| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Wotlankor
Neh'bu Kau Beh'Hude
Ushra'Khan
   |
Posted - 2010.03.16 07:39:00 -
[31]
 Originally by: Merdaneth
Why would so many capsuleers choose to visit or live in Providence?
And herein lies the problem.
The pod pilots and their Amarrian masters were free but at the cots of minmatar backs that were not deemed worthy to work out for themself their own path.
If this is indeed what your view of the world is build upon then yes your "logic and "assumprtions" make sense.
Ofcource Providence was attractive the s****of the universe who wanted to reap the fruit of slavery.
|
Rodj Blake
Amarr
PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 08:21:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Karn Mithralia
As for rent, what? Certainly no one is paying rent to U'K we routinely turn down any such offers.
Of course nobody is paying you rent.
I suspect that like many landlords, -A- probably take a dim view of their tenants sub-letting out their property.
Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori.
|
Karn Mithralia
Neh'bu Kau Beh'Hude
Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 08:49:00 -
[33]
No one is paying them rent either.
Your grasp of the facts is dismal.
|
Darveses
DAEDALUS X
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 08:59:00 -
[34]
The reason for the "success" of Providence really is quite a simple one.
This isn't about principles and ethics, and it certainly isn't about CVA being such nice people to invite everyone to their private playground either.
It merely relies on the fact that the generic capsuleer just doesn't care.
I'm quite sure that, would you ask 50 random capsuleers in New Eden, at least half of them wouldn't even know what "IGS" stands for. As long as they get their ISK down in Providence, they're satisfied.
They don't care who has to pay the price, as long as it isn't themselves.
CVA could have set up an agreement that claims "By using our facilities in Providence you agree that you actively and openly support child abuse and genocide, just because it's pretty fun stuff" and people would still sign to reap their share.
Therefore, I could care less about what a safe haven Providence was, because slavery isn't much better than child abuse, and genocide...? Well, I'm sure we have that covered down there.
No one living in Providence and therewith supporting the CVA should be considered "neutral" in this conflict, no matter what the almighty CVA standing list says.
And no Archie, that doesn't mean SF now shoots neutrals just because.
---
Star Fraction Public - The new Channel
|
Butter Dog
Gallente
The Littlest Hobos
Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 09:30:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Xina Tutor
Hehe... we were a threat to -A- sov... Damn.
Well, you wont be by the end of the week 
----------
~bitter dog~
etc |
Butter Dog
Gallente
The Littlest Hobos
Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 09:38:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Archbishop
So you admit you will engage in "Warfare Enclosurement" and restrict the warfare of those residing "freely" in Providence? You should be careful in readily admitting to do something the Ushra'Khan and others have so vocally claimed to oppose.
Do we have an Ushra'Khan representative here who can comment on the "enclosurist" plans of -A- and their admitted policy of forcing a rule on others?
Archbishop
You're deliberately missing the point.
Do you honestly think that any one of the New Providence entities will be able to territorially assault AAA and survive? The rule does not need to be written - it is basic common sense. Attacking a member of perhaps the most powerful bloc in New Eden isn't good for your health. That my friend is a simple fact.
Or are you proposing that if one of these entities assaults AAA space, they should be allowed to get on with it, without anyone fighting back? Don't be so ridiculous. Of course they are going to get crushed - if you act with such rash stupidity, you deserve the appropriate response.
You also conveniently ignore one of the key benefits - that AAA and UK will protect Providence from unwanted territorial invasion. This means these new entities will be quite safe by 0.0 standards. They will have their independence, yet also be able to turn to us should the worst happen and their space be invaded by an outside entity.
We're not going to hold their hands if a roaming gang passes through, but I think we'd rather enjoy crushing invasion attempts, for example by CVA or slaver-aligned forces.
----------
~bitter dog~
etc |
Halarach
Amarr
Epitoth Guard
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 11:39:00 -
[37]
Edited by: Halarach on 16/03/2010 11:41:22
Originally by: Xyla Vulchanus
Originally by: Merdaneth
If anything, the attack on Providence was an attack on freedom, perpetrated by the enemies of freedom.
You speak of freedom as if it has a universal application. Are you really so dim?
