Field Marshall Dunning calls for talks on future relations.

[Drogue]

Oh sorry, my bad. I thought Archaic was makign the opposite point, that he said he was never a member but he was. My bad. If he was never a member, then he was never a member, and is not now. He did not withdraw, but the fact that he is not a member stands, and so it is legal for him to sell nukes. What's the problem?

[GeneralTacticus]

He did not withdraw, but the fact that he is not a member stands, and so it is legal for him to sell nukes. What's the problem?

The problem is that, by selling nukes on the open market, he is creating an enormous destabilising influence - which you, he who is fixated on "the stability of the region" (whatever the hell that means) are completely ignoring. If a Sheepstan nuke wound up in the hans of the Eletharian apartheid forces, or another terrorist group in the region, and was detonated within a major city and caused millions of deaths - hardly a far-fetched scenario, given who he's been selling to, and the lack of any possibility of monitoring what they do with them - then would you admit you had been in error by not preventing him from doing so?

[Drogue]

I am not fixated on stability at all. I am fixated on respecting sovereignty, on nations imposing on others, and on legality. There are many nations that have not signed the non-proliferation treaty, and they are not bound by the limits imposed by that treaty. Why single out Sheepsta? If he wants to trade, that is his business. Should we stop people trading other things such as medicines because there is a possibility they could be used against another nation? I would be saddened by such a disaster, but the end does not justify the means, we cannot do an illegal act simply because it may prevent a disaster. It is not our place to say whether or not Sheepsta should be allowed to trade, it is up to Sheepsta and the nation involved only. If they choose to use it, then that nation will pay, and if the nuke is launched by an ICBM, it will be intercepted.

[Archaic]

Originally posted by Drogue
Expected? Under Alecrastian morals maybe. Is it no consession of yours to sign a non first strike treaty? That should be expected of every nation. As should respecting sovereignty. The Junta is not illegal. Just like the revolution in Akiria was not illegal. It is only illegal if it is illegal under their domestic law, since it is a domestic issue.

Kindly explain to me how many nations IRL would tollerate a nuclear power not being signatory to such treaties? It is not a matter of morals, it is a matter of the responsibilities and expectations of a nation on the world stage.

Actually, the revolution in Akiria *was* illegal. Explain to me how overthrowing the established government by force (In your case, mind controlling all the citizens through an as yet still unspecified means, and don't try and deny it again like you did in the regional board before, because it's all in the threads) is *not* illegal. We tollerate it in your case because you're not warlike nor opressing your populace. In the case of Sheepsta, it is a clear case of the military overthrowing the established regime.

As for the bull**** about "It is only illegal if it is illegal under their domestic law, since it is a domestic issue.", I hope you realise that an illegal government retroactivly declaring its actions legal is illegal.

Originally posted by Drogue
It is not legal. It is not legal for one nation to impose its will on another, that is violating sovereignty. If you wish to remove trade between your nation and Sheepsta, that is fine, but other nations wish to trade with Sheepsta, and that is not yours to stop.

There is currently no soverign nation of Sheepsta to violate the sovereignty of. There is only an illegal military junta. The blockade will continue.

Originally posted by Drogue
Nice to see you have the regions best interests at heart.

Strawman. If it's a choice between short term stability (Appeasing Sheepsta, not cracking down, letting it grow into a power, and getting into a bigger war later) and long term stability (Removing the Sheepstan Military Junta, restoring a democratically elected government to the nation [Something it hasn't really had since the protectorates], preventing a bigger war in the long run), I choose the second option.

Originally posted by Drogue
That would involved Sheepsta being a power that wishes to take other nations, which I have seen no such intent of. It would also involved Sheepsta being one of the most powerful military nations in the world, when hald of the Akirian army, posted in Zetaris, is far more powerful than it's is. Sheepsta is no threat.

Your failure to read all the threads is not my problem Drogue. Sheep is only starting to back down here because he's realising that he's totally overmatched.

As for Sheepsta being "one of the most powerful military nations in the world", it's irrelevant if he is or not, because simply by the virtue that he is a nuclear power which has used nukes in the region on other nations in the past, and which is currently selling nuclear weapons to terrorists and countries not signatory to the nuclear treaties, he presents a clear and present threat to regional stability.

And how and why exactly did half the Akirian Army get there BTW? Seems rather overkill to have that massive a force on an island that could easily muster its own SDF.

Originally posted by Drogue
That is wrong. Stability is best served without pre emptive strikes, and with only interfering when they start other things. (OOC: This was proven by an Oxford Game Theoriest looking at "*** for tat" simulations, which create the most stability, even though they allow peaceful but illegal systems to remain in place. /OOC) Illegal blockades will not be tolerated. They can threaten nuclear war all they want. They will not use them. Akirias CMD systems will remove the threat of nukes, as it has done for many years. Stability is best served by the absense of wars. I do not promote appeasement, simply inaction, until we have a reason to act. We should have stopped hitler as soon as he marched into Austria, when he first acted outside his nation.

Short term stability =/= Long term stability

We are not advocating a pre-emptive strike, if you haven't bothered to check. We have established this blockade, which is not illegal, to put pressure on the regime to hand over power to a democratically elected government. They cannot afford this sort of blockade for long, simply because they could not possibily support their nuclear stockpile.

And BTW, with how you've described them, I consider your CMD systems ubertech, and thus even if it would be to my disadvantage, I will ignore cannon them until you restore them to a reasonable level. Besides, the Alecrast/Centralis ABM shield will be more than sufficient. There is no need for you to get involved in an issue which doesn't concern you.

Inaction in this case is appeasement. You have a reason to act. An illegal military Junta, which broke international treaties, is selling Nuclear Weapons to terrorists and nations not a signatory to the treaties.

And you should've stopped Hitler when he started violating the treaty Germany was forced to sign at the end of the first world war, which he did before he even invaded Poland.

Originally posted by Drogue
Akiria will defend any nation that is attacked, as we have promised to do. That blockade is illegal, and must be removed. The legitmacy of the Sheepsta ruler is not your concern, only their foreign actions. When they have actually attacked someone, then it will be legal. At the moment, there is no basis for it, expect that you do not like the ruler of Sheep. You don't get to approve the ruler of every nation. If necessary, Akiria is willing to use force to enforce the law of national sovereignty. Something which this illegal blockade is violating.

We repeat. There is no legitimate nation to violate the sovereignty of. The blockade will remain. Threats of force against Alecrast, Centralis, Noosland, and everyone else (Far too many nations to name) only serve to reflect badly on yourself.
Furthermore, what law, and how the hell would it apply to Sheepsta, which isn't a member of the regional court anyway? Who died and made you regional policeman? By your own arguements here, you have no authority to intervene in an issue which doesn't concern you. You aren't the nation with a corrupt military junta right on your border.
In fact, I'll repeat that point, since you so casually said "The legitmacy of the Sheepsta ruler is not your concern, only their foreign actions." They haven't attacked someone, but they have broken treaties and are selling nukes to terrorists and other nations who aren't signatory to the treaties.

Originally posted by Drogue
Sheepsta is very near to Zetaris, Akiria's colony, which is protected by the Akirian army. It is in our backyard. And we will deal with any problem legally. However at the moment, the only problem is that actions of those countries in this blockade.

A colony which didn't toe the line of its mother country and condemned the Sheepstan junta. As for the rest, our actions are perfectly legal.

Originally posted by Drogue
Oh sorry, my bad. I thought Archaic was makign the opposite point, that he said he was never a member but he was.

No, that was actually what I was saying. Sheep said elsewhere in the thread (Honestly Drogue, do you ever read all these things? You constantly ask for "proof" of various things that you'd see if you only bothered to read the recent threads about the issue, which you should be doing anyway) that the Unified Republics of Sheepsta, which took charge after the Protectorates, weren't ever a part of the treaties, and thus that he wasn't breaking any treaties. Now, he never actually explicitly stated that he was a part of those treaties, however every former Sheepstan government, including the Protectorates, was, and thus we all assumed that the Unified Republics were. If they weren't going to follow in the footsteps of their predecessors, he should've said so then.

Declaring it now just when it's convenient makes no sense in RP. If it had been the case then there would've been a massive diplomatic incident over the issue. That obviously didn't happen.

[Whaleboy]

We do not recognise the term "illegal government", as the people in charge of a given nation are by definition its government. Whether we like the manner in which it came to power is entirely irrelevant to its position, like I said, if we want to deal with Sheepsta, we deal with Dunning.

