 |
|
Duck Hunter
|
|
Ft. Myers, Fl
Sep 1999
time: 05:12
|
|
The votes are in and posted regaurding the Norwich Conflict.
------------------------------------
www.home.earthlink.net/~edgar3/
Civ PBEM "play-by-play"
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Klair
|
|
Toulouse, France
Sep 1999
time: 05:12
|
|
Sophanthro, I didn't received turn 28. Could you send it again (klair@netcourrier.com)
Thanks in advance,
Klair
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Klair
|
|
Toulouse, France
Sep 1999
time: 05:12
|
|
Turn 28 sent to Ed
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Klair
|
|
Toulouse, France
Sep 1999
time: 05:12
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sophanthro on 01-09-2000 07:55 PM
Ed is the only leader who could impartially stand over INCs preceding, because at this time his country has no direct connection with any other. |
I think it's false. I think that now Germans have contact with Vikings. So I'm not sure Ed would be impartial. But I hope it will.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Duck Hunter
|
|
Ft. Myers, Fl
Sep 1999
time: 05:12
|
|
#1. I have not recieved the game from Klair yet.
#2. It is true that we have run into a Viking unit, but have had no contact with the Viking leadership yet.
Klair, please resend the game.
---------------------------------------
www.home.earthlink.net/~edgar3/
Civ PBEM "play-by-play"
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Klair
|
|
Toulouse, France
Sep 1999
time: 05:12
|
|
Turn 28 sent again
Klair
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Duck Hunter
|
|
Ft. Myers, Fl
Sep 1999
time: 05:12
|
|
okay. got it this time and passed it to Don.
---------------------------------
www.home.earthlink.net/~edgar3/
Civ PBEM "play-by-play"
|
|
| |
|
|
|
3rdTrial
|
|
Sorry Luk, I don't have time for this (or I would be playing....) You took my words out of context and made them seem what you want them to mean. You know very well that by that time the previous offer I am reffering to was your first offer and not the last one in which you limit the lands into Norwich. In your first offer your border was as England finnaly suggested with the exception of the river banks.
After we requested the river banks too, you came with this Norwich colony bullshit, this obscene proposal and a military threat. My reaction was to remove England from the talks, and if you haven't apologized right after I was ready to go into military readiness.
The British goverment has the file with your first proposal made by you to me. I'm sure they will be glad to share with the international community.
Your first offer plus the river banks is in fact what we request, no more. THIS IS NOT ONLY THE NORWICH AREA. I have all emails that we have exchange so don't make misquotes off me counting that I either don't have the material or the time to share them. Lord Sophanthro also has it.
Actually, leave out of it, because altough I would love to, I can't put time into it.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Jon
|
|
Official Statement of The Holy See
It is quite apparent that the original concerns expressed by the Irish government regarding the setting up the INC were fully justified. The SF clearly did not intend the INC to be a forum the peaceful settlement of international disputes but merely as an extension of SF, or SFU, foreign policy.
Germany is the only Nation that can genuinely claim to be independent in it's judgements upon disputes between the SF, or SFU, and England as it has no direct borders with either. Whilst we have established contact with Germany it will take another six years for us to be able to establish formal diplomatic relations due to the distances involved. Having exchanged cartographic information with Germany we know them to be ignorant of their eastern borders and therefore unable to have formed any negative view of the SF, SFU, position of the Norwich Peninsula Issue.
It is quite clear that despite the consistant claims of upholding 'honour' the SFU has little intent of honouring the territorial integrity of it's immediate neighbours. Canadian citizens must be feeling somewhat nervous as to the honour of their 'friends' at this time.
Ireland enjoys, and again committs itself to, a non-agression and mutual defence treaty with the SF but contrary to Mr Castle's viewpoint does not regard this as giving him the right to determine Irish foreign policy. If the SF, SFU, are set upon an aggressive and expansionist policy that threatens either our or our allies security we will act.
Ireland does honour it's Treaty obligations, whether they be formal or agreed through ICQ, and will stand by them. Let this matter be settled through the INC under the Chairmanship of, the only true neutral, Ed of the Germans and peace prevail.
Cardinal Nihalisticus
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Luk
|
|
Wroclaw, Lower Silesia, Poland
Mar 1999
time: 06:12
|
|
The Statement of SC
How can we disscus when the past leader of England Lord Trial is a lier. We looked one more time on our first border proposal and it is the same proposal as we have now. Norwich and the zone of Norwich is Engliash and English will not expand. If you say that it is not true you are the LIER.
