NATION

PASSWORD

Chelsea Manning Released from prison

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Remove ads

User avatar
Internationalist Bastard
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14409
Founded: Aug 09, 2015
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Internationalist Bastard » Thu May 18, 2017 8:35 pm

Athrax wrote:
KrakenCo wrote:
>Implying the US Armed Forces manifest tyranny


lol'd

More the CIA, IMO

KrakenCo wrote:
Yea, because we were still angry as fuck over 9/11. Hell, if some guy orchestrates an attack that kills 2000+ innocent people, I wouldn't care about the rules of war either.


That's certainly the reason why we did that, but it's a pisspoor justification. We're supposed to be better than that. That's why we put a lot of those rules into place in the first place

It does annoy me how we are supposed to live up to the ideals of the constitution, then skirt around it constantly and saying, "welp we're fighting terrorists"
Call me Alex, I insist
I am a girl, damnit
Slut Pride
Always click tentacles
Feel Free to TG me, I'm bored and lonely

User avatar
FelrikTheDeleted
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7770
Founded: Aug 27, 2016
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby FelrikTheDeleted » Thu May 18, 2017 8:42 pm

Internationalist Bastard wrote:It does annoy me how we are supposed to live up to the ideals of the constitution, then skirt around it constantly and saying, "welp we're fighting terrorists"


In that case, I would advise that you pick one or the other and ignore those that urge you to pick both.
Last edited by FelrikTheDeleted on Thu May 18, 2017 8:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.

"Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends." - John 15:13.
Deleted for violating the rules at 966 posts.
RIP Dagashi Shojo - RIP Renewed Imperial Germany - RIP Kieven Peoples - RIP Balk

User avatar
The Horror Channel
Diplomat
 
Posts: 563
Founded: Jan 27, 2006
Father Knows Best State

Postby The Horror Channel » Fri May 19, 2017 3:37 am

Treason is pretty popular these days. Hell, even the President is doing it.

User avatar
Oneracon
Senator
 
Posts: 4719
Founded: Jul 18, 2012
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Oneracon » Fri May 19, 2017 6:48 am

KrakenCo wrote:
Athrax wrote:
The Gitmo files alone prove just how horribly the US acted in the early days of the War of Terror


Yea, because we were still angry as fuck over 9/11. Hell, if some guy orchestrates an attack that kills 2000+ innocent people, I wouldn't care about the rules of war either.

Being mad about 9/11 = the constitution and international law out the window.

This is exactly what was so important about Manning's leaks, she provided concrete evidence to what the rest of the world has known for years. That the US talks a lot about ideals of democracy, freedom, and friendship between nations... but in reality it throws all of those under the bus with no regard for the consequences.
NSG Senate
Red - Green Alliance,
Fighting for your Fernão!
Oneracon IC Links
Factbook
Embassies
Economic Left/Right: -8.13
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.72
Pro:LGBTQ+ rights, basic income, secularism, gun control, internet freedom, civic nationalism, non-military national service, Elizabeth May, Niki Ashton, EU, independent Scotland
Anti: Social conservatism, laissez-faire capitalism, NuAtheism, PETA, capital punishment, Putin, SWERF, TERF, GamerGate, "Alt-right" & neo-Nazism, Drumpf, ethnic nationalism, "anti-PC", pineapple on pizza

Your resident Canadian neutral good socdem graduate student.
Studying: geographies of internet governance

*Here, queer, and not a prop for your right-wing nonsense.*


*Ashton for Leader 2017*

"The abuse of greatness is when it disjoins remorse from power"

User avatar
Salandriagado
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14127
Founded: Apr 03, 2008
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Salandriagado » Fri May 19, 2017 7:12 am

KrakenCo wrote:
Athrax wrote:
The Gitmo files alone prove just how horribly the US acted in the early days of the War of Terror


Yea, because we were still angry as fuck over 9/11. Hell, if some guy orchestrates an attack that kills 2000+ innocent people, I wouldn't care about the rules of war either.


You realise that by swapping "9/11" for "The Iraq War" and increasing the number significantly, you're quoting Al-Qaeda propaganda word for word?
Cosara wrote:
Anachronous Rex wrote:Good thing most a majority of people aren't so small-minded, and frightened of other's sexuality.

