NationStates Jolt Archive

This is the thread for the Unum Veritas review in which we will discuss what action should be taken after Unum Veritas supported Dark Terror who is known for his slavery and executions (the gulach as he called them). He will either be reinstated or removed depending on other members feeling towards the issue.

Please feel free to argue your case however you feel is appropriate, however flaming is not permitted. You may bring non-NAIA members into this but they should be invited into the thread, not just posting as they see fit (with exceptions of tags). Should you wish to be able to post in this thread or otherwise wish to join the NAIA then please contact me via telegram.


My personal view of the situation, NAIA President hat removed:

Personally this was only drawn to my attention in the first place by an ally of mine who was looking into the NAIA as a possible threat because of Unum Veritas's support of his ally, Dark Terror. I personnally make a point of IC ignoring him on many grounds however I cannot and will not allow this to cloud my opinion of Unum Veritas who has proven to be an reasonably active member of this alliance.

Each and every member of the NAIA is still an individual nation and as such each nation has it's own form of government, from Dictatorships to Democracies as well as it's own alliances and trade agreements. The issue here is that Unum Vertitas supported his ally, which he is free to do... however in doing so he made a borderline break on two of the three basic rules of the alliance:

Do not support slavery.

Do not support genocide.

However, I accept he may not have understood that this was a problem and as such I am willing to hear him out on the issue... if this is just a misunderstanding that can be solved with a couple of words, I will be happier then loosing a active member of this alliance, which I am hoping to get moving again.


Meanwhile in other news, I will be making a new thread for hot new situations that may or may not need our assistance as we are going to have to become more active if we are going to gain the recognition we seek.

You all have basically already heard my "side" of the story. I saw a thread where an official ally of my nation was being attacked on his homeground by a much older nation, so I offered my ally help. My forces were there merely to keep the aggressing nation (Fluffywuffy) from invading and taking over my ally. They had no plans of a counterattack or any other aggressive act. I then found myself attacked on my own homeland by Fluffy's supporters. Before I knew it, countless other nations had jumped in on the "Annex UV" (my own title for it) campaign. Now, most of these new attacking nations jumped in just to support their ally who had initiated hostilities with me (Phyrric). Now, does that not mean that they did the exact same thing I did? They attacked me because Phyrric had attacked me and Phyrric was their ally. The only difference I can see is that I jumped in to defend an ally, while these others jumped in to attack someone their ally was.

Never once did I state my support nor my approval/apathy of genocide/slavery. In fact, my nation is "seen to favor Catholics". Now please tell me why I would be supporting their mass slaughter if my government "favored" them. Now, I was one of the first members of this alliance and have been waiting on it to become more active (in fact I've tried to get it involved in a few different conflicts) and frankly I think this should weigh into the matter. Had my government been slaughtering catholics, etc then their might be an arguement here, but "guilt by association" is hardly a fair or reasonable cause for expulsion or suspension.

I would also just like to point out that after Phyrric withdrew from the conflict, I could have very easily cut off reinforcements to the other enemy vessels in Veritasean, sovereign waters and then destroyed them, but instead I allowed them all to pull out. I had large amounts of ships massing and coming around to form a hammer to my other ships' anvil (not to mention my allies' forces) and it would have been easy to sink all of the other vessels after all of Phyrric's were gone, however I knew they were just doing what I'd done by helping out an ally and I wasn't going to hold it against them, so please don't anyone forget that little part either.

http://www.angelfire.com/music5/drunk_man/banners/banner_Veritas.gif
"I see in your eyes the same fear that would take
the heart of me. There may come a day when
the courage of men fails; when we forsake our
friends and break all bonds of fellowship, but it is
not this day. This day, we fight!”
-the Lord Aragorn, before the final battle for
Veritasean independence

You all have basically already heard my "side" of the story. I saw a thread where an official ally of my nation was being attacked on his homeground by a much older nation, so I offered my ally help. My forces were there merely to keep the aggressing nation (Fluffywuffy) from invading and taking over my ally. They had no plans of a counterattack or any other aggressive act. I then found myself attacked on my own homeland by Fluffy's supporters. Before I knew it, countless other nations had jumped in on the "Annex UV" (my own title for it) campaign. Now, most of these new attacking nations jumped in just to support their ally who had initiated hostilities with me (Phyrric). Now, does that not mean that they did the exact same thing I did? They attacked me because Phyrric had attacked me and Phyrric was their ally. The only difference I can see is that I jumped in to defend an ally, while these others jumped in to attack someone their ally was.

Never once did I state my support nor my approval/apathy of genocide/slavery. In fact, my nation is "seen to favor Catholics". Now please tell me why I would be supporting their mass slaughter if my government "favored" them. Now, I was one of the first members of this alliance and have been waiting on it to become more active (in fact I've tried to get it involved in a few different conflicts) and frankly I think this should weigh into the matter. Had my government been slaughtering catholics, etc then their might be an arguement here, but "guilt by association" is hardly a fair or reasonable cause for expulsion or suspension.

http://www.angelfire.com/music5/drunk_man/banners/banner_Veritas.gif
"I see in your eyes the same fear that would take
the heart of me. There may come a day when
the courage of men fails; when we forsake our
friends and break all bonds of fellowship, but it is
not this day. This day, we fight!”
-the Lord Aragorn, before the final battle for
Veritasean independence

I can fully understand your situation and to be honest, this this review is looking in your favour, but I have to how this sits with the rest of our allies and how it looks for our alliance as a whole...

I think it would be favourable if we could settle on some middle ground. By this I am thinking that you could use your influence with DT to veer him away from actions which are against your own morals...

However... I guess techniqually your coming to aid could be viewed as a pro-NAIA action against unprovoked aggression.


Eitherway, I wish to allow others to post before closing this issue... I'l give it until the end of the week then I'll either go to a vote or make a choice.

Yes, I too can understand UV's position, and respect the fact that they went to help an ally. The only thing I can question, or rather, have trouble fathoming is why he was allied with DT to begin with, however let us save that for another discussion, shall we?

Now shall begin my interpretation, opinion, and judgment on the curious case of Unum Veritas' status in the NAIA:

The facts are there for all to see, however they are not always clearly presented, and most remain very hazy, especially in this case.

Unum Veritas went to the aid of an ally. In my opinion when you go to the aid of an ally you are not only supporting their nation itself, but the policies of that nation, by in fact, defending it with military means. There was a rather large debate where DT was condemned, threatened and also politely asked (by myself and others in fact) to stop what he was doing, which was the imprisonment and eventual murder of many peoples, including Catholics, but not exclusively.

This genocide is a crime worthy of great punishment, and if this were RL I would imagine his leader going before the Hague, but back to my point.

DT had the chance to end the genocide, prevent the lose of life, and perhaps gain respect for his willingness and compassion regarding the matter. However he chose against it, very unwisely in my opinion.

Since he was given sufficient warning, and refused to heed it, one can only come to the conclusion that he was merely instigating a war. Knowing this, that this genocide was nothing more than Bait, I have come to the conclusion that UV is not at fault for helping his ally, however he is at fault for not completely understanding the situation, taking the necessary steps to peace, and/or realizing the faults of his ally before blindly sending in troops to help back up his tyranny.

Now is this an infraction worthy of expulsion from this organization, the NAIA? That I do not know the answer to, however I must let it be known, that UV did have the willingness for peace, and the compassion that his ally, DT, lacked. He was the first to make peace, and even to condemn his ally, albeit very late.


For Reference:

Here (http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=90646&start=0) is the Thread announcing the opening of his gulags

Here (http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=91021&start=0) is the opening of the War on DT

Here (http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=93580&start=0) is the attack against UV

There seems to be some glaring issues at hand that your alliance is refusing to address, but Agrigento did target that question:

1. Why is UV allied with DT, a known warmonger in NS community?

And the second point at hand is this question that NAIA has missed. Fluffywuffy announced his reasons and intentions for attacking DT in his opening paragraph of his thread, the reason was genocide and slavery. This being a fact:

2. Why did UV come running to DT aid after the reasons for the attack was made known? Ignorance of the law is not a reason to break the law.

