Anti-Communism Alliance - [MEMENTO MORI]

by **Prussia-Steinbach** » Thu Jun 21, 2012 8:45 pm

ANTI-COMMUNISM ALLIANCE

MEMBERS ONLY

Now Celebrating Our First Anniversary Fighting the Red Horde Across NationStates!

Monarchists! Capitalists! Democrats! Heed our call!
Defend your Nations from the threat of the Red Menace!

Open Thread: [X]
IRC: [X]

“The Red Horde, a Devastating Plague on the World, must be Fully Eradicated. It is a Scourge, a Violent, Oppressive System that None but the Most Perverted and Twisted Minds could Ever Hope to bring into Being. The Ideology of Sadists and Masochists, the Destiny of this Abhorrent Abomination shall be Eternal Burning in Hell with its Devilish Contrivers, Marx, Stalin, Mao. It shall Rank in the Halls of those Positions Spurned by Civilised Mankind.
Who but Satan could have Idealised such a System? One in which the Incompetent gain Power over the Great, the Despotic over the Benevolent; the Enshrouded top the Hierarchy, rather than the Enlightened. How Long must Terra and Her Regions Suffer under the Mighty Yoke of Marxism? Shall the Red Fist be given Power to Crush its Opposition, an Opposition that hath no Goal but Freedom for All Mankind? Shall the Shackles Ever be Removed? Those who Envision a Magnificent and Peaceful World Shrink in Number every Day, as the Infection of Marxism Spreads, Consuming its Way from Coast to Coast, Capital to Capital, Border to Border, Intent on the Destruction and Eradication of All Goodness, Morality, and Order left in the World. The Red Disease can only be Stopped with Brute Force; Violence and Brutality are the Tongues of the Communist, and He Speaks Them Well, Better than the Capitalist, the Monarchist, the Democratic Republican and All Else that Request Emancipation from Their Red Oppressors. Many will Call, Many hath Called; Who hath Answered? Not the Anarchists, Nay; Not the Socialists, Nay; Not the Leftists, the Moderates, Compromisers - Hath They? - Nay.
May the Alliance Ever Heed the Call of Those Unable, Those Oppressed, Those Weak, Those Afeared, Those Without the Means to Provide Their People's Defence! Rise up, Freedom Lovers, Carers for Order, Servants of God, the State, the Nation, and Thine People! You have Naught to Lose but Thine Chains! Only Our Father in Heaven hath Any True Right to Oppress, and shall He? Let the Mighty Earth Resound with a Deafening Chorus, - Nay!
Let Anti-Communism Reign! Chosen by the People, Favoured by God, and Appointed by All Those Well-Meaning, An Ideology Opposed to the Left shall Forever be Firmly Planted in the Right.

God Help Us All.”

§

Constitution

ARTICLE I

Concerning Governments and Political Ideologies

i. All member nations of the Anti-Communism Alliance—henceforth referred to as the “ACA”—must retain a capitalist, corporatist, or otherwise non-socialistic economic and governmental system within their borders.
ii. All member nations must refrain from using the “hammer & sickle” symbol in their national, departmental, and provincial flags, recognising that said symbol represents Marxist ideals.
iii. The Alliance hereby defines “Communism” as any ideology related to, derived from, identifying with, or emulating the ideologies espoused by such men as Karl Marx, Josef Stalin, Vladimir Lenin, and Mao Zedong.
iv. All member nations’ governments must take a firm, official stance against Communism, and all its forms and variations, and against their furthering and propagation in the world. This clause may be supported by the Board of Founders and Grand Council with necessary force.

ARTICLE II

Concerning Military Aid and War

i. All member nations must be, at all times, able and willing to donate at least twenty thousand troops and two warships, to assist in defending a member nation, or to take preemptive action against an overly aggressive Communist nation and convert it to a better system of governance. The requirement of two warships may be waived in the case of a landlocked nation being admitted to the ACA.
ii. All member nations must have at least one percent of their total population as active members of their armed forces.
iii. If attacked, a member nation may call on the ACA for assistance. Upon an alliance-wide majority vote, the Board of Founders may require another member state to assist the attacked member nation.
iv. If attacked, a non-member nation may call on the ACA for assistance. The same rules apply as in Article II, Part 3.

