 |
Should we go to war with Morgan, or provoke him to declare on us?
This poll is closed. |
Yes! Let us kill the idiot and slaughter all his children  .... *cough* sorry  *cough* |
   |
3 |
18.75% |
| No! We are upstanding citizens who believe in peace and will not give in to unprovoked attacks upon our allies |
   |
13 |
81.25% |
Xenobanana. I'm an unpatriotic drone who doesn't care (thanks Lemmy  ) |
   |
0 |
0% |
| Total: |
16 voters |
100% |
|
| |
|
|
Voltaire
|
 |
Calgary, Alberta
Aug 2001
time: 22:24
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Drogue
We don't have a choice with Yang, we are already at war. That is why we prefer to attack him (as well as being diametrically opposed morally, which Morgan isn't) I think people are aware it isn't official, since it has 'unofficial' in the title, it is purely for testing the water. And it seems to suggest that people do not want to go to war without provocation or a very good reason. |
Fine, we’re at war with Yang, but that’s little more than just on paper. We haven’t had any confrontations as of recent with Yang, and it is highly unlikely that we will see a full invasion by Hiverian forces in the near of far future. So why then are some planning already for our invasion of the Hive? Opps, excuse me, I mean our liberation of the Hive.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Kirov
|
|
Warsaw, Poland
Sep 2002
time: 06:24
|
|
Voltaire, the pure fact that invasion on Hive is pointless doesn't make the invasion on Morgan reasonable...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Voltaire
|
|
Calgary, Alberta
Aug 2001
time: 22:24
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kirov
It seems like the faction I have joined on "Unity" and the faction I live in at the moment were two different ones... |
Last I recalled we also valued freedom of speech; and furthermore what kind of society would we have is everyone simply agreed on all issues? It’s bad enough as it is that we hardly have any opposition to the current government, and little choice in elections due to both voter apathy and lack of interests for the governmental positions. But what is disturbing is that we’ve been reduced to arguing about free market vs. planned/green; has our political system become so mundane that there are no other issues on which there is disagreement? Democracy, to have a true democracy, you need diversity of opinion; we are in desperate need of that.
The faction you joined on Unity is very much still here, but it has been reduced to an bureaucratic oligarchy which seems to be content in sitting on its ass debating issues of little relevance, while in reality they do nothing. Democracy is inefficient, there is little doubt about this, but what we have become is ridiculous. We, as a faction, are stagnating, and something needs to be done to change this.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Voltaire
|
|
Calgary, Alberta
Aug 2001
time: 22:24
|
|
One last thought for the time being.
It has been said that a state has no allies, rather only interest. This is the sort of foreign policy we should adopt. A policy of reakpolitik, where foreign policy is simply a means by which we better our situation at home and aboard. It is a romantic idealism to attempt to treat others as we would have them treat us. In reality, we need to be prepared for the worst, so that we are never caught of guard. And the reality comes down to this, do we value our citizens more that we value those of other factions? We are responsible to our people alone, and we must do their bidding the representative of the people. If the people desire war, fine; if the people desire peace, fine. We are simply to carry out their wishes, and not to impose upon the people some arbitrary decision, even if it is in for their own good. Power should not be exercised in such a way. But we must present these choices to the people, and also given them the proper information to make a decision, the debates we’ve been having thus far are certainly useful in presenting both sides of the issue, but the unofficial poll posted by one of the government officials is not the sort of tactics we should be resorting to. If we wish to get a point across, fine, but do it in a civilized manner using facts to defend a position, rather than rhetoric. Democracy is not about letting the citizens view propaganda form both sides of the issue, but about giving them the information to make an informed decision. Until we can do this, calling ourselves a democracy is a pretense.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Kirov
|
|
Warsaw, Poland
Sep 2002
time: 06:24
|
|
Why has this unofficial poll pissed you off so much? Drogue has the right to do this, and has the right to include his own comment. I know it is somewhat biased, but come on, I don't believe that anyone voted "No" because Drogue suggested that in his comments. After this discussion we can do the poll once again in order to see whether someone will have changed opinion. I bet that the outcome will be the same - so far 80 % of the voters are against the war!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GeneralTacticus
|
 |
of Melbourne, Australia
Dec 2001
time: 15:24
|
|
quote:
The faction you joined on Unity is very much still here, but it has been reduced to an bureaucratic oligarchy which seems to be content in sitting on its ass debating issues of little relevance, while in reality they do nothing. |
We do nothing because there's nothing to do; the game is moving so slowly atm that little changes, and thus little more needs to be discussed.
