NationStates

The IDSF has often been portrayed as a war mongering monster, destroying all in search of wealth. Or, as the founder of CUSP helpfully said, a sheep in a wolf's clothing. Well, let's check our list of wars. Hmm... is seems as if every war we did was: A. because they were a humans-rights violating, nuclear weapon wielding dictatorship. B. because they attacked us. This thread is for any questions about the IDSF, to clear up any confusion.

how do you define 'attack' or 'human rights violations'?, for all we know you could just be waiting to attack us and make u some political excuse!

Reuteria wrote:how do you define 'attack' or 'human rights violations'?, for all we know you could just be waiting to attack us and make u some political excuse!

Well, thanks for the question, and I mean declaring war and torturing, massacring, etc. You're welcome.

Reuteria wrote:how do you define 'attack' or 'human rights violations'?, for all we know you could just be waiting to attack us and make u some political excuse!

Well, if you trade slaves that are malnourished and not treated properly, you are violating human rights by trading those slaves. If one member nation gets attacked in a military conflict, you are pretty much declaring war against our entire alliance. If you oppress your people and have access to nuclear-level weapons, we can declare you as a threat to us and the rest of the world.

Southeast Marajarbia wrote:

Reuteria wrote:how do you define 'attack' or 'human rights violations'?, for all we know you could just be waiting to attack us and make u some political excuse!

Well, if you trade slaves that are malnourished and not treated properly, you are violating human rights by trading those slaves. If one member nation gets attacked in a military conflict, you are pretty much declaring war against our entire alliance. If you oppress your people and have access to nuclear-level weapons, we can declare you as a threat to us and the rest of the world.

Can you define those words?

Romextly wrote:

Southeast Marajarbia wrote:
Well, if you trade slaves that are malnourished and not treated properly, you are violating human rights by trading those slaves. If one member nation gets attacked in a military conflict, you are pretty much declaring war against our entire alliance. If you oppress your people and have access to nuclear-level weapons, we can declare you as a threat to us and the rest of the world.

Can you define those words?

If you have big bombs, you are dangerous to your neighbors. If you illegally keep people in your basement, and force them to work for you without payment, while not allowing them to eat, you are evil. If you attack one of us, you attack all of us.

Southeast Marajarbia wrote:

Romextly wrote:Can you define those words?

If you have big bombs, you are dangerous to your neighbors. If you illegally keep people in your basement, and force them to work for you without payment, while not allowing them to eat, you are evil. If you attack one of us, you attack all of us.

so, are you saying that it is your right to just go around, fighting nations who do, i'll admit it, terrible things, as some kind of Robin Hood without regard to sovereignty?

Reuteria wrote:

Southeast Marajarbia wrote:
If you have big bombs, you are dangerous to your neighbors. If you illegally keep people in your basement, and force them to work for you without payment, while not allowing them to eat, you are evil. If you attack one of us, you attack all of us.

so, are you saying that it is your right to just go around, fighting nations who do, i'll admit it, terrible things, as some kind of Robin Hood without regard to sovereignty?

Roughly yes.

Reuteria wrote:

Southeast Marajarbia wrote:
If you have big bombs, you are dangerous to your neighbors. If you illegally keep people in your basement, and force them to work for you without payment, while not allowing them to eat, you are evil. If you attack one of us, you attack all of us.

so, are you saying that it is your right to just go around, fighting nations who do, i'll admit it, terrible things, as some kind of Robin Hood without regard to sovereignty?

Well, yes.

Reuteria wrote:

Southeast Marajarbia wrote:
If you have big bombs, you are dangerous to your neighbors. If you illegally keep people in your basement, and force them to work for you without payment, while not allowing them to eat, you are evil. If you attack one of us, you attack all of us.

so, are you saying that it is your right to just go around, fighting nations who do, i'll admit it, terrible things, as some kind of Robin Hood without regard to sovereignty?

Without a way of diplomatically doing anything it seems, except for the efforts of IHS

Romextly wrote:

Reuteria wrote:so, are you saying that it is your right to just go around, fighting nations who do, i'll admit it, terrible things, as some kind of Robin Hood without regard to sovereignty?

