PPO Sails to War

[Walshington]

You're already a self-described ass. And since you guys think reality is constructed by words and I know it's determined by actions, we were in agreement.

 

A strong reaction to what was intended as light OWF banter, but as conceded in that earlier thread, your point is taken.

[Unknown Smurf]

You're already a self-described ass. And since you guys think reality is constructed by words and I know it's determined by actions, we were in agreement.

So lets say alliance A is attacked by alliance B because alliance A spied on alliance B.

If alliance C declares on B due to the fact that they have a MDoAP with alliance A. Does that mean alliance C condones alliance As spying?

[Schattenmann]

A strong reaction to what was intended as light OWF banter, but as conceded in that earlier thread, your point is taken.

You asked.  :v:
 

So lets say alliance A is attacked by alliance B because alliance A spied on alliance B.

If alliance C declares on B due to the fact that they have a MDoAP with alliance A. Does that mean alliance C condones alliance As spying?

What else would it mean?  Alliance C is either a brainless slave or a co-conspirator.

But your question here is a non sequitur; in no account can PPO be defending SRA. It has joined the aggressive coalition on an optional aggression clause. Edited December 17, 2014 by Schattenmann

[Walshington]

 

You asked.  :v:

 

 

What else would it mean?  Alliance C is either a brainless slave or a co-conspirator. 

 

In a black and white, binary world, yes.  This logic is perhaps best applied to some of the legends of Old Earth:

 

Finland, by fighting the Soviet Union in the 40's, was complicit in the holocaust.

The Los Angeles firefighters during the Watts riots were complicit in civil rights violations.

War protesters during Vietnam were complicit in the Soviet gulag system.

Barack Obama condones the repressiveness of the Cuban government.

 

Whereas the "greys" can be a haven of moral cowardice, the black and whites can lack nuance of any sort.  Both are attractive and make for excellent straw man and propaganda opportunities.

[Unknown Smurf]

What else would it mean?  Alliance C is either a brainless slave or a co-conspirator.

But your question here is a non sequitur; in no account can PPO be defending SRA. It has joined the aggressive coalition on an optional aggression clause.

Alliance C could be a stalwart ally or are those all brainless slaves in your eyes?

PPO is honoring it's treaty and have said as much in the OP. No different than what SUN is doing for the Legion except that PPO could have let their allies burn without technically violating a treaty.

Bottom line: any attempts to force reparations or anything other than white peace from them will end poorly for you.

[Schattenmann]

In a black and white, binary world, yes. This logic is perhaps best applied to some of the legends of Old Earth:

Finland, by fighting the Soviet Union in the 40's, was complicit in the holocaust.
The Los Angeles firefighters during the Watts riots were complicit in civil rights violations.
War protesters during Vietnam were complicit in the Soviet gulag system.
Barack Obama condones the repressiveness of the Cuban government.

Whereas the "greys" can be a haven of moral cowardice, the black and whites can lack nuance of any sort. Both are attractive and make for excellent straw man and propaganda opportunities.

All of your non-existent equivalencies are false, which is probably why you had to resort to them. 

 
You got your ass in over its head in a war you are supporting which you claim not to support.  Realizing your situation, you logically decided to . . . double down.
 
As we've established, you can talk out of both sides of your mouth but we know bollocks when we hear it.
 

Alliance C could be a stalwart ally or are those all brainless slaves in your eyes?

Again, this exercise has no bearing on PPO which has used an optional treaty to enter an aggressive coalition in support of its ally which has done the same.  I have made my position on the matter of compulsive treaties and their implications clear for years. 2012 2013 2014

 

PPO is honoring it's treaty and have said as much in the OP. No different than what SUN is doing for the Legion except that PPO could have let their allies burn without technically violating a treaty.

Not even OsRavan is so backwards that he can't understand that we are all on the defense and the rest of you are on the offense.

 

Bottom line: any attempts to force reparations or anything other than white peace from them will end poorly for you.

HAH!

Don't get all white knight dipwad on me from the aggressive coalition.  I'm shakin' in my jackboots over here. 

 

If you think that PPO and SRA's actions are so bad that we would put harsh terms on them, then maybe you shouldn't deaf-dumb defend them.

Edited December 17, 2014 by Schattenmann

[smurthwaite]

All of your non-existent equivalencies are false, which is probably why you had to resort to them. 

 

You got your ass in over its head in a war you are supporting which you claim not to support.  Realizing your situation, you logically decided to . . . double down.

 

As I said, you can talk out of both sides of your mouth but we know bollocks when we hear it.

 

I think the stats say the opposite.  Not only are we not in over our heads, we are going toe to toe with an AA 5 times our size, and winning.  I usually agree with you, but in this case you forgot to check your facts, bud.  I never realized you were just as bad as the "you are on the other side so Imma sling some shit your way" posters.  I guess we were both wrong today.

[Schattenmann]

 

I think the stats say the opposite.  Not only are we not in over our heads, we are going toe to toe with an AA 5 times our size, and winning.  I usually agree with you, but in this case you forgot to check your facts, bud.  I never realized you were just as bad as the "you are on the other side so Imma sling some !@#$ your way" posters.  I guess we were both wrong today.

In point of fact, I figured I would give PPO the benefit of the doubt, but if SRA says that what PPO means by "help a friend" is that PPO is simply bandwagoning in unnecessarily for the sake of piling on then there it is. 

Maybe if the nations of PPO are so starved for war and so incapable of getting their own, they should merge with an alliance that is capable of satisfying their needs.

[Unknown Smurf]

All of your non-existent equivalencies are false, which is probably why you had to resort to them. 
 
You got your ass in over its head in a war you are supporting which you claim not to support.  Realizing your situation, you logically decided to . . . double down.
 
As I said, you can talk out of both sides of your mouth but we know bollocks when we hear it.

Stating they are false without stating why seems like a cheap cop out and I daresay I expected more from you. My equivalencies are not false, they just stem from one of our fundamental differences. I see my allies as an extension of my alliance and you see yours as seperate entities.

And for the record I never claimed not to support it, SRA and PPO did in their OPs. I haven't made a statement one way or the other because the fact is that what I feel about it is irrelevant at this junction.

[Unknown Smurf]

Not even OsRavan is so backwards that he can't understand that we are all on the defense and the rest of you are on the offense.

You miss my point entirely. I am not stating that they are not on the offensive. Just that they are helping their allies the same way that SUN is helping it's ally.
 

[font='comic sans ms']HAH![/font]
Don't get all white knight dipwad on me from the aggressive coalition.  I'm shakin' in my jackboots over here. 
 
If you think that PPO and SRA's actions are so bad that we would put harsh terms on them, then maybe you shouldn't deaf-dumb defend them.

I don't think they are that bad. Polar members have stated that they shouldn't get white peace, I am just commenting on that.

[Schattenmann]

 

I think the stats say the opposite.  Not only are we not in over our heads, we are going toe to toe with an AA 5 times our size, and winning.  I usually agree with you, but in this case you forgot to check your facts, bud.  I never realized you were just as bad as the "you are on the other side so Imma sling some !@#$ your way" posters.  I guess we were both wrong today.

Oh, by the way, I would be remiss if I failed to say congrats on SRA's big 5:1 win against Legion, which was accomplished without any help from TJL, Ai, Kaskus, and Kashmir---oh, speaking of stats, that's over 150 to Legion's 124.  Jesus, please. 

I guess we were both wrong today.

[Schattenmann]

You miss my point entirely. I am not stating that they are not on the offensive. Just that they are helping their allies the same way that SUN is helping it's ally.
 

I don't think they are that bad. Polar members have stated that they shouldn't get white peace, I am just commenting on that.