U'K have always, and will continue to, fight for the freedom of Matari slaves and against the freedom of the Amarrian Empire to act howsoever it chooses, despite the suffering it leaves in its wake. Maybe a further 20 or 30 discussions on this point will enable the message to get across?
Are you able to communicate in any other form than poor smack Xyla? Woof woof bark some more.
I find what defines U'K (anti-slavery) to be somewhat paradoxal. It means your only reason to exist is to be against something. It's so much easier than trying to actually build.
Also that makes you very dependent of us. What would you do, if you'd manage to destroy slavery. I guess the answer that comes to mind is collapse, since you wouldn't have any reason to exist anymore.
As such by wanting to destroy us you're destroying yourself, poor you.
|
Butter Dog
Gallente
The Littlest Hobos
Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 11:51:00 -
[38]
Slavery will, unfortunately, never truly die. There will always be those vile enough to support it, promote it even, and the ill concieved economic 'benefits' they feel it brings.
UK shall always remain as the guardians against slavery. Without our watchful eyes, who knows what foul deeds would be committed. We've saved millions from their plight, and if that is because we are against something, then so be it.
However, you're also wrong when you claim we don't want to build something. We do. A universe free from slavery and those who support it. But even if such a goal were to be obtained, we would have to remain ever vigilant to prevent the descent into horror that is (or was) CVA's Providence regime.
----------
~bitter dog~
etc |
Syyl'ara
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 15:30:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Butter Dog
Do you honestly think that any one of the New Providence entities will be able to territorially assault AAA and survive? The rule does not need to be written - it is basic common sense. Attacking a member of perhaps the most powerful bloc in New Eden isn't good for your health. That my friend is a simple fact.
According to AAA, the new providence entities will not able to engage in territorial assault period. They will be told (as opposed to deciding for themselves) what actions they may or may not engage in and where.
Kinda sounds like slavery.
Quote:
Or are you proposing that if one of these entities assaults AAA space, they should be allowed to get on with it, without anyone fighting back? Don't be so ridiculous. Of course they are going to get crushed - if you act with such rash stupidity, you deserve the appropriate response.
I don't think that's the extent of his "enclosurist" issues, his point is you make this big objection to the way CVA operates with its lesser alliances, yet AAA plans an even more invasive dictating of diplomatic options without even being a member of the same bloc.
Quote:
You also conveniently ignore one of the key benefits - that AAA and UK will protect Providence from unwanted territorial invasion. This means these new entities will be quite safe by 0.0 standards. They will have their independence, yet also be able to turn to us should the worst happen and their space be invaded by an outside entity.
Never once have I seen a conquering army not sell itself as a liberation force. You are proposing a system whereby smaller entities are kept dependent upon you. You claim you'll provide protection, but for weeks have frothed at the mouth and convulsed while shouting how terrible it is to foster such weakness and complacency and that those not capable of the fortitude required should stay in empire.
Also, can I see where AAA has made its official statement of intent that includes responding to all calls for aid from their newly installed provi-pets as a dutiful protectorate?
Quote:
We're not going to hold their hands if a roaming gang passes through, but I think we'd rather enjoy crushing invasion attempts, for example by CVA or slaver-aligned forces.
Because its well known how much capsuleers enjoy sovereignty campaigns as opposed to casual roaming.
You may as well put on your resume's now: Garden Keeper.
Keep in mind, I am no supporter of slavery or oppression...I'm just also not a fan of yet another self-serving war being sold as a battle for freedom.
|
Butter Dog
Gallente
The Littlest Hobos
Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 15:37:00 -
[40]
I think you will find most entities enjoy the larger scale battles which accompany sov warfare. We spend time building up the shiny toys (titans, supercarriers, dreads) to be able to use them for just this purpose.
The only time Sov warfare is dull, is when it is not contested and becomes a grind. But an active attempt by CVA to reclaim sov will certainly not be dull.
----------
~bitter dog~
etc |
Fuku Hitori
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 15:40:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Syyl'ara
Originally by: Butter Dog
Do you honestly think that any one of the New Providence entities will be able to territorially assault AAA and survive? The rule does not need to be written - it is basic common sense. Attacking a member of perhaps the most powerful bloc in New Eden isn't good for your health. That my friend is a simple fact.
According to AAA, the new providence entities will not able to engage in territorial assault period. They will be told (as opposed to deciding for themselves) what actions they may or may not engage in and where.
