I really think Bel hit the nail on the head. If, we've determined Funk and the ruling party of Laz to be illegitimate — and not the same party that signed our treaty — we need to stand with the resistance movement and not be seen as a fair weather friend.

Making us "take flack" for it is a way to isolate the resistance. Other regions have taken a more neutral stance on the issue, but I don't believe those nations were allies of the form government. In fact, I think we could even make the argument that making personal attacks against Glen and Roavin for their "defenderdom" is the sign that defenses of Funk and the new government are pretty illegitimate.

I'm coming to agree with what you and Bel are saying - there really isn't any feasible way to backdown right now while maintaining any of our treaty obligations and credibility. Nevertheless, I'm not totally convinced that we've been going about this entirely the right way. When important members of our region directly contradict the statements of members of the resistance, does that really help them? It almost casts us into the light of using the whole situation to take potshots at the longlasting "Rahlliance" that some of our members have always cried wolf about.

Whether the Resistance succeeds or not, Funk is not a legitimate governor of Lazarus. Wolf is a long-time antagonist. And I don't care if Gameplayers think we're paranoid, Rahl involvement is plain to see. 

We lose nothing never having relations with Lazarus while that regime is there. Having alliances with GCRs isn't a necessity, and TSP shouldn't enable the Rahl sprawl by allying with regions under their influence, or sit there and be complicit in active neutrality.

Here's that continual claim of Glen's - sudden change of government, Rahl coup. Conspiracy between Osiris and The West Pacific, Rahls sprawling across GCRs. Yet this is something that the Lazarene Resistance denounces as lacking in evidence - as it is. Shouting Rahl whenever something happens isn't helpful in anyway. Instead, it exposes us to ridicule and give's credence to the claims of people like Cormac. 

Having alliances with GCRs isn't a necessity

Please tell me that was a joke.

Marius Rahl

Fortitudine Vincimus!

Reply

What you say we "cry wolf" about is the official position of the CRS and the Cabinet, based on a wealth of intel and historical documentation. Not just some minor conspiracy theory being pushed by one person.

And no, it's not a joke. If a GCR alliance doesn't fit with our interests, the fact that it's a GCR doesn't change the calculus that our alliances should always operate to the benefit of our interests. We don't have treaties with Osiris, Balder, and TWP, because each of those regions acts in ways either purposefully contrary to our interests, or has an ideology that makes an alliance irrelevant in terms of what we want our treaties to do. Lazarus under Funk is contrary to our diplomatic and military interests-- we don't ally with despots, and LWU has been a foe more than a partner. The lack of any other regime to point to, if the resistance fails, doesn't mean we have to recognize Funk's regime. We did that with Osiris and saw that it bought us nothing.

So no, it's not a necessity of foreign affairs to ally with a GCR just for the sake of it. Why would that be a joke?

There was once a time where pan-GCR security was feasible. That ended when this era of leaders stopped believing in GCR sovereignty.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(This post was last modified: 08-15-2017, 04:18 PM by sandaoguo.)

Reply

What you say we "cry wolf" about is the official position of the CRS and the Cabinet, based on a wealth of intel and historical documentation. Not just some minor conspiracy theory being pushed by one person.

I've yet to see any convincing evidence to that point. A collection of uncertain and lackluster intel and a couple of shared names between Empire and Rahl are perfectly suited evidence to a minor conspiracy theory, rather than a damning truth. 

And no, it's not a joke. If a GCR alliance doesn't fit with our interests, the fact that it's a GCR doesn't change the calculus that our alliances should always operate to the benefit of our interests. We don't have treaties with Osiris, Balder, and TWP, because each of those regions acts in ways either purposefully contrary to our interests, or has an ideology that makes an alliance irrelevant in terms of what we want our treaties to do. Lazarus under Funk is contrary to our diplomatic and military interests-- we don't ally with despots, and LWU has been a foe more than a partner. The lack of any other regime to point to, if the resistance fails, doesn't mean we have to recognize Funk's regime. We did that with Osiris and saw that it bought us nothing.

