sigelopisan Posted February 6, 2013 Report Share Posted February 6, 2013 NSO, i have fought in many many war and your action to sanction me is sooo low. We are at alliance war and you are the one who in offensive war. We warned you to not attacked US, and you did it. We are in defensive war to protect our members. If you think that sanction me will make my soldiers put down their gun, you were wrong. i will continue to kill you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayvon Posted February 6, 2013 Report Share Posted February 6, 2013 Now you come here and blame Kaskus for not accepting nothing other than white peace, but you should also blame NSO for trying to ask for any kind of surrender term when Kaskus already lost 70% of their original NS, isn't that punishment enough? I think it is. The same way you blame Kaskus for not ending this war because their stubbornness I can blame NSO for not ending this war because their arrogant behavior in demand a surrender. Also I hope NSO like my new signature :smug:Do try and keep up with the politics if you want to do more than make pretty pictures.We've already done more than demand a surrender, we've made concessesions to work with them around it. Our "arrogance" has seen us bend our knee graciously to offer an end without a 'surrender' and make multiple offers off our original stance. As I've said, this has been a result of a series of their decisions. Quite frankly, it does me no disservice to avoid catering to your tears.Stick to signatures. That one is good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hereno Posted February 6, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 6, 2013 You accepted a person on NSO's ZI list and then attacked them after refusing to work with them on the issue when NSO followed through on it's listing. How any of you can sit there and try to claim the moral high ground here is fucking mind boggling, and no your war is not in any way defensive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D34th Posted February 6, 2013 Report Share Posted February 6, 2013 (edited) Do try and keep up with the politics if you want to do more than make pretty pictures. We've already done more than demand a surrender, we've made concessesions to work with them around it. Our "arrogance" has seen us bend our knee graciously to offer an end without a 'surrender' and make multiple offers off our original stance. As I've said, this has been a result of a series of their decisions. Quite frankly, it does me no disservice to avoid catering to your tears. Stick to signatures. That one is good. The funny thing is NSO is who want to put and end on this so eagerly, but since you couldn't do it in your terms as a spoiled child you appealed to the use of sanctions in a alliance war, the shame is on you, and don't worry, I'll be around to remember it as many times as possible in the next months and years to come. I'm sure that everyone will love to hear the history about how NSO failed to fight a war against an alliance much smaller than them, called two allies - one being the #5 biggest alliance in the game - and even after that had to resort to the pitiful tactic of use senate sanctions. And they will say "I thought that the lowest point of NSO history would be their defeat to Legion, but I was wrong..." and the young nation rulers will ask: "Is NSO the reformation of GGA?" It will be glorious, you'll see. Now man up and fight in a clean way. Edited February 6, 2013 by D34th Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayvon Posted February 6, 2013 Report Share Posted February 6, 2013 The funny thing is NSO is who want to put and end on this so eagerly, but since you couldn't do it in your terms as a spoiled child you appealed to the use of sanctions in a alliance war, the shame is on you, and don't worry, I'll be around to remember it as many times as possible in the next months and years to come. I'm sure that everyone will love to hear the history about how NSO failed to fight a war against an alliance much smaller than them, called two allies - one being the #5 biggest alliance in the game - and even after that had to resort to pitiful tactic of use senate sanctions. And they will say "I thought that the lowest point of NSO history would be their defeat to Legion, but I was wrong..." and the young nation rulers will ask: "Is NSO the reformation of GGA?" It will be glorious, you'll see. Now man up and fight in a clean way.Glorious indeed. I eagerly await your great efforts with bated breath. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griff Posted February 6, 2013 Report Share Posted February 6, 2013 just an excuse to cover up the shameonly cowards!! It's hilarious watching you bawww from the sidelines. Don't you think it's just a little hypocritical that you of all people call others cowards? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ditchboy00 Posted February 6, 2013 Report Share Posted February 6, 2013 Glorious indeed. I eagerly await your great efforts with bated breath. How long until you got NPO to attack us? 2 minutes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Caparo Posted February 6, 2013 Report Share Posted February 6, 2013 Your leader wishes to bring up events from another world quite frequently; in this other world he loves to speak of, it's not uncommon for sanctions to be applied by those with the ability to do so to further increase their position. :) Would you care to tell us who YOU think the leader of Kaskus is? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gantanX Posted February 6, 2013 Report Share Posted February 6, 2013 (edited) saw this coming,... Thank god i always trade in secret :D Edited February 6, 2013 by gantanX Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayvon Posted February 6, 2013 Report Share Posted February 6, 2013 Would you care to tell us who YOU think the leader of Kaskus is? I believe that Bitburg is one of your leaders.http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?/topic/114932-a-shangri-la-announcement/page-6#entry3092669Quote embedding removes Bitburgs words if I quote Longshadows post. This is not the first reference to other wordly comparisons by him or by Tan - who I think is also one of your leaders. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KenoCore Posted February 6, 2013 Report Share Posted February 6, 2013 Perhaps you should *cough* do something about it? :D Don't Tempt the Indo beast ^_^ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corinan Posted February 6, 2013 Report Share Posted February 6, 2013 Why are we acting like senate sanctions are so morally reprehensible? Until we start sending Kaskus members to death camps, I'd calm down. Go take your medication, D34th. That said, I like your signature. Thanks for the free publicity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sardonic Posted February 6, 2013 Report Share Posted February 6, 2013 Why are we acting like senate sanctions are so morally reprehensible? Until we start sending Kaskus members to death camps, I'd calm down. Go take your medication, D34th. That said, I like your signature. Thanks for the free publicity. I wouldn't read too much into D34th's posts, or actually read D34th's posts at all really. He's just trying to make the same tired political points people made against GOONS in similar situations. Kaskus is barely an alliance, no forums, no clear chain of command, seemingly no accountability. Why should NSO refrain from using sanctions on such a group? The anwser: they should not refrain at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USMC123 Posted February 6, 2013 Report Share Posted February 6, 2013 Guys why are you responding to D34th? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saniiro Matsudaira Posted February 6, 2013 Report Share Posted February 6, 2013 People must be running out of things to criticize if one must resort to condemning sanction use. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KenoCore Posted February 6, 2013 Report Share Posted February 6, 2013 I wouldn't read too much into D34th's posts, or actually read D34th's posts at all really. He's just trying to make the same tired political points people made against GOONS in similar situations. Kaskus is barely an alliance, no forums, no clear chain of command, seemingly no accountability. Why should NSO refrain from using sanctions on such a group? The anwser: they should not refrain at all. Tan is the leader We have a forum but we use more effective means of communication. Were a small alliance no need for a forums. We know the situation and have reacted in a way we few is respectable to whom matters to us. We don't play by your rules you don't have to play by ours I could care less about sanction. Its part of the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esial Posted February 6, 2013 Report Share Posted February 6, 2013 Really, Kaskus? http://www.cybernations.net/search_wars.asp?search=289420&Extended=1 And [b]you[/b] whine about us prolonging the war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hereno Posted February 6, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 6, 2013 (edited) Guys why are you responding to D34th? I'm really bored and nothing interesting is happening in other places. If you want, I can try to coup you or something and be able to post internally about fun stuff. :ehm: Really, Kaskus?http://www.cybernations.net/search_wars.asp?search=289420&Extended=1 And you whine about us prolonging the war. Oh snap, a nation that high on their side? I think our lower mid-tiers are going to be nuking each other over the chance to actually fight in the war. Edited February 6, 2013 by Hereno Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Bit Posted February 6, 2013 Report Share Posted February 6, 2013 Another speed bump! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz Posted February 6, 2013 Report Share Posted February 6, 2013 (edited) Don't Tempt the Indo beast ^_^ Hey man, just sayin' if he finds it so outrageous and cowardly, he probably shouldn't just be shouting from the sidelines about it :D Edited February 6, 2013 by Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Longshadow Posted February 6, 2013 Report Share Posted February 6, 2013 Would you care to tell us who YOU think the leader of Kaskus is? I have a quote for you. <RagnarBuliwyf[NPO]> Razor leads in peace time <RagnarBuliwyf[NPO]> Bit in war time <RagnarBuliwyf[NPO]> Tan is there for war help I love getting these double messages pray tell us who actually holds any power and mind you we don't actually care at this point anymore. Tan is the leader We have a forum but we use more effective means of communication. Were a small alliance no need for a forums. We know the situation and have reacted in a way we few is respectable to whom matters to us. We don't play by your rules you don't have to play by ours I could care less about sanction. Its part of the game. Oh gosh I love this, Tan is the leader! No, Razor is the leader! No, Bit is the leader! Please can you give us a straight answer, or better yet just don't give us an answer at all and we will happily oblige to turn you all into dust. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KainIIIC Posted February 6, 2013 Report Share Posted February 6, 2013 (edited) My latest contribution: Edited February 6, 2013 by KainIIIC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D34th Posted February 6, 2013 Report Share Posted February 6, 2013 Why are we acting like senate sanctions are so morally reprehensible? Until we start sending Kaskus members to death camps, I'd calm down. Go take your medication, D34th. That said, I like your signature. Thanks for the free publicity. Because the use of senate sanctions in regular wars are morally reprehensible, senate sanctions are used to deal with nuclear rogues, not with alliances that you can't defeat. I wouldn't read too much into D34th's posts, or actually read D34th's posts at all really. He's just trying to make the same tired political points people made against GOONS in similar situations. Kaskus is barely an alliance, no forums, no clear chain of command, seemingly no accountability. Why should NSO refrain from using sanctions on such a group? The anwser: they should not refrain at all. I thought you had stopped with the non sense of think that you is who define what is and what isn't an alliance, just because they have no forums doesn't mean they aren't a organized group under the same AA and with the same objectives, if having no forums is your excuse to defend the use of senate sanctions you should look for another, because this one is a poor one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sardonic Posted February 6, 2013 Report Share Posted February 6, 2013 I thought you had stopped with the non sense of think that you is who define what is and what isn't an alliance, just because they have no forums doesn't mean they aren't a organized group under the same AA and with the same objectives, if having no forums is your excuse to defend the use of senate sanctions you should look for another, because this one is a poor one. You can argue about how your definition of "alliance" differs from mine until you are blue in the face. It doesn't matter what the definition is, the point is that Kaskus are clearly operating outside the bounds of normal alliance diplomacy and compromise. NSO are justified to call sanctions on them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ardus Posted February 6, 2013 Report Share Posted February 6, 2013 Because the use of senate sanctions in regular wars are morally reprehensible, senate sanctions are used to deal with nuclear rogues, not with alliances that you can't defeat. Kaskus is something of a rogue alliance. Does the validity of tactics against one rogue cease to be valid when dealing with mass rogue activity? If so, at what point does the use of sanctions cease to be valid? Is there a specific number of nations or particular indicia of cohesion that grant hostile nations the veil of the purported "no sanctions on alliances" standard? The use of sanctions to fight a war is rare simply because in coalition warfare it is for the most part a zero-sum game, even if you have a senate advantage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.