ChristosIOT I

[Mat93]

The Dominion declares Egypt a ally and declare that we fear not the danger in America.

We inform the USA that we might be intrested in removing the threat in the north. If they deny us there then they allow a figure to lay there in dark plot. We hence declare that we wish to fight the evil one in the north. If the RSA agrees with us then the US should consider.

We has the resources to nuke the USA out of existence. I would recommend you do not encourage us to do so by threatening London.

We will invade Alaska. The nuke option was set as a sign of how determined we are to remove the threat ourselfs. The USA will not stop us. If they nuke for sending in conventional troops to Alaska then they aid the droids by injuring a threat to the drones and have broken the sign pact detailing we would not use nuclear weopon on fellow human figures. Attack us conventionally in Alaska and we can have a test to see who is worthy enough to face the traitor. Invade London and you will find we will forget about our "not use nuclear weopons on other people" pact. We are not invading the USA but Alaska, whic his its own power at the moment. We will hand Alaska to the USA after we removed the threat: our armies are to be set. We would suggest you do not get in our way.

I like how you change from 'if the RSA agrees USA should consider allowing us to' to 'We will despite both disagreeing'

And from what I can tell, and have read, all I have seen are 2 nations agreeing not to nuke other humans, and you are already admitting to being ready to ignore that if you want to. Nice to see you keep to your agreements.

More specifically...'Invade London and you will find we will forget about our "not use nuclear weopons on other people" pact.' None of that is dependant on any other nation using nukes...if everyone else keeps to the deal, you would break it just because you were in danger of losing a war.

But sure...lets have a battle conventionally to determine who fights the droids...and when you lose, maybe you will make an agreement you will stick to for once, or am I being unrealistic here?

OOC: You can't win them all, so stop trying.




To USA

Nukes are not the answer to the dispute. Rather obviously we support your cause...and will support with all weaponry except nuclear ones. We advise against nuking anyone...even the droids except their 'super empire'.

 

[Ailedhoo]

I like how you change from 'if the RSA agrees USA should consider allowing us to' to 'We will despite both disagreeing'

And from what I can tell, and have read, all I have seen are 2 nations agreeing not to nuke other humans, and you are already admitting to being ready to ignore that if you want to. Nice to see you keep to your agreements.

We issued on Aleska we nuke it to remove the traitor. The traitor has sided with the drones: there is no protection for tratiors!

As for the USA: they threatened to nuke London...

More specifically...'Invade London and you will find we will forget about our "not use nuclear weopons on other people" pact.' None of that is dependant on any other nation using nukes...if everyone else keeps to the deal, you would break it just because you were in danger of losing a war.

It is called final security. We will not invade the USA itself (Alaska is not in US control), they will not nuke us. If they invade Britain, we have permission to nuke them. Security.

Anyway: this is in presumption you could face match to match against the Dominion's armies.

But sure...lets have a battle conventionally to determine who fights the droids...and when you lose, maybe you will make an agreement you will stick to for once, or am I being unrealistic here?

A battle of determination would set out lost of human life, yes? As such we would suggest the USA do not invade Alaska if they value the life of their troops: we have means of winning well, especilly as the defeat of Dominion troops would be a act of war, no?

OOC: You can't win them all, so stop trying.

OOC: I am determined. I will not back down.

To USA

Nukes are not the answer to the dispute. Rather obviously we support your cause...and will support with all weaponry except nuclear ones. We advise against nuking anyone...even the droids except their 'super empire'.

We are thankful to the RSA for this statement on reguards to nuclear warfare. We also note that the RSA should consider that one force is needed to face the traitor and the Dominion is to commit itself. We can call our many allies if need be and that the USA would be wasting its resources to attack a province that the Dominion will attack and even give to the USA as a sign of trust. We are here to remove the traitor. We do not need the world in Alaska. We of the Dominion will claim our prize of reward and then go against the drones. Simple. Keep in mind we have the resoureces to set our ships in great number. We advice you do not set about to interupt our operations against the traitor. Our operation is in stone. You could instead build up and attack the drones. We ensure you that we can handle the matter: we are first to declare and first to strike: that is the law of the Dominion on the matter.