Bandwagoning weasels shouldn't get white peace, and no one has ever thought they should.  Fortunately, Polaris is a democratic autocracy with a moralist Emperor, not a democracy.

Edited December 17, 2014 by Schattenmann

[Unknown Smurf]

Oh, by the way, I would be remiss if I failed to say congrats on SRA's big 5:1 win against Legion, which was accomplished without any help from TJL, Ai, Kaskus, and Kashmir---oh, speaking of stats, that's over 150 to Legion's 124.  Jesus, please. 
I guess we were both wrong today.

He's clearly saying that solely comparing Legion and SRA wars, SRA is winning. Perhaps you should take a breather.

[smurthwaite]

In point of fact, I figured I would give PPO the benefit of the doubt, but if SRA says that what PPO means by "help a friend" is that PPO is simply bandwagoning in unnecessarily for the sake of piling on then there it is. 

Maybe if the nations of PPO are so starved for war and so incapable of getting their own, they should merge with an alliance that is capable of satisfying their needs.

 

You are back to black and white, binary thinking, and because of it, will eternally (if the world will forgive me for mixing metaphores) be right only twice per day.

 

In other words, you still are not checking your facts.

 

We are winning.  Stats don't lie.  We are also a micro and do need help, as being a micro, we cannot possibly cover the entire NS spectrum.

 

But remember, you are right.  Always right.  Never wrong.  Never willing to think past your own indignation.  Unwilling to see the world expect in your own black and white, binary terms. 

 

Should I go on, or have these last 2 lines exemplified your argument thoroughly enough?

[Schattenmann]

 

Should I go on, or have these last 2 lines exemplified your argument thoroughly enough?

 

No, we all understand perfectly: SRA has elected to join DS/DBDC's effort to grind down Polarsphere, and PPO has done the same at SRA's request, and 150 nations are doing more damage to 124 than 124 are doing to 150. 

 

It's all very impressive.

Edited December 17, 2014 by Schattenmann

[Walshington]

All of your non-existent equivalencies are false, which is probably why you had to resort to them. 

 

 

Now you're disappointing me -- a hallmark of Socratic debate is NOT a statement of "I am right and you are wrong."

The equivalencies are not non-existent.  According to Old Earth legends:

 

Finland fought WITH Nazi Germany against the allies, of their own volition.  Did their actions not speak louder than words?

 

Rioters in Watts were burning buildings in protest of a system that kept them as second class citizens.  Sure, the LAFD had a duty (or MDP, if you will) to fight those fires.  Did they not slavishly carry out this brainless function to protect the very society that was holding the rioters down?

 

Vietnam protesters were attempting to quell American involvment in Vietnam.  Their success ultimately enabled North Vietnam, a puppet f the Soviet bloc, to install a Communist government there, thereby enabling further domination of the Eastern Bloc.

 

This morning, Barack Obama resumed diplomatic relations with a country known for human rights violations -- he overtly acknowledged this in his speech.  How is this not legitimizing such a government? 

 

Each example involves actions that seem, in a binary way, to condemn those who took them.

[smurthwaite]

 

No, we all understand perfectly: SRA has joined DS/DBDC's effort to grind down Polarsphere, and PPO has done the same at SRA's request, and 150 nations are doing more damage to 124 than 124 are doing to 150.  It's all very impressive.

 

Don't be intentionally dense.  I said stats.  I referred to SRA, not a collective we. (Yes, I realize the SRA is a collection of nations and therefore a collective we, but think of it as one entity on RIA's stat machine R15):

 

(Line 33)  Screaming Red Asses:  Damage taken:  296,872.25  Damage inflicted:  376,142.39

 

To my knowledge, SRA is currently, and has been, for the entire time since they entered, been fighting only The Legion.

 

The stats don't lie.  We are winning.  You trying to take one idea, even though it was neither implied, stated, inferred, nor intended, just makes you look stupid.  That's one thing I've never though you are.  Don't pretend to be now because you are feeling indignant.

 

Your obtuseness right now is on par with the idiots who think wars are supposed to be fair.  That isn't how wars are won.  And if Legion, who could, and frankly should, be one of the more powerful AAs on the planet, won't buy some soldiers and stand up to a collection of micros (now I'm going to pull a fast one and use an idea you neither implied, stated, inferred, nor intended) that members of your coalition have stated should just quit, leave the planet, or in your own words, merge, then take your ridiculous woe-is-me crying to somebody who cares.  You see, your argument makes me think you, and by extension Polar, must endorse and want to enforce all the ideas presented by members of your coalition, including MI6.  Or, does that sort of thinking only work when you use it?

[Schattenmann]

I don't really give a flying anything about fairness in war; I've never once advocated a fair war in my life and I've never fought one, either. 

I simply find it hilarious that you're acting like your damage ratio with Legion exists in a vacuum.  It's the most funny thing I've seen today.  Congratulations.  The win is going to look great on your wiki.  :rolleyes:  I'm writing a song about your heroics.

Edited December 17, 2014 by Schattenmann

[smurthwaite]

So, when all else fails, bring sarcasm?

 

Noted.

[Schattenmann]

So, when all else fails, bring sarcasm?

I certainly think sarcasm is the best response to ridiculousness.

[Walshington]

Bandwagoning weasels shouldn't get white peace, and no one has ever thought they should. 

 

I thought the working definition of bandwagoner was jumping on an alliance that was already overwhelmed, such as TSC.  I think Legion may still have the NS advantage.

 

 

150 nations are doing more damage to 124 than 124 are doing to 150. 

 

It's all very impressive.

 

Oh come now!  You know number of nations is not the be all end all of statmongering, nor is NS.  In fact, stats themselves are merely a barometer -- a war really doesn't end until someone is willing to surrender.  That may be the one with the best stats, or not.  I still find them irresistible.

 

I think we're giving as good as we're getting against Legion, and you'll hear no LOLegion posturing from me on the OWF. The guys I'm fighting are fighting back just fine. I think this is about an even fight -- warchests and coalition decision will largely determines who "wins" this war. We're all pushing the same buttons with the same arsenals in the same NS band, after all.

 

 

 

No, we all understand perfectly: SRA has elected to join DS/DBDC's effort to grind down Polarsphere, and PPO has done the same at SRA's request

 

It's all very impressive.

 

 

Not quite, although the argument can be made if you want to throw bottles at or shoot at the LAFD as well. Fixed a couple things for you:

 

SRA has elected to join DS/DBDC's effort to grind down Polarsphere Kashmir in their war against Legion.

 

PPO has done the same at for SRA

 

In our little Ass-O-Sphere, we don't really request anything.  People come, or they don't, as they wish. 

Edited December 17, 2014 by Walshington

[Master Hakai]

HEH!

 

Glad to see Schatt bringin the heat about the implications of helping an ally on the battlefield over in this thread, too. Good job pirates!

[IYIyTh]

Have fun Lurunin. It would figure the one war we're truly on opposite sides we don't line up. :(

 

<3

[smurthwaite]

Have fun Lurunin. It would figure the one war we're truly on opposite sides we don't line up. :(

 

<3

Just wait until after the war and hit him.  I must have destroyed...I don't know how many spies...messing with him....though he usually got the better of me.  

 

/me sees the print and thinks it isn't nearly as funny as it sounded before said.

[Margrave]

It should be noted that Kashmir is fighting an entirely different conflict than DBDC and those philosophically aligned with them. Our involvement with Legion and Invicta is due to their alliance with SUN, not as a larger alliance with the Doomsphere. We've already said why we're at war with SUN, (conflicts of interest with them, the behavior of members of their alliance).

Do our interests align with the Doomsphere? For the moment, yes. But the actual motivation for the conflict is the stated Casus Belli. With Kashmir, what you see is what you get.