ARTICLE III

Concerning the Alliance’s Structure

i. The ACA will be governed by the Board of Founders, consisting of the founding nations of said alliance: the German Empire, the Tyrannian Empire, and the Nachfolgian Reich.
ii. No nations may ever be added to the Board of Founders.
iii. The Lower Governing Body will be the Grand Council.
iv. There will be one member of the Grand Council for every five nations in the entire Alliance; they will be elected by the representatives of each ACA member nation thrice a year, on the first week of the months of February, July, and October.
v. There will be a president of the Grand Council, appointed by the Board of Founders; this president will have right of veto over all legislation to be presented to the Board by the Grand Council; however, this veto may be overridden upon a unanimous vote by the lesser member nations of the Grand Council.
vi. At such a time as all the nations comprising the Board of Founders have fallen, the Grand Council will become the highest governing body of the ACA.
vii. Member nations will appoint a representative to the ACA upon entrance to the Alliance; this representative may be changed at any time.
viii. Grand Council members are allowed and encouraged to use the Great Seal of the Alliance with their other coat of arms and seals on governmental documents.

ARTICLE IV

Concerning the Powers of the Alliance

i. The Board of Founders retains the right to alter the content of the Constitution at will.
ii. The Grand Council, after a successful majority vote, may present a petition to the Board for an amendment to the Constitution. This amendment may only be passed with unanimous agreement from the Board.
iii. Any territory occupied by the Alliance will officially be governed by the occupying military forces; however, the occupying forces are required to establish a liberal democratic government upon evacuation.
iv. The Alliance may never permanently retain territories, only occupying territories until they are deemed stable and free of destructive Communist influence.

ARTICLE V

Concerning State Sovereignty

i. All member nations, while a part of the ACA, will unconditionally submit to all rules and laws passed. This clause may be supported by the Board of Founders and Grand Council with necessary force.
ii. The ACA recognises the complete sovereignty of each of its member nations, excluding those national rights they voluntarily surrender to the Alliance, and will not attempt to violate this sovereignty unless the integrity and security of the entire Alliance is at stake.
iii. “The Stediculian Clause” — Member nations must be in full control of all their claimed territory, and a state of civil war, violent unrest, or political instability must not exist within their borders upon entrance to the Alliance.
iv. All member nations retain the right to secede from this union, with or without just cause.
v. Treason against the Alliance shall consist of harbouring the enemies of one of the states of the ACA, levying war against one of the states of the ACA, conspiring or attempting to illegally end the reign of one of its leaders, or disobeying the orders of any ACA officer.
vi. If a member nation is considered to have engaged in dishonourable conduct, the Board of Founders may exact punishment upon them as they see fit.

FINIS

Nation	Representative	Status
The German Empire	His Imperial and Royal Majesty, Kaiser B.E. Steinbach	Board of Founders Member
The Germanic Military Reich of Nachfolgia	Obersterführur Dieter von Sturmgeist	Board of Founders Member
The Grand Fascist Empire of Old Tyrannia	His Imperial Majesty, Emperor Gaius Romulus IV	Board of Founders Member
The Imperial Union of Kel-Elysia	His Excellency, Lord Governor-General Kim Myung-Chul	Grand Council President
The Constitutional Monarchy of New Belhavia	His Majesty, Emperor Ryan Adrian I	Grand Council Member
The Theocratic Republic of Transnapastain	Miss Hannah Lenier Adamson	Grand Council Member
The Nanomechanical Empire of Cruciland	הקיסר ללבןצצל	Member State
The Kingdom of Adwest	Her Serene Majesty, Queen Beatrice Durnador	Member State
The Second Republic of New Nassrau	Her Excellency, Vitaliya Aleksandra	Member State
The Anarcho-Monarchist Realm of Distruzio	His Majesty, Titolli di Medici	Member State
The Republic of Segland	His Excellency, Chancellor Jean Beluy-Chaveux	Member State
The Corporatocracy of Elcric Kcalb	His Excellency, Executive Chairman Adenauer	Member State
The Grand Arctic Federation of Dakini Femina	His Majesty, King Kristian Olsen XIII	Member State
The Autocratic Stratocracy of Imperial--Japan	Her Imperial Majesty, Empress Akechi Motoyasu	Member State
The Empire of Lyncanestria	His Imperial Majesty, Emperor William III	Member State
The Autocratic Establishment of Syleru	His Excellency, Abraham Turen IV	Member State
The Kingdom of Divitaen	His Royal Highness, Crown Prince of Lacertus	Member State
The Royal Dominion of Southron	His Grace, the Duke of Bolton	Member State
The Vast Dominion of Chernobl	Ambassador Eliza Retz	Member State
The Inexorable Dominion of Finium	Imperial Minister Nix	Member State
The Ascendancy of the Mainframe	Av-Techsin Garasov Ja'Ameral	Member State
The Imperium of Mediciano	Foreign Minister Jeremiah del Castea	Member State
The Federal Republic of Anacaspia	The Honourable Ambassador at Large Penny Belltower	Member State
The Confucian Empire of Ulvena	Her Highness, Princess Sonia Inzen	Member State
The Imperial Empire of Unicario	General Seto Tojo	Member State
The Security Syndicate of the Black Plains	CEO Jason Mansor	Private Contractor

+

Anti-Communist Policing Agency

The Anti-Communist Policing Agency is an international police force, by which member states of the Anti-Communism Alliance may participate in voluntarily. Its purpose is to track, regulate, and remove all damaging anti-government, extremist, and radical Leftist activity within the participating state, within said state's respective laws and ordinances; however, it ultimately answers to the the Alliance as a whole, and is under the direction of the Board of Founders.

Participants:
Prussia-Steinbach
Nachfolgia
Monetary Supporters:
Prussia-Steinbach
Nachfolgia
Material Supporters:
Prussia-Steinbach
Nachfolgia

Foreign Basing Initiative

The Foreign Basing Initiative is a network of bases throughout the Anti-Communism Alliance, operated, supplied and hosted by member states in the interest of promoting the security of our organisation by means of placing our deployable military forces in strategically important and nationally desirable locations, with the consent of the stationing nation and the host. Membership in this program is entirely optional; however, we fully encourage your country to participate, in order to facilitate closer inter-alliance relations and further provide for the ACA’s security.
To enter the Foreign Basing Initiative (‘FBI’), simply state your desire to do so on this thread, and fill out a form as the ones below. If someone wishes to station troops in any of the bases listed below, they need only post the amount and type of troops in this thread.

Name of Base: Alpine Luftstreitkräfte Base
Location of Base: Ten Miles North of Berchtesgaden
Origin of Forces to be Stationed There: The German Empire, other ACA states
Amount Able to be Stationed: 25,000
Stationed Forces: 10,000 German, 2,000 NBEIC, 5,000 Adwestian, 5,500 Nachfolgian
Base Functionality and Purpose:
Air readiness facility; designed for fast fighter and bomber deployment and easily-activated national defence capabilities.
Other: Transnapastaini Military Staging Base

Name of Base: Joint Base Vanderfield-Germantown
Location of Base: 35 miles north of Vanderfield, Castille de Italia
Origin of Forces to be Stationed There: Castille de Italia, other ACA states
Amount Able to be Stationed: 30,000
Stationed Forces: 5,000 German, 5,000 Adwestian, 5,500 Nachfolgian
Base Functionality and Purpose: Joint Military Training Exercise Complex

Name of Base: London Foreign Initiative Base
Exact Location of Base: The East India Docks, Blackwall, London
Origin of Forces to be Stationed There: United Kingdom, New British East India Company, other ACA states
Amount Able to be Stationed: 25,000
Stationed Forces: 14,000 British, 4,000 German, 5,000 Adwestian, 2,000 Nachfolgian
Base Functionality and Purpose: Naval Base and Drydock, Naval Testing Facility, Royal Navy Submarine Base.

