Syzygy Posted February 11, 2010 Report Share Posted February 11, 2010 (edited) [center][img]http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/cybernations/images/4/48/Gremlins.jpg[/img][/center] Ladies, Gentlemen, I will make it short. While I absolutely do not support TOP's offensive war declaration for obvious reasons, I nonetheless have chosen a side. Their side. My side. Our side. Now some may ask: "Why fight for them if you don't agree with their war?". Because that is my duty as their friend. Not because I want them to [i]win[/i], no for sure not. They made a mistake, both in using offensive war as 'preemptive' strike (veeeery thin reasoning for war imho because I don't believe C&G would have attacked TOP openly anytime soon) but also in trusting the wrong people and relying on their word. They should have known better. Their experienced leaders should have known better. They have been warned beforehand. But, I also see that this other side, now claiming to be the poor innocent victims, have also done their part for this escalation. TOP and IRON were both played, tricked and betrayed and the enemies of TOP are right now using this chance to beat them down, not in "defense" but as "retribution". I believe TOP and IRON would instantly stop this war, if given the chance. But the "poor innocent defenders" do not want it to stop. They want to make TOP *pay*. Pay for old grudges and historic rivalries. And that is the point where it is my duty as their friend (and also MK's, FARK's and MHA's friend - the people in there should know that) to step in and say: So not. What happens here is wrong. What happens here is no [i]defense[/i] any more. And I am ashamed that my own old alliance, used to the highest moral standards, also fails to realize that this "defense" is nothing but a beatdown, (well) planned and based on betrayal - and taking part in it, without obligation and violating the own charter and oath. That being said, my days in these realms are counted. My age is almost over. But to anyone wanting to see TOP bleed I say: Here I stand. Come and get some. Before I go down, I'll take a whole lot down with me. And yes, MK, FARK, MHA: I would have done the same for you, anytime. I hold no grudge against you, nor my direct opponents in this war. I wish this war come to an end, and soon. But as long as one side does not want that, they will face me on the other side. En Taro Adun. /(DAC)Syzygy [center][img]http://www.abload.de/img/nuclear_explosion6v0u.png[/img][/center] Edited February 11, 2010 by (DAC)Syzygy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Blair Posted February 11, 2010 Report Share Posted February 11, 2010 What would you have us do? Accept their offer of white peace so that they may come for us again with another flimsy CB? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyriq Posted February 11, 2010 Report Share Posted February 11, 2010 I laugh every time I see that pic! o/ peace Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted February 11, 2010 Report Share Posted February 11, 2010 Nice post, shame it will probably be ignored until IRON and TOP have been completely destroyed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syzygy Posted February 11, 2010 Author Report Share Posted February 11, 2010 @Arthur: If you want to gain friends, you have to invest trust. Even if someone did you wrong. But the fewest have the greatness to do so, while they see themselves on the "stronger side". Hah, no illusions, your leaders don't want that. They want to see TOP defeated over everything else. And they are willing to sacrifice a lot for that "victory". I don't really care for their reasons, but the point stands: the 'defenders' are only defending as long as they are willing to end the fight if possible. If they are not, they are no 'defenders' any more, but seekers of retribution. They will just come with the standard argument "we are only makeing sure no threat is coming in the future blablablabla and so on." to make their beatdown look reasonable. I have no problem with people wanting to see TOP dead. But at least they shouldn't lie about it and play the "oh see the big guy did me wrong, all help me poor victim and beat the crap out of him!" !@#$%^&*. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpiderJerusalem Posted February 11, 2010 Report Share Posted February 11, 2010 Good speech Syz, even if I don't agree with it. Good luck in your endeavours Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fernando12 Posted February 11, 2010 Report Share Posted February 11, 2010 Here we go again with the same old arguments... Some - Yes you should offer white peace to prove that you are better than them and they have nothing to fear. CnG - But they will come after us again and WE WERE ATTACKED. TOP/IRON - We only attacked cuz you guys were surely going to attack us and were just waiting for the opportunity. CnG - Prove that we were going to attack you, your just paranoid. TOP/IRON - Everyone knows it, then why were a bunch of your nations sitting in peace mode. CnG - This is war, we were preparing to possibly engage where ever needed. TOP/IRON - You were just waiting for us and you know it. CnG - no u TOP/IRON - no u CnG - no u TOP/IRON - NO U, thats right capital letters for more emphasis! CnG - [b]NO U![/b], Ha bold letters with an exclamatiion point! TOP/IRON - [b]NO U![/b] CnG - [b]NO U![/b] TOP/IRON - [b]NO U![/b] CnG - [b]NO U![/b] TOP/IRON - [b]NO U![/b] CnG - [b]NO U![/b] TOP/IRON - [b]NO U![/b] CnG - [b]NO U![/b] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lebubu Posted February 11, 2010 Report Share Posted February 11, 2010 Poor choice. Have fun in your wars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tromp Posted February 11, 2010 Report Share Posted February 11, 2010 Best of luck, I hear you'll need it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eden Taylor Posted February 11, 2010 Report Share Posted February 11, 2010 /o True Gramlins /o Vengence Best of luck bringing about the end of even just a couple little worlds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astronaut jones Posted February 11, 2010 Report Share Posted February 11, 2010 This whole "if we give them white peace, they'll just come back to get us again!" thing is complete !@#$%^&*. Now, I think MK above all others is due reparations for this war, (from TOP and dare I say it, from NpO as well) but holding people to war indefinitely, and that's what it sounds like you're all going to do, is absolutely no better than the pre-karma days. What !@#$@#$ hypocrites you all are IF that is the case. And also, Grub is a !@#$@#$ liar. I support DAC for doing what he thinks is right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moridin Posted February 11, 2010 Report Share Posted February 11, 2010 [quote name='astronaut jones' date='11 February 2010 - 06:20 AM' timestamp='1265898043' post='2174705'] This whole "if we give them white peace, they'll just come back to get us again!" thing is complete !@#$%^&*. Now, I think MK above all others is due reparations for this war, (from TOP and dare I say it, from NpO as well) but holding people to war indefinitely, and that's what it sounds like you're all going to do, is absolutely no better than the pre-karma days. [/quote] I'm no supporter of keeping an alliance in perpetual war, but C&G has absolutely zero obligation to make a timetable for when they will offer peace terms right now. There is nothing wrong with wanting to take an alliance down a few pegs before offering terms, and just because C&G hasn't yet offered terms doesn't mean they never will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jer Posted February 11, 2010 Report Share Posted February 11, 2010 (edited) How delightfully self-important; it's as though you think your singular nation is going to turn the tide of the war or something. I will have to remember to make one of these whenever I next go to war for an alliance. Also I just noticed the True Gramlin line again. I find your scrabbling around on the sidelines complaining about the affairs of an alliance that you left to be both desperate and classless in equal measure. You quit on them instead of sticking around to affect things, so you forfeited your right to whine about how their alliance functions imo. Edited February 11, 2010 by Aimee Mann Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lebubu Posted February 11, 2010 Report Share Posted February 11, 2010 [quote name='Moridin' date='11 February 2010 - 03:26 PM' timestamp='1265898365' post='2174712'] I'm no supporter of keeping an alliance in perpetual war, but C&G has absolutely zero obligation to make a timetable for when they will offer peace terms right now. There is nothing wrong with wanting to take an alliance down a few pegs before offering terms, and just because C&G hasn't yet offered terms doesn't mean they never will. [/quote] Tell that to the numerous crystal ball wielders who plague this place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astronaut jones Posted February 11, 2010 Report Share Posted February 11, 2010 [quote name='Moridin' date='11 February 2010 - 02:26 PM' timestamp='1265898365' post='2174712'] I'm no supporter of keeping an alliance in perpetual war, but C&G has absolutely zero obligation to make a timetable for when they will offer peace terms right now. There is nothing wrong with wanting to take an alliance down a few pegs before offering terms, and just because