Join the new world

Understood! I will fight RED for the glory of the UK!

"Do not be angry with the Canadian/Fortis/Eden propagandists...they are only trying to win back their freedom, and they are trying to confuse some of us to help them in their cause."

That has got to be one of the cruellest lines I've ever heard here.

Hey Arjay...I do not say that with any bias or bitterness. I want people to be clear about why they are fighting; not to blindly follow the government, or to be tricked into it. If I were in the position Canada was in, I would consider doing the same in order to help win my freedom. However, I feel for citizens of the eUK, they should fight red because they believe in the cause of Canadian (and global) freedom from tyranny with their very bones, NOT because two dozen Fortis propagandists have tried to trick them into doing it.

Perhaps that is cruel of me to say that, but lets face it, rather have an educated population who will do the right thing, than a population who are like lost sheep being blown on the wind.

Erepublik is judged on score. On RM we were given very little. Alberta has Wood.

So your line about agreement is flawed, even though I know how you're subtle propaganda works.

"If you agree with the betterment of the UK, as the Wood in Alberta would greatly relieve the UK markets, then fight Green."

I think, if you actually wrote a factual article for once, people might listen to you. Otherwise, the only people as evidenced above me that pay any attention to you whatsoever are Americans.

Go figure.

At the end of the day, a citizen should consider the reason why (s)he is clicking on the red or green button and do so because they agree with the principles/morals/etc of their action. Clicking on a colour because the government orders you do shouldn't be a valid reason for doing so.

It might well be that you (the reader) agrees with the government anyway, but I think the whole point of the original article is basically make your own mind up based upon your own sense of belief of what is the right thing to do and not just be sheep and do as the last advert you see says...

"I think, if you actually wrote a factual article for once"

Funny, I wasn't aware I made a habit of writing articles that were unfactual. Infact, you will find most of my articles pertain to congress elections!

"So your line about agreement is flawed, even though I know how you're subtle propaganda works."

My subtle propaganda...not sure again where I see the propaganda. I am not telling people what I think they should do, only giving them the choice. Unlike the government who say 'Fight Green' and leave it at that!

"If you agree with the betterment of the UK, as the Wood in Alberta would greatly relieve the UK markets, then fight Green."

And that is a perfectly legitmate argument for you to make in regards to your opinion. However, lets be clear about why you fight...

"Erepublik is judged on score. On RM we were given very little. Alberta has Wood."

So we take a nation's sovereignty and reduce them to having to start resistance wars to ensure their very existence so that we can have some wood? One MAJOR error that this nation (and I sense many others) has made is that this is some game to be won or lost. The New World is about creating a society which is based on your ideals-for some that means stomping across the world making war on weaker nations...others choose to be a democratic society...still others have chosen different ways (experiments in communism and theocracy). I am not suggesting one is better than the other (I of course have my own preference). However to suggest this is a game to be won, is quite frankly, absurd in my opinion. And to make decisions as a society based on that fact is an error we must wake up from. Creating a fully functioning society is the goal of this game, not gathering as much resources as we can. There is no 'end' to this game, but there can be an end to our nation as a functioning society if we continue to pursue the path of adolescent desire to win at the expense of others!

The easiest way to secure Canadian Wood is to invest in a company in Alberta. You will keep the eUK market licence no matter what happens in the RW. In relation to the principle of this article, Jacen is right. Citizens should know which way to fight and the reason for their decisions without having to follow competing sets of instructions.

For now, Alberta is "ours". If we want to retain it, fight GREEN. If we disagree with this, the other option is there.

This is not just about a region we hold from its original or rightful owners. It is also about playing our part in the current scenario. Our PEACE masters may have thrown us a few Canadian "scraps" and they may not care enough to help us keep them but they are our 30 pieces of silver and we ought to hold on to them until we can find a way out of this mess and set things right with our traditional allies.

Changing our government and realigning ourselves is the way to solve this problem - not cutting off our noses to spite our faces by weakening the eUK further and giving up territory we hold, whether ill gotten or otherwise.

I would probably go further than that wingfield and say that EVERY single territory that we got through oppression and conquest should be given back to their original owners now, whilst we still have the opportunity to do the right thing. Otherwise we will loose them, and with it, the opportunity to regain some dignity after our betrayal.

However, I do agree with you on the matter of ultimately changing our alignment. I realise that is a process which takes time, but I cannot abide by comments that I have seen elsewhere that have basically said 'we have made the decision now, it is too late to turn back'...well it is never too late to do the right thing my friends!

"it is never too late to do the right thing my friends!"

Jacen, you are quite right. I do hope the (eventual?) liberation of Alberta will be a step towards mending our tried relations. eCanadians generally do not feel ill will towards the citizens of the eUK, but rather take issue with those who hold the strings of power, and would keep us from our rightful lands.

'Perhaps that is cruel of me to say that, but lets face it, rather have an educated population who will do the right thing, than a population who are like lost sheep being blown on the wind.'

Most of our lost sheep are being worked to death in King Foods and other companies set up to kill our new players(the funds from which are being distributed to a variety of E/F sources, including Emerick).

"Erepublik is judged on score. On RM we were given very little. Alberta has Wood."

A war of principle, then! eBritain must be top nation and Canada has something we want, so let's stab them in the back and steal it from them! I wonder how much timber all the gold spent on this ruinous and shameful war would have bought on the open market.

"Most of our lost sheep are being worked to death in King Foods and other companies set up to kill our new players(the funds from which are being distributed to a variety of E/F sources, including Emerick)"

I do not condone some of the methods used by our 'enemies'...however, that does not mean we have to continue with wars of wanton aggression and conquest.

"A war of principle, then! eBritain must be top nation and Canada has something we want, so let's stab them in the back and steal it from them! I wonder how much timber all the gold spent on this ruinous and shameful war would have bought on the open market"

I have wondered that as well Hereward; XP gained for citizens aside, how much have we spent as a nation on war and trying to hold our overseas territories (and how much will we continue to spend)?! And what could that money have bought instead?

How much gold does it take to buy one's lost honour?

The idea that eUk needed Alberta for wood is absurd. You want wood, go someplace where there is high wood, set up a company, ship the wood home. See "how most of the world gets iron" if you want further examples.

A nation may decide it wishes to invade another because of greed, but it never needs to do so because of need.