Kinda sounds like slavery.
Do you cry "I'm a slave" to your god, Ammarian, because you cannot fly your pod into the heart of a star? Do you cry "free me" whilst choking back tears, upon realising you have to enter a pod to experience the vacuum of interstellar space?
|
Syyl'ara
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 15:47:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Butter Dog
I think you will find most entities enjoy the larger scale battles which accompany sov warfare. We spend time building up the shiny toys (titans, supercarriers, dreads) to be able to use them for just this purpose.
An activity you state is widely found to be enjoyable (why is warfare and the suffering of millions a leisure activity to some?) yet you openly declare the intention of denying this "recreational activity" to those who will be installed in the future.
Enjoying privileges you specifically intend to deny to others.
This largest fault with continuing to sell this war as a great "moral" crusade...is that it isn't one.
You'd probably garner more support just by admitting your races hate each other and this has nothing to do with rights or protecting the oppressed, it has to do with blood vendettas and personal honor.
There is nothing altruistic about beating one's chest and declaring themselves the possessor of superior moral conviction.
|
Syyl'ara
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 15:54:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Fuku Hitori
Do you cry "I'm a slave" to your god, Ammarian, because you cannot fly your pod into the heart of a star? Do you cry "free me" whilst choking back tears, upon realising you have to enter a pod to experience the vacuum of interstellar space?
See, another example of blind, vengeance-filled hatred. Anyone not in lock-step with their interpretation is apparently an Ammarian slaver.
I'm Intaki, not Ammarian, and I don't own slaves.
Maybe if you all turned down the light of your self-proclaimed purity and selfless-ness, you'd be able to see what's really in front of you and that you're being used by powers who have spent not one minute in anguish over your brothers and sisters in bondage and, if it were possible, would win this war in such a way that not one slave was freed from doing it yet all of their self-serving interests would still be secured.
|
Jade Constantine
Gallente
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 16:25:00 -
[44]
Edited by: Jade Constantine on 16/03/2010 16:28:19
Originally by: Halarach
I find what defines U'K (anti-slavery) to be somewhat paradoxal. It means your only reason to exist is to be against something. It's so much easier than trying to actually build.
I hear a lot of this kind of bleating from the CVA and Amarrian imperialism in general. The concept that "building" is good by default and "destroying" is bad. But its such a dishonest idea really and would have us believe that its impossible to build "bad things".
Listen Halarach (and I mean really listen.) If a man (lets call him Aralis) builds a giant machine designed to torture and punish, to rip the flesh from victims, to expose the vitals, to drain blood, to remove organs, to rip the bones and crush the joints and all the while preserving "life" with support tubes and ointments the better to prolong the agonies and terror of the subjects displayed on an ornate raised dias in the town square. If this man presents this "masterwork", this temple to mortal suffering and invites us to praise his industry and creativity, his attention to detail and enduring designwork - his vision even. If he then comes here and says "respect what I have built!"
Are you really genuinely surprised that the audience hurls imprecations and gathers brands to burn his machine to dust and ashes and him with it on principles of basic humanity and innate love for life and freedom?
Not everything that is built is good.
Not every act of destruction is bad.
It is good to burn an evil thing.
From the ashes something better may rise.
This is what the CVA have always struggled to understand. You built your empire on suffering and misery. It was corrupt and diseased from the start. Do not be surprised then tearing it down is the rational decision made by idealists and heroic free-fighters the cluster wide.
True Knowledge |
Butter Dog
Gallente
The Littlest Hobos
Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 16:35:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Syyl'ara
An activity you state is widely found to be enjoyable (why is warfare and the suffering of millions a leisure activity to some?) yet you openly declare the intention of denying this "recreational activity" to those who will be installed in the future.
This is incorrect. It's just basic common sense that a Providence entity won't be able to territorially assault the member of a powerful coalition and expect to survive.
They have no hope of succeeding in a territorial war against the Southern Coaltion. This is not anyone 'controlling' anything, it is basic and simple fact.
----------
~bitter dog~
etc |
Garreck
Amarr Border Defense Consortium
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 16:43:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Jade Constantine
Not everything that is built is good.
Not every act of destruction is bad.
It is good to burn an evil thing.
From the ashes something better may rise.
This is what the CVA have always struggled to understand.
Hardly. In fact, many of us operate with this very understanding. Our definitions of good, bad, evil, and better are simply quite different from what Star Fraction adheres to.
It is always entertaining to see Star Fraction describe whomever is convenient for their current propeganda purposes as "idealists" and "freedom fighters." If this were an Ushra'Khan led initiative with organizations like-minded to Ushra'Khan's stated ideals of freedom, the sentiment would be accurate.
The Souther Coallition, however, is not a coallition of idealists and freedom fighters.
CVA bit off way more than we could chew and we're getting what we brought upon ourselves, but the prognostications and analyses by ideological enemies of the CVA who have (repeatedly) failed where the Southern Coallition is succeeding continue to be transparent in their agendas. We are observing the collapse of one authoritarian regime under the weight of another authoritarian regime...even more interestingly the falling regime is being crushed because they a) dared to be ambitious and b) refused to kneel or be coerced.
Discussion about the victory of idealism and freedom over tyranny and oppression is laughable.
|
Syyl'ara
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 16:54:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Butter Dog
Originally by: Syyl'ara
An activity you state is widely found to be enjoyable (why is warfare and the suffering of millions a leisure activity to some?) yet you openly declare the intention of denying this "recreational activity" to those who will be installed in the future.
This is incorrect. It's just basic common sense that a Providence entity won't be able to territorially assault the member of a powerful coalition and expect to survive.
They have no hope of succeeding in a territorial war against the Southern Coaltion. This is not anyone 'controlling' anything, it is basic and simple fact.
The public statements released by AAA state they are most certainly going to be "controlling" providence. My comments have nothing to do with an group installed by AAA turning on them, but on their stated intentions to use corrective discipline/consequences for engaging in certain kinds of activity after being so installed.
Again, let me state, I have no personal issue with your operations of late.
What I do take issue with is the chest beating over your supposed morality and the attempts to sell what you're doing as a "noble" crusade. Some noble causes are being claimed in the midst of this, but not at nearly the same rate as territorial control.
|
Jade Constantine
Gallente
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 17:13:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Garreck
...but the prognostications and analyses by ideological enemies of the CVA who have (repeatedly) failed where the Southern Coallition is succeeding...
Oh come on. Thats a merdenath/archbishop style nonsense argument you are better than that Garreck.
CVA (more than any entity in recent memory) have famously succeeded only on the efforts of others. Without the Amarr-bloc of holders in Providence you were nothing. Don't try to diminish the efforts of others by claiming that things they couldn't achieve on their own are worthless.
Nobody is claiming they achieved the defeat of CVA providence "on their own" that would be ridiculous. As ridiculous in fact as CVA claiming to have built and held Providence "on their own."
True Knowledge |
Merdaneth
Amarr
Angel Wing.
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 17:29:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Darveses
The reason for the "success" of Providence really is quite a simple one.
This isn't about principles and ethics, and it certainly isn't about CVA being such nice people to invite everyone to their private playground either.
It merely relies on the fact that the generic capsuleer just doesn't care.
Most indeed don't care about if the rulers of PRovidence keep slaves or not. Most of them *do care* about their own freedom and about the growth of their wealth. They came to Providence because they could increase their wealth in relative freedom.
Therefore, the current attacks grant the non-capsuleer slaves more freedom, but take away freedoms from the capsuleers. That is why I am concerned, the motivation to fight CVA because of standings enclosurism or to allow capsuleers in Providence more freedom is false one. The motivation to free slaves is a true one.
Currently, Ushra Khan propaganda seems to echo that the new Providence will be more free to capsuleers as well. It is quite obvious that the policies -A- and they plan to implement will restrict capsuleer freedoms. Star Fraction has been fighting under false pretenses all along, but that is nothing new. To have Ushra Khan echo the false SF propaganda is something new.
____
The Illusion of Freedom | The Truth about Slavery |
Merdaneth
Amarr
Angel Wing.
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 17:42:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Jade Constantine
Not everything that is built is good.
Not every act of destruction is bad.
It is good to burn an evil thing.
From the ashes something better may rise.
Ms. Constantine, I quite agree.