 

[christos200]

From USA
To Dominion:

No. It is either you leave the Americas or start a global war. Choose one of the two options. There is no option C. Only option A (leave) or Option B (Start WWIV).

From Jedi
To Anyone interested:

Here is our proposal: The Dominion takes over Alaska without using nukes, gets the Jedi Monk and the reward, but it gives Alaska to the USA the same turn it takes it over. What do you say?

 

[Ailedhoo]

We accept, oh Order.

The USA should accept this. We are not seeking war but we are to enter Alaska. Hence Option D is our option: take care of the traitor and hand Alaska to you.

 

[christos200]

From USA
To Dominion:

If RSA agrees, we shall agree with this. We hope that the RSA will agree.

 

[Mat93]

To Jedi

Our issue is 3-fold, 1) them sending troops to America, and 2) them claiming the rewards for something that doesn't concern them (due to its location), and 3) their choice of diplomatic methods.

That solution does not solve any of them. So alas, we cannot agree to it. They already suggested it, and we made our opposition to it clear then as well.

To the Dominion

Into you get a more competent diplomatic leader, we will not waste any more time on you.


OOC: Nothing personal, just tired of your statements that change to suit what you want at that time while ignoring your previous actions, and that if it was IRL, I would of stopped all diplomatic contact a few messages ago.

 

[Ailedhoo]

The Dominion will remove the traitor. We suggest America heeds logic instead of being a slave to the RSA.

We backed off Cuba; it is your turn to back off.

OOC: we will leave the personal out of this...

 

[Mat93]

We backed off Cuba; it is your turn to back off.

OOC: we will leave the personal out of this...

We backed off Australia, and Egypt.

You only backed off because you knew it would mean war you couldn't win. We backed off out of respect and cooperation...

 

[Ailedhoo]

We backed off Australia, and Egypt.

You only backed off because you knew it would mean war you couldn't win. We backed off out of respect and cooperation...

But we did not threaten nukes over Australia and Egypt was a case that we declared intererst and you said "no problem."

We can win. We did not want to wash resources than could be used against the drones.

In the end we ask the USA of how much they value their loyalty to the RSA...

 

[Mat93]

But we did not threaten nukes over Australia and Egypt was a case that we declared intererst and you said "no problem."

We can win. We did not want to wash resources than could be used against the drones.

In the end we ask the USA of how much they value their loyalty to the RSA...

Exactly. Threats with nukes doesn't get you anywhere. And there are areas we are willing to compromise on...and areas we are not willing.

And your claim of being able to win is far from backed up from your actions (OOC and IC), it certainly looked like you were attempted to either improve your situation or avoid war at all costs...not what I would call being confident.

 

[christos200]

from NATO (Spain, USA, Peru)
To RSA and Dominion:

The NATO alliance shall stay loyal to RSA. We will aslo try to expand the alliance in Europe.

 

[Mat93]

To NATO

We thank you for your continued support, and the continuing cooperation we share between us.

 

[Ailedhoo]

Exactly. Threats with nukes doesn't get you anywhere. And there are areas we are willing to compromise on...and areas we are not willing.

And your claim of being able to win is far from backed up from your actions (OOC and IC), it certainly looked like you were attempted to either improve your situation or avoid war at all costs...not what I would call being confident.

OCC: Do not bring OOC into diplomacy! It is rude and rather ungood! And Christos: RSA is the player yes? He does the allainces. Plus Spain is controlled by a player so it is ungood to speak for them Christos.

IC: The Dominion offers a grander allaince than NATO, one based on defeating the drones over threatening nations with nukes as the USA had done.

I am observent of costs and the RSA clearly does not know the meaning of messuring cost to messure if they reguard violence as a good way to stop a nation from using violence correctly against a traitor. We are following the Order's suggestion.

 

[christos200]

OOC: Spain has been NPC'ed since I have not got orders again.