Any Sheepstan missile, rocket or nuclear-missile carrying aircraft launched will be destroyed by our anti-missile capability on ships, subs, air and space-craft. If not by us, then like Drogue said, someone else will do it!

It is not the business of the international community to dictate what is right, what is wrong, and what manner of government a nation should have. Certainly apply that to your own nation, and perhaps use diplomacy (carefully), but you cannot force your own subjective choice onto another.

Only if treaties are broken or nations are attacked, is there any possible justification for imposing oneself onto another (the definition of a war).

[Archaic]

Originally posted by elijah
We do not recognise the term "illegal government", as the people in charge of a given nation are by definition its government. Whether we like the manner in which it came to power is entirely irrelevant to its position, like I said, if we want to deal with Sheepsta, we deal with Dunning.

We recognise this. It's just to show Akira that, where he said...

"As should respecting sovereignty. The Junta is not illegal...It is only illegal if it is illegal under their domestic law, since it is a domestic issue."

...that he was incorrect, because it clearly was illegal under the domestic law.

[Sheep]

Field Marshall again reiterates that as the Sheepstan Constituion had been suspended after the parliamentry bombings, rule of election had ceased in Sheepsta. When President Ginakis was deposed by military revolt, it was indeed withing the bounds of Sheepstan law.

As testimony to the legitamacy of the Sheepstan regime, Field Marshall Dunning has ratified the nuclear non-proliferation treaty ending the warhead export program.

While we have made it Sheepstan law not to pre-emptive strike using nuclear weapons, we still reserve the right to use these if attacked through conventional means.

We accept with great respect the recent actions of the Akirian government and give them our deepest gratitude. If they or anyone else who still has no problem with the government of Sheepsta would like to enter into a defensive alliance, we would be most willing.

[GeneralTacticus]

Why single out Sheepsta? If he wants to trade, that is his business. Should we stop people trading other things such as medicines because there is a possibility they could be used against another nation?

One again, we see your amazing powers of logic-bending demonstrated. Medicines are non-military in nature; nukes, quite transparently, are not.

[Sheep]

Nuclear power and the know how to make reactors part of the packages sold to El Salvadoristan and Pharoh Garnoses [sic] are not necessarily military.

[GeneralTacticus]

I'm not concerned with them (not much, anyway). However, the sale of actual nuclear warheads is inherently military, and don't bother trying to deny this, because trying to do so will only embarass you.

[Sheep]

It isn't El Salvadoristan has stated that both warheads will be used to fuel their new reactors, the plans from from the same sale came from.

While Sheepsta cannot be held accountable by what El Salvadoristan and Pharoh Ganoses do with their new toys, we do reiteerate that the Sheepstan government has ratified the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and as such this prgram is now defunct.

[Drogue]

Originally posted by Archaic
Kindly explain to me how many nations IRL would tollerate a nuclear power not being signatory to such treaties? It is not a matter of morals, it is a matter of the responsibilities and expectations of a nation on the world stage.

Easily, it's a matter of choice. The signing of that treaty was optional, not compulsory.

Originally posted by Archaic
Actually, the revolution in Akiria *was* illegal. Explain to me how overthrowing the established government by force (In your case, mind controlling all the citizens through an as yet still unspecified means, and don't try and deny it again like you did in the regional board before, because it's all in the threads)

I have never said that it was with mind control, you have twisted that from the start. It was not illegal, Akizeta was operating under its own juristiction. It had the authority to lock down the war room, and it did. No laws broken.

Originally posted by Archaic
As for the bull**** about "It is only illegal if it is illegal under their domestic law, since it is a domestic issue.", I hope you realise that an illegal government retroactivly declaring its actions legal is illegal.

Yes, but show me which Sheepstan law Dunning broke. That would make it illegal. It is an internal matter, with internal law.

Originally posted by Archaic
There is currently no soverign nation of Sheepsta to violate the sovereignty of. There is only an illegal military junta. The blockade will continue.

Yes there is. That government is illegal. All nations have the right to self rule. That does not mean democracy, which you seem intent on forcing onto Sheepsta, even though it has proved unstable there in the past, that means that Sheepsta has the right to sovereignty, like any other nation. It is still a sovereign nation.