The war with UV ended because it was unanimous by myself and my allies through TG that he is a waste of our time because:

A. he is totally ignorant by not reading the threads and
B. that he is a complete utter whimp (being polite here).

The fleets did survive his "wrath", not because he was showing generousity as he so claims, the reason was that we left for those two reason above. Notice none of my allies posted after I IGNORED him. We grew extremely tired of his (for lack of better word) crap. If he was better at paying attention, he would have been utterly destroyed and anyone with common sense reading the threads would have realized this, a key reason he became beligerent towards myself and my allies: He was trapped between a rock and hardplace and knew it. He was incapable of defeating Nations totaling population over 10 billion and only sending less than 25% of their combined forces.

Ever see what happens to the blacksmith weilding the hammer when there is sulfer on the anvil and all around him?

The Sambizie have had "little" to "no" contact, to the nations in question. Yes, in the begining we have had contact with DT, but this was by him trying to threaten us. Thankfully, at that time, I was a member of fairly strong region. In the end, he is "IGNORED" by the Sambizie. In any case, we would like to remain neutral but some interesting questions do arise.

TO:UV

1. Even through the 1st month of Sambizies existance, DT had proved and thusly reconized as an international "bully", "warmonger", and "slave driver". How is it, do you explain your "alligence" to DT?

For now, as I stated, The official position of the Sambizie is: "NEUTRAL". We do not vote for, or against UV's membership in the NAIA.

Respectfully,
Emperor Mwto'ar Uganda
CEO/Aero-Tech:IVA Industries

-APTO-
-NATO-
-NAIA-
-UTP-
-TFW-
-LFW-

Dont boot UV. Just make him pay some money to the alliance or punish him somehow (slap on the wrists) and then we'll consider it all good...And if he renounces DT, then fine. Keep him on.

I must say that I am against his rejection from the NAIA. I do not believe his actions warrant it.

I must say that I am against his rejection from the NAIA. I do not believe his actions warrant it.

I agree, at the time I think I was a little angery with Regional issues as our delegate booted out a loved ally of mine for a minor issue... eitherway I think it is safe to say that kicking him out would be a terrible idea... meanwhile we still need to look into whether he has done anything punishable.

I think one thing has been made clear in this though... alot of people don't like DT.

Phyrric, I have already addressed several of these issues of yours and I will do so briefly here once more, however you are not a member of this alliance so please keep your biased comments (not to mention flaming) out. In the DT thread you said your fleets were mobilizing, that's it. The next day I get on and all of your ships are suddenly in my waters launching air assaults against land targets, apparently without any resistance because you decided I had no forces in the area. For that reason alone I should have ignored you from the outset, but I was willing to give it a chance. Unfortunately, as I stated repeatedly in the thread, I am very busy OOCly and do not have time to read nearly 4 pages of attacks on my forces. I even posted losses and asked if they were reasonable or not and offered to alter them if they were not. But, if you ignored me, then doesn't that mean I don't exist, so how can you be posting about me in a review thread all about me?

Now, as stated, I did desire for peace, however from the outset this proved to be difficult:
"It is our policy to declare war while talks are going on to say we will be commited to the effort"
President Arthas

I have stated my desire to have better RP relations with all of the nations involved (including those of my former "enemies"), and I stand by that.