To Jon the antipope of Ireland.
We want to have the territorial integrity not anyone. England tries to take the lands which is not their. It is all. We can't agree to the proposition which is the imperialist ambition of nationalistic King Sophantaro.
We back our decision of veto and agree to the proposition of Ed to be a General Secretary for 10 turns (as it is in Constitution), but we will strongly recomend to Ed to be neutral. In Dutchesse reporter we can see a lot of text which is subiective not obiective point and which definitly recomends the English position. If Ed will not change this position we will veto aftre 10 truns the proposition of reelection.
We will not agree to secret votnig because it could be manipulated. We cant belive GS that he tells true. Every country which has honour shouldnt be unhonourable and should announce the decision - this could eliminate the manipulations.
We want GS to be the mediator not the representant of english view.
Our civiliations grow in peacefull way and we do not want the war... We want to belive the Ireland Authorities that they will not attack us first. But I think England would never be the friend of our country. We are tolerant not nationalistic and integristic and imperialistic country. Our people love multicultural live - we are one community together with 10 nations and the Great French Nations which has the most talented scientists Ive ever heard.
Head of SC and co-head of SFU,
Luk
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Out of Character
Luk let us agree not to bring up the words of 3rd Trial any further, it clear that he does not have time to respond
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lord Sophanthro called an assembly today to discuss the situation concerning Norwich.
" Luk Castle continually calls us Nationalistic and Imperialistic. In what way have we shown ourselves to nationalistic, was it by submitted the dispute before INC, was it by trying to draw up an equitable border, which the nations of world have endorsed. In fact, the epitome of nationalism is Luk. He has rejected INC, alluding that General Secretary Ed has lied about the ballots. He calls for an open ballot, feeling that he can bully nations into voting for his Nationalistic proposals.
We desire to prove Luk wrong, and ask the Nations to state how they voted. We will take no offense if a nation has voted against the English proposal. We also will respect any nations right to remain silent.
We ask Luk Castle to do the same, and agree to hold no grudge against any nation, who doesn't agree with the SFU proposal.
Of course none of this would be necessary if Luk had any sense of dignity. The act, he accuses Ed of is so heinous, that we find it hard to believe any one could ever stoop to that level.
Every Day Luk proves himself more and more nationalistic, we want Luk to prove us wrong. We want him to prove that he is the equitable and fair ruler he pretends to be. Prove that Slavia is a nation which welcomes diversity, and not a nation where the phrase 'Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Fuhrer' is all to applicable"
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Klair
|
|
Toulouse, France
Sep 1999
time: 05:12
|
|
Hello from Paris
I had hard work with internal affairs, that's why Luk speak for us. But last message from Lord Sophrano is for me a sort of personal attack against Luk.
I want to say that Norwich's problems isn't in fact the city itself but that english want to make an other city on this continent. This is the problem. We had accepted Norwich but we couldn't accept new cities close to French or Slav one.
May be Luk is nationalistic, but english seems to be "expansionist" and I think it will be more dangereous to be expansionist that to be nationalistic. If english want to create new cities they could build it on others continents.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
DON
|
|
Will the SFU agree to the English Map proposal if the English agree to not build any more city's on the peninsula?
If this is not suitable than how about we create a zone about two tiles wide along the English/SFU border. We keep this zone occupied with INC peacekeeping troops from nations of the SFU choosing. The English get to approve/disapprove of the SFU choice's. The selected nations will then send a military unit(high defence,low offence)and a diplomat to the area.
These units will take up positions along the English/SFU border. This border is not very long so it should be fairly easy to monitor. If any aggression or trespassing is
detected by these units then the offending unit(s) will be confronted and destroyed. INC members will send a somewhat larger force of peacekeeping units to the area to support it's existing peacekeeping force if it is necessary.
The INC troops will not invade or occupy the offending nation(s)lands. But sanctions or other measures could be imposed against the offending nation(s) for a period of time. With this plan the SFU would agree to the English map proposal and the English get to do whatever they please within the boundries of their map proposal. As technology improves in the future the INC peackeeping units will be upgraded so they can perform their peacekeeping duties adequately.
The Canadian people want peace and hopes the World leaders can find a solution to this conflict.
[This message has been edited by DON (edited January 12, 2000).]
[This message has been edited by DON (edited January 12, 2000).]
