Jump to content

DOE/DOW CN-Rangers


Thorgrum

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 142
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

 

I have as valid a CB as any on nation could have. The very core of the relationship is the protection an AA offers its members. When that protection is revoked without notice said nation has recourse. The fact I am choosing the path less traveled as recourse does not make me a rogue at all. The conditions by which this situation has occurred were not my creation, hence my action cannot be a rogue action at all.

 

Of course I do understand the venue I am in and the intellectual capacity of the participants so I dont expect the limited number of people left here to understand the simplicity of the concept but its really neither here nor there anyway. Kashmir will portray me as a rogue, what else are they going to do ?

 

Either way you cant defeat apathy. So for them because they are essentially small minded !@#$% bags they are going to now have to deal with the consequences of their actions. I'll know they are serious about the conditions I set forth for peace once they have Lysergide contact me. Until then, its a march to the lower teirs, billions of dollars and months and months, and months of 2cm's and a nuke daily.

 

*shrug* Next time start face book group .  

 

Thorgrum you might be able to pull one over some of the noobs here, but I too come from the olden days of this world, and you know very well the old school definition of a rogue. I'm not directly allied to Kashmir but I might as well write a refutation of the above for the benefit of newer nation rulers.

 

A rogue is a nation or group of nations without global political recognition who attack a politically established and recognized alliance. As you have no treaties, and Kashmir does, you are a rogue. There is no political mechanism to hold you responsible for your actions therefore the only recourse is a military response.

 

Rogues do not have rights and deserve to be treated ruthlessly as an example to others who would consider similar options... at least until a politically recognized force is willing to vouch for them. For rogues, then, PZI is an acceptable course of action, especially in a situation where the rogue threatens long term destabilization. Formal declarations of war are also not necessary in dealing with rogues, meaning nations allied to the defending alliance can cycle in to suppress.

 

You might think you are all-powerful but the individual cannot stand against the organized collective. All Kashmir needs to do is consistently cycle single nations and stagger you, keeping you in nuclear anarchy perpetually, until you get bored and give up. The damage you will cause will be fairly minimal while in fact stirring the activity of Kashmir's upper/mid/lower tiers out of necessity.

Edited by Immortan Junka
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thorgrum, I know who you really want to hurt. I've got your name at the top of my dance card, and I'll be waiting until you work down to my level. Until then:

I call a Nid upon you, and declare you a lawless man; you broke faith, and spit upon the stalla-hring; you are an oath breaker and beneath the contempt of warriors. Loki's get, we will whip you and chase you from the land into Helheimer, where you and all your kindred go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thorgrum? More like Thorgrumpy. You seriously need to take a chill pill man. Like lighten up you're gonna give yourself an ulcer.

 

I am also curious to know how exactly we forced you to cuss out people for no reason, delete your account and all the other crap.

 

Is there an evil hypnotist in our midst? Did Sir William's adorable smile drive you mad? Is this the end for the caped crusader?

 

Find out next week. Same bat-time. Same bat-channel.

 

Uranium is green.

Bullets are lead.

You seem angry bro.

It might be time for bed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Thorgrum you might be able to pull one over some of the noobs here, but I too come from the olden days of this world, and you know very well the old school definition of a rogue. I'm not directly allied to Kashmir but I might as well write a refutation of the above for the benefit of newer nation rulers.

 

A rogue is a nation or group of nations without global political recognition who attack a politically established and recognized alliance. As you have no treaties, and Kashmir does, you are a rogue. There is no political mechanism to hold you responsible for your actions therefore the only recourse is a military response.

 

 

I'm no noob, and this is far from 'the' old school definition of a rogue.

 

Thorgrum is a very grumpy and unpleasant individual without established treaty ties. That does not bode well for him, but it does not actually make him a rogue by "the old school definition" in the minds of anyone who can distinguish between old school and late-middle school Ivan. Ivan didnt speak for everyone then, and his over-the-top irrationality certainly does not constrain us now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The definition I wrote is literally the opposite of irrational...

I think as long as Thorgrum and this AA he has established retain the attributes of an alliance, most will see him as an alliance. Calling him a rogue is just one perspective among many & its to early to know if he has the resolve needed to keep his alliance alive having declared a war upon founding it. So far he's followed proper protocol by issuing a DoW & giving his CB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think as long as Thorgrum and this AA he has established retain the attributes of an alliance, most will see him as an alliance. Calling him a rogue is just one perspective among many & its to early to know if he has the resolve needed to keep his alliance alive having declared a war upon founding it. So far he's followed proper protocol by issuing a DoW & giving his CB.

And it's official; he's a rogue.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Civilization is built by the treaties that exist between alliances which form a social construct. It's that structure that provides the global and regional stability necessary for nations and alliances to grow without experiencing constant warfare. Anytime you have a single nation or even a group of nations who split from this construct to destabilize it, they are rogues.

 

If you disagree that Thorgrum is a rogue, offer him a treaty and vouch for him with political and military capital.

Edited by Immortan Junka
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Thorgrum you might be able to pull one over some of the noobs here, but I too come from the olden days of this world, and you know very well the old school definition of a rogue. I'm not directly allied to Kashmir but I might as well write a refutation of the above for the benefit of newer nation rulers.

 

A rogue is a nation or group of nations without global political recognition who attack a politically established and recognized alliance. As you have no treaties, and Kashmir does, you are a rogue. There is no political mechanism to hold you responsible for your actions therefore the only recourse is a military response.

 

Rogues do not have rights and deserve to be treated ruthlessly as an example to others who would consider similar options... at least until a politically recognized force is willing to vouch for them. For rogues, then, PZI is an acceptable course of action, especially in a situation where the rogue threatens long term destabilization. Formal declarations of war are also not necessary in dealing with rogues, meaning nations allied to the defending alliance can cycle in to suppress.

 

You might think you are all-powerful but the individual cannot stand against the organized collective. All Kashmir needs to do is consistently cycle single nations and stagger you, keeping you in nuclear anarchy perpetually, until you get bored and give up. The damage you will cause will be fairly minimal while in fact stirring the activity of Kashmir's upper/mid/lower tiers out of necessity.

 

People believe whatever they want, the truth is largely irrelevant as someone from the "olden days" you should know that fact trumps any definition you can conjure up about what is and what is not a rogue. 

 

Im not here to fool anyone or change anyones mind, believe whatever you want. I am however doing something about my circumstance, which is more than I, or you can say for most of the half assed want to be arm chair generals that parlay here year after year, month after month, day after day. So you, and they can go back to your holes, hide in your treaty web and wait until one of the bosses tells you its time to go to war. You'll either be in the tidal wave or the PM side, like every other ridiculous war we have had since Kharma. 

 

Me? I was kicked off an AA without what I believe to be reasonable recourse, and I am acting upon that. What anyone else believes isnt greatly important however this declaration was necessary as it potentially allows me a small measure of manuevre down the road should that circumstance present itself. While my expectations are extremely low, I have been around for a long time and I do know that not making the declaration absolutely would have made me a rogue, by my definition. 

 

Anyway they already called in someone else, hopefully stripes wont have to disband like its predecessor they really arent very good. Either way the long term strat begins to work once you get to the lower ns range. Thankfully my choice of target allowed them to stagger, which enables my strat to come to fruition sooner. There really are some extremely bright individuals still on our planet, its a wonder why its contracting so rapidly, lol. 

 

3 months from now, you will have moved on. 

Edited by Thorgrum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You outliers can argue that he's not a rogue all you'd like, what matters to those of us that will be seeing him on his way out - and to the numerous alliances that gladly sanctioned him - is that he very much fits the definition. End of story.

 

But who cares, he's butthurt so he doesn't like us and although we're chill dudes our tolerance for the dumb is low so we don't really like him either. Months of war sounds super, thanks!

 

 

Feel free once you tire of your ramblings, wise one, to answer how exactly you figured a trial could be held when you ragequit deleted your forum account? Or, given you were so caddy in the first place, why exactly you even deserved one?

 

More logic, less nukes. $%&@ it, we'll take both!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...