Over 40% (including me), are, so I fixed the post for accuracy.

Vilatania wrote:
Salandriagado wrote:
Notice that the link is to the notes from a university course on probability. You clearly have nothing beyond the most absurdly simplistic understanding of the subject.
By choosing 1, you no longer have 0 probability of choosing 1. End of subject.

(read up the quote stack)

Deal. £3000 do?[/quote]

Of course.[/quote]

User avatar
Antekset
Civilian
 
Posts: 1
Founded: May 13, 2017
Ex-Nation

Postby Antekset » Fri May 19, 2017 7:19 am

Salandriagado wrote:
KrakenCo wrote:
Yea, because we were still angry as fuck over 9/11. Hell, if some guy orchestrates an attack that kills 2000+ innocent people, I wouldn't care about the rules of war either.


You realise that by swapping "9/11" for "The Iraq War" and increasing the number significantly, you're quoting Al-Qaeda propaganda word for word?

Well, that and adjusting that number by an order of magnitude or two.

Most of the enemies the US has find cause in the actions of the US.

User avatar
Gig em Aggies
Senator
 
Posts: 4560
Founded: Aug 15, 2009
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Gig em Aggies » Fri May 19, 2017 7:39 am

Antekset wrote:
Salandriagado wrote:
You realise that by swapping "9/11" for "The Iraq War" and increasing the number significantly, you're quoting Al-Qaeda propaganda word for word?

Well, that and adjusting that number by an order of magnitude or two.

Most of the enemies the US has find cause in the actions of the US.

even if the US didn't do these types of things that were leaked most of the enemies of the US still wouldn't like us for instance Al-Qaeda and bin laden they hated us because we were friends with middle eastern nations and helping them be nicer to Israel and the west, North Korea hates us because we won the Korean war and squashed their dream to have full control over all of Korea, Iran hates us because we were allies of the shah. you don't have to intervene into another countries problems to have another country as an enemy.
“One of the serious problems of planning against Aggie doctrine is that the Aggies do not read their manuals nor do they feel any obligations to follow their doctrine.”
“The reason that the Aggies does so well in wartime, is that war is chaos, and the Aggies practices chaos on a daily basis.”
“If we don’t know what we are doing, the enemy certainly can’t anticipate our future actions!”

User avatar
Jamzmania
Senator
 
Posts: 4864
Founded: Dec 01, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Jamzmania » Fri May 19, 2017 7:44 am

Fartsniffage wrote:
Jamzmania wrote:Perhaps, but "the horrible shit being carried out in the name of the US people" makes it sounds like there were atrocities being committed that no one knew about, but, again, the worst that was revealed seems to be battlefield fuck ups and ignoring crime and corruption in the Afghan and Iraqi governments. These things could have been revealed without also leaking a lot of the other stuff that Manning did, which served no purpose other than to harm US interests.


That kinda makes the assumption that US interests should be protected while battlefield fuckups are protected.

I'm not sure either way. But I do know that without Mannings actions the US armed forces would have had less drive to put their house in order.

I'm not sure what you mean. I'm saying that Manning could have blown the whistle on these fuck ups without also leaking many of the other things that he did. These hundreds of thousands of diplomatic cables didn't reveal any awful crimes, they only hurt US interests. You can say you don't care about US interests, but don't act surprised if the US does and locks up one of their own soldiers who was responsible for knowingly harming their interests.
The Alexanderians wrote:"Fear no man or woman,
No matter what their size.
Call upon me,
And I will equalize."

-Engraved on the side of my M1911 .45

User avatar
Eastfield Lodge
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8878
Founded: May 23, 2008
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Eastfield Lodge » Fri May 19, 2017 8:08 am

Jamzmania wrote:
Fartsniffage wrote:
That kinda makes the assumption that US interests should be protected while battlefield fuckups are protected.

I'm not sure either way. But I do know that without Mannings actions the US armed forces would have had less drive to put their house in order.

