AirMe's Blog

"I find it interesting that the same people who argued that Athens attacking TPF over a 6 month old CB was wrong are the same people that are now supporting an offensive war with no cause other than "they looked at us funny" against C&G."

Oh, you. .

How dare you point out their hypocrisy!

Most people are !@#$%^&*. Most people don't apply the same standards to themselves, that they force onto others, and that goes for each and every side in this war.

There are many sides in this war, and they're all guilty of double standards and hypocrisy.

Most people are !@#$%^&*. Most people don't apply the same standards to themselves, that they force onto others, and that goes for each and every side in this war.

There are many sides in this war, and they're all guilty of double standards and hypocrisy.

What is going on here....I am starting to agree with you way too much for my own good!

Chaos isn't a necessarily a bad thing for this game.

"I find it interesting that the same people who argued that Athens attacking TPF over a 6 month old CB was wrong are the same people that are now supporting an offensive war with no cause other than "they looked at us funny" against C&G."

Some of us a drawn in via MDP treaties, and don't really support the war

"I find it interesting that the same people who argued that Athens attacking TPF over a 6 month old CB was wrong are the same people that are now supporting an offensive war with no cause other than "they looked at us funny" against C&G."

Some of us a drawn in via MDP treaties, and don't really support the war

The only people in this war who were drawn in on MDP treaties are those on the C&G side. TOP and IRON launched an OFFENSIVE war so no MDP treaties should be activated on their side.

Agreed on all points.

So what about when people on your side counter attacked?

So are you attempting to tell me when someone walks up to a person and kicks someone in the kahones they aren't allowed to kick back?

What is going on here....I am starting to agree with you way too much for my own good!

Nah, I'm quite rational when I want to be, so there's no need to worry.

What is going on here....I am starting to agree with you way too much for my own good!

Don't sell AJ short. That man may be fairly rough with his language and has the diplomatic skills of a coke snorting bull that's been injected with heroin, but that dude has some really impressive insights to what's up. All you gotta do is laugh off all the censored words and the occasional rant and you'll find he poops out nuggets of gold a good bit of the time.

I find it interesting that the same people who argued that Athens attacking TPF over a 6 month old CB was wrong are the same people that are now supporting an offensive war with no cause other than "they looked at us funny" against C&G.

The two situations are not even close to comparable. In one case, a bloc chose to launch an aggressive war over a dubious CB. In the other, several alliances chose to make a pre-emptive attack on alliances which had already chosen to side against them in a coalition war.

Also, I don't know how many people support TOP/IRON's way of entering. Even my friends in TOP largely acknowledge that it was a poor decision.

Bob Janova's posts this war are making him look like a fool.

you too.

The two situations are not even close to comparable. In one case, a bloc chose to launch an aggressive war over a dubious CB. In the other, several alliances chose to make a pre-emptive attack on alliances which had already chosen to side against them in a coalition war.

Also, I don't know how many people support TOP/IRON's way of entering. Even my friends in TOP largely acknowledge that it was a poor decision.

you too.

I'm sorry Bob, I am only telling the truth. Some of your arguments come down to the smallest of technicalities. Or you ridicule an alliance for something that the other side is doing at the same time. Sometimes you need to take a step back and look at what you are saying. I understand there is a character you want to play but I think you have gone off the deep end with some of the points you have tried to make.

The only people in this war who were drawn in on MDP treaties are those on the C&G side. TOP and IRON launched an OFFENSIVE war so no MDP treaties should be activated on their side.

No, unless I'm mistaken...Harmlins attacked IRON with no treaty at all but friendship. FARK declared on IRON to support MHA. Both offensive wars, technically.

Very few people in the initial fronts were drawn in by mandatory treaties (see my blog entry on the legalities of the first few days), though ironically Polar's MDPs should have been triggered back then. In the second part of the war, C&G's MDPs triggered, but many alliances have bandwagoned in (for example Aircastle, Dark First, Harmlins, and many more that I can't keep track of) and TOP and IRON's MDPs should have triggered at that point. As usual, treaty commitments are jettisoned in favour of back room political deals.

Most people are !@#$%^&*. Most people don't apply the same standards to themselves, that they force onto others, and that goes for each and every side in this war.

There are many sides in this war, and they're all guilty of double standards and hypocrisy.

AJ hit it right on the head here. We all use subjective lenses to justify our own actions, and use the same lenses to castigate our foes for doing the same actions. Its how "poltiics" works on Bob. I prefer the nuking part over the politicing part.

No, unless I'm mistaken...Harmlins attacked IRON with no treaty at all but friendship. FARK declared on IRON to support MHA. Both offensive wars, technically.

Harmlins attacked based on the Gremlins friendship with C&G I believe. Gremlins is a paperless FA alliance now. As was OSF back in the day. I have no issues with an alliance with no treaties declaring in defense of their friends and wouldn't consider that an offensive war.

Very few people in the initial fronts were drawn in by mandatory treaties (see my blog entry on the legalities of the first few days), though ironically Polar's MDPs should have been triggered back then. In the second part of the war, C&G's MDPs triggered, but many alliances have bandwagoned in (for example Aircastle, Dark First, Harmlins, and many more that I can't keep track of) and TOP and IRON's MDPs should have triggered at that point. As usual, treaty commitments are jettisoned in favour of back room political deals.

AirCastle and DF have entrance through the NOIR treaty....like it or not Optional Treaties are valid entries into a war given the fact that oA's have been used extensively by both sides. There are no backroom political deals going on. People are backing their treaty partners and in some cases their friends.

So are you attempting to tell me when someone walks up to a person and kicks someone in the kahones they aren't allowed to kick back?

They are but it's different whet they get a gang of friends and have them kick too.

Harmlins attacked based on the Gremlins friendship with C&G I believe. Gremlins is a paperless FA alliance now. As was OSA back in the day. I have no issues with an alliance with no treaties declaring in defense of their friends and wouldn't consider that an offensive war.

MHA also has an ODP with Athens through ICE.

Anyone has entrance through 'those people are my friends', that doesn't affect the fact that they weren't mandated to enter (and therefore with the wording of most non-chaining clauses, the people they hit can bring in their MDP partners on a mandatory clause).

None of us have the right to call our opponents hypocrites.

We all have the right to do whatever the hell we please.

We all have the right to do whatever the hell we please.

Except tech raid. NpO will come after you then. And TOP will support them.