 

[Mat93]

OCC: Do not bring OOC into diplomacy! It is rude and rather ungood! And Christos: RSA is the player yes? He does the allainces. Plus Spain is controlled by a player so it is ungood to speak for them Christos.

IC: The Dominion offers a grander allaince than NATO, one based on defeating the drones over threatening nations with nukes as the USA had done.

I am observent of costs and the RSA clearly does not know the meaning of messuring cost to messure if they reguard violence as a good way to stop a nation from using violence correctly against a traitor. We are following the Order's suggestion.

OOC: It was OOC into a debatably partially both IC and OOC post. And yes I am the player, but to say I am the one who does the alliances suggests I am the 'head' of NATO, which is rather rude towards the other nations.

IC: I'm sure you have seen our continued actions and diplomatic communications against nuke usage, so to say that this alliance is based on that is entirely untrue.

You are completely missing the point of why I am interfering...not to protect the traitor, but to protect the interests of every nation inside NATO, both long term and short. That includes RSA.

 

[Ailedhoo]

OOC: you NPCed him without permission?! Christos: players have to control their nations! Plus he was acting neutral to the Dominion as a player...

IC: Kazakhstan might wish to respond to this matter, either by condemming the RSA's arrogance or by just taking Alaska and keeping it for themselves. The Dominion woudl give Alaska to the Americans once the tratior is down. Kazakhstan can afford to war against NATO and win... alone.

OOC: It was OOC into a debatably partially both IC and OOC post. And yes I am the player, but to say I am the one who does the alliances suggests I am the 'head' of NATO, which is rather rude towards the other nations.

IC: I'm sure you have seen our continued actions and diplomatic communications against nuke usage, so to say that this alliance is based on that is entirely untrue.

You are completely missing the point of why I am interfering...not to protect the traitor, but to protect the interests of every nation inside NATO, both long term and short. That includes RSA.

OCC: considering the NPCs are yes men then you should have voice. Also diplomacy is by IC, not OCC.

IC: Your long term interest is to not threaten the Dominion in its mission. We are committed and we offered to return Aleska to the USA afterwards. By your logic yoru should not have entered the Mediterian. We allow you in Europe: hence we can allow ourselfs in America just to remove a traitor. That is all we are intrested in.

 

[Mat93]

OOC: you NPCed him without permission?! Christos: players have to control their nations! Plus he was acting neutral to the Dominion as a player...

IC: Kazakhstan might wish to respond to this matter, either by condemming the RSA's arrogance or by just taking Alaska and keeping it for themselves. The Dominion woudl give Alaska to the Americans once the tratior is down. Kazakhstan can afford to war against NATO and win... alone.

OOC: He was given fair warning. Do you want to play a game where most the nations do nothing through activity?

IC: The RSA's arrogance?

 

[Ailedhoo]

OOC: He was given fair warning. Do you want to play a game where most the nations do nothing through activity?

IC: The RSA's arrogance?

OOC: He was asking what to do and how much he had. Chris could have given him some help instead of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

 

[Mat93]

OCC: considering the NPCs are yes men then you should have voice. Also diplomacy is by IC, not OCC.

IC: Your long term interest is to not threaten the Dominion in its mission. We are committed and we offered to return Aleska to the USA afterwards. By your logic yoru should not have entered the Mediterian. We allow you in Europe: hence we can allow ourselfs in America just to remove a traitor. That is all we are intrested in.

OOC: The diplomacy was by IC. But there is no way for a human to allow all OOC comments to not have some kind of impact on their IC dealings.

IC: I think we know our long term interests better than anyone else. Just like you know yours better than us.

By your logic any deal can be broken the moment there is a chance of us losing. Do you want us out of the Mediterranean? Did you ever ask in advance for us not to send troops? Did you ever state your intention to deal with that situation?

You cannot compare apples to oranges.

 

[Mat93]

OOC: He was asking what to do and how much he had. Chris could have given him some help instead of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

OOC: He could of been given more help...he was given some help, I know that for a fact. Was it harsh? Maybe. Was it acceptable? Yes.