Embassy of Lazarus + News

[Syberis]

I'm pretty sure he meant you as in the collective plural of the New Pacific Order, rather than you individually.

As I have no small say in the policy direction of the NPO and I have never attacked Lazarus, why would we be ‘seeking to attack Lazarus’ now?

What reason would Lazarus have to take you at your word? What safety and security would they gain from trusting a group that has harmed them so?

[Consular]

I'm pretty sure he meant you as in the collective plural of the New Pacific Order, rather than you individually.

As I have no small say in the policy direction of the NPO and I have never attacked Lazarus, why would we be ‘seeking to attack Lazarus’ now?

While I actually do believe you, eventually you'll want to step down again, and someone else will take over again and do bad things again. It's like clockwork.

[Pierconium]

As I have no small say in the policy direction of the NPO and I have never attacked Lazarus, why would we be ‘seeking to attack Lazarus’ now?

While I actually do believe you, eventually you'll want to step down again, and someone else will take over again and do bad things again. It's like clockwork.

Maybe this time I will decide to stick around long enough to see the sea change I thought I had started last time around take better root.

I do not blame Lazarus for being weary at all in general terms, but as I am at present in position to influence NPO policy it is difficult for me to accept the idea that we must be currently seeking to attack Lazarus in some way (outside of the fact that they have declared war on the NPO and continue to support calls for our destruction of course).

[Bhang Bhang Duc]

While I actually do believe you, eventually you'll want to step down again, and someone else will take over again and do bad things again. It's like clockwork.

Maybe this time I will decide to stick around long enough to see the sea change I thought I had started last time around take better root.

I do not blame Lazarus for being weary at all in general terms, but as I am at present in position to influence NPO policy it is difficult for me to accept the idea that we must be currently seeking to attack Lazarus in some way (outside of the fact that they have declared war on the NPO and continue to support calls for our destruction of course).

You go away for 18 months and on your return you find some things never change. Hi Ivan.

[Pierconium]

Maybe this time I will decide to stick around long enough to see the sea change I thought I had started last time around take better root.

I do not blame Lazarus for being weary at all in general terms, but as I am at present in position to influence NPO policy it is difficult for me to accept the idea that we must be currently seeking to attack Lazarus in some way (outside of the fact that they have declared war on the NPO and continue to support calls for our destruction of course).

You go away for 18 months and on your return you find some things never change. Hi Ivan.

That's how I often feel as well.

Hi BBD.

[Myrth]

Ultimately, how far the war progresses is up to how it escalates. Right now at the very least the New Pacific Order and Lazarus are in a cold war, as while we are at war with them, it hasn't taken the form of us attempting to raid/invade the NPO directly. We haven't escalated action to more than allowing our citizens of their own accord to participate in operations against the New Pacific Order, and that activity hasn't been directed by the Lazarene government.

Perhaps because you recognise the utter futility of attempting to do so and would rather spare yourselves the embarrassment of failure? The NPO is, was, and always shall be the Pacific, and the best anyone can seem to manage in this "war" is to post a bunch of hot air about us on the forums. Truly we are quaking in our jackboots.

[Lord Dominator]

The NPO is, was, and always shall be the Pacific

Unless you're playing with some 1984-esque stuff over there, the NPO can not have always been The Pacific given the defined start date some number of months after NS started

#PedantsUnite!

[Aclion]

The NPO is, was, and always shall be the Pacific

Unless you're playing with some 1984-esque stuff over there, the NPO can not have always been The Pacific given the defined start date some number of months after NS started

#PedantsUnite!

[The NPO[is][was][always shall be]The Pacific]

[The Gilded Star]

The NPO is, was, and always shall be the Pacific

Unless you're playing with some 1984-esque stuff over there, the NPO can not have always been The Pacific given the defined start date some number of months after NS started

#PedantsUnite!

The past was alterable. The past never had been altered. The Order was one with the Pacific. The Order had always been one with the Pacific.

