motivations in Valhalla).

This, allegedly, justifies TNI (who don't prescribe to 'raider unity' but still take advantage of it) invading Belgium, and then invading TRR for a few hours (they were beaten in endos within hours in TRR but kept the delegacy until the minor update, before which many regions, such as Europeia, ordered their troops to withdraw) to damage the FRA in some way. Whether the Belgium raid, and subsequent invasion of TRR (the only, it has been claimed, successful invasion of TRR with only military troops) damages the FRA or galvanises it, is yet to be seen.

See? Two simple paragraphs, nicely summarizing what before had taken a full dissertation between three or four collaborators to still not conclude.

[Cromarty]

Belgium has like 3 members of the UDL in it (apparrently this constitutes a 'standing army in Belgium' the UDL has ) and once had FRA guys in there or something. TNI went to war with the FRA after the FRA liberated/invaded (depending on which side of this tedious debate you're on) a region named Valhalla, which TNI had originally invaded/taken to region build (again, depending on what side you're on, there is dispute over TNI's motivations in Valhalla).

This, allegedly, justifies TNI (who don't prescribe to 'raider unity' but still take advantage of it) invading Belgium, and then invading TRR for a few hours (they were beaten in endos within hours in TRR but kept the delegacy until the minor update, before which many regions, such as Europeia, ordered their troops to withdraw) to damage the FRA in some way. Whether the Belgium raid, and subsequent invasion of TRR (the only, it has been claimed, successful invasion of TRR with only military troops) damages the FRA or galvanises it, is yet to be seen.

See? Two simple paragraphs, nicely summarizing what before had taken a full dissertation between three or four collaborators to still not conclude.

I think the difference is I have no interest at all in Belgium, Valhalla, the FRA or TNI and so I can sum up the two arguments, 'rationally' look at them, and decide I still have no interest in Belgium, Valhalla, the FRA or TNI

[The Murtunian Tribes]

See? Two simple paragraphs, nicely summarizing what before had taken a full dissertation between three or four collaborators to still not conclude.

I think the difference is I have no interest at all in Belgium, Valhalla, the FRA or TNI and so I can sum up the two arguments, 'rationally' look at them, and decide I still have no interest in Belgium, Valhalla, the FRA or TNI

Interesting. I do have an interest and still decided I didn't care about this nonsense.

[Frattastan]

That's the point.
No-one cares about whatever "war" the TNI or the LKE leadership are conducting. Or about whatever _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ argument they propose.
My main interest is defending - not waging "wars" or debating them.

Why am I doing this, then?
I don't have a personal reputation to defend, so I am free to go on and prove the senselessness of this discussion until the thread is locked

[Rachel Anumia]

That's the point.
No-one cares about whatever "war" the TNI or the LKE leadership are conducting. Or about whatever _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ argument they propose.

I actually care

[Frattastan]

By the end of this discussion, you'll be sick of it.

[Zemnaya Svoboda]

I seem to spy an interesting contradiction in the argument the New Inquisition has apparently put before members of the Founderless Regions Alliance.

As I understand it, (and I do ask the leadership of the New Inquisition to correct me if I misapprehend) the New Inquisition argues the following:

1. We are able to hurt FRA member regions, and regions remotely affiliated with FRA, even ones as large as the Rejected Realms.
2. We are at war with FRA.
3. Therefore, membership or any kind of affiliation with FRA leads to a risk of being hurt by us.

This is all appears very straightforward. One faction is at war with another and seeks to dismantle it through intimidation. A decision to avoid risk by withdrawing from FRA appears to be suggested.

And yet, some pages later, we discover that the New Inquisition's cause for war with FRA is that FRA intervened against TNI's attempted conquest of Valhalla. Valhalla had not done anything to offend TNI, and yet TNI invaded it to expand its territorial reach.

Surely therefore, a region choosing to leave FRA would not, then, eliminate the risk of TNI invasion? Indeed, as it appears TNI is interested in invading regions on a regular basis regardless of any lack of enmity, it would appear that it is in a weaker region's interest to support the continuing existence of a defender organization. After all, in the absence of defenders, invaders (both raiders and imperialists) would have a significantly greater scope for their activities.

[Whiskum]

The sovereignty of every region is sacrosanct and you've been infringing this for years, so you can't speak about it, sorry.