So no, it's not a necessity of foreign affairs to ally with a GCR just for the sake of it. Why would that be a joke?

Certainly. It's worth noting that our allies among GCRs have been on the decline recently though. We've now lost our relations with the in-game region of Lazarus (at least at present), and lost any chance of an improvement of relations with TWP over the Lazarus affair and the constant claims of a Rahlspiracy. Of the GCRs we have strong relations with but two - TNP and TRR. Not a highly encouraging scene there...

Marius Rahl

Fortitudine Vincimus!

Reply

You haven't seen the intel because you're neither in the CRS, the Cabinet, nor an intelligence officer with access to it. You're a TWP immigrant whose only involvement with TSP thus far is criticizing its response to everything. Thankfully, you're not the one with the responsibility to protect TSP.

6 CRS members and 2 Cabinets have come to conclusion that Rahl leadership is a continuation of Empire, with all the ambitions that come with them, based on intel, evidence, and common sense. Your response is simply "No they aren't." We can weigh that pretty easily.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Reply

You haven't seen the intel because you're neither in the CRS, the Cabinet, nor an intelligence officer with access to it.

Ah. So I'm supposed to simply believe what you say because of some intel which I have no knowledge of or access to, rather than draw conclusions from what I do know and can see. Forgive me if that sounds more than a little ridiculous. 

You're a TWP immigrant whose only involvement with TSP thus far is criticizing its response to everything. Thankfully, you're not the one with the responsibility to protect TSP.

I haven't been here anywhere near as long as you, so of course I can't expect my contributions to equal your own, or those of others who've poured their time into the region for years. I would like to note that during my time here, I've been an highly active member of the gameside community and worked with my fellow Local Councillors to promote activity there. While my views on many matters may have differed from the status quo, I am well within my rights to express them. I'd further argue that the expression and consideration of views and beliefs that are in opposition to the mainstream is a good thing - without it, one runs the risk of stagnation.

6 CRS members and 2 Cabinets have come to conclusion that Rahl leadership is a continuation of Empire, with all the ambitions that come with them, based on intel, evidence, and common sense. Your response is simply "No they aren't." We can weigh that pretty easily.

I suppose I'll have to wait 8 months to really be able to respond to this, since I won't have access to any of that evidence or intel till then...assuming the public ever sees any of it at all. That leaves your "common sense", which I find to be lacking in any sense whatsoever. So yeah, I can weigh that pretty easily as being very easily dismissible.

Marius Rahl

Fortitudine Vincimus!

Reply

While I certainly don't agree with Drall's political opinion here, I don't think it's fair to minimalise his contribution since he arrived. If nothing else he's been an excellent LC and RMB welcomer and moderator.

Whatever his political intentions, he is doing a good job and that deserves recognition.

Also, let's not make this debate another filled with ad hominem attacks. Stick to the topic.

Sent from my imagination.

Founder of the Church of the South Pacific [Forum Thread] [Discord], a safe place to discuss spirituality for people of all faiths and none (currently looking for those interested in prayer and/or "home" groups);
And The Silicon Pens [Discord], a writer's group for the South Pacific and beyond!

Yahweo usenneo ir varleo, ihraneo jurlaweo hraseu seu, ir jiweveo arladi.

Salma 145:8

translate

The LORD is gracious and compassionate, slow to anger and rich in love.
Psalm 145: 8

(This post was last modified: 08-16-2017, 12:23 PM by Seraph.)

Reply

You can certainly hold that opinion. I'm fully cognizant, however, that not every player is as innocent and conflict-free as we like to pretend they are.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Reply

I didn't say he was innocent and conflict free. I'm not saying anything at all about his motivations one way or another at this point, since that's not the purpose of the thread, just acknowledging something he has contributed well, regardless of intent. By ignoring that and using the language of the Daily Mail (or whatever the US equivalent might be... Trump, I guess), you don't actually help your argument.

But, regardless, this isn't about Drall and neither is it about accusing others of conspiracy theories. Does anyone have anything else to add to the topic in the title of the thread?