C&G hasn't yet offered terms doesn't mean they never will. [/quote] The only thing that would save them from further comparison to how everyone operated pre-karma, is the fact that TOP and company seem to be doing some significant damage to all parties. It's no beatdown. Otherwise, it's the same mentality. Exactly the same mentality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted February 11, 2010 Report Share Posted February 11, 2010 [quote name='astronaut jones' date='11 February 2010 - 02:32 PM' timestamp='1265898755' post='2174720'] Otherwise, it's the same mentality. Exactly the same mentality. [/quote] With one exception, they think they are different in every way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Blair Posted February 11, 2010 Report Share Posted February 11, 2010 [quote name='astronaut jones' date='11 February 2010 - 02:32 PM' timestamp='1265898755' post='2174720'] The only thing that would save them from further comparison to how everyone operated pre-karma, is the fact that TOP and company seem to be doing some significant damage to all parties. It's no beatdown. Otherwise, it's the same mentality. Exactly the same mentality. [/quote] Do you also think that the justification for that mentality is the same? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Janova Posted February 11, 2010 Report Share Posted February 11, 2010 Good to see you back Syz. TOP's choice of method to enter the war, and the fact that I have a good new home, means I can't really justify joining you, but no-one can say you don't put your money where your mouth is. Good luck finding many enemies in range though [quote]What would you have us do? Accept their offer of white peace so that they may come for us again with another flimsy CB? [/quote] Step 1: ditch paranoia Step 2: stop acting like the Hegemony Step 3: yes TOP did not 'come for you with a flimsy CB', and they will not 'come for you' again unless you are lined up in an enemy coalition again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moridin Posted February 11, 2010 Report Share Posted February 11, 2010 [quote name='astronaut jones' date='11 February 2010 - 06:32 AM' timestamp='1265898755' post='2174720'] The only thing that would save them from further comparison to how everyone operated pre-karma, is the fact that TOP and company seem to be doing some significant damage to all parties. It's no beatdown. Otherwise, it's the same mentality. Exactly the same mentality. [/quote] No, it's really not the same mentality.NPO would attack alliances aggressively and not offer peace terms for months, if ever. See the GATO-1V War and the second FAN war for examples. In this situation, C&G is [i]not[/i] the aggressor by any stretch of the imagination, and it's only been two weeks of war and already everyone is whining "You're no better than NPO!" Of course, they've been whining about that since the Karma War ended so I guess no surprises there. Furthermore, we have a different military reality here. For the most part in the pre-Karma days, a couple weeks of war did lasting damage to an alliance, forcing them to spend several months rebuilding. If the current war, on the other hand, were to end today half of TOP could probably rebuild most of their lost infra with the warchests they still have left. What I really can't believe about this whole situation is that I'm actually defending C&G. C&G for the most part are a bunch of extremely irritating alliances that all in all, I really have no love for at all. Yet, somehow you people manage to throw out such ridiculous accusations that I can't help but call you out on them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timmmehhh Posted February 11, 2010 Report Share Posted February 11, 2010 (edited) So TOP & co declare an aggressive war on C&G and destroy the top tier of C&G in a 8 day offensive war while dishing out a lot more damage than they took. Now the first wave is over, and the advantage has swifted to the defenders side and C&G need to peace out immediately because otherwise its unfair? If someone comes in your house and kills your wife, and you manage to shoot him in the leg, the judge in the court won't say "Ooh but you shot his leg, things are even now, next case!" Let alone that the reasons for this war have been dubious to say the least, it basically boils down too "we don't like C&G and we consider them a threat". C&G has every right to keep them at war a little longer. And knowing C&G, I know they won't keep someone in war a long unneeded time, like IRON did to FAN, they just want their retribution and after that peace will be offered which is fine with me. Edited February 11, 2010 by Timmehhh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HellAngel