[PASSED] Liberate Region of Reunited Muslim States

[Xanthal]

Certainly! I just wanted you to admit that this is a load of crap.

I will not. But I don't expect you to change your position either, so unless you'd enjoy arguing in circles for the next three days- or until I get tired of it anyway- it seems the only thing to do is agree to disagree.

[Crushing Our Enemies]

Now hold on a minute. These two posts are at odds with one another:

Time and again we see argument and counterargument lobbed across the table on Liberations regarding what might or might not happen if the Liberation is or is not passed. Maybe the invaders will leave, maybe the natives won't come back, maybe defenders will hijack the region. The only certainty is the present: a group has taken possession of a region that does not belong to them, and abridged the rights of those who called it home. Nobody has ever said Liberation was anything but a blunt and clumsy instrument, but it is the only tool the WA has at its disposal, and giving Natives a chance at reclaiming what is theirs is preferable to leaving a region in the hands of usurpers without opposition.

This is not a question of who has a higher moral claim, or which group is more politically agreeable, it is a question of one party seizing something by force that belonged to another. Whether the raided region is inhabited by a couple barely-active hermits or a bastion of activity, home to delightful and inoffensive nations or genocidal lunatics, it is theirs. When a raiding group steps beyond planting a flag, having a bit of a laugh, and moving on to consolidating power and abusing natives, they become not just invaders but occupiers. They become the enemy of every Founderless region because we all know that but for a prejudice, an association, a whim- it could have been us facing humiliation and displacement.

I've said it before and I will say it again; raiders and defenders play in our backyards. If they can be good guests they'll often be tolerated, even welcomed. If they start tearing up the lawn and moving into the house, though, they should expect no less than that we use every method available to push them out. Better to risk all the problems Liberation can bring for a chance at regaining control than leave an occupying force in place unchallenged. As far as Xanthal is concerned, any other approach to these scenarios only obfuscates the real issue.

Whatever the birthplace of the sentiment, it is one rooted in the only definition of regional ownership recognized by NationStates, and in the game mechanics which enforce that definition.

Those same game mechanics also give us the tools to dislodge the forces of raiders who abuse those mechanics in the eyes of the majority. If the power to hold a region is all that matters and the ability to do so is all the justification you need, then by your own admission what you or I say here is of no consequence, unless you really think either of us is likely to change the outcome of the forthcoming vote. Therefore I suggest we let the game mechanics you tout as the ultimate authority on the subject do their part and see who prevails.

Affirming the one disavows the other. Now which one are you standing by?

[Xanthal]

Now hold on a minute. These two posts are at odds with one another:

Time and again we see argument and counterargument lobbed across the table on Liberations regarding what might or might not happen if the Liberation is or is not passed. Maybe the invaders will leave, maybe the natives won't come back, maybe defenders will hijack the region. The only certainty is the present: a group has taken possession of a region that does not belong to them, and abridged the rights of those who called it home. Nobody has ever said Liberation was anything but a blunt and clumsy instrument, but it is the only tool the WA has at its disposal, and giving Natives a chance at reclaiming what is theirs is preferable to leaving a region in the hands of usurpers without opposition.

This is not a question of who has a higher moral claim, or which group is more politically agreeable, it is a question of one party seizing something by force that belonged to another. Whether the raided region is inhabited by a couple barely-active hermits or a bastion of activity, home to delightful and inoffensive nations or genocidal lunatics, it is theirs. When a raiding group steps beyond planting a flag, having a bit of a laugh, and moving on to consolidating power and abusing natives, they become not just invaders but occupiers. They become the enemy of every Founderless region because we all know that but for a prejudice, an association, a whim- it could have been us facing humiliation and displacement.

I've said it before and I will say it again; raiders and defenders play in our backyards. If they can be good guests they'll often be tolerated, even welcomed. If they start tearing up the lawn and moving into the house, though, they should expect no less than that we use every method available to push them out. Better to risk all the problems Liberation can bring for a chance at regaining control than leave an occupying force in place unchallenged. As far as Xanthal is concerned, any other approach to these scenarios only obfuscates the real issue.

Those same game mechanics also give us the tools to dislodge the forces of raiders who abuse those mechanics in the eyes of the majority. If the power to hold a region is all that matters and the ability to do so is all the justification you need, then by your own admission what you or I say here is of no consequence, unless you really think either of us is likely to change the outcome of the forthcoming vote. Therefore I suggest we let the game mechanics you tout as the ultimate authority on the subject do their part and see who prevails.

Affirming the one disavows the other. Now which one are you standing by?