Sent from my imagination.

Founder of the Church of the South Pacific [Forum Thread] [Discord], a safe place to discuss spirituality for people of all faiths and none (currently looking for those interested in prayer and/or "home" groups);
And The Silicon Pens [Discord], a writer's group for the South Pacific and beyond!

Yahweo usenneo ir varleo, ihraneo jurlaweo hraseu seu, ir jiweveo arladi.

Salma 145:8

translate

The LORD is gracious and compassionate, slow to anger and rich in love.
Psalm 145: 8

(This post was last modified: 08-16-2017, 06:14 PM by Seraph.)

Reply

The current stance wasn't reached based on "well Funk doesn't want fendas and the resistance does", as some claim. First, that's silly because I don't think it's a R/D dichotomy guiding this conflict, even if the sides ostensibly have more representation from opposing members of that spectrum (and it gets mentioned in the propaganda, which is in some instances unfortunate).

We kept ourselves well covered and neutral during the pre-coup conflict. We issued a statement that I believe to be neutral, offered mediation, and despite Omega badgering me about it in PM, didn't do anything to condemn Funk or close embassies or propose ending the treaty or anything of that sort. I was also invited to the Resistance chat, which I categorically refused to take part in.

When the coup broke out, Resentine gained access to the resistance server, and independently confirmed that the accusations made against the resistance by Killer Kitty/Evil Wolf on the GP forum were untrue and that the screenshots were taken out of context and didn't imply any of what was accused. After briefly debating the issue, referencing Lazarene law and our treaty with Lazarus, we came to the unanimous conclusion that this was, in fact, a coup d'etat by any sensible definition.

Our treaty with Lazarus states:

Section 3. Both parties agree to assist each other in responding to an internal coup d'etat, unless relieved of duty by mutual agreement.

From this, the way forward was clear - as a good ally, we would be supporting the resistance.

Now, going forward - yes, the resistance isn't as perfect as it should. Yes, things were said that shouldn't have been said. Yes, some people took the opportunity to take potshots at our region. But on the other hand, if we take that as a pretext to stop our involvement now, what does that say about us? If we did that, any outside observer would rightly say that we don't follow through on our commitments. The going was tough, so TSP just went home. That's not what a good ally does.

Even if the resistance ends up failing, it's our duty to support it while it stands so that any other region we are allied with can clearly see - yes, indeed, TSP takes their commitment seriously, and that if, say, TNP got couped today, we would fight just as hard there, just like they would fight for us (and indeed, TNP has fought for us). It's what a good ally does.

We tried hard to mediate at least one week before Funkadelia couped and therefore violated the terms of our treatied agreement as allies.  Then, I talked to Wolf for a while (who has previous history in TSP) and got nowhere with him either because he took over for Funk but reiterated more of the same.  The question of "If TSP were in this situation, what would we want our allies to do?" still seems relevant. If we only did things because we were sure to easily win, we would always be following other agendas.

I always like to remember that of the hundred or so active players in the game, only a handful are active on NSGP. The majority of TSPers, for example don't even go there or if we send a TG to them linking to the embassy thread are like "Why is this important?" Then there are the RMBers or TGers who are like "that place just seems really toxic."  Finally, I mean most of NSGP seems like a place for people to take pot shots at each other.  

Some of the people I respect most in this game and from TSP have not even posted there. I'd probably recommend taking NSGP with a grain of salt and instead talking concretely about things like what is beneficial to TSP and our regional security and our image as being faithful to our word.

Escade

~ Positions Held in TSP ~
Delegate | Vice Delegate 
Minister of Regional Affairs, | Minister of Foreign Affairs | Minister of Military Affairs
~ The Sparkly One ~

My Pinterest

 

Reply

This disgusts me. Funk shall fall!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Signed,

Positions:
Legislator of The South Pacific
King of Machina, Defence Realm of Illuminati Alliance
Citizen of The East Pacific

Former Positions:

Overlord of Masterz
Seargant of HYDRA
Talon of Firehehlm
Munifiex of The Roman Empire

Reply