Posted February 11, 2010 Report Share Posted February 11, 2010 Nice speech Syz, i totally agree with it. Most people wont get the point though, and everything that will happen now is people taking apart your argument as if it were isolated points while missing to see the bigger picture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dochartaigh Posted February 11, 2010 Report Share Posted February 11, 2010 [quote name='(DAC)Syzygy' date='11 February 2010 - 08:06 AM' timestamp='1265897205' post='2174686'] @Arthur: If you want to gain friends, you have to invest trust. Even if someone did you wrong. But the fewest have the greatness to do so, while they see themselves on the "stronger side". Hah, no illusions, your leaders don't want that. They want to see TOP defeated over everything else. And they are willing to sacrifice a lot for that "victory". I don't really care for their reasons, but the point stands: the 'defenders' are only defending as long as they are willing to end the fight if possible. If they are not, they are no 'defenders' any more, but seekers of retribution. They will just come with the standard argument "we are only makeing sure no threat is coming in the future blablablabla and so on." to make their beatdown look reasonable. I have no problem with people wanting to see TOP dead. But at least they shouldn't lie about it and play the "oh see the big guy did me wrong, all help me poor victim and beat the crap out of him!" !@#$%^&*. [/quote] unfortunately TOP has a history of preemptively striking others because they fear their power. Polaris was hit by TOP and a coalition partly because ES stated he wanted to dance on their graves... now CnG were attacked because TOP is paranoid once again. so honestly, with that history, can you really blame CnG for not believing TOP or trusting them? i know many in TOP but their penchant for "preemptive strikes" should be well known. now if TOP would not do that, white peace would most likely have already been had or lets put it plainly, this war would not even be happening. This new segment of war is TOP/IRON/TORN/DAWN's fault, not CnG's. i would hope that white peace was not to be offered to TOP or IRON as both have made themselves genuine threats to CnG. @Bob Janova- sorry, but it was TOP/IRON and their preemptive strike that is and still are acting more like the old Heg. 1) by preemptive striking in the first place. 2) by whining that they aren't getting white peace despite being the aggressors. 3) by using a CB of "we consider CnG a threat to our wellbeing". so maybe TOP/IRON should have stopped being paranoid in the first place and invested trust in CnG. if they are incapable of it, why should CnG even attempt it? until TOP/IRON can prove they are no longer paranoid and have invested themselves in the idea that CnG won't "threaten them", then why should CnG do it? this whole "be the bigger man" is bs as white peace at this point will basically ensure TOP/IRON can do this all over again in a month or less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROMMELHSQ Posted February 11, 2010 Report Share Posted February 11, 2010 o/ Syz, good to have you with us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChairmanHal Posted February 11, 2010 Report Share Posted February 11, 2010 [quote name='Arthur Blair' date='11 February 2010 - 08:57 AM' timestamp='1265896652' post='2174676'] What would you have us do? Accept their offer of white peace so that they may come for us again with another flimsy CB? [/quote] I see this from C&G and you seem to fail to grasp a very plausible alternative: TOP and IRON shot first not because they are aggressive alliances that want to restore some old regime, but that they feared the current regime would not allow them to continue to be successful alliances and would come up with some CB or other to beat them down. Yours was/is the stronger position, even if NPO is on the field. That will only continue to be the case so long as you live by the standards you claim to uphold. You are currently at best lacking in that area and eliminating TOP and IRON (whether literally or as a viable threat) is no guarantee that someone else won't also put you to the sword. Ask NpO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shardoon Posted February 11, 2010 Report Share Posted February 11, 2010 It will be good to have another one of the historic CN players joining our ranks. [quote name='Bob Janova' date='11 February 2010 - 08:57 AM' timestamp='1265900262' post='2174754'] TOP did not 'come for you with a flimsy CB', and they will not 'come for you' again unless you are lined up in an enemy coalition again. [/quote] ^ I think this deserves to be quoted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts