Embassy of The North Pacific

[Comfed]

You appear to have accidentally addressed the inconvenient truth, which is that that, for all intents and purposes, Warzone Trinidad is a vassal of the Brotherhood of Malice. Semantics aside, the Murder Inc. Corporate Charter has the effect of requiring Warzone Trinidad to participate in military operations if it is requested by BoM. You are correct insofar as, yes, that provision of the treaty is one which vassalizes the Warzone Trinidad Mafia to BoM.

Ok... WZT cozied up to raiders, turning themselves into a vassal state of BoM

Incredible. You two have managed to construct this entire narrative while ignoring the singular other section in Article 3, wherein the Mafia has the same right to request assistance from Malice on their own operations. Are you now going to argue that we have vassalized ourselves to WZT?

If you wish to maintain BoM's snake-oil "friendship," than that is entirely your prerogative, although I would note that BoM has not even lifted a finger to defend you against the two destructive raids you have suffered.

I have a reasonably clear understanding of the way in which "raider treaties" - by which I assume you mean the treaties signed between the regions of the Brotherhood of Malice sphere of raiding - work differently from treaties between other regions. Treaties between other regions tend to be based around mutual respect and friendship. On the other hand, treaties with the sort of region you associate with are, almost without exception, based on a formalizing a relationship by which one region asserts its dominance over another. The absurd nature of the relationship between Warzone Trinidad and BoM, where they are supposedly allied, but BoM has never been required to come to the defence of its warzone "ally," is illustrative.

Ah, this tired old talking point. One day, folks like you will learn that the world does not revolve around your outsider assumptions of how diplomacy works between Malice and its allies. Of course, you already know that our working relationship is real and meaningful, given that you spent the entire day up to this point wrongfully portraying WZT as a Malice front. It should be obvious to everyone reading this that you really have no idea what you're talking about, and are just throwing narratives at the wall to see what sticks.

It would be ludicrous to claim that a UCR with an executive governor and a strong military presence could ever be considered the vassal of a warzone that has neither. The Warzone Trinidad Mafia has not conducted, so far as I am aware, a politically significant operation in its entire history, and likely does not have the capacity to do so even if it wanted to. Considering the other end of the treaty, the Brotherhood of Malice regularly conducts aggressive military operations against defender, independent, and neutral regions with the ready and eager support of pre-eminent members of Warzone Trinidad. Indeed, Texico, the "HR Director" of Warzone Trinidad, implicitly admitted earlier in this thread that the relationship between BoM and WZT more closely resembles a protection racket more than any sort of alliance between equals.

Of course, it is hardly surprising that the provision has never been invoked, because WZT is a region whose membership is almost entirely cosmopolitan. Asking for units representing WZT is rather redundant when those units are already present from the various other raider military organizations they are a part of, which together form a sphere of regions subordinate to BoM interests.

A supposedly neutral region such as The East Pacific really has no grounds to object to our attack on what is essentially a front for BoM members and affiliates.

Your entire basis for this narrative seems to be based on the presence of a handful of cross-members between our regions and a farcical reading of our treaty. I look forward to your expanded analysis of interregional cosmopolitanism. I apologize to The Rejected Realms in advance, as soon Comfed may learn how many citizens are also present in the Brotherhood. Undoubtedly, our very consistent friend will be loudly and humorously decrying TRR as a Malice front. He may even need a change of pants when he learns the delegate's family name.

There is an obvious difference between the cases of Warzone Trinidad and The Rejected Realms. The percentage of TRR citizens who are also members of BoM and its affiliated regions is far lower than the percentage of BoM members in Warzone Trinidad. TRR is a part of the Aegis Accords, as compared to Warzone Trinidad, which unfailingly associates with the "raider unity" faction dominated by BoM. The Rejected Realms Army is a historic and staunchly defender military with a substantial native membership, whereas the WZT Mafia is an upstart raider group composed almost entirely of members of other organizations. The two regions are not remotely comparable; the relatively small number of BoM members who are also citizens of TRR do not determine the direction of the region, while WZT's foreign policy is entirely determined by cross-members such as its "Director of Foreign Acquisitions," the Ambis.

