IOT Clash of Ideologies

Jehoshua said:

Correct, and also a historical reference. The part about the melting down of the chain is a roundabout way of explaining the +1 IP Austria got for nation of the year. Oh and Ailedhoo, you didn't get the general til this turn, so I'm going to keep what I said. If you disagree than just consider it as propaganda.

Click to expand...

I got the general recruited for the... Germany operation.

Outside the 'temple burning' thing (also debatable if there was a golden chain) I was willing to set to a wait and see policy. I am still willing to evoke this; my decision waste set to your RP true but keep in mind that such stuff is most unlikely to give good results, especially as conduct reports are likely to not please the Norse Union.

Due to revelations made known to me by the French, the peace treaty that was on the table has been discarded.

In return, we'll let the Byzantines know just how willing the Austrians were ready to throw them under the bus.

...the Norse ask "can the Austrians be trusted?" To trust Austria is to expect Loki to not have a trick up his sleeve.

OOC: Loki's tricks didn't fare so well against the hulk....sorry that just made me think of the end of the Avengers . Ill try and dig the youtube video up later.

-redacted-

Thought it was a good analogy for the events happening in the game, sorry if it bothered anyone.

I likewise don't see why it was reported, as it was actually quite accurate.

Orders Lock: 5PM EST Tuesday Evening

1/18 Orders In.

-L

Go me!

We note to Carthage that we are at war, it is thus hardly a surprise that in the absence of a peace, which we were discussing but which had not been made manifest, Austria was doing everything possible to help itself in the war, including appealing to the French.

We also note that we said

"If France does this (presuming peace does not break out)..."

Click to expand...

We clearly indicated to the French that if peace did occur between Carthage and Austria, that we would no longer be inclined for them to take such action at our request, that our request for assistance would be forfeit, since Carthage would have shown itself to not be interested in untrammelled hegemony, and inclined towards pacific relations with its neighbours. Carthage's dinsingenuous attempt to portray us as "betraying its trust", when we were simply engaging in normative wartime behaviour, which is imperative upon us every second that Carthage persists in its war of aggression against us (we are at war, and must act as if we are at such until the day peace is signed), shows that it is unlikely that Carthage ever had a mind for any peace, whatsoever, although Austria still maintains the offer of peace it sent Carthage as a token of its goodwill in the matter.

We would also note for Byzantium's reference, that we have no power whatever to assist it so long as Carthage is at war with us. Thus terms for non-aggression with regards to peace with it would change nothing of the situation. Reality is as it is, and nothing else.

The Norse will declare it is discussing talks of a White Peace with Austria, that will see a return of core lands and a regret of war with the repairs the Norse will have to conduct repairs in Norway, Sweden and Finland.

The prime focus of the Norse is now a White Peace.

Ailedhoo said:

The Norse will declare it is discussing talks of a White Peace with Austria, that will see a return of core lands and a regret of war with the repairs the Norse will have to conduct repairs in Norway, Sweden and Finland.

The prime focus of the Norse is now a White Peace.

Click to expand...

As we've discussed with the Ausrians prior, we will follow peace along these lines

Austria, France, the Norse, and Carthage sign non-aggression pacts (which would by extension include Austrian neutrality vis a vis Byzantium)

Austria apologises for setting the French on you

Austria financially renumerates Carthage with regards to the above

Austria repatriates the French to their homeland

I apologize for the lack of orders. I will do so tonight. RL has kept me rather busy.

After due consideration and reflection, we have concluded that although we are willing to agree to peace on Carthage's terms and are amenable to peace with the Norse, that the Norse demands for the repatriation of their homeland without them providing any satisfaction to Austria for their original offences whatsoever (noting in particular that they initiated the war of aggression) is egregious, and offensive to the people of Austria and cannot in any way be countenanced by us. Likewise the French have nowhere whatever provided terms for peace to Austria, or in any way whatever indicated a desire for peace. It would thus be egregious to unilaterally proclaim non-aggression with them in the absence of reciprocity.