Name of Base: Rabanastre Royal Military Hub
Location of Base: The city of Rabanastre, Eastern Adwest
Origin of Forces to be Stationed There: Kingdom of Adwest, other ACA states
Amount Able to be Stationed: 40,000
Stationed Forces: 10,000 Adwestian, 5,500 Nachfolgian
Base Functionality and Purpose: Combined Arms Base; contains a number of docks, airfields, and training facilities

Name of Base: Special Operations Base Göttlichkeit
Location of Base: 100 miles outside Sarajevo
Origin of Forces to be Stationed There: Nachfolgia, other ACA states
Amount Able to be Stationed: 30,000
Stationed Forces: 10,000 Nachfolgian, 10,000 German
Base Functionality and Purpose: Special Operations and Intelligence, Special Forces Training

by **Kel-Elysia** » Thu Jun 21, 2012 8:54 pm

by **Prussia-Steinbach** » Thu Jun 21, 2012 9:08 pm

by **Reselia** » Fri Jun 22, 2012 12:43 am

by **Prussia-Steinbach** » Fri Jun 22, 2012 1:02 am

by **Reselia** » Fri Jun 22, 2012 1:17 am

Prussia-Steinbach wrote:
Reselia wrote:Anyone care to suggest any discussion topics?

Just a note - in this thread, we can talk with relative freedom. Every IC post doesn't have to be a diplomatic communique, it just has to be, well, in character. Talk like you're the leader of your nation.

I have a topic. An Anti-Communist Summit. We don't need to have one soon, like every let-everyone-in n00b alliance does, but I would suggest a conglomerate meeting of all (or most of) the ACA nations, to set everything in order. We're still growing, of course - we still need to appoint Ministers of War, Propaganda, Foreign Affairs, and Domestic Affairs, cement the Constitution, possibly figure out an official mission statement, though I believe our intent is rather clear. I just think that, after we get a good membership size - say, ten to fifteen nations - we should all arrange a time for our leaders to meet, in RP.

Also, I was thinking about establishing an Intelligence Service. Spies would be useful for us.

by **Old Tyrannia** » Fri Jun 22, 2012 4:58 am

I would like to propose abolishing Article II, Part 2 (All member nations must have a total military consisting of at least ten million men) on the grounds that 1) Even I, as a Founder, have a military of less than 10 million men and 2) For a smaller nation a military of 10 million men would likely bankrupt the Government and be equipped with sticks and stones. Instead, I suggest replacing Part 2 with two totally different requirements:

2. All member nations must have a standing military including at least 0.5% of their population.
3. All member nations must be able to demonstrate the ability to adequately support their entire military.

Part 2 would ensure that everyone has a large enough standing army to be of use to the alliance during wartime, whilst Part 3 would require all members to be able to prove that they can realistically equip and maintain their military without becoming bankrupt or being left unable to adequately train and equip their forces. This means that militaries should be made up of 5% or less of a nation's population, except for the very richest of nations, with less wealthy nations (eg nations with an economic rating of 'Reasonable' or less) aiming more in the region of 3%. We will of course be fairly slack with this rule, but if a nation with a 'Reasonable' economy and 50 million citizens comes along with an army of, say, 5 million we will reject them on the grounds of being incapable of sufficiently equipping their military and thus being virtually useless to the alliance. We don't want conscripts with pitch forks getting in the way of our professional troops, do we?

Also, I would suggest altering Article II Part 1 ("All member nations must be, at all times, able and willing to donate at least twenty thousand troops and two warships, to assist in defending a member nation, or to take over a Communist nation and convert it's nation to another system of governance") to say "to take over a hostile (or aggressive) Communist nation...", which should keep the self-righteous brigade off our backs whilst leaving us with some leeway when it comes to determining if a Communist nation is 'hostile' enough to take action. Thoughts?

by **Undead Gypsies** » Fri Jun 22, 2012 1:25 pm

Old Tyrannia wrote:
I would like to propose abolishing Article II, Part 2 (All member nations must have a total military consisting of at least ten million men) on the grounds that 1) Even I, as a Founder, have a military of less than 10 million men and 2) For a smaller nation a military of 10 million men would likely bankrupt the Government and be equipped with sticks and stones. Instead, I suggest replacing Part 2 with two totally different requirements:

2. All member nations must have a standing military including at least 0.5% of their population.
3. All member nations must be able to demonstrate the ability to adequately support their entire military.