[Lord Dominator]

Unless you're playing with some 1984-esque stuff over there, the NPO can not have always been The Pacific given the defined start date some number of months after NS started

#PedantsUnite!

The Order was one with the Pacific. The Order had always been one with the Pacific.

Technically a true statement, given that the NPO has never existed as not ruling The Pacific. The problem is simply that Myrth wrote it in such a way that it implies that The Pacific has never been ruled by anyone not of the NPO.

[Pierconium]

The Order was one with the Pacific. The Order had always been one with the Pacific.

Technically a true statement, given that the NPO has never existed as not ruling The Pacific. The problem is simply that Myrth wrote it in such a way that it implies that The Pacific has never been ruled by anyone not of the NPO.

Considering how many of the nations that served as Delegate prior to August 2003 ended up in the NPO it isn’t too far from the truth.

Also, I have often held the moniker Big Brother in the Pacific so the newspeak isn’t too off base.

[Lord Dominator]

Technically a true statement, given that the NPO has never existed as not ruling The Pacific. The problem is simply that Myrth wrote it in such a way that it implies that The Pacific has never been ruled by anyone not of the NPO.

Considering how many of the nations that served as Delegate prior to August 2003 ended up in the NPO it isn’t too far from the truth.

Also, I have often held the moniker Big Brother in the Pacific so the newspeak isn’t too off base.

There's the 1984 stuff! (Though counting people who were Delegate before the NPO existed and joined after it did seems a bit silly )

[The Gilded Star]

Technically a true statement, given that the NPO has never existed as not ruling The Pacific. The problem is simply that Myrth wrote it in such a way that it implies that The Pacific has never been ruled by anyone not of the NPO.

Crap you're right, I should have flipped the names around.

[Lord Dominator]

Technically a true statement, given that the NPO has never existed as not ruling The Pacific. The problem is simply that Myrth wrote it in such a way that it implies that The Pacific has never been ruled by anyone not of the NPO.

Crap you're right, I should have flipped the names around.

I do tend to exist in such a state, thanks for noticing

[New Rogernomics]

The NPO is, was, and always shall be the Pacific

Unless you're playing with some 1984-esque stuff over there, the NPO can not have always been The Pacific given the defined start date some number of months after NS started

#PedantsUnite!

Yeah, though Myrth isn't getting that given the war, if there was a regime change in The Pacific under the premise of war, it would be a positive consequence. You don't even need to be at war with a region to respond positively to regime change either, you just need to not like their govt structure or their flag or what not.

That said, never ending pages of arguments on minor semantic points seems to be the common trait of the Gameplay forum threads. So Myrth should probably carry on, so that we are in the running some day for longest gameplay thread.

[Pierconium]

Unless you're playing with some 1984-esque stuff over there, the NPO can not have always been The Pacific given the defined start date some number of months after NS started

#PedantsUnite!

Yeah, though Myrth isn't getting that given the war, if there was a regime change in The Pacific under the premise of war, it would be a positive consequence. You don't even need to be at war with a region to respond positively to regime change either, you just need to not like their govt structure or their flag or what not.

That said, never ending pages of arguments on minor semantic points seems to be the common trait of the Gameplay forum threads. So Myrth should probably carry on, so that we are in the running some day for longest gameplay thread.

I always find this sort of hypocrisy amusing. I understand that Lazarus is upset with the NPO because of our past interference with your region. But, there is this phrase about two wrongs that comes to mind when I see the calls from others to see our region couped or otherwise thrown into chaos. First, the population of the Pacific generally supports the NPO and has for an extended period of time. Second, the NPO is recognised by most regions as the legitimate government of the Pacific. So the premise with which you fight this supposed war is simply that we took your toys and now you want to take ours in return.

In order for the cycle to actually stop the realisation that this sort of tit for tat produces nothing but harm must be arrived at mutually.