quote:
Democracy is inefficient, there is little doubt about this, but what we have become is ridiculous. We, as a faction, are stagnating, and something needs to be done to change this. |
And your solution is to go off and attack an ally because we want to take a few dry wastelands? If you have a solution that might actually work, do tell.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GeneralTacticus
|
|
of Melbourne, Australia
Dec 2001
time: 15:24
|
|
quote:
It has been said that a state has no allies, rather only interest. This is the sort of foreign policy we should adopt. A policy of reakpolitik, where foreign policy is simply a means by which we better our situation at home and aboard. |
I do hope you realize what the results of 'realpolitik' have been in the past; it was the force that drove European imperialism and Nazi aggression, providing license to every atrocity, every murder, in the name of the State. We're here to AVOID those mistakes, not repeat them.
quote:
It is a romantic idealism to attempt to treat others as we would have them treat us. |
This might be so if we were dealing with those who had a realistic chance of harming us. We aren't. We're dealing with those who we have little to fear from except disuprtion and the reduction of benefits we can derive from them. Under the circumstances, we can well afford to respect the rights we preach when dealing with others.
quote:
In reality, we need to be prepared for the worst, so that we are never caught of guard. |
Your idea of preparing for the worst is to do the worst to others first. This will bring about the harm you claim it will avoid, thus, for you, validating your original claim.
quote:
And the reality comes down to this, do we value our citizens more that we value those of other factions? |
No, the reality comes down to 'Do we value the lives of human beings AT ALL?' You want to attack Morgan, an operation which will cost tens of thousands of civilian lives, to say nothing of miltiary ones, because you think it will benefit us. Tell me, do you support the atrocities committed by the United States during the Cold War and after? They were very similar to what you are proposing.
quote:
We are responsible to our people alone, and we must do their bidding the representative of the people. If the people desire war, fine; if the people desire peace, fine. We are simply to carry out their wishes, and not to impose upon the people some arbitrary decision, even if it is in for their own good. |
I'm glad we agree there, but the reason for that is that we often DON'T know what is for the people's own good.
quote:
But we must present these choices to the people, and also given them the proper information to make a decision, the debates we’ve been having thus far are certainly useful in presenting both sides of the issue, but the unofficial poll posted by one of the government officials is not the sort of tactics we should be resorting to. |
And why not? Drogue posted this poll as a private citizen, for the purposes of information gathering. Most people will be intelligent enough to ignore the question and vote what they think, and so far, what they think is overwhelmingly opposed to you. 3 for you, 12 against you; 80% of the voters don't want a war.
quote:
If we wish to get a point across, fine, but do it in a civilized manner using facts to defend a position, rather than rhetoric. Democracy is not about letting the citizens view propaganda form both sides of the issue, but about giving them the information to make an informed decision. |
The rhetoric in the poll is only window dressing; it doesn't affect the results. And I have yet to see any rhetoric at all, from either side, in this debate.
quote:
Until we can do this, calling ourselves a democracy is a pretense |
Since we have done it, I guess this point is moot.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Drogue
|
 |
Omnipresent conscience
Oct 2002
time: 05:24
|
|
Voltaire: Unofficial polls, as suggested by our Constitution, are useful for information gathering. We are presenting both sides, you and DBTS yours, it just happens more people wish to argue against the war. I wanted to see if people were open to the idea of a war, and I also thought, being unofficial, to make it a little fun. I'm sorry if it offended you so much.
No one is taking away your free speech, you are entitled to say what you want, as are we. I agree with the need for diversity, but quite simply, most people do not agree with the war. We just happen to disagree, and will voice as much. We present one side of the argument, you present another. This poll is not a 'tactic', it is a means of gathering information, and is slightly tongue in cheek. Is anyone really going to be swayed by obvious joke comments? I think not. The fact most voters have not just voted, but activly voiced their opinion against war shows it is their real feelings on the issue.
You say the outcry surprised you. I have to say it didn't me, because he is an ally, and he is friendly with us. If you walked out into the street and punched your friend, there would probably be an outcry, among other friends, and the unprovoked and surprising attack. If however, you were to punch someone whom it was well knowed you did not like, and whom had started the fued, it would be much more understandable. Morgan is a friend, Yang is an enemy, there is no hypocrasy, as we are not removing people who disagree with us (I say let them be) but Yang has brought this on himself, Morgan has done nothing.
As for the war with the Hive, we are not saying that we can impose ourselves on the Hive but not on Morgan. Yang has declared war. If someone declares war on us, then we need to defend ourselves, even by means of assult. We need to stop him from harming us. Morgan is a friend, and has proved as much with trading. Why build up such a rapport and reputation to see it trashed later? IMHO, we should set an example of peace and tolerance, but show that if someone declares war on us, we will defend ourselves.
Last edited by Drogue on 18-12-2002 at 14:15
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:24.
Apolyton Time is 00:24. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
18-12-2002 03:57
)
|