I'm not sure what you mean. I'm saying that Manning could have blown the whistle on these fuck ups without also leaking many of the other things that he did. These hundreds of thousands of diplomatic cables didn't reveal any awful crimes, they only hurt US interests. You can say you don't care about US interests, but don't act surprised if the US does and locks up one of their own soldiers who was responsible for knowingly harming their interests.

Thing is, 'knowingly harming their interests' can easily be extended to exposing war crimes.
Economic Left/Right: -5.01 (formerly -5.88)
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -2.31 (formerly 2.36)
ISideWith UK
My motto translates to: "All Eat Fish and Chips!"
First person to post the 10,000th reply to a thread on these forums.
Flag courtesy of Astrolinium.
International Geese Brigade - Celebrating 0 Radiation and 3rd Place!
info to be added
stuff to be added
This nation partially represents my political, social and economic views.

User avatar
Gig em Aggies
Senator
 
Posts: 4560
Founded: Aug 15, 2009
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Gig em Aggies » Fri May 19, 2017 8:33 am

Eastfield Lodge wrote:
Jamzmania wrote:I'm not sure what you mean. I'm saying that Manning could have blown the whistle on these fuck ups without also leaking many of the other things that he did. These hundreds of thousands of diplomatic cables didn't reveal any awful crimes, they only hurt US interests. You can say you don't care about US interests, but don't act surprised if the US does and locks up one of their own soldiers who was responsible for knowingly harming their interests.

Thing is, 'knowingly harming their interests' can easily be extended to exposing war crimes.

What your posts still confuse me?
“One of the serious problems of planning against Aggie doctrine is that the Aggies do not read their manuals nor do they feel any obligations to follow their doctrine.”
“The reason that the Aggies does so well in wartime, is that war is chaos, and the Aggies practices chaos on a daily basis.”
“If we don’t know what we are doing, the enemy certainly can’t anticipate our future actions!”

User avatar
Infected Mushroom
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15849
Founded: Apr 15, 2014
Father Knows Best State

Postby Infected Mushroom » Fri May 19, 2017 10:48 am

Galway-Dublin wrote:Chelsea Manning's prison term, which was cut down to 7 years from 35 in one of Obama's final acts in office, has ended this morning with her release today from the United States Disciplinary Barracks at 2:00 am.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/16/us/p ... prion.html

What do you think about this, NSG? Is Ms.Manning a hero or a villain for her leaking of classified documents? Considering her life and her story, is she bound to remain a public figure, or for her own good slip into the life of a private one?

In my opinion, it's good that she's been freed, especially considering her history of attempting suicide in prison and holding a hunger strike in order to receive gender transition surgery.


Her release is a sign of weakness from the government. The government is going to lose respect for this. Treason cannot be tolerated.
Reincarnation and Successor of God Kefka +~4500 posts


Art Thread (http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic ... #p19679163)
[/b]

User avatar
Jamzmania
Senator
 
Posts: 4864
Founded: Dec 01, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Jamzmania » Fri May 19, 2017 10:53 am

Eastfield Lodge wrote:
Jamzmania wrote:I'm not sure what you mean. I'm saying that Manning could have blown the whistle on these fuck ups without also leaking many of the other things that he did. These hundreds of thousands of diplomatic cables didn't reveal any awful crimes, they only hurt US interests. You can say you don't care about US interests, but don't act surprised if the US does and locks up one of their own soldiers who was responsible for knowingly harming their interests.

Thing is, 'knowingly harming their interests' can easily be extended to exposing war crimes.

In this case it extended to much less criminal revelations. Which is my point. Why did Manning have to leak everything if all he wanted to do was expose crimes?
The Alexanderians wrote:"Fear no man or woman,
No matter what their size.
Call upon me,
And I will equalize."

-Engraved on the side of my M1911 .45

User avatar
Athrax
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1012
Founded: May 02, 2017
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Athrax » Fri May 19, 2017 11:00 am

Jamzmania wrote:
Eastfield Lodge wrote:Thing is, 'knowingly harming their interests' can easily be extended to exposing war crimes.

In this case it extended to much less criminal revelations. Which is my point. Why did Manning have to leak everything if all he wanted to do was expose crimes?

