The French leader must have misinterpreted our message. No doubt, his galloping spy paranoia makes him see agents everywhere and obscures his judgement about the surrounding world.
The Norse people did not decry violence as a mean to enforce our interests, to help our allies, or as appropriate response to a military threat. The crux, however, lies in the word appropriate. We find the discussion about espionage point allocation petty, and consider declaring wars, overthrowing governments and hijacking labour forces over it inadequate. These points are given by the gods and can not be stopped, only redirected. We ask, who does the French leader think he is, that he refuses to accept his fair share of them? Is he somewhat better than every other leader?
The French have proven to be aggressive and have repeatedly ambushed their neighbours. This is no badmouthing, such are the facts on the table. So it is in everyone's best interest to carefully monitor their military strength. Allocating espionage points to such a neighbour is not only not an affront, but as it stands it's an absolute necessity.
The Norse people did not decry violence as a mean to enforce our interests, to help our allies, or as appropriate response to a military threat. The crux, however, lies in the word appropriate. We find the discussion about espionage point allocation petty, and consider declaring wars, overthrowing governments and hijacking labour forces over it inadequate. These points are given by the gods and can not be stopped, only redirected. We ask, who does the French leader think he is, that he refuses to accept his fair share of them? Is he somewhat better than every other leader?
The French have proven to be aggressive and have repeatedly ambushed their neighbours. This is no badmouthing, such are the facts on the table. So it is in everyone's best interest to carefully monitor their military strength. Allocating espionage points to such a neighbour is not only not an affront, but as it stands it's an absolute necessity.
Comment