There is no generic principle that every region's sovereignty is sacrosanct. TNI does not care to postulate as to every region. We do assert our own sovereignty in our territories, and do so without seeking or needing foreign approval. TNI has every right to 'speak' as to its own affairs and will not be stopped from doing so by the FRA's one size fits all generalisations. Other regions are free to similarly assert their sovereignty do and pursue military action to enforce their claims if they wish, but TNI is not bound to acknowledge their claim if it clashes with overriding TNI interests. TNI refuses to be forced to acknowledge such claims through the compulsion of external military and political power, namely the FRA in the case of Valhalla. There's no inconsistency in that position; it is merely a TNI-centric view which takes no position on the general ethics of regional sovereignty, which is in reality how most active gameplay regions of significance conduct themselves even if they do not use raiding as a tool of their foreign policy (whereas TNI does). As they do not raid and engage in diplomatic niceties, such regions are simply not as overt and honest as to their true position as TNI is. Some regions do maintain the principles you outline, mainly some defender and isolationist regions (and the former group's associated massive inter-regional organisations), though almost all end up hypocritically breaking their professed principles (as seen with the FRA's invasion of UKB in May 2010).

Whatever TNI thinks, violations and wars exist only in its unique mindset.
FRA didn't violate TNI sovereignty in Valhalla, because that region never belonged to you, no matter you say.
Valhalla belongs only to its natives. You can keep claiming it, if you wish and it makes you happy, but this doesn't change the fact.

First, the War is not just part of TNI's 'mindset'; it is the cause of the 'countless invasions' which Northern Chittowa was complaining about earlier.

Why should the FRA's mindset, however widespread among defender and isolationist sympathisers, take precedence over TNI's? TNI had in-game control of Valhalla for a period. Control does not equate to sovereignty, but there's no reason which TNI recognises why the claims of the inactive natives of November 2006 should be regarded as more important than those of an active region seeking to develope Valhalla. In any case, the matter was nothing to do with the FRA and thus it warrants TNI retaliation for adjudicating as to those claims by applying brute force under the pretense of 'defending'.

At the moment, Valhalla's natives consist of different individuals to the ones when TNI occupied it, namely individuals associated to 10000 Islands and Yggdrasil, defender regions. Indeed, after the FRA Arch Chancellor finished his month-long aggressive occupation of Valhalla, Treutopia of Peaceian took it over. Since then, apart from total decay or the odd raid, the region has spent most of its time under defender control. You say Valhalla was neutral before TNI invaded it in November 2006. If so, then the defender world has certainly made a habit of inhabiting the region since. In your own terms, they should have no greater claim to the Valhalla of December 2006 than TNI, having merely refounded instead of having invaded it when it was a ruin.

TNI had practical control of Valhalla between 27th November 2006 and 11th December 2006; the natives were not asserting any control then. Since January 2007, we have acknowledged we lost practical control (except for the brief period when we invaded Valhalla once again). It has merely been outraged that its sovereignty, having asserted Valhalla as its territory when it gained control of Valhalla, was violated by an FRA and RLA invasion. Control is not the same thing as holding a region legitimately, but the fact individuals within a region are natives doesn't mean they have a better claim to it than anyone else: it is not a fact that they own Valhalla, in December 2006 they could have been (and were deprived of) Valhalla, when it belonged to TNI. You earlier argued for legitimacy based on in-game mechanics, saying:

That was a basic realist reflection. A mere proclamation has no effect in-game so, given your apparent disregard for several principles I consider "natural" in international relations, military force is what determines whether a region is yours or not.

What the FRA considers 'natural' is irrelevant to TNI. The FRA merely chose back then to judge the claims of the natives as being superior to those of TNI. It is fortunate that TNI did not and does not subject any of its claims of sovereignty to approval by the FRA or anyone else. For TNI, your claims of native legitimacy only exist the mindset of the FRA (unfortunately shared by many defender and isolationist sympathisers) as it seeks to interfere in global affairs which do not concern it. You may find our 'mindset' alien, but the assumptions you consider inherent are utterly irrelevant to us.

Valhalla is not yours. Nor it has ever been.
I'm not sure you can even find someone who would reasonably support TNI's claim outside its treatied allies (of course, since they are bound to behave in a certain way). If you find it, let me know. You don't need to submit your claims to anyone for approval? Good.
Beware, however. Claims founded on unreasonable principles tend to be lost causes.