I'd imagine she wanted to be thorough and didn't have the ability to parse these things out on the spot, similar to why Snowden stole as much as he did. Wikileak's decision to release irrelevent data says more about that organization than it does Manning. It's a large part of why I don't trust them (the possibly being run by Russian intelligence also doesn't help). But she also went to prison for 7 years because of all that she took. We act like she's gotten off scott free because the former president decided to show some mercy before he left office.

User avatar
Calladan
Minister
 
Posts: 3064
Founded: Jul 28, 2016
Ex-Nation

Postby Calladan » Fri May 19, 2017 11:02 am

Infected Mushroom wrote:
Galway-Dublin wrote:Chelsea Manning's prison term, which was cut down to 7 years from 35 in one of Obama's final acts in office, has ended this morning with her release today from the United States Disciplinary Barracks at 2:00 am.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/16/us/p ... prion.html

What do you think about this, NSG? Is Ms.Manning a hero or a villain for her leaking of classified documents? Considering her life and her story, is she bound to remain a public figure, or for her own good slip into the life of a private one?

In my opinion, it's good that she's been freed, especially considering her history of attempting suicide in prison and holding a hunger strike in order to receive gender transition surgery.


Her release is a sign of weakness from the government. The government is going to lose respect for this. Treason cannot be tolerated.


From what I understand, it wasn't *this* government that released her.
Tara A McGill, Ambassador to Lucinda G Doyle III
"Always be yourself, unless you can be Zathras. Then be Zathras"
A Rough Guide To Calladan | The Seven Years of Darkness | Ambassador McGill's Facebook Page
"Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, providing they are Christian & white" - Trump

User avatar
Gig em Aggies
Senator
 
Posts: 4560
Founded: Aug 15, 2009
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Gig em Aggies » Fri May 19, 2017 11:04 am

Athrax wrote:
Jamzmania wrote:In this case it extended to much less criminal revelations. Which is my point. Why did Manning have to leak everything if all he wanted to do was expose crimes?

I'd imagine she wanted to be thorough and didn't have the ability to parse these things out on the spot, similar to why Snowden stole as much as he did. Wikileak's decision to release irrelevent data says more about that organization than it does Manning. It's a large part of why I don't trust them (the possibly being run by Russian intelligence also doesn't help). But she also went to prison for 7 years because of all that she took. We act like she's gotten off scott free because the former president decided to show some mercy before he left office.

in my view this "mercy" was only to make Obama look good. plus no one will really hire manning for any important jobs cause manning cant be trusted ever.
“One of the serious problems of planning against Aggie doctrine is that the Aggies do not read their manuals nor do they feel any obligations to follow their doctrine.”
“The reason that the Aggies does so well in wartime, is that war is chaos, and the Aggies practices chaos on a daily basis.”
“If we don’t know what we are doing, the enemy certainly can’t anticipate our future actions!”

User avatar
Soldati Senza Confini
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 82720
Founded: Mar 11, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Soldati Senza Confini » Fri May 19, 2017 11:05 am

Jamzmania wrote:
Eastfield Lodge wrote:Thing is, 'knowingly harming their interests' can easily be extended to exposing war crimes.

In this case it extended to much less criminal revelations. Which is my point. Why did Manning have to leak everything if all he wanted to do was expose crimes?


To be fair, Manning seems like a deeply conflicted individual with a lot of issues hanging over her back.

I would not trust her with leaking anything. However, she handed the files to WikiLeaks, whose editor-in-chief is Julian Assange. He should have known better.

In this instance, because Manning handed the information to a third party for them to release it, she's not personally responsible for what was leaked. She is responsible for giving the files to an irresponsible shitbag if she wanted to leak them, but not for what was leaked.
Soldati senza confini: Better than an iPod in shuffle more with 20,000 songs.
Tekania wrote:Welcome to NSG, where informed opinions get to bump-heads with ignorant ideology under the pretense of an equal footing.

"When it’s a choice of putting food on the table, or thinking about your morals, it’s easier to say you’d think about your morals, but only if you’ve never faced that decision." - Anastasia Richardson

Current Goal: Flesh out nation factbook.

User avatar
Soldati Senza Confini
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 82720
Founded: Mar 11, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Soldati Senza Confini » Fri May 19, 2017 11:07 am

Gig em Aggies wrote:in my view this "mercy" was only to make Obama look good. plus no one will really hire manning for any important jobs cause manning cant be trusted ever.


I don't see how the choice of profession after release is relevant, since I wouldn't be so sure she wants to deal with secret information anymore. At least I would hope she doesn't.
Soldati senza confini: Better than an iPod in shuffle more with 20,000 songs.
Tekania wrote:Welcome to NSG, where informed opinions get to bump-heads with ignorant ideology under the pretense of an equal footing.

"When it’s a choice of putting food on the table, or thinking about your morals, it’s easier to say you’d think about your morals, but only if you’ve never faced that decision." - Anastasia Richardson

Current Goal: Flesh out nation factbook.

User avatar
Gig em Aggies
Senator
 
Posts: 4560
Founded: Aug 15, 2009
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Gig em Aggies » Fri May 19, 2017 11:09 am

Soldati Senza Confini wrote:
Jamzmania wrote:In this case it extended to much less criminal revelations. Which is my point. Why did Manning have to leak everything if all he wanted to do was expose crimes?


To be fair, Manning seems like a deeply conflicted individual with a lot of issues hanging over her back.

I would not trust her with leaking anything. However, she handed the files to WikiLeaks, whose editor-in-chief is Julian Assange. He should have known better.

In this instance, because Manning handed the information to a third party for them to release it, she's not personally responsible for what was leaked. She is responsible for giving the files to an irresponsible shitbag if she wanted to leak them, but not for what was leaked.

actually your wrong manning is responsible for leaking the documents if manning didn't steal them then they would not have been leaked.
“One of the serious problems of planning against Aggie doctrine is that the Aggies do not read their manuals nor do they feel any obligations to follow their doctrine.”
“The reason that the Aggies does so well in wartime, is that war is chaos, and the Aggies practices chaos on a daily basis.”
“If we don’t know what we are doing, the enemy certainly can’t anticipate our future actions!”

User avatar
Soldati Senza Confini
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 82720
Founded: Mar 11, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Soldati Senza Confini » Fri May 19, 2017 11:12 am

Gig em Aggies wrote:
Soldati Senza Confini wrote:
To be fair, Manning seems like a deeply conflicted individual with a lot of issues hanging over her back.

I would not trust her with leaking anything. However, she handed the files to WikiLeaks, whose editor-in-chief is Julian Assange. He should have known better.

In this instance, because Manning handed the information to a third party for them to release it, she's not personally responsible for what was leaked. She is responsible for giving the files to an irresponsible shitbag if she wanted to leak them, but not for what was leaked.

actually your wrong manning is responsible for leaking the documents if manning didn't steal them then they would not have been leaked.


There's a difference between what the actual actions of Manning were and what people think she did.

She handed the files to Assange. That's all she really did. In this, I find her fully responsible for handing them over to a shitbag like Assange. I find Assange more culpable on releasing the leaks as they were, because he was the one who owns and edits WikiLeaks, so he was responsible to do a responsible job in leaking these documents, if they were to be leaked at all.
Soldati senza confini: Better than an iPod in shuffle more with 20,000 songs.
Tekania wrote:Welcome to NSG, where informed opinions get to bump-heads with ignorant ideology under the pretense of an equal footing.

"When it’s a choice of putting food on the table, or thinking about your morals, it’s easier to say you’d think about your morals, but only if you’ve never faced that decision." - Anastasia Richardson

Current Goal: Flesh out nation factbook.

User avatar
Gig em Aggies
Senator
 
Posts: 4560
Founded: Aug 15, 2009
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Gig em Aggies » Fri May 19, 2017 11:37 am

Soldati Senza Confini wrote:
Gig em Aggies wrote:actually your wrong manning is responsible for leaking the documents if manning didn't steal them then they would not have been leaked.


There's a difference between what the actual actions of Manning were and what people think she did.

She handed the files to Assange. That's all she really did. In this, I find her fully responsible for handing them over to a shitbag like Assange. I find Assange more culpable on releasing the leaks as they were, because he was the one who owns and edits WikiLeaks, so he was responsible to do a responsible job in leaking these documents, if they were to be leaked at all.

here's what I mean
example: you and I go into a store and rob the cashier at gun point under my plan the cashier then pulls a gun and shoots you or me dead, who ever is left can be charge for murder or manslaughter without either one of us actually pulling the trigger.
its the same premise except with stealing classified data then handing it to a third party who then leaks it manning is still responsible for the leak not necessarily to the public but he leaked it to an unauthorized third party
“One of the serious problems of planning against Aggie doctrine is that the Aggies do not read their manuals nor do they feel any obligations to follow their doctrine.”
“The reason that the Aggies does so well in wartime, is that war is chaos, and the Aggies practices chaos on a daily basis.”
“If we don’t know what we are doing, the enemy certainly can’t anticipate our future actions!”

User avatar
Esternial
P2TM RP Mentor
 
Posts: 50618
Founded: May 09, 2009
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Esternial » Fri May 19, 2017 11:56 am

Won't stop folks having a hate boner against her.

User avatar
The East Marches II
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8004
Founded: Mar 11, 2017
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby The East Marches II » Fri May 19, 2017 11:57 am

Internationalist Bastard wrote:
Athrax wrote:More the CIA, IMO



That's certainly the reason why we did that, but it's a pisspoor justification. We're supposed to be better than that. That's why we put a lot of those rules into place in the first place

It does annoy me how we are supposed to live up to the ideals of the constitution, then skirt around it constantly and saying, "welp we're fighting terrorists"


I wasn't aware foreigners were American citizens :^)
Former Paşa‎ of Vilâyet-i Halep and Equatoria
Note:
This is infact Gauthier
Petrasylvania wrote:If you can submit actual discussion instead of a smug ad hominem that would be great.


Konzervativni Kripto-Titoist

User avatar
Neo Balka
Minister
 
Posts: 3124
Founded: Feb 07, 2017
Ex-Nation

Postby Neo Balka » Fri May 19, 2017 11:59 am

The East Marches II wrote:
Internationalist Bastard wrote:It does annoy me how we are supposed to live up to the ideals of the constitution, then skirt around it constantly and saying, "welp we're fighting terrorists"


I wasn't aware foreigners were American citizens :^)


Apparently they are.

which is odd.
The mere fact that i pissed someone off either means i stood for something or i said something offensive.
in this day and age it's both.
#garbagehumanbeing

User avatar
Esternial
P2TM RP Mentor
 
Posts: 50618
Founded: May 09, 2009
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Esternial » Fri May 19, 2017 11:59 am

The East Marches II wrote:
Internationalist Bastard wrote:It does annoy me how we are supposed to live up to the ideals of the constitution, then skirt around it constantly and saying, "welp we're fighting terrorists"


I wasn't aware foreigners were American citizens :^)

I guess such an idea sounds foreign to you.

User avatar
The East Marches II
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8004
Founded: Mar 11, 2017
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby The East Marches II » Fri May 19, 2017 12:00 pm

Esternial wrote:
The East Marches II wrote:
I wasn't aware foreigners were American citizens :^)

I guess such an idea sounds foreign to you.


It really does. I don't understand why people insist that people who aren't citizens are entitled to the same rights as a citizen. Oh well, can't win them all.
Former Paşa‎ of Vilâyet-i Halep and Equatoria
Note:
This is infact Gauthier
Petrasylvania wrote:If you can submit actual discussion instead of a smug ad hominem that would be great.


Konzervativni Kripto-Titoist

PreviousNext

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bakery Hill, Bing [Bot], Britanania, Chernoslavia, Democratic Communist Federation, Eclius, Ethel mermania, Fauxia, FelrikTheDeleted, Greed and Death, Grinning Dragon, Gun Manufacturers, Independant Nations and Guilds, Kamchastkia, Kholdlands, Len Hyet, Luziyca, Mattopilos II, MERIZoC, Nat Socs, Neo Rome Republic, New haven america, Northern Davincia, Senkaku, Telconi, The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp, The Flutterlands, The Two Jerseys, Val Halla, Wysten, Yagon, Yagusk

Remove ads