[Wycliffe]

Yeah, though Myrth isn't getting that given the war, if there was a regime change in The Pacific under the premise of war, it would be a positive consequence. You don't even need to be at war with a region to respond positively to regime change either, you just need to not like their govt structure or their flag or what not.

That said, never ending pages of arguments on minor semantic points seems to be the common trait of the Gameplay forum threads. So Myrth should probably carry on, so that we are in the running some day for longest gameplay thread.

I always find this sort of hypocrisy amusing. I understand that Lazarus is upset with the NPO because of our past interference with your region. But, there is this phrase about two wrongs that comes to mind when I see the calls from others to see our region couped or otherwise thrown into chaos. First, the population of the Pacific generally supports the NPO and has for an extended period of time. Second, the NPO is recognised by most regions as the legitimate government of the Pacific. So the premise with which you fight this supposed war is simply that we took your toys and now you want to take ours in return.

In order for the cycle to actually stop the realisation that this sort of tit for tat produces nothing but harm must be arrived at mutually.

If the NPO is doing us harm, and we have no reason to believe they will not continue doing us harm after repeatedly violating past assurances of good will, is the only logical solution not to strike at the source? If the people in the Pacific stand behind the NPO, they stand behind the NPO's actions against our regional sovereignty. You can't try using the "will of the people" against us when it suits you, only to ignore it in our region when opportunity presents itself. If the people of the Pacific "generally support the NPO", are they not, then, also accountable for your hostile actions against us?

[New Rogernomics]

Yeah, though Myrth isn't getting that given the war, if there was a regime change in The Pacific under the premise of war, it would be a positive consequence. You don't even need to be at war with a region to respond positively to regime change either, you just need to not like their govt structure or their flag or what not.

That said, never ending pages of arguments on minor semantic points seems to be the common trait of the Gameplay forum threads. So Myrth should probably carry on, so that we are in the running some day for longest gameplay thread.

I always find this sort of hypocrisy amusing. I understand that Lazarus is upset with the NPO because of our past interference with your region. But, there is this phrase about two wrongs that comes to mind when I see the calls from others to see our region couped or otherwise thrown into chaos. First, the population of the Pacific generally supports the NPO and has for an extended period of time. Second, the NPO is recognised by most regions as the legitimate government of the Pacific. So the premise with which you fight this supposed war is simply that we took your toys and now you want to take ours in return.

In order for the cycle to actually stop the realisation that this sort of tit for tat produces nothing but harm must be arrived at mutually.

It isn't 'hypocrisy', instead it is how Gameplay is. Lazarus has no interest in ruiling The Pacific, but as a region at war with the government of that region, it is entirely logical to want that government gone.

Lazarus never has wanted 'your toys', but for ideological reasons and so on, the NPO decided it wanted all the Lazarene toys, and for a time the NPO got them. Then Kazmr knocked over the board, and the NPO were kept out for a bit, before coming back for another round of Lazarene Bingo.

On legitimacy of government, since you brought it up. 'Your recognition is irrelevant' is probably the most succinct explanation of how in diplomacy you can refuse to recognize a government, regardless of others recognition. Likewise Lazarus wouldn't shrug if the NPO denies recognition of the Lazarene government.

In terms of how a government can be refused recognition even though that government might exist, it can be for reasons of another competing govermment in existence (i.e. Republic of China vs PRL dispute), ideological differences in government style (i.e. fascist vs liberal democratic), or war time or cold war reality (i.e. us vs them), which for Lazarus is more the last one - even though I am sure some in Lazarus don't like your govt structure.

The 'cycle' as you call it, has a continuing resetting timer. The Humane Republic and Celestial Union fell to infiltration because they believed the timer stopped. It never does it seems, as the infultration by NPO citizens to overthrow Lazarene governments never stopped at peace time. Thus being at war with the NPO is not dramatically different than being at peace, except the former is a more accurate a realization of how relations between the NPO and all nominally independent Lazarene governments have been.

Could a future Lazarene government declare peace with the New Pacific Order. That is possible. But peaceful relations is not realistic, as long as NPO citizens or former NPO citizens for that matter, use Lazarus as a battlefield for revenge or ideological change. Lazarus doesn't hold the NPO (or it's citizens for that matter) letting go of it's grudges against Lazarus being realistic. So wanting the NPO gone from The Pacific, seems pretty sensible, regardless of whether it is achievable or not - as the NPO as long as it stands will be a threat to Lazarus. Harm was never mutual, if anything the Humane Republic and Celestial Union wanted peace, but it didn't stop NPO citizens infiltrating Lazarus to help fire up a civil war.

[Pierconium]

However you wish to rationalise your hypocrisy is, of course, your choice.

[New Rogernomics]

However you wish to rationalise your hypocrisy is, of course, your choice.

How you wish to hypnotize your national or regional population is your choice, and isn't my problem. I prefer doing work to this pointless gameplay chat though. Enjoy the thread till next NPO triggering issue.

[Pierconium]

However you wish to rationalise your hypocrisy is, of course, your choice.

How you wish to hypnotize your national or regional population is your choice, and isn't my problem. I prefer doing work to this pointless gameplay chat though. Enjoy the thread till next NPO triggering issue.

Will do. I’ll still be in the Pacific.

[Cormactopia Prime]

However you wish to rationalise your hypocrisy is, of course, your choice.

Was it hypocrisy when the Allies oversaw regime change following WWII?

The NPO has attacked Lazarus multiple times. By your logic, no matter how many times the NPO attacks other regions, it is always hypocritical and never justified for other regions to declare war against the NPO and seek regime change. Funny how that works. I didn't realize you had become such a pacifist that you now believe there is never any justification for war under any circumstances. Or is it only war against the NPO that is never justified?

[Pierconium]

However you wish to rationalise your hypocrisy is, of course, your choice.

Was it hypocrisy when the Allies oversaw regime change following WWII?

The NPO has attacked Lazarus multiple times. By your logic, no matter how many times the NPO attacks other regions, it is always hypocritical and never justified for other regions to declare war against the NPO. Funny how that works. I didn't realize you had become such a pacifist that you now believe there is never any justification for war. Or is it only war against the NPO that is never justified?

Thank you for once again comparing me with Nazis. Seems to be a running pattern. I didn’t bother to even read the rest of your tripe.

[Cormactopia Prime]

Was it hypocrisy when the Allies oversaw regime change following WWII?

The NPO has attacked Lazarus multiple times. By your logic, no matter how many times the NPO attacks other regions, it is always hypocritical and never justified for other regions to declare war against the NPO. Funny how that works. I didn't realize you had become such a pacifist that you now believe there is never any justification for war. Or is it only war against the NPO that is never justified?

Thank you for once again comparing me with Nazis. Seems to be a running pattern. I didn’t bother to even read the rest of your tripe.

The fact that 1/3 of the Axis powers were Nazi was hardly the point, but I'm not at all surprised you deflected there because your argument is nonsensical.

[Myrth]

Yeah, though Myrth isn't getting that given the war, if there was a regime change in The Pacific under the premise of war, it would be a positive consequence. You don't even need to be at war with a region to respond positively to regime change either, you just need to not like their govt structure or their flag or what not.

That said, never ending pages of arguments on minor semantic points seems to be the common trait of the Gameplay forum threads. So Myrth should probably carry on, so that we are in the running some day for longest gameplay thread.

I don't see how that's even relevant. My point was that declaring open hostilities when there's apparently no intention to act on them besides the odd strongly worded statement seems a bit pointless. Since WW2 analogies seem to be flavour of the month it'd be like the UK and France declaring war on Germany after it invaded Poland and then signing a joint declaration that Hitler has been a very naughty boy and really should stop being so nasty to poor old Poland.