Part 2 would ensure that everyone has a large enough standing army to be of use to the alliance during wartime, whilst Part 3 would require all members to be able to prove that they can realistically equip and maintain their military without becoming bankrupt or being left unable to adequately train and equip their forces. This means that militaries should be made up of 5% or less of a nation's population, except for the very richest of nations, with less wealthy nations (eg nations with an economic rating of 'Reasonable' or less) aiming more in the region of 3%. We will of course be fairly slack with this rule, but if a nation with a 'Reasonable' economy and 50 million citizens comes along with an army of, say, 5 million we will reject them on the grounds of being incapable of sufficiently equipping their military and thus being virtually useless to the alliance. We don't want conscripts with pitch forks getting in the way of our professional troops, do we?

Also, I would suggest altering Article II Part 1 ("All member nations must be, at all times, able and willing to donate at least twenty thousand troops and two warships, to assist in defending a member nation, or to take over a Communist nation and convert it's nation to another system of governance") to say "to take over a hostile (or aggressive) Communist nation...", which should keep the self-righteous brigade off our backs whilst leaving us with some leeway when it comes to determining if a Communist nation is 'hostile' enough to take action. Thoughts?

I support this notion.

by **Prussia-Steinbach** » Fri Jun 22, 2012 2:33 pm

Old Tyrannia wrote: -snip-

I see your point. I would, though, suggest we change 0.5 % to 1%. We don't want an anti-militarist, almost pacifist nation with a Frightening economy and one billion citizens to have only a million or so soldiers. If they have the means, let's hold them to it. We want to be a strong alliance, one that people would actually have to think about attacking before they did so.

As to your second proposition, I agree completely. In the interest of the alliance's solidarity, I would like to ask the rest of the members' opinions on Romulus' proposition to alter Article II, Part 2 of the Constitution.

by **Kel-Elysia** » Fri Jun 22, 2012 2:36 pm

Prussia-Steinbach wrote:
Old Tyrannia wrote: -snip-

I would say that propositions to alter the Constitution would be IC - therefore, a spoiler is unneeded.

For instance, you can say "I have a report on a hostile Communist nation" or "I propose we alter Article X Part X of the Constitution" in IC. Like I said, this should be a relatively free thread, where the IC/OOC line is a bit blurred.

I see your point. I would, though, suggest we change 0.5 % to 1%. We don't want an anti-militarist, almost pacifist nation with a Frightening economy and one billion citizens to have only a million or so soldiers. If they have the means, let's hold them to it. We want to be a strong alliance, one that people would actually have to think about attacking before they did so.

As to your second proposition, I agree completely. In the interest of the alliance's solidarity, I would like to ask the rest of the members' opinions on Romulus' proposition to alter Article II, Part 2 of the Constitution.

In favor.

by **Colonial** » Fri Jun 22, 2012 2:59 pm

Prussia-Steinbach wrote:
Old Tyrannia wrote: -snip-

I would say that propositions to alter the Constitution would be IC - therefore, a spoiler is unneeded.

For instance, you can say "I have a report on a hostile Communist nation" or "I propose we alter Article X Part X of the Constitution" in IC. Like I said, this should be a relatively free thread, where the IC/OOC line is a bit blurred.

I see your point. I would, though, suggest we change 0.5 % to 1%. We don't want an anti-militarist, almost pacifist nation with a Frightening economy and one billion citizens to have only a million or so soldiers. If they have the means, let's hold them to it. We want to be a strong alliance, one that people would actually have to think about attacking before they did so.

As to your second proposition, I agree completely. In the interest of the alliance's solidarity, I would like to ask the rest of the members' opinions on Romulus' proposition to alter Article II, Part 2 of the Constitution.