Originally posted by Archaic
If it's a choice between short term stability (Appeasing Sheepsta, not cracking down, letting it grow into a power, and getting into a bigger war later) and long term stability (Removing the Sheepstan Military Junta, restoring a democratically elected government to the nation [Something it hasn't really had since the protectorates], preventing a bigger war in the long run), I choose the second option.

However it is not your choice to make.

Originally posted by Archaic
As for Sheepsta being "one of the most powerful military nations in the world", it's irrelevant if he is or not, because simply by the virtue that he is a nuclear power which has used nukes in the region on other nations in the past

No he hasn't. He threatened, but to my knowledge, he has not fired a nuke at anyone.

Originally posted by Archaic
is currently selling nuclear weapons to terrorists and countries not signatory to the nuclear treaties

Which terrorists? Yes to other nations, but nations don't have to sign that treaty. It was optional. Indeed, trading with terrorists, though strongly frowned upon, is not illegal.

Originally posted by Archaic
he presents a clear and present threat to regional stability.

Alecrast has enforced blockades and invaded another nation . It is hardly the model of stability. Sheepsta has not invaded other nations. Selling weapons is legal, unless they sign otherwise.

Originally posted by Archaic
And how and why exactly did half the Akirian Army get there BTW? Seems rather overkill to have that massive a force on an island that could easily muster its own SDF.

Zetaris has no army of it's own, hence my title is Foreign Minister for Akiria and Protector of Zetaris. The force has been trickling there from the 1/4 of the army that was there at the founding, due to instability in the region. Zetaris was set up without a military, as it was supposed to be a haven. It is protected by Akiria.

Originally posted by Archaic
We are not advocating a pre-emptive strike, if you haven't bothered to check. We have established this blockade, which is not illegal, to put pressure on the regime to hand over power to a democratically elected government. They cannot afford this sort of blockade for long, simply because they could not possibily support their nuclear stockpile.

The blockade is illegal, as it is countries violating sovereignty of Sheepsta to trade, and other nations to trade with it.

Originally posted by Archaic
And BTW, with how you've described them, I consider your CMD systems ubertech, and thus even if it would be to my disadvantage, I will ignore cannon them until you restore them to a reasonable level.

Since they have had huge amounts of funding (over 10 times the yearly budget for the US defense shield) and have been over 15 years in development, I don't. The first one was not accurate, and was unreliable, but has been modified and we are now on the 3rd model. It is liek the US Missile Defense Shield, except with 10 times the funding, and thus instead of a ~70% accuracy, it has about a 90-95% accuracy. You think there are sum gains for such huge resources pilled into them What is so ubertech about a more accurate system than the one the US is building, given 10 times the funding and teams of scientists and engineers working on them?

Originally posted by Archaic
Besides, the Alecrast/Centralis ABM shield will be more than sufficient. There is no need for you to get involved in an issue which doesn't concern you.

Yes it does. As Delegate and Chief Judge, international events on this scale do concern me.

Originally posted by Archaic
Inaction in this case is appeasement. You have a reason to act. An illegal military Junta, which broke international treaties, is selling Nuclear Weapons to terrorists and nations not a signatory to the treaties.

He withdrew from the treaties, and he can sell to who he wants. Inaction against Alecrast for this illegal blockade is appeasement too. It is not appeasement like the UK and Hitler however.

Originally posted by Archaic
And you should've stopped Hitler when he started violating the treaty Germany was forced to sign at the end of the first world war, which he did before he even invaded Poland.

In your opinion. I think with a less harsh Treaty of Versailles, as proposed by the English delegate, WWII would have never happend. Hitler was aggrieved at the treatment of Germany after WWI. That treaty went too far, and so I don't thinkw e should have invaded when he broke it, although it would ahve been justified and legal.

Originally posted by Archaic
We repeat. There is no legitimate nation to violate the sovereignty of. The blockade will remain. Threats of force against Alecrast, Centralis, Noosland, and everyone else (Far too many nations to name) only serve to reflect badly on yourself.

And threats of violance against Sheepsta reflect badly on you. If a nation commits and illegal act, puts up a blockade against a nation that has not attacked anyone, that is not right. I will seek to have that blockade removed. That blockade is illegal, as Sheepsta is a nation, and you have violated it's sovereignty.

Originally posted by Archaic
Furthermore, what law

At the begining of the court, we all agreed that nations ahve the right to national sovereignty, to rule themselves. We said that nations should not impose their opinions on other nations, as you are doing.

Originally posted by Archaic
and how the hell would it apply to Sheepsta, which isn't a member of the regional court anyway?

Every nation has a right to sovereignty, as we agreed at the begining. It was one of the reasons why we vote against many UN resolutions, that each nation has a right to choose for itself.

Originally posted by Archaic
Who died and made you regional policeman?

The people when the elected me delegate and chief judge. Moreover, this is for any nation to stop illegal actions. You are all ganging up on Sheepsta without provocation. That is wrong, and we intend to stop it. Who elected YOU policeman to blockade Sheepsta without trial, and without provocation. You are the one intervening, we just seek an end to that intervention.

Originally posted by Archaic
By your own arguements here, you have no authority to intervene in an issue which doesn't concern you. You aren't the nation with a corrupt military junta right on your border.

Yes I am. Zetaris. Im will not intervene when Sheepsta is left alone. As long as some seek to oppress Sheepsta, I will seek to defend it.

Originally posted by Archaic
In fact, I'll repeat that point, since you so casually said "The legitmacy of the Sheepsta ruler is not your concern, only their foreign actions." They haven't attacked someone, but they have broken treaties and are selling nukes to terrorists and other nations who aren't signatory to the treaties.

No they haven't. They withdrew from those treaties, if they were ever part of them.

Originally posted by Archaic
A colony which didn't toe the line of its mother country and condemned the Sheepstan junta. As for the rest, our actions are perfectly legal.

A colony whose leader was too busy to comment.

Originally posted by Archaic
No, that was actually what I was saying.

That's what I thought, however GT said differently.

Originally posted by Archaic
(Honestly Drogue, do you ever read all these things? You constantly ask for "proof" of various things that you'd see if you only bothered to read the recent threads about the issue, which you should be doing anyway)

I ask for proof of his wrongdoing, because to be legal, you would have to have proof to have a blockade. AnNd yes, I do read them, but you seem to interpret much differently. I like to know what others think of as proof, so I can counter then, if necessary.

Originally posted by Archaic
that the Unified Republics of Sheepsta, which took charge after the Protectorates, weren't ever a part of the treaties, and thus that he wasn't breaking any treaties. Now, he never actually explicitly stated that he was a part of those treaties, however every former Sheepstan government, including the Protectorates, was, and thus we all assumed that the Unified Republics were. If they weren't going to follow in the footsteps of their predecessors, he should've said so then.

Why? Why do you assume he is still a member when he has not stated it, whith a new nation. It is up to him to say. Untied Sheepsta is a new nation, and thus isn't subject to North and South Sheepsta agreements. It started afresh. You should have asked him if you wished to know if he was still in them. He never stated he was, so I assumed he wasn't. Indeed, whatever else, he is now not a member, thus his actions are legal.

Originally posted by Archaic
because it clearly was illegal under the domestic law

Show me Sheepsta's domestic law that he broke? I didn't think he has even published his laws.

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
Medicines are non-military in nature; nukes, quite transparently, are not.

Tell that to the UN with regards to Iraq. medicines can be used to make chemical and biological weapons. Also, weapons trading is not illegal. Frowned upon yes, and thus withdrawing trade from your antion woudl be an option, but it is not illegal.

[Archaic]

Too late to make a fully reply and rebuttal, I'll do it tomorrow, however I'll make one correction to what you've said.

invaded another nation

Alecrast has never done any such thing. We have enforced a blockade against an illegitimate government in the interests of regional safety. These weapons cannot be allowed to get out.

[Mr. President]

I never heard of anybody being poisoned by penicillin.

And if you want my honest opinion, I think you, Drogue, and your friends on this forum get away with a hell of a lot of ubertech bubkis. Between 95% reliable ABM systems, artificial-intelligence rulers, and hyper-battleships, it's a wonder you don't rule the world.

[Whaleboy]

Is it unrealistic though? 95% ABM systems are theoretically very very simple. The physics certainly are very easy, ballistic missiles have a course that a GCSE physics student could predict. AI Rulers is perhaps stretching it a little, but looking at RL computer capacities, Akiria's IT sector, is it really unrealistic? My battleships use existing technology, but integrated and fine tuned to a much greater extent, if battleships were continued development from 1940's to today, we could expect stuff similar to what I have.