[Astoria but Norwegians]

Our foreign policy is dictated by our CEO and Director of Public Relations, not our Director of Foreign Acquisitions. Our DFA is solely responsible for overseeing the Mafia.
edit: whoopsies posted from my astorian nation, hi arsto here

[Pallaith]

Obviously TEP’s former MoFA thinks so,

Did I miss the part where Altys was fired? Or am I reading this wrong

I was trying to mirror the construction of Altys’s barb at me, forgetting for a moment that only one of us phased out of that role. We overlapped for about half the time and TEP had another election. I’m sure a bunch of you will get a chortle out of that but it’s just a dumb mistake.

Calling the world to take action against malignant actors and speaking to an ally in a formal diplomatic setting where we give explicit requests and lay out expectations are not the same thing. Do you think they’re the same thing?

You were replying directly to the Vice-Delegate of TEP, asking if they were sorry enough for The Wellspring to stand up to those that del-tipped you. That's not calling "the world" to take action. The screenshot is right there and you're still trying to spin it!

Obviously TEP’s former MoFA thinks so, since he’s citing my off the cuff snarky remark in a Discord server as if it’s equivalent to our FA team asking TEP to take some sort of action. I appreciate this though because I think it’s painting the picture much better than my words had been up to this point.

"Former" MoFA? Are you wishcasting?

And I know the cabinet minister recently hired by TEP, someone who participated in our delegate tip and the delegate tip of our ally, and who TEP angrily insisted they had every right to appoint and we had no right to take issue with it, isn’t in here talking about mutual respect. That’s too silly to be real.

After what happened with HumanSanity, I'm surprised TNP still tries to press its allies on controversial cabinet appointments. Obviously regions will prioritize contributing members of their community over rude and increasingly hostile external entities.

Alright let me clear this up really quickly. We have made numerous statements after outrageous behavior from the usual suspects, trying to rally the world to the cause. This is what I am referring to. The screenshot where I (a citizen of TW) reply to TEP’s VD about what they’ll do about the aggression against TW is more akin to such rallying - that is, publicly encouraging or putting out the idea that a response is needed. I still fail to see how that is somehow being construed as a formal expectation from TNP for TEP to behave a certain way. This screenshot is even worse for your argument because it’s not even TNP speaking, and there’s no request for troops - it’s basically saying “so what will you do about it?” I’m not sure how this is considered spin, or how this is considered a gotcha. Doesn’t take much for you folks I guess.

In most reasonable regions, appointing the enemy of your ally, who participated in an attack on that ally, raises eyebrows, and the affected party raising an objection to that is not a surprise or an unreasonable thing. Bringing up TSP is interesting, because the same people who thought we should have been angrier about being extorted by our ally think we shouldn’t be angry when our ally picks someone who did wrong to us to be a leader in their government. And the discourse implies that we’re going to expect them to fire them or something? I never understand what the next part of this is because being upset they did something that insensitive doesn’t come with a mandate that they pick someone we sign off on or something. It’s purely because of who the person picked is and what they did. Getting mad at us for objecting and then claiming we’re insisting on some divine right to pick our ally’s cabinet is an unreasonable response and it is transparently trying to shift blame to make us the bad guy. Again, we can all see it, your attempt to make this something different doesn’t change any of that.

Honestly it’s really telling how many apparently walk away from this and want to act like somehow we were being unreasonable or unprofessional. I assume it’s just agenda posting but if any of you are actually sincere and somehow think that the way TEP has conducted itself is appropriate then that speaks poorly for the state of gameplay in general, and the quality of our political simulating. But I think this is being driven in part by the general lack of awareness of what’s transpired, which is in part a result of how FA discussions tend to work. TEP has been unprofessional and inept at foreign policy for years now, this isn’t a recent development, nor is this breakup a result of fresh things. But to dive into all that would take more time and a much longer post, which I guess I’ll have to try when I have an actual keyboard and some time.

[Texico]

It would be ludicrous to claim that a UCR with an executive governor and a strong military presence could ever be considered the vassal of a warzone that has neither. The Warzone Trinidad Mafia has not conducted, so far as I am aware, a politically significant operation in its entire history, and likely does not have the capacity to do so even if it wanted to. Considering the other end of the treaty, the Brotherhood of Malice regularly conducts aggressive military operations against defender, independent, and neutral regions with the ready and eager support of pre-eminent members of Warzone Trinidad. Indeed, Texico, the "HR Director" of Warzone Trinidad, implicitly admitted earlier in this thread that the relationship between BoM and WZT more closely resembles a protection racket more than any sort of alliance between equals.