Both. The second was a response to your OOC objections and thus itself OOC, whereas the first was IC. From an OOC perspective, the game is what the game is. Strictly speaking, as long as one acts within the rules they can do whatever they want. There is a deeper OOC disconnect, though- you present the game mechanics as they stand as an unassailable final authority. I am compelled to point out that just because one has the power to do something does not give them legitimacy in the eyes of others. The striking thing is that so many raiders seem genuinely to care that others have a poor opinion of them when they engage in tactics the community decides it doesn't agree with. If they didn't, they wouldn't show up in these threads and argue with people like me that they were justified. In other words, from my perspective, the very fact that you (again) rise to meet my challenge indicates to me that what I and those like me think and feel about the actions of you and your associates does indeed concern you. Why? Well, I can think of two reasons: one, you're deeply riddled with doubt and guilt over your tactics and feel compelled to appeal for approval from others or two, you feel threatened by Liberations. If it's the former, then my IC argument may carry more weight OOC than you would care to admit. If the latter, I am confidently reassured that despite your ilk's deflections and denials, we are in fact striking blows against irresponsible raiding by challenging it in that manner. And what is the basis for Liberation if not that the community- OOC or IC, however they play- believes that one group has less legitimacy to control a region than another? In that capacity at least, even if I'm wrong I'm still right.

[Delegate Vinage]

As someone who has previously been half involved in RORMS and watched over their development I'm not sure saying it was a large and active region is really the right call here. Also, looking over some of the history of the RMB it seems that there were a large number of puppets brought in to bulk up the regional population. So is there a significant native population? Mmm maybe. That all said are these actions undertaken by the raiders in good taste? Hmmm....

By anyway, Europeia will be having an internal vote on the matter and decide which way we will be voting.

[Mahaj]

As someone who has previously been half involved in RORMS and watched over their development I'm not sure saying it was a large and active region is really the right call here. Also, looking over some of the history of the RMB it seems that there were a large number of puppets brought in to bulk up the regional population. So is there a significant native population? Mmm maybe. That all said are these actions undertaken by the raiders in good taste? Hmmm....

By anyway, Europeia will be having an internal vote on the matter and decide which way we will be voting.

Oh i'm not claiming every single of the 90+ nations at the start wasn't a puppet.

But to claim the native population was minimal? Uh-uh.

(yeah you weren't saying that, but in case anybody else does... >___> )

[Dutch Jericho]

The IRA and Vietnam War being argued in support of a fictional liberation? Lol.

To the victors go the spoils.

[Skizzy Grey]

It's shameful that the UDL got an anti-Nazi resolution quashed, just to bump this bit of raider/defender tripe up in the queue.

[Crushing Our Enemies]

The striking thing is that so many raiders seem genuinely to care that others have a poor opinion of them when they engage in tactics the community decides it doesn't agree with. If they didn't, they wouldn't show up in these threads and argue with people like me that they were justified. In other words, from my perspective, the very fact that you (again) rise to meet my challenge indicates to me that what I and those like me think and feel about the actions of you and your associates does indeed concern you. Why? Well, I can think of two reasons: one, you're deeply riddled with doubt and guilt over your tactics and feel compelled to appeal for approval from others or two, you feel threatened by Liberations. If it's the former, then my IC argument may carry more weight OOC than you would care to admit.

Dr. Freud called. He wants his bullshit back.

EDIT: Also, I have no IC persona. All my posts are made as a player. Since the Security Council is by default an OOC forum, I'd appreciate it if you marked your posts accordingly. It'd save posters like me a bit of time and headache. /notamod.

[Opaloka]

It's shameful that the UDL got an anti-Nazi resolution quashed, just to bump this bit of raider/defender tripe up in the queue.

Hear hear! But the antics of the 'nazi defenders league' have long since ceased to amaze. AGAINST and I hope the raiders (by the way it appears to be a BR not TBH op) thrash the quisling crew either on this floor or in the field.

[Crushing Our Enemies]

It's shameful that the UDL got an anti-Nazi resolution quashed, just to bump this bit of raider/defender tripe up in the queue.

Maybe some non-defenders should become SC authors.

(No worries, Tim. I'm not talking about you )

[Cowardly Pacifists]

Full disclosure: I don't really understand the raiding/defending/liberating side of NS game play.

It seems to me that this is exactly the situation in which a liberation should be used. The region has been invaded and locked and the natives are looking to have it unlocked so they can at least try to return home.

I'll be voting FOR this proposal, unless someone can tell me why this instance of a raider group expelling natives and locking them out should be treated differently from any other (as I said, I'm a bit removed from the R/D/L community, so I honestly don't know if there's some relevant consideration I'm missing).

Best Regards.

[Cromarty]

Do these natives really deserve their region back?

Nope.

Against.

[Crushing Our Enemies]

Do these natives really deserve their region back?

Nope.

Against.

Wow, you really aren't a defender anymore, are you?

[Cromarty]

my aunt Stacie.

She hot?

Nope.

Against.

Wow, you really aren't a defender anymore, are you?

Eh, I have little interest in supporting a liberation of a region that would happily kill and oppress me and people like me.