Without a way of diplomatically doing anything it seems, except for the efforts of IHS

And Nordeslund. And Tyrantio. And SM, though I admit he must discuss more with us when he enters wars.

Romextly wrote:

Reuteria wrote:so, are you saying that it is your right to just go around, fighting nations who do, i'll admit it, terrible things, as some kind of Robin Hood without regard to sovereignty?

Without a way of diplomatically doing anything it seems, except for the efforts of IHS

We can use diplomatic approaches whenever we want.

Islamic Holy Sites wrote:

Reuteria wrote:so, are you saying that it is your right to just go around, fighting nations who do, i'll admit it, terrible things, as some kind of Robin Hood without regard to sovereignty?

Well, yes.

THAT'S INSANE! If other countries do things within their borders, yes they may be horrendous, but do you really have the right to just barge in there and say "stop or else". Because A. the other country could probably crush you and B. it's their land, if they invaded you and started right-ing all your wrongs (and don't pretend like you don't have any) you wouldn't like it.

ok, diplomacy makes a little more sense, but if you put sanctions on a country, and want them to give up a lucrative (thought albeit inhumane) business for you to lift sanctions and strike a trade deal in which they make less money, what do you think they will do?

Reuteria wrote:

Islamic Holy Sites wrote:Well, yes.

THAT'S INSANE! If other countries do things within their borders, yes they may be horrendous, but do you really have the right to just barge in there and say "stop or else". Because A. the other country could probably crush you and B. it's their land, if they invaded you and started right-ing all your wrongs (and don't pretend like you don't have any) you wouldn't like it.

aaaaand when they threaten us and/or an ally. Otherwise we'd be in endless wars, which we are not. And they shouldn't do it. That's the point.

Reuteria wrote:ok, diplomacy makes a little more sense, but if you put sanctions on a country, and want them to give up a lucrative (thought albeit inhumane) business for you to lift sanctions and strike a trade deal in which they make less money, what do you think they will do?

Attempt retaliation

Southeast Marajarbia wrote:

Reuteria wrote:ok, diplomacy makes a little more sense, but if you put sanctions on a country, and want them to give up a lucrative (thought albeit inhumane) business for you to lift sanctions and strike a trade deal in which they make less money, what do you think they will do?

Attempt retaliation

and where does that leave you, i'll tell you where, knee-deep in another war

Reuteria wrote:

Southeast Marajarbia wrote:
Attempt retaliation

and where does that leave you, i'll tell you where, knee-deep in another war

Sometimes, unless it is a trade war.

declare war on nations that refuse to comply with sanction

This is from your recruitment page. What do you mean by this?

Romextly wrote:

declare war on nations that refuse to comply with sanction

This is from your recruitment page. What do you mean by this?

Who basically bomb our ships, get a force to start blockading us, etc.

Romextly wrote:

declare war on nations that refuse to comply with sanction

This is from your recruitment page. What do you mean by this?

If you resist our sanctions, you earn yourself a Military conflict.

Southeast Marajarbia wrote:

Romextly wrote:This is from your recruitment page. What do you mean by this?

If you resist our sanctions, you earn yourself a Military conflict.

Please explain that.

Southeast Marajarbia wrote:

Romextly wrote:This is from your recruitment page. What do you mean by this?

If you resist our sanctions, you earn yourself a Military conflict.

Would the CUSP defense fleet under Operation Breaking cover belong there?

Romextly wrote:

Southeast Marajarbia wrote:If you resist our sanctions, you earn yourself a Military conflict.

Please explain that.

If you threaten an IDSF blockade, or initiate in trade that benefits your economy while sanctions are in place, that = war

Romextly wrote:

Southeast Marajarbia wrote:If you resist our sanctions, you earn yourself a Military conflict.

Please explain that.

Basically, if a teacher gives you detention because you broke a window, you don't slap the teacher in the face because you'll get a bigger punishment. Human rights violating nation= bad student teacher= IDSF

And no Laciena