(Emphasis is my own)
This sounds like a challenge. People forget we got like 60 pilers in France and that was purely a meme hold based around "it would be funny to say we raided France". I assure you our lack of hosting of any op of note has been a voluntary choice as we haven't felt the need to. So, be careful what you wish for and I'll see you on the battlefield I guess?

[Ambis2]

while WZT's foreign policy is entirely determined by cross-members such as its "Director of Foreign Acquisitions," the Ambis.

1) Guy you’re looking for is Spok
2) Why is “Director of Foreign Acquisitions” in quotes?
3) Why am I lowercase t the capital A Ambis? Ambis works fine.

[Devious]

Indeed, Texico, the "HR Director" of Warzone Trinidad, implicitly admitted earlier in this thread that the relationship between BoM and WZT more closely resembles a protection racket more than any sort of alliance between equals.

my sibling in christ, you literally have a treaty outlining how one of your partners has the option to become an official tnp territory. that feels far less of an alliance between equals than anything malice or wzt has done

[Comfed]

Our foreign policy is dictated by our CEO and Director of Public Relations, not our Director of Foreign Acquisitions. Our DFA is solely responsible for overseeing the Mafia.
edit: whoopsies posted from my astorian nation, hi arsto here

while WZT's foreign policy is entirely determined by cross-members such as its "Director of Foreign Acquisitions," the Ambis.

1) Guy you’re looking for is Spok

Thank you for the correction. Regardless, it does not alter my point about the enormously high degree of influence that BoM members, including Ambis, exercise over the foreign policy of Warzone Trinidad. Indeed, it is notable on its own that the head of the Warzone Trinidad military, Ambis, is himself a member of BoM; perhaps that explains why Warzone Trinidad's military policy has been wholly aligned with BoM's for the duration of the Mafia's existence.

It would be ludicrous to claim that a UCR with an executive governor and a strong military presence could ever be considered the vassal of a warzone that has neither. The Warzone Trinidad Mafia has not conducted, so far as I am aware, a politically significant operation in its entire history, and likely does not have the capacity to do so even if it wanted to. Considering the other end of the treaty, the Brotherhood of Malice regularly conducts aggressive military operations against defender, independent, and neutral regions with the ready and eager support of pre-eminent members of Warzone Trinidad. Indeed, Texico, the "HR Director" of Warzone Trinidad, implicitly admitted earlier in this thread that the relationship between BoM and WZT more closely resembles a protection racket more than any sort of alliance between equals.

(Emphasis is my own)
This sounds like a challenge. People forget we got like 60 pilers in France and that was purely a meme hold based around "it would be funny to say we raided France". I assure you our lack of hosting of any op of note has been a voluntary choice as we haven't felt the need to. So, be careful what you wish for and I'll see you on the battlefield I guess?

Actually, I think the example of France is illustrative. It was during that operation that the initial occupation of Warzone Trinidad occurred, and your government used the occupation of France as a bargaining chip to secure the withdrawal of the coalition occupying WZT. You can hardly be considered capable of executing high-profile operations if the only way to do so is to compromise your region's internal security against invasion.

Indeed, Texico, the "HR Director" of Warzone Trinidad, implicitly admitted earlier in this thread that the relationship between BoM and WZT more closely resembles a protection racket more than any sort of alliance between equals.

my sibling in christ, you literally have a treaty outlining how one of your partners has the option to become an official tnp territory. that feels far less of an alliance between equals than anything malice or wzt has done

The respective situations are very different and not comparable.

Our treaty with the Wellspring was formed after productive negotiations conducted between both parties. The option for the Wellspring to become a territory exists so that it may, if it so desires, enjoy the full protection of The North Pacific's network of alliances. In exchange, the Treaty of the Northern Wells grants TW sweeping exemptions from the territorial laws of The North Pacific, meaning that as a region it would remain fully autonomous. Additionally, it has the option to withdraw from this arrangement at any time. TW has never opted to go this route, nor have we ever asked nor pressured them to do so.

By contrast, the relationship between Warzone Trinidad and the Brotherhood of Malice is patently one based on subjugation. The entire basis of the treaty is one of a protection racket, in which WZT agrees to surrender its military autonomy to BoM in exchange for the latter abstaining from attacking it. When Warzone Trinidad itself has been attacked, it has received more support from its embassy partner, The East Pacific, than its supposed ally, BoM.

[Bormiar]

No, there's a more than clear imbalance: WZT doesn't run operations as much as BoM does, if at all, and anyways they wouldn't get any or much of the credit if they did. BoM benefits more, much more.