[Cromarty]

But the antics of the 'nazi defenders league' have long since ceased to amaze.

You stay classy Opaloka!

[Crushing Our Enemies]

Wow, you really aren't a defender anymore, are you?

Eh, I have little interest in supporting a liberation of a region that would happily kill and oppress me and people like me.

Wow, you really aren't a defender anymore, are you?

[Mallorea and Riva]

Eh, I have little interest in supporting a liberation of a region that would happily kill and oppress me and people like me.

Wow, you really aren't a defender anymore, are you?

One of us... one of us... one of us...
Here's my questions: if this passes, what then? Eh?

[Crushing Our Enemies]

Wow, you really aren't a defender anymore, are you?

One of us... one of us... one of us...
Here's my questions: if this passes, what then? Eh?

Simple. Then TBR finishes locking down the region, and The United Kingdom of Britain falls too, because the SC wasted four days making an irrelevant move in a game they can't win.

INSTA-EDIT: I'm not a member of TBR, and I am not privy to their plans for RORMS.

[Mallorea and Riva]

One of us... one of us... one of us...
Here's my questions: if this passes, what then? Eh?

Simple. Then TBR finishes locking down the region, and The United Kingdom of Britain falls too, because the SC wasted four days making an irrelevant move in a game they can't win.

INSTA-EDIT: I'm not a member of TBR, and I am not privy to their plans for RORMS.

But as the officially-unofficial radiostation of the TBR I can predict that this liberation will do little to actually help the region. After all the defenders will most likely be unable to gather the forces necessary to liberate it, leaving behind a shattered region that even if the defenders liberate it, will be forever open to raids thanks to the resolution being in force.

[Mahaj]

Wow, you really aren't a defender anymore, are you?

Eh, I have little interest in supporting a liberation of a region that would happily kill and oppress me and people like me.

Oh really? They'd do that?

I hardly think so.

[Mahaj]

It's shameful that the UDL got an anti-Nazi resolution quashed, just to bump this bit of raider/defender tripe up in the queue.

Hear hear! But the antics of the 'nazi defenders league' have long since ceased to amaze. AGAINST and I hope the raiders (by the way it appears to be a BR not TBH op) thrash the quisling crew either on this floor or in the field.

Have you ever considered learning to understand what you see a group do and not act like a bumbling fool?

[Of the Free Socialist Territories]

AGAINST, because once again the defenders have got their priorities muddled.

Apparently, helping a generic region that's been invaded by generic raiders is less important than helping a generic region invaded by Nazis. Let me make this clear: TBR will move on from RORMS one day. The GGR will not move on. If action is not taken now, then that region is essentially lost to the Nazis until Antifa step in and liberate it.

Please, at least have the decency to stop appeasing the GGR at least once in a while.

[Mahaj]

AGAINST, because once again the defenders have got their priorities muddled.

Apparently, helping a generic region that's been invaded by generic raiders is less important than helping a generic region invaded by Nazis. Let me make this clear: TBR will move on from RORMS one day. .

TBR will move one once its destroyed and refounded, and while you might be okay with region destroying, I'm not, and I will do what it takes to solve it, including helping to write a liberation proposal.


GGR, on the other hand, is woefully incompetent. Furthermore, based on influence levels, GGR's destroying will take far longer than this one will.

Anybody with reasonable priorities would see that trying to fix RORMS first makes more sense.

[Delegate Vinage]

Wow, you really aren't a defender anymore, are you?

Eh, I have little interest in supporting a liberation of a region that would happily kill and oppress me and people like me.

Oh really? They'd do that?

I hardly think so.

Going through the RMB you'll find they've made some homophobic comments in the past - Notably this comment but you'll find other similar ones if you look around the 15 - 20 day mark.

[Of the Free Socialist Territories]

AGAINST, because once again the defenders have got their priorities muddled.

Apparently, helping a generic region that's been invaded by generic raiders is less important than helping a generic region invaded by Nazis. Let me make this clear: TBR will move on from RORMS one day. .

TBR will move one once its destroyed and refounded, and while you might be okay with region destroying, I'm not, and I will do what it takes to solve it, including helping to write a liberation proposal.


GGR, on the other hand, is woefully incompetent. Furthermore, based on influence levels, GGR's destroying will take far longer than this one will.

Anybody with reasonable priorities would see that trying to fix RORMS first makes more sense.

You're right, I love destroying Fascist regions. However, as far as I am aware, TBR rarely if ever refound - their original intention with RORMS was a tagging raid, as the RMB makes clear. It's only the defenders' complete lack of courage that's allowed them to get a password in place. The GGR, however, intend to refound TUKB. There is no argument for liberating RORMS first.

Also, some RORMS members support stoning gays based upon the Qu'ran. If you want to defend that, that's your choice, but really?