Thus, since we cannot accept Norse terms for peace, that renders Carthages demand for non-aggression with the Norse, which was not part of the original discussions between us we add, impossible. In addition to the problematic nature of the French aspect of the peace proposed in the absence of French acquiescence to the same, this means that we cannot in good conscience sign peace on the terms proposed by Carthage. The war as such continues.

The Norse regards Austria's feeling of 'non-aggression pact as impossible' as not a policy of pragmatic wisdom but rather of questionable passive aggressive rhetoric that was a continuation of the same rhetoric that justified the invasion of France and would have justified a attack on the Rhineland, if it did not fall. The entire point of the peace set was a White Peace was a notion of satisfaction, especially regarding rumours of the Austrian vandal in the Norse lands. It appears hence Austria wants war not because they distrust the Norse and French but because they want Norse and French lands.

As such we would like Austria to prove us wrong and accept the peace. Denying it, when we have agreed to the principles Carthage laid down, is not going to aid Austria in the long term. Remember that the Norse's assault came after Austria's aggression against France, as well as noting rhetoric against nations that do not share Austria's ideology that was prone to aggression, especially regarding the plot Austria had against Carthage.

The Norse has also faced enough damage to be stratified from a non-aggression pact and our terms of a White Peace would also regard Austria's strike against the Norse, which would be simply regarded as pre-emptive against a aggression if not for the reports of oppressive policies by the Austrians' own news agencies, which well could be regarded as propaganda does seem strange to be carried out in regards to the set table.

Returning to France, the plot against Carthage and the willingness to sacrifice Byzantine we should suggest that Austria adopts a humble taking and heed not the path to a continued war which would promote a joint response that would in the end see Austria not benefiting from continued war.

The Norse can regard our statements however they want, however the fact remains that Austria cannot in good conscience sign a peace with Carthage where the terms regarding France have not been reciprocated by the French (indeed to sign a treaty of non-aggression involving them, with them not reciprocating would be a non-sequiter and quite absurd) and when the terms of non-aggression with the Norse are utterly dependant on signing a separate peace treaty with the same that is problematic at best.

If these problems were to be resolved than peace would be entirely possible, considering the acceptability of the remaining terms.

Jehoshua said:

The Norse can regard our statements however they want, however the fact remains that Austria cannot in good conscience sign a peace with Carthage where the terms regarding France have not been reciprocated by the French (indeed to sign a treaty of non-aggression involving them, with them not reciprocating would be a non-sequiter and quite absurd) and when the terms of non-aggression with the Norse are utterly dependant on signing a separate peace treaty with the same that is problematic at best.

If these problems were to be resolved than peace would be entirely possible, considering the acceptability of the remaining terms.

Click to expand...

The non aggression pact applies to all parties involved (Norse, France, Carthage, Austria.)

Which changes not one jot or tittle the truth we have stated. Carthage still has no authority to act on behalf of the French, who have not made recourse to peace with Austria, or affirmed non-aggression with us in accord with the proposed arrangement, and has no power to change the reality that peace (with the norse) is necessary for a non-aggression arrangement applying to them to take affect. (which is problematic as we have noted, since no satisfaction is provided for their original act of aggression, nor is there any renunciation of their egregious claims to land in the Rhineland or elsewhere)

The Norse has noted a White Peace; a peace Carthage has ratified along with its own peace accord.

Mosher said:

As we've discussed with the Ausrians prior, we will follow peace along these lines

Austria, France, the Norse, and Carthage sign non-aggression pacts (which would by extension include Austrian neutrality vis a vis Byzantium)

Austria apologises for setting the French on you

Austria financially renumerates Carthage with regards to the above

Austria repatriates the French to their homeland

Click to expand...

The Norse lost resources and its fleets, as well as the humility of the occupation of Sweden, Norway and Finland. As such a peace deal has to account this and Carthage has put this in consideration.

You claim peace with the Norse is necessary... so accept the peace offer! We will be able to sign the non-aggression act as soon as you sign the peace agreement.

Finally it would be hence considerable that the agreement should also be set in nature of the Norse desire to enshrine their defence pact with Carthage in case of a return of a decline of relations.