Now, as to my reasons for being allied with DT in the first place. Unfortunately I must admit some fault here. I played this game for several months, but my only real activity on the forums was a few war games and my storefront. Finally this began to bore me so I sought out ways to increase my RPing. I wandered into a thread involving some fool n00b (not quite sure what the thread was about anymore) and DT was in it also, both of us on the same side. I was unaware of his reputation so I decided to ally myself with him. I asked about his rep in my regional board, but no one really answered so I went ahead. Now, after we allied I ran into him in a few other slavery threads, always on opposing sides (I was trying to intimidate other nations to back away from the slave trade), but we never really mentioned it. Then I got the link to this thread (through TG's, I believe), but it was the link to page 2. The link was accompanied by a brief description saying he'd been attacked and would like some help, so I immediately replied and went to his aid. Now, after I learned the nature of the conflict I was uncomfortable because it is my nation's policy to detest slavery etc, yet we do not go back on our word either. We were committed to this action and so we would continue. I'd planned on helping him through this conflict and then distancing myself from him.

It would be a waste of time trying to deter DT from his actions. I believe he does so for the shock factor and for the fun of fighting wars constantly. My nation is a pacifistic one and the leaders who got involved in this war have already lost reelection. Now frankly I don't see why this can't all be put behind us seeing as how mostly it ended on a good note (with the exception of Phyrric's invading me[prolly cause he didn't like what I had to say OOC] then ignoring me). However if you all think it would be better for one of the first and more active members to step aside then Unum Veritas shall do so.

***TRIPLE POST DELETED***

***TRIPLE POST DELETED***

Could you edit each them to say "Triple Post deleted" or something, so that they don't take too much space... I know the boards are a bitch and I have to fight them to when I post at night... but I guess thats life.


Meanwhile I did allow Phyrric a say on this before he posted, he's allied to me in another alliance and he is involved with this in some respect.

However, from what you've said I am willing to leave it at that... you've shown yourself not to be another one those tag along allies that DT has* and you are a active member of this alliance who has shown alot of willing to help in its organisation. Your sorry for supporting DT (though it was a obligation, I know about those I assure you) and I'm sorry for bringing old arguements back up...

I will allow others to make comment, just so we can settle any greivences, but I will not support any action beyond a warning...


* you know, the big nations who don't have any idea about RP, not all of his allies, just enough for me to notice.

Iuthia, I thank you for your vote of confidence and I am sorry the NAIA became involved in this, it was never my goal to tarnish its reputation in any way (one reason I didn't bring it up in any of the conflict).

Iuthia, I thank you for your vote of confidence and I am sorry the NAIA became involved in this, it was never my goal to tarnish its reputation in any way (one reason I didn't bring it up in any of the conflict).

That, I think, would of done it... but I would of mentioned it then if you had because I really don't want something done in the name of the NAIA unless you are completely sure that NAIA supports your actions, because I do not want NAIA's name to be along side that of nations like Dark Terror.

Fair enough 8)

Hm... the question now is what are we going to do with you... I take it you still support DT and that is a problem for me, I can only judge you for the time being on the posts that I've seen, which aren't too bad, but you know I will be looking into some of this to "reassure myself" that I've not made a mistake...

Eitherway I would just like to know what your current position is with DT, he's not going to change, we all know that so what are you going to do about it and what options are we left with if you don't.


I know this sounds like another hurdle to the whole mess, but it's one I'm going to have to ask you to jump... DT is to bigger issue for us to have a member technically support, I'm sure everyone will agree on that much here.

I don't care what I may find out about you after the above decision, that is the past and I'm going to assume that you are willing to think about what this support will mean for this alliance... it's got to the point where half our members don't acknowledge that he exists and the rest generally don't like him, me included.

So I guess this is something that we will have to hear about...

is DT a "he?"

I have had no real contacts with DT since the end of the conflict. I am not ignoring him or officially terminating any alliance with him, however I am backing away to reassess the situation. I would prefer for him to become more moderate and for everyone to reach some middle ground, however that doesn't seem likely. I joined the NAIA, before becoming allied to DT, so I suppose my primary allegiance is to this organization. I shall not turn my back completely on any of the nations who came to my aid (including DT), however I will think twice before committing any more of my forces to armed combat.

is DT a "he?"

I don't know, maybe I'm making too many presumption, but it wouldn't be the first time.