What on earth are you talking about? Since the charter was signed, do you know how many times we have led an operation that would invoke Article 3? Once. It was Alcatraz. In contrast, off the top of my head I can recall that WZT has invoked Article 3 to request help from us at least twice, in France and Nova Authoritaria. If you knew absolutely anything about what you were talking about, you could only come to the conclusion that the Mafia benefits twice as much from Article 3 as Malice does.

Dude, why are you so mad? Slow down. You misread my post.

It's not a matter of counting operations - plenty of problems with doing that. BoM is a raider region, whose goals are raider-aligned, which benefits from the growth of raiderdom, which is currently locked in a state of war, whose reputation depends on the success of raiderdom, and which can protect itself from retaliation. WZT is none of those things. Hence, the imbalance to which I referred.

And did you defend your treaty ally? I strongly recommend, for their own sake, that WZT break off this ridiculous, preying, parasitic treaty.

It does not surprise me in the least that you seem to understand neither raider nor Warzoner ideology. Either that, or you're intentionally playing ignorant about how incursions into Warzones tend to play out in reality. Anyone who raids Warzone Trinidad will inevitably become bored or exhausted, and the Corporation will return to power after a quick vacation. This is a known fact of Warzone life, and while I'm sure you'd like to see us fling ourselves pointlessly at your temporary show of force, it was demonstrably better for both sides of the charter to just hang back and wait for the NPA to go home. There is an obvious mutual ideological basis for the lack of a mutual defense pact within our charter, your ignorance does not imply parasitism on our part.

Close, it was a rhetorical question.

As for the "warzone ideology" - under that, TEP can't be so mad that TNP invaded WZT then, can it? It's either raiding WZT is harmful to its current government, in which case BoM should've assisted in the defense, and either neglect or "raider ideology" or a conception of "warzone ideology" got in the way; or raiding WZT is not harmful to that government, in which case TEP does not have a valid complaint.

[The Ambis]

Indeed, it is notable on its own that the head of the Warzone Trinidad military, Ambis, is himself a member of BoM; perhaps that explains why Warzone Trinidad's military policy has been wholly aligned with BoM's for the duration of the Mafia's existence.

Weird. The first mention of the Mafia in the WZT thread is June 3rd. I applied, and was accepted, into the Acolytes on February 16th, and only to their piling force. So, unless I’m also a time traveler, this is just wrong

[Devious]

Indeed, it is notable on its own that the head of the Warzone Trinidad military, Ambis, is himself a member of BoM; perhaps that explains why Warzone Trinidad's military policy has been wholly aligned with BoM's for the duration of the Mafia's existence.

Weird. The first mention of the Mafia in the WZT thread is June 3rd. I applied, and was accepted, into the Acolytes on February 16th, and only to their piling force. So, unless I’m also a time traveler, this is just wrong

indeed, it is notable on its own that the head of the warzone trinidad military, ambis is himself a former notable member of thaecia, perhaps that explains why warzone trinidad's military policy has been wholly aligned with the thaecian raider element for-
oh wait

[Hulldom]

Weird. The first mention of the Mafia in the WZT thread is June 3rd. I applied, and was accepted, into the Acolytes on February 16th, and only to their piling force. So, unless I’m also a time traveler, this is just wrong

indeed, it is notable on its own that the head of the warzone trinidad military, ambis is himself a former notable member of thaecia, perhaps that explains why warzone trinidad's military policy has been wholly aligned with the thaecian raider element for-
oh wait

As for Thaecia’s raider element—FIRST THEY HAD STEAK, and I was too repulsed by Steak’s evangelism for medium well steak to actually do much of anything else, so point taken, Steak.

And honestly, I’m a bit baffled about what we’re doing here. None of us are actually going to convince the other and we’re literally just talking past each other. Perhaps it’s just worth it to drop it?

[Tanbearia]

damn didnt know there was this much drama for TNP

i just joined so i could have endorsements to write WA resolutions for model UN practice qwq

[Valtarre]

Dude, why are you so mad? Slow down. You misread my post.

It would behoove you to learn the difference between anger and dumbfoundedness.

WZT doesn't run operations as much as BoM does, if at all

It's not a matter of counting operations - plenty of problems with doing that.

Don't claim I misread your post when you can't keep your narrative straight.

BoM is a raider region, whose goals are raider-aligned, which benefits from the growth of raiderdom, which is currently locked in a state of war, whose reputation depends on the success of raiderdom, and which can protect itself from retaliation. WZT is none of those things. Hence, the imbalance to which I referred.

Malice is by no means "locked in a state of war" the way The North Pacific is. That region declared a war that we neither reciprocate nor frankly care much about at all other than as a subject of mockery, because they have proven themselves a continual source of entertainment for my assassins. I tire of having supposed limits imposed on me from foppish feederites who are so desperate for relevance that they feel the need to piggyback on my own.

As for the "warzone ideology" - under that, TEP can't be so mad that TNP invaded WZT then, can it? It's either raiding WZT is harmful to its current government, in which case BoM should've assisted in the defense, and either neglect or "raider ideology" or a conception of "warzone ideology" got in the way; or raiding WZT is not harmful to that government, in which case TEP does not have a valid complaint.

As above, I could not care less about whether what I said invalidates the position of a feeder. I am only here because TNP has once again invoked the name of the Brotherhood in their statement, whether or not TEP has a valid complaint is none of my concern. I stand by what I said regardless of any other party.

[Tanbearia]

damn didnt know there was this much drama for TNP

i just joined so i could have endorsements to write WA resolutions for model UN practice qwq

tbf im too busy to keep up with raiding lore and alliances so i wouldnt understand lol

[Bormiar]

Dude, why are you so mad? Slow down. You misread my post.

It would behoove you to learn the difference between anger and dumbfoundedness.

I don't know what it is you're currently taking out on me.

WZT doesn't run operations as much as BoM does, if at all

It's not a matter of counting operations - plenty of problems with doing that.

Don't claim I misread your post when you can't keep your narrative straight.

No, you did misread my post. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heuristic

BoM is a raider region, whose goals are raider-aligned, which benefits from the growth of raiderdom, which is currently locked in a state of war, whose reputation depends on the success of raiderdom, and which can protect itself from retaliation. WZT is none of those things. Hence, the imbalance to which I referred.

Malice is by no means "locked in a state of war" the way The North Pacific is. That region declared a war that we neither reciprocate nor frankly care much about at all other than as a subject of mockery, because they have proven themselves a continual source of entertainment for my assassins. I tire of having supposed limits imposed on me from foppish feederites who are so desperate for relevance that they feel the need to piggyback on my own.

Even if I were to accept that, it covers one point of six total. (Did I count that right?)

As for the "warzone ideology" - under that, TEP can't be so mad that TNP invaded WZT then, can it? It's either raiding WZT is harmful to its current government, in which case BoM should've assisted in the defense, and either neglect or "raider ideology" or a conception of "warzone ideology" got in the way; or raiding WZT is not harmful to that government, in which case TEP does not have a valid complaint.

As above, I could not care less about whether what I said invalidates the position of a feeder.

Ok

It matters to the discussion at-hand. This isn't a thread entitled "What does Koth think?".

Anyways, I don't see this going anywhere. I suppose if you don't have anything else to say we'll talk next time you're mad about an @citizens ping in TRR.

[Dreadton]

As one of TNP's legal role players (#1 fake lawyer for hire, Do you know you have rights?) , I along with a few others, pointed out that TEP's not following the provisions of the treaty still bound us to it in terms of our criminal code. As a person who loves red tape, it was pointed out the best legal avenue for TNP was to revoke the treaty according to the provisions of the treaty. Making it clear cut repeal, since TEP lacked the reading comprehension to follow through on its word on how the treaty was to be dissolved. Cant have TNP and the NPA caught up in a bureaucratic swamp land because a fly by night region can't do basic procedures.

[Gavriel]

Why can't we all just get along?

[Lord Dominator]

As one of TNP's legal role players (#1 fake lawyer for hire, Do you know you have rights?) , I along with a few others, pointed out that TEP's not following the provisions of the treaty still bound us to it in terms of our criminal code. As a person who loves red tape, it was pointed out the best legal avenue for TNP was to revoke the treaty according to the provisions of the treaty. Making it clear cut repeal, since TEP lacked the reading comprehension to follow through on its word on how the treaty was to be dissolved. Cant have TNP and the NPA caught up in a bureaucratic swamp land because a fly by night region can't do basic procedures.

Indeed, and as one of the other top fake lawyers, I recall agreeing with the same.

Withdrawing from a treaty may be a mere exercise for TEP, but for us there are distinct legal provisions to doing it properly.