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Luk
|
|
Wroclaw, Lower Silesia, Poland
Mar 1999
time: 06:12
|
|
We will never agree to the international forces at our territory. We agree on full indepedeince of Norwich but all the lands out of this city is Slav.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Turn 29 ==> Klair
Dear Klair, I hope you realize that the nations of the world are fully aware of the dispute, and have backed the English proposal thru a majority of votes.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Jon
|
|
The view of the Holy See remains that English territorial claims to both Norwich AND the peninsular are entirely valid.
The difference between the respective positions seems to be entirely one of a readiness to compromise. England, under different leadership, has always expressed a desire for a peaceful negotiated settlement whilst all SFU statements have been issued at the point of a gun.
We pray that peace should triumph in this matter.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Klair
|
|
Toulouse, France
Sep 1999
time: 05:12
|
|
Turn 29 sent to Ed
Dear Sophanthro, I'm not sure all the world:
English -> English
Irish -> English
Viking -> English
French -> SFU
Slav -> SFU
Slamp -> Neutral (neutral land and neutral zone)
Canadian -> Neutral (land for english but non-building area and neutral zone)
German -> Neutral ?
Correct me if I'm wrong.
Slamp could I send your proposal to Ed ?
Regards,
Klair co head of SFU
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Duck Hunter
|
|
Ft. Myers, Fl
Sep 1999
time: 05:12
|
|
Turn sent to Don.
******
I am trying to be neutral in this land crisis. On my site I try to present the issue from both sides. I do agree with a neutral border area of about two squares, but I do not agree with placing military units there. If anything like that is ever agreed to, it should be kept as a de-militarized zone. "dead" squares. The German people can not afford to keep a unit that far from home, especially when we have no interests there.
----------------------------------------
www.home.earthlink.net/~edgar3/
Civ PBEM "play-by-play"
*I'm going to try and get an update in this morning, no promises tho. work has been long and hard lately.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
DON
|
|
Well...
I'm neutral but I voted for the English proposal as I feel the city was put there by Becky, I know that city was there on turn 4. If that's the case then that city has every right to be there.
As far as claiming the land because it is on the same continent.......Well..Luk your on the same continent as me, I think you should abandon your cities and turn your land over to me...FAIR..I think not.
Security issues: I have the french and the mayans right beside me with cities very close to mine. You don't see me crying about their cities being too close. I realize that they could be a security threat and I adjust my strategy to compensate for the possible threat. Also you could wreak just as much havoc on the english (if not more)as they could to you, so it's a two way street.
Expansion: Every bloody country has a right to grow. I betcha every single nation right now is building a settler or has built a new city since the original 10. What's wrong with that. Why are the English the bad guys?
The area that you guys is arguing over is so tiny and it's all desert. sigh.....
I agree with the Irish when they say there needs to be a will to compromise, I don't see any attempt by the SFU to negotiate. And please negotiate on this messageboard so the world can see whats going on.
Turn to luk
[This message has been edited by DON (edited January 13, 2000).]
|
|
| |
|
|
|
DON
|
|
The Canadian people think the Mayan proposal is a very good one. We are wondering what the English think of this proposal?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Jon
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Klair on 01-10-2000 05:35 AM
I think it's false. I think that now Germans have contact with Vikings. So I'm not sure Ed would be impartial. But I hope it will.
|
As stated by ED of the Germans he has as yet had no formal links with any Nation and following his brave and lonely trek through the wilderness we are confident that it will be our Irish Ambassador who is the first to open an Embassy in Berlin.
If we, who set the standards that the rest of the World can only wonder at in terms of fairness, equity, justice, the rule of International Law and the avoidence of armed conflict, can trust the even-handedness of Ed then we would think that all others should be able to do likewise.
The Germans share a land border only with the Vikings and are far enough removed from the Norwich Peninsula to be able to make truly unbiased and objective judgement. The areas of expansion of both England and SFU have a direct impact upon all other nations. Lord Ed is not just the best choice, as both arbiter in the current dispute and as SG of the INC, but the only sensible choice.
Cardinal Apostatus
HIE Special Legate for the Norwich Crisis
|
|
| |
|
|
|
The English negotiators reviewed the maps submitted by the Mayans, and found them to be fair, and equitable. " We had hoped that such a proposal would have come out the SFU. " Stated John Whitman today during his visit to Norwich. He wnt on to state, " The English government had hoped for a little more, but sacrifices must be made in order to preserve peace."
When asked about Klair recent statement, he replied that we never said all of the nations supported us but a majority did. At least 5 of the nations, maybe one more, voted for our original proposal when it was before INC.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:12.
Apolyton Time is 00:12. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
10-01-2000 10:58
|