At the moment TNI has not been actively asserting the claim in the practical sense, and apart from an invasion a few months ago, has not done since January 2007. However, when TNI was asserting the claim, in December 2006, a coalition of regions arose (nearly all of which had no treatied or even any prior link to TNI), supporting TNI's claim to Valhalla: the group, known as Pactium Imperium, consisted of (in addition to TNI, LKE and EoE): the Great Green Federation, Americana, Corporate Conservative, The League of Dictatorships, Catlandatopia, The Blades of Conquest, HIVE and Torino, inter alia. Outside PI, GB&I also supported TNI's claim. Since then, other issues in the FRA War have been more prominent (like the deliberate framing of three senior TNI members as FRA spies and the invasion of UKB), on which TNI and The LKE have many supporters. Yet the idea that TNI's claim over Valhalla is some sort of minority fringe view is wrong: it may repulse the defender and isolationists of this game, but we are not constrained by your 'mindset'.

The issue you raise is irrelevant though becaue, while TNI maintains the invasion of Valhalla was an intrusion on its sovereignty, it is not actively seeking control over Valhalla when the game mechanics do not allow us to maintain that control (hence why there is no hope of our claim on Valhalla being anything but a lost cause), hence why we reasonably have not wasted time canvassing support for our claim. Our claim is purely theoretical. TNI does not submit of any of its theoretical claims or views to outside approval: we have our own sovereign territory and we decide what our attitude towards it is, not anyone else. That is the only attitude any self-respecting sovereign state takes to what it believes to be its land. TNI is no diffeernt and rejects FRA interference.

My point remains.
You undertook an action that is widely condemned in the Nationstates community and for a reason that is so arbitrary that it even scares me a little

I would apologise for the fact The LKE scared you, but that's generally the effect we are trying to achieve when it comes to the FRA! Indeed, the deterrent effect of invading Free Thought for a second time in response to their conduct has actually benefited The LKE since.

Your point remains in the sense you are arguing a different reason to reach the same conclusion. As to that point, again, Security Council Resolution # 14 had 2,896 in favour and 2,832 votes against. Yes, a significant number were opposed to The LKE's actions, but an equivalent number rejected the FRA's right to enroach on LKE sovereignty in Free Thought. LKE foreign policy is not determined by conducting a poll of regions. The views of the defender and isolationist regions which composed the bulk of the pro-resolution 14 vote are of no interest to us. The fact there was substantial support against the resolution shows The LKE is not alone and there was wide opposition to liberating Free Thought within the NationStates community, in the same way you cite wide support in favour of it. Views on the issues involved were finely balanced and the showing against the resolution was relatively good.

No, actually. TNI was interested in owning a region named 'Valhalla'. Given that said region already existed, it had to be forcibly refounded first.

Despite the fact I was not a member of TNI at the time, as the head of The LKE's military at the time I believe I did and do have a better appreciation of TNI's motives for refounding Valhalla than you do. TNI was refounding Valhalla so it was able to revive the region in secure conditions without the threat of FRA invasion.

Regarding your claim that empire-building benefits the game, I completely dismiss it. Colonies tend to be dead wastelands, yours included, and attempts at developing a region in conditions of inequality are usually doomed to fail.

Firstly, what I was describing was not my claim, but TNI's motives for the invasion of Valhalla. Whether or not TNI's attempts to achieve an external benefit (by reviving a dead region) were effective, these were its motives, not purely selfish concerns (or else it would have simply founded a new region). That is altruistic behaviour and that is what you were contesting.

Second, The LKE has had great success both historically and in the present in developing dominions. Norwood, founded by Jaybagz in September 2006, for instance, brought many notable players such as SenatorTC (founder of Hampshire), Kazaman, GovernorGoldFarb, Joseph Thomas, (even Lord Alphanesia dare I say it), into our sphere. It flourished as an LKE colony on an unequal footing for about a year (at one point being bigger than The LKE itself), declining for the same reasons as any region does rather than because of its colonial status. Currently, The LKE is fostering active communities separate to its main forum in both The Land of Dragonia (taken by a raid all the way back in August 2006) and Imperial Elite. Other colonial projects are ongoing. The imperialist cause is not lost. Furthermore, the FRA has no right to enforce its negative view of imperialism, even in founded regions, as it tried to do in UKB with the May 2010 invasion. Opposing imperialism in all its forms and conducting military operations on this basis is the FRA trying to impose its world view on TNI and The LKE. There are inevitable consequences for that unacceptable challenge to our sovereignty, like the invasions of Belgium and TRR.

Seriously?

Yes.

The practice of willingly complying in the hope of being 'spared' from a nasty fate such as ejection, while perhaps gaining some political advantage, is usually called collaborating or pulling a quisling and mostly regarded as an un-nice thing to do.