[The Ever-Wanderer]

If the North Pacific needs any tips on getting their quorum raids to a more successful point, I would be glad to help.

Some free starter tips:

• Hitting more than 15 of the 25 targets you jumped on would help, but when the bare minimum needed to even jeopardize the target resolution is all 25, you're gonna have a tough time in general. I'd usually pick enough targets to get it at least ten below quorum if we got 100% of hits.
• ...especially if your triggers are frankly just bad. Maybe consider doing some detags on an actual trigger to practice those? Or just jumping earlier, assuming you've got the privilege of asking Defenders to abstain from "friendly" fire. Assuming they're chasing at all in the first place.
• There's not much point jumping on a region where you need 5e to tip it if you only have 3 people. You might as well just skip that target, especially if it's a somewhat notable region with a change of fallout!
• You can avoid almost killing an allied resolution by screening your targets for collateral - though, that does make getting the number of targets you need more difficult.
• If you bring just a *few* more endos, then you can actually hit 3-6e on Del regions instead of just tipping them. Which is better because a tip still has a native delegate that can re-approve in the next 12 hours, while a hit means no del at all. That can make a big difference in the resolution actually dying at next update!

Hope that helps!!

[Lord Dominator]

snip

Not all of us have been consistently quorum raiding for the last several years, cut me some slack

[The Ever-Wanderer]

Well, first off, you should be really proud of yourself, full back pay mode, for doing two updates in a row. That's more than anyone else in the indefendant inspection can claim to have done for eclipsis. That's not sarcasm, honestly, when literally everyone else gave up after one jump, going for two is impressive by comparison.

Still a little bit too little too late though. And while going for 14 when you needed 11 it is theoretically enough this time, it's not if you miss five. Closer though! I'm not sure you can take it home without killing the lib, unless defenders bring some more firepower to their anthills.

Also my advice about jumping early? Doesn't always work when it's a Raider controlled region that can ban you ;p but if you're jumping anyways and willing to get banned, you might as well also jump on eclipsis and see if we're paying attention!!

[Lord Dominator]

Still a little bit too little too late though. And while going for 14 when you needed 11 it is theoretically enough this time, it's not if you miss five. Closer though! I'm not sure you can take it home without killing the lib, unless defenders bring some more firepower to their anthills.

For once I know the math better than you

Also my advice about jumping early? Doesn't always work when it's a Raider controlled region that can ban you ;p but if you're jumping anyways and willing to get banned, you might as well also jump on eclipsis and see if we're paying attention!!

Yes, I rather forgot during prep that someone might actually be paying attention this time, lol

[Chaotic Sparkles]

Also my advice about jumping early? Doesn't always work when it's a Raider controlled region that can ban you ;p but if you're jumping anyways and willing to get banned, you might as well also jump on eclipsis and see if we're paying attention!!

Yes, I rather forgot during prep that someone might actually be paying attention this time, lol

i hope i didnt trigger any updaters magna aurea siege banjection flashbacks >:3

[Aivintis]

I know Issue 35 of the North Star hasn't (yet?) been posted here, but it's been published and advertised to other regions, so I wanted to address the NEST Article.

https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispa ... 8#ARTICLE2

Most of this is true, I applaud Vice Delegate Chipoli for conveying the facts (and making accurate quotes from both sides, something I know regions at war don't always do). However, as someone who likes to call myself an NS journalist, I just wanted to recommend a couple corrections:

1. TEP did not hold cultural events with BOM, it just refused to ban BOM members from cultural events it held with others. Obviously this was still a point of contention, but the clarification, imo, is important.

2. "they did not believe they were obligated to respond to any possible attacks faced by the North from its enemies" is also untrue. To my knowledge, TEP indicated that it would respond to attacks on TNP (as it had in the past, such as when EPSA sent pilers following the initial BOM/TCB attack), but would just not go further than defense. I.e. not get involved in the war. So it's a difference between a defensive response and an offensive response. Again, this clearly was not satisfactory to TNP, and I won't comment on the truth of opinions, but I just wanted to clear up the description itself.

Overall a pretty good article. More concise than I could be lol

[Angeloid Astraea]

1. TEP did not hold cultural events with BOM, it just refused to ban BOM members from cultural events it held with others. Obviously this was still a point of contention, but the clarification, imo, is important.

I don't understand, why was it a point of contention that TEP wasn't abiding by sanctions that TEP hadn't signed onto?