OK, if we are talking OOC, you reffered to "We agreed that the war can continue" Who are "We"?
We = Israel and me
Israel is a nation of many people and so is the Sanhedrin. So I try to avoid saying "I" as in "Amram Goan" all the time, since he's just the face.
That has sneaked into my ooc babling
What I want to say is: "I'm not calling measured war vote nor am I running out of this game. I'm fine with continueing"
If this is some independent court and they say what happens to you is because Russia and Turkey are acting unreasonable, I will of course obey the judgment. But if they judge it is you who are acting unreasonable, then what?
There's no need for a judge b/c nobody wants to revert things.
We can ask "The Priest" and "mzprox" who were involved in writing these definitions but aren't involved in this game (Anymore). We can then just setup an anonimized version of the story that both of us agree on and then ask their input.
And if there is no such special diplo-game court of justice, but instead those are we - all the players in DoE who must put the high standards of the diplo-gaming, I can hardly see anyone except your ally France who is supporting your position vocally.
Neither is any civ supporting you, outside your own alliance.
I can't blame other civs that they don't want to get involved.
What is happening to Israel is happening for a reason and was so easily to be avoided by you.
again an IC argument.
IC Israel plays a role, that's the beauty of diplogaming.
You can't say that b/c of that role it should be annihilated or cripled.
Comment