First, there was no genuine prospect of the active individuals within the 7 nations (mostly inactive) which were in Valhalla prior to the invasion receiving allegations they were 'a quisling' from their fellow members. Second, it was not TNI's role to consider the natives' interests, though TNI did actually consider their interests unnecessarily by offering them a choice, while prioritising the overall need to revive by Valhalla securely over their individual wants.

You can't invade and forcibly refound region (without any justification behind this action. or, at most, a silly one, which is even worse) and at the same time claim you're benefitting the whole world, or the native population itself. This old, paternalistic conception is long dead, as this duality cannot be accepted anymore.

Can't we?

'Dead' to the defender and isolationist world perhaps (not that it was very much alive with this group in the first place). It is not however dead to the substantial imperialist regions in this world (of which there are 20 pages, whereas there are only 16 pages of self-described defender regions), led principally by TNI and LKE, its largest and oldest members of note respectively. The FRA's persistent total intolerance for this community of regions is what has led it to the War with TNI (over Valhalla) and its War with The LKE (over UKB), including the Belgium and TRR invasions.

The summary is: "we work with raiders, but this doesn't mean we're partners or that we will refrain from attacking them, if that will serve our future political interests."

Let us look at what I said (the section you quoted here):

Not being a raider region, TNI does not subscribe to ''Raider Unity' at all, in its good or bad form: we work with many regions, raider and non-raider, in military contexts without having a treaty. A treaty merely creates an entitlement to military support; mutual benefit and goodwill are sufficient to provide support in most circumstances (all circumstances essentially involving regular, close military partners). We don't attack our partners, but simply because a region is raider does not make it a partner, unless it has a relationship with TNI (which raider regions are in an advantageous position to have but do not automatically have).

I expressly stated that 'We don't attack partners': if regions work with us, they are our partners. Thus any raiders that work with TNI can consider themselves safe from TNI attack in the future. The point is that TNI does not allow its foreign policy to be changed by a region deciding to call itself raider when the use of this descriptor has nothing to do with TNI. This is because TNI rejects the raider-defender axis as a basis for foreign policy.

Given my meaning is so obvious, you as a representative of the FRA are flagrantly trying to damage TNI's relations with the raider world, evidently because you know that when the raider and imperialist world unite (as has been seen recently from Stargate to Asia to The West to East Pacific to Belgium), the FRA and the UDL can't touch them. So you resort to these crude distortions of the facts to compensate for your military weakness, as you did with Hong Kong. TNI works to great effect with most raiders (notably TBH and TBR recently, Unknown as a treatied ally) as partners and it treats these regions like it treats its other partners. This is not because these regions are raider but is because these regions are friends of The New Inquisition, not to be devalued.

Probably many don't really understand what you stand for. This is the purpose of this thread.
To show the world what you really are. Keep digging that hole

The LKE has maintained the position I have outlined here frankly throughout its history, regularly including similar explanations to the ones I proffer here in its regional updates and other announcements. We are proud of our position on these issues and have never hidden it. Rather than seeking to blame other regions' ignorance of LKE policy, I suggest the FRA accepts that other regions accept The LKE. The FRA's 'mindset' is not universal.

The purpose of this thread was to announce the invasion of Belgium and TNI's reasons for it. Thank you for confirming, for any that doubted, that the blatant purpose of the FRA's response to this announcement is to attempt to crudely sabotage The LKE and TNI's diplomatic relations.

Source?

Todd McCloud was intending to use The East Pacific's vote to oppose the resolution. He was going to do so just before the timer ran out. Another region, Empires of Earth, an ally of LKE and TNI through the Congres of Sovereigns, originally voted against the resolution but the Delegate changed its vote in favour without consulting anyone (after receiving a telegram from the FRA backed authors of the resolution). Had the timer been correct, the EoE Delegate would have been online to follow the instructions of the region's government and change it back. Had either of thee votes gone in The LKE's favour, we would have won based on the final tally. The timer was faulty (a fact which was widely known among some at the time), but this was not known by us.

Why am I doing this, then?
I don't have a personal reputation to defend, so I am free to go on and prove the senselessness of this discussion until the thread is locked

You are doing it because you deploying FRA propaganda as a counter to TNI's announcement and trying to damage TNI by doing so.

[The Murtunian Tribes]

That's the point.
No-one cares about whatever "war" the TNI or the LKE leadership are conducting. Or about whatever _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ argument they propose.
My main interest is defending - not waging "wars" or debating them.

Why am I doing this, then?
I don't have a personal reputation to defend, so I am free to go on and prove the senselessness of this discussion until the thread is locked

I care about the war. Just not this grandstanding.

[Akatos]

Its been a while!