I have to agree with you on the point of 1% over .5%. Also it may be true that a 10million man Army could bankrupt a small nation, it's only true if the nation doesn't use the military as a stimulus. A strong military can be used in some cases to float the economy if you don't have a lot of over sea's bases. Keeping you military strong, and in the country to spend their paychecks will boost the economy very well.

by **Prussia-Steinbach** » Fri Jun 22, 2012 3:04 pm

Colonial wrote:I have to agree with you on the point of 1% over .5%. Also it may be true that a 10million man Army could bankrupt a small nation, it's only true if the nation doesn't use the military as a stimulus. A strong military can be used in some cases to float the economy if you don't have a lot of over sea's bases. Keeping you military strong, and in the country to spend their paychecks will boost the economy very well.

I see your point as well. What is your opinion on the altering of Article II, Part 2 of the Constitution?

by **Colonial** » Fri Jun 22, 2012 3:09 pm

Prussia-Steinbach wrote:
Colonial wrote:I have to agree with you on the point of 1% over .5%. Also it may be true that a 10million man Army could bankrupt a small nation, it's only true if the nation doesn't use the military as a stimulus. A strong military can be used in some cases to float the economy if you don't have a lot of over sea's bases. Keeping you military strong, and in the country to spend their paychecks will boost the economy very well.

I see your point as well. What is your opinion on the altering of Article II, Part 2 of the Constitution?

I think that keeping it as is would be the correct course of action. You wouldn't have to strictly enforce it right away. For the now it could even be used as a guide-line, or something to strive for. I agree with you that an Alliance is only as strong as it's military. You can't fight off Communist's with just ideas.
Also we happen to be in a very large excepting world communists. The Commies aren't keeping small forces. They are preparing for more wars. If we can't stand toe to toe, we aren't worth much in the eyes of the community. We won't be taken seriously by the foe.

by **Prussia-Steinbach** » Fri Jun 22, 2012 4:03 pm

Colonial wrote:I think that keeping it as is would be the correct course of action. You wouldn't have to strictly enforce it right away. For the now it could even be used as a guide-line, or something to strive for. I agree with you that an Alliance is only as strong as it's military. You can't fight off Communist's with just ideas.
Also we happen to be in a very large excepting world communists. The Commies aren't keeping small forces. They are preparing for more wars. If we can't stand toe to toe, we aren't worth much in the eyes of the community. We won't be taken seriously by the foe.

And Article II, Part 1?

by **Colonial** » Fri Jun 22, 2012 5:59 pm

Prussia-Steinbach wrote:
Colonial wrote:I think that keeping it as is would be the correct course of action. You wouldn't have to strictly enforce it right away. For the now it could even be used as a guide-line, or something to strive for. I agree with you that an Alliance is only as strong as it's military. You can't fight off Communist's with just ideas.
Also we happen to be in a very large excepting world communists. The Commies aren't keeping small forces. They are preparing for more wars. If we can't stand toe to toe, we aren't worth much in the eyes of the community. We won't be taken seriously by the foe.

And Article II, Part 1?

Article II, Part I is more than acceptable in my opinion. It's only 20,000 troops in defense of our Brothers of the alliance. If you're not willing to aid in a allied nation in time of need, you shouldn't be here. We're all set out on a cause. A cause to end Communism. If you aren't expecting to troops to be used in a join effort, what are you doing here? I find Article II, part I and part II were all very reasonable.

How do the other nations of the Alliance feel on the matter?

by **Prussia-Steinbach** » Fri Jun 22, 2012 6:02 pm

Colonial wrote:Article II, Part I is more than acceptable in my opinion. It's only 20,000 troops in defense of our Brothers of the alliance. If you're not willing to aid in a allied nation in time of need, you shouldn't be here. We're all set out on a cause. A cause to end Communism. If you aren't expecting to troops to be used in a join effort, what are you doing here? I find Article II, part I and part II were all very reasonable.

I mean, should we change it to "hostile Communist nations" instead of just "Communist nations?" This would, as Romulus said, get the "self-righteous brigade" off our backs, and still allow us freedom to determine what is hostile and not.

by **Colonial** » Fri Jun 22, 2012 6:09 pm

Prussia-Steinbach wrote:
Colonial wrote:Article II, Part I is more than acceptable in my opinion. It's only 20,000 troops in defense of our Brothers of the alliance. If you're not willing to aid in a allied nation in time of need, you shouldn't be here. We're all set out on a cause. A cause to end Communism. If you aren't expecting to troops to be used in a join effort, what are you doing here? I find Article II, part I and part II were all very reasonable.

I mean, should we change it to "hostile Communist nations" instead of just "Communist nations?" This would, as Romulus said, get the "self-righteous brigade" off our backs, and still allow us freedom to determine what is hostile and not.

Yes, changing it to "Hostile Communist Nations", or even "Dictator-ran Communist" nations. This would certainly keep "Commie-lovers" off our back. Unless of course they're just completely unreasonable.

by **Reselia** » Fri Jun 22, 2012 7:12 pm

Perhaps a merger would be in order, those please tell me if I have overstepped my bounds:

http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=186974

by **Prussia-Steinbach** » Fri Jun 22, 2012 7:23 pm

Reselia wrote: -snip-

Perhaps. I will send a diplomatic missive to them, proposing one, or becoming an allied alliance.

As to your overstepping your bounds, well, you just might have. I would have preferred if you had let me know about it beforehand - but, no harm done. Just think about it next time.

by **Old Tyrannia** » Sat Jun 23, 2012 12:28 am

Prussia-Steinbach wrote:
Reselia wrote: -snip-

Perhaps. I will send a diplomatic missive to them, proposing one, or becoming an allied alliance.

As to your overstepping your bounds, well, you just might have. I would have preferred if you had let me know about it beforehand - but, no harm done. Just think about it next time.

The Empire is deeply concerned that the Anti-Communism Alliance has chosen to associate itself with an organization that explicitly endorses racial discrimination in its founding document. Had we chanced across this organization under different circumstances, we likely would have declared war upon it.

by **Prussia-Steinbach** » Sat Jun 23, 2012 8:37 am

Old Tyrannia wrote:The Empire is deeply concerned that the Anti-Communism Alliance has chosen to associate itself with an organization that explicitly endorses racial discrimination in its founding document. Had we chanced across this organization under different circumstances, we likely would have declared war upon it.

You are exactly right. I did not notice the racial discrimination mentioned, and only noticed it very late into the night, and, after noticing, decided to withdraw from the alliance, and break the ties the ACA has with it - but, was going to wait for morning.

by **Prussia-Steinbach** » Sat Jun 23, 2012 8:57 am

There we go.

by **Colonial** » Sat Jun 23, 2012 3:02 pm

Gentleman,

I am here finally. Sorry that it took me so long to arrive. I had to wait for Vice President Sarah Palin to arrive before I was able to leave the country. One of us must be present at all times.

by **Colonial** » Sat Jun 23, 2012 3:04 pm

Prussia-Steinbach wrote:
Old Tyrannia wrote:The Empire is deeply concerned that the Anti-Communism Alliance has chosen to associate itself with an organization that explicitly endorses racial discrimination in its founding document. Had we chanced across this organization under different circumstances, we likely would have declared war upon it.

You are exactly right. I did not notice the racial discrimination mentioned, and only noticed it very late into the night, and, after noticing, decided to withdraw from the alliance, and break the ties the ACA has with it - but, was going to wait for morning.

Yeah, I noticed they were anti-Semitic in the middle of the night. I just got on, so I'll go announce a withdrawal.

Aren't we the ACA? Anti Communist Alliance?>

by **Nachfolgia** » Sat Jun 23, 2012 3:05 pm

i propose that we create some sort of "Home Guard", a private military police force separate from the main armies of the ACA who's job will be to search for and eliminate any communist supporters within the borders of the ACA and any territories that the ACA may aquire. what do the fellow members of the ACA feel about this proposal.

Anti-Communism Alliance - [MEMENTO MORI]

Anti-Communism Alliance - [MEMENTO MORI]

Who is online