I've said it before, there are two things which drive diplomacy in this game. The first thing is prudence, players want to see their realm do well, so they will naturally and unconsciously choose the diplomatic paths which are most sensible. The second thing is role play, the idea that instead of a player conducting himself in a manner that he prefers, he might act counter to his own benefit by playing in favour of the character he invented.
These two types of behaviour are in conflict, due to the fact that the character cannot exist apart from the player and so is subject to the player's neural make-up and conditioning. One might reasonably compare this conflict to the sort of conflict which the guy in FIGHT CLUB experienced. The guy in FIGHT CLUB wanted to play the character he/society had created for himself (the buttoned down desk jockey) but was subconsciously foiled by his inner self, his Tyler Durden. Tyler Durden was the manifestation of Edward Norton's base character, a concept-made-physical which Edward Norton could not deny. Try as he might to play to his character's benefit, he could not deny his primordial lust for violence and other base instincts and so was constantly confronted by Tyler, who drove him to abandon his character and revert to his primitive nature.
This type of thing is why Morek Empire is at war with Aurvandil. The players know that there is no practical cause for it, however by denying their nature they have gone ahead with it anyway. For, it is for their characters' benefit somehow, I do not know how, I am not privy to diplomacy, but the specific reason need not matter -- only that it is there. So, Dante, that is how Morek's war with Aurvandil is justified (and it needs no justification other than the players' self-justification; might is right and if it is within their might to engage in an activity then it is outside of anyone else's ability or right to stop them). Perhaps, some day, they will be presented with their own Tyler Durdens. Scaled appropriately to the level of which they have breached their human nature.
Speaking as someone who just finished a freshman level psych course, why do all of your posts seem like they're freshman level psych papers? Did you just read a chapter on cognitive dissonance so now that's your thing? A while ago you were all about the superego and operant conditioning. You realize that you can phrase these arguments in normal English, right? They're not very complex.
Also, way to spoil Fight Club for anyone here who hasn't read/seen it.
To actually say something constructive, I don't think that distance limits force people to fight closer to home. What it does is force them not to fight. Basic politics dictates that your closest neighbors should also be your closest friends. If they were enemies, either they would be dead or you would. Why not let people project force? Going on distant voyages to raid foreign lands seems like an awesome adventure, to me, and it sucks that the game shuts it down. Should you be able to TO and all that? Probably not. Should you be able to raid and pillage? Totally.