Meanwhile... I am again some what, lost as to what to think, I will take time to reassess the situation but I'm getting alot of heat over this because I'm caught in the middle of too much crap.

So everyone will have to just keep giving me their opinion, if they have any they feel must be heard and in the mean time I will just bang my head against some walls for a week or two...

I know that an obligation is a obligation so I am willing to accept why you can't turn your back on him... however I think this is going to need some serious thinking, now you are aware of his history you should really think about avoiding something like this again...

Also, if I find anything that would suggest you don't beleive in the basic rules of the alliance (this applies to everyone really) then you may not get a second chance... ignorance is something which can only be claimed once and next time DT is under attack you should look into:


Why he is under attack. This is important because if its due to his terrible morality then I would keep out of it.

Whether he needs more allies, afterall, he has boasted around 200 of them before.


Perhaps if we have to defend against him you can refuse to help, thats as much as I'll except from now on, going out and defending him while he is still commiting crimes against humanity will not be tollerated...


Yeah I know, this is a big change in voice from "This is all over" but it's something I have to say... I've got alot of confidence that you will not disapoint me, but I've got alot riding on this two... I'm losing respect by ignoring my allies calls for a booting and I'm sticking by my guns possibly loosing my membership in another alliance I really like.

So I'm sorry if this seems to be two faced, but I've got pressure and I need to know I'm not going to regret it.

OOC-Just out of curiousity I'd like to know who wants me to be booted, why they aren't posting here where I can defend myself, and why you'd be facing consequences in an entirely different alliance. Frankly this war was not all that big of a deal and most of the nations here weren't even involved, and as I've already stated numerous times, I learned my lesson and all the nations that are still dwelling on the past should rethink that position as I've been forced to rethink my own stances.

As I already stated, I've been putting distance between myself and DT since the end of this conflict. I do not plan on rushing to his aid again without being very sure as to what is going on. The other nations in that RP on my side were all extremely good allies and I will not abandon any of them, however DT should not rely on any aid from me in the any future wars that he basically asked for. If he is attacked for no reason whatsoever then I might consider helping him some, but other than that I shall not (I evidently did not make this clear enough in my last post).

Look, I'll keep it simple... an ally of mine, pointed it out and I reacted to it, I wasn't threatened to resign... on the contary, I feel I've messed up I fealt like I should resign, I won't say who because I don't want them to be harassed and if the others want, I am happy to give someone else the leadership of the alliance... seriously I feel I've been to hasty on a number of things and if others feel i'm not up to it, like I already feel myself then please say.


Meanwhile, I would say you have defended yourself, otherwise you would be out, I feel we all get a second chance and this is how I'm going to leave it, your in and thats ok.

However the DT issue will never go away becuase I even recall two NAIA allies being in that war against you. We can't have that and they are not under review because that war was about this issue and in responce to this issus... even if it did go to crap at the end.

It's simple, you don't have any obligations to the NAIA so if you want you can leave and stay in full support of DT. Or you can stay if you want but you will have to understand that we can't have nations supporting DT while he still commits crimes of slavery and genocide. I would also like to add that the FW vs DT war was done because of these crimes and not without reason...

I don't know if helping DT in a war against him with no grounds is reason enough to kick you next time, because I may well not be leader anymore... but personally if people from our alliance are prepared to go to war with you over it then there is a big issue to resolve.




Meanwhile, for everyone else, please judge me on this affair as well as my recent events like getting this alliance started again, if you feel you could do better then feel free to say so and let the others decide... I feel I've made some mistakes and I want a democratic idea of what overs think of it.

Stay, both of you. Our quarrel is with DT, not UV or Iuthia, and should we lose you two, we may not be as strong agst his godmodding ass as we want to be.

Well I'm going to reaffirm that my allegiance is to this alliance and that my naval forces (the brunt of my military) remain at the alliance's disposal. Iuthia, I have seen no mistakes you have made that would give another nation the right to criticize you and as far as I am concerned you should remain in charge.