However, what CVA build was considered good and attractive to capsuleers. It granted them unprecented freedom to exploit the wealth of nullsec space. Current developments are taking away those freedoms, and making the Providence nullsec wealth just as hard to gain as most other regions to unaligned pilots.
The capsuleers were granted these freedoms by an entity they could trust and rely upon. An entity that freely granted aid in the form of patrols and docking rights to the unaligned neutrals desiring to increase their wealth.
If in the new Providence gatecamps trying to keep out all newcomers and docking rights are only given to a priviliged few, then yes, freedom will have suffered. And the Star Fraction contributed to it. The policies of the CVA and holders gave the capsuleers a great sense of freedom, the greatest in all of nullsec. Your legacy will be that you helped destroy this 'freespace' and not some idiot propaganda statement about standings enclosurism which will soon be forgotten.
Capsuleers will remember that there once was a part of nullsec space where new pilots could freely go to, where small corporations could mine vast quantities of ore and aid Concord in destroying the most dangerous pirates. They will remember there once was a part of space you didn't need to pay or negotiate with others first to give one a relatively risk-free entrance. They remember the camaraderie of giving aid to an unknown pilot instead of choosing between running or attacking. They will remember a part of space not filled to the brim with psychopathic killers ruled over by tyrants and robber barons.
____
The Illusion of Freedom | The Truth about Slavery |
Butter Dog
Gallente
The Littlest Hobos
Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 17:44:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Syyl'ara
What I do take issue with is the chest beating over your supposed morality and the attempts to sell what you're doing as a "noble" crusade. Some noble causes are being claimed in the midst of this, but not at nearly the same rate as territorial control.
We will have to agree to disagree that the removal of a regime supported by slavery is not a 'noble cause'.
Also, you don't seem to understand the restrictions CVA placed on their holders. They were puppet states. Entities moving to New Providence are under no such leash. They are entirely free to manage their own affairs, including diplomatic relations.
If they wanted to set AAA red and roam to HED, so be it.
----------
~bitter dog~
etc |
NEMESIS SIN
Method In Khaos
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 17:46:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Merdaneth
Outdated rhetoric
Put to it whatever rational you like, your time is at an end.
|
Jade Constantine
Gallente
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 17:48:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Merdaneth
The capsuleers were granted these freedoms by an entity they could trust and rely upon. An entity that freely granted aid in the form of patrols and docking rights to the unaligned neutrals desiring to increase their wealth.
Well it wasn't "free" was it? They needed to hold their nose and ignore the stink of human misery on the worlds below. They needed to accept the lies told them in the Citadel channel, they needed to accept their inferior place in the hierarchy of Imperial Providence where Amarrians and Holders could order them out of belts at will, where permits had to be begged for to raise towers, where standings were dictated and where freedom of action and interaction were restricted severely. They had to accept the safety of the pirates that CVA considered friends - They couldn't take revenge on criminal acts committed by CVA loyalists and allies elsewhere in eve.
It was largely impossible to be an "unaligned neutral" in Providence because eventually you'd be bullied and harrangued into aggressing the enemies of the CVA regardless of whether those enemies would themselves shoot first on neutrals.
This is the reality. Your lies in this thread are being exposed now by the day.
True Knowledge |
Garreck
Amarr Border Defense Consortium
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 17:54:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Jade Constantine
Originally by: Garreck
...but the prognostications and analyses by ideological enemies of the CVA who have (repeatedly) failed where the Southern Coallition is succeeding...
Oh come on. Thats a merdenath/archbishop style nonsense argument you are better than that Garreck.
It's no argument. It's a reminder of what has brought us here. Allow me to be more specific: in this particular case, Star Fraction, having met repeated failure in multiple campaigns with various allies to undermine the CVA and Holders regime, is now trying to tie in some sort of Fractionite ideological success to the Southern Coallition's victory, when what is in fact happening here is two enclosurist organizations are fighting and one is losing. There is no victory for freedom or dreams or any such nonsense in a Southern Coallition take-over of Providence. There is merely a new authority to answer to.
The attempt to dress up the Southern Coallition's campaign with Fractionite ideology is the nonsense argument, Ms. Constantine. It is a land grab precipitated by CVA aggression and fully pursued in the face of CVA defiance. Your nonsense argument continues with the following smoke and mirrors:
Originally by: Jade Constantine
CVA (more than any entity in recent memory) have famously succeeded only on the efforts of others. Without the Amarr-bloc of holders in Providence you were nothing. Don't try to diminish the efforts of others by claiming that things they couldn't achieve on their own are worthless.
Nobody is claiming they achieved the defeat of CVA providence "on their own" that would be ridiculous. As ridiculous in fact as CVA claiming to have built and held Providence "on their own."
This is all a complete deflection from the topic at hand! Nowhere did I so much as imply anyone claimed the dfeat of Providence "on their own," and I've already explicitly stated in this very discussion that the CVA and Holders relationship was one of interdependence by design. Not only is your argument here a slight of hand as it is irrelevant to the current discussion, it's a complete deception as it puts words in my mouth.
My point is simple, and stated many times: Southern Coallition occupation of Providence is not a victory of freedom or anything close. It is the replacement of one authoritarian system with another.
|
Jade Constantine
Gallente
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 18:04:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Garreck
My point is simple, and stated many times: Southern Coallition occupation of Providence is not a victory of freedom or anything close. It is the replacement of one authoritarian system with another.
And you are quite wrong. If the new victors in Providence abolish slavery then freedom herself has won a victory in these stars. If the CVA is wounded and broken and unable to project power to oppress and bully its neighbours then again, freedom has won a victory. I remember the 370 Slaver starships that came against Space and Freedom II last year Garreck. That was CVA providence attempting to extinquish the lives of 38,000 freed Matari Slaves.
If the outcome of the war in Providence means that CVA lack the power to oppress in this scale in the future. Then again, freedom has won a victory.
True Knowledge |
Garreck
Amarr Border Defense Consortium
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 18:07:00 -
[56]
Edited by: Garreck on 16/03/2010 18:08:38
Originally by: Jade Constantine
If the CVA is wounded and broken and unable to project power to oppress and bully its neighbours then again, freedom has won a victory.
If the replacement of one authoritarian, enclosurist regime with another authoritarian, enclosurist regime is a victory for freedom, Ms Constantine, then not only do I have nothing further to add...but I must agree with you.
I suppose it goes without saying that I find the premise utterly rediculous.
|
Jade Constantine
Gallente
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 18:10:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Garreck
I suppose it goes without saying that I find the premise utterly rediculous.
Well it would be too much to expect a man blinded by religion into accepting that one human being should be enslaved by another as a natural state of order to be capable of debating with logic.
True Knowledge |
Rodj Blake
Amarr
PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 18:10:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Jade Constantine
And you are quite wrong. If the new victors in Providence abolish slavery then freedom herself has won a victory in these stars.
Tell me, has -A- abolished slavery in the systems it previously controlled?
Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori.
|
Syyl'ara
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 18:11:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Butter Dog
Also, you don't seem to understand the restrictions CVA placed on their holders. They were puppet states. Entities moving to New Providence are under no such leash. They are entirely free to manage their own affairs, including diplomatic relations.
Being given space, told what you may or may not do with it, and having those expectations backed by threat of expulsion from the entity that installed you is the very definition of being under a leash.
Quote:
If they wanted to set AAA red and roam to HED, so be it.
I find it slightly humorous that all of your examples involve direct aggression against AAA when I'm not talking about that at all. If AAA installs an alliance, then another next door who is constantly a threat to the first, what options are available for resolving this? Will AAA play dutiful landlord and sit the tenants down? Will AAA remove the first alliance for trying to remove the second? Will AAA remove the offending alliance or say "if you can't stand the heat..."?
Their own statements are a matter of public record, now...they intend to "enforce" certain behaviors and standards in Providence.
I do appreciate that we can agree to drop the slave issue and talk substance. While it is truly a deplorable condition to impose upon others, its being called into the debate seems to automatically make it dwarf all other equally important considerations.
|
Jade Constantine
Gallente
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 18:15:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Rodj Blake
Originally by: Jade Constantine
And you are quite wrong. If the new victors in Providence abolish slavery then freedom herself has won a victory in these stars.
Tell me, has -A- abolished slavery in the systems it previously controlled?
I have no idea, but I know Ushra'khan have. And they are challenging for sovereignty and control of key systems in Providence right now. I trust the Ushra'khan to ensure their allies will free the slaves in Providence. Little more needs to be said.
True Knowledge |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |