Serian News Corporation

The Serian News Network looks like a reliable source of information.

TL;DR: Karma is just as bad as the hegemony. Or worse!

Unless i am mistaken the only treaty TOP had that linked itself to the war was a treaty through IRON to NSO who was a treaty partner with Polar who held 2 separate treaties to CnG alliances at the time of TOP/IRON declaring war. So as i understand it the CB was that they where preemptivly attacking us to stop us from attacking an allies ally. A thing which historically we have never done nor did we plan to do. For this reason TOP/IRON's CB is invalid and thus is in fact a separate war of aggression started by TOP/IRON.

Yes because it is fair to grant white peace to a coalition who attacks an un-involved bloc, out of paranoia and extreme opportunism. Now it is CnG's miss-doings, whoops sorry, it is the Hegemony V2.0's fault for not allowing peace, when this other coalition has stated they want to see CnG eliminated as a threat. Not only did they attack an uninvolved bloc, they took advantage of the bad relations between the general member's of CnG and Polar, to assure a victory for themselves when they attack CnG. If that is not pathetic, I honestly do not know what is. It is very opportunistic and shows great cowardice.

We believe that TOP and coalition partners' poorly chosen entry to the war is not sufficient reason to deny them peace, and that C&G's desire to prosecute the war until TOP are 'no longer a threat' is reminiscent of the Hegemony.

TOP & IRON attacked C&G because they perceived us as a threat. Does that mean...

OH !@#$ EVERYONE IS THE HEGEMONY

What is an invalid CB?

TOP & IRON attacked C&G because they perceived us as a threat. Does that mean...

OH !@#$ EVERYONE IS THE HEGEMONY

If TOP were trying to roll you until you were 'no longer a threat', then yes. But they're not (they've offered peace any time you want it).

As for the rest of you, I acknowledged that TOP made a poor choice, so saying 'hurf durf TOP' doesn't actually make any points

Edit: Re the treaty chain. If IRON and TOP had entered on SF (to relieve NSO), and you could not hit NSO because of your 'ally of an ally' thing, surely that makes you more likely to have countered TOP and/or IRON?

If TOP were trying to roll you until you were 'no longer a threat', then yes. But they're not (they've offered peace any time you want it).

As for the rest of you, I acknowledged that TOP made a poor choice, so saying 'hurf durf TOP' doesn't actually make any points

Edit: Re the treaty chain. If IRON and TOP had entered on SF (to relieve NSO), and you could not hit NSO because of your 'ally of an ally' thing, surely that makes you more likely to have countered TOP and/or IRON?

As long as TOP maintains that they will only 'offer' white peace, then I don't expect CnG to take it.

Who would take a slap in the face by someone who has stated he wanted to bring you down at the moment your own friends are fighting each other, and let him get away with it? This is what you are saying, and I find it ridiculous to such an extend I can't even explain it.

Also, one could wonder about treaty obligations with regards to TOP as well... Why didn't TOP defend Umbrella the moment they got declared upon?

With regards to the present situation I think you summed it Bob, though it probably could have been phrased a bit differently. It's most unfortunate that some people are picking and choosing your words in replying rather then understanding everything in this entry and the context with which everything occurred under. Everyone is jumping to conclusions based on their personal beliefs, thoughts or assumption are or were and disregard what anyone else's are or were. They also like to bring out only one of the two stated reasons for TOP/IRON/etc. declaring because of their own emotional state because they feel wronged. Nobody here is saying that they aren't wrong; quite the contrary they were. However, it's been widely recognized as a mistake as a mixture of poor strategy and out of poor communication.

Both sides have done it wrong.

The cops catched a burglar who attemped to rob at my house.

At the trial, the burglar's lawyer arged that I was as bad as his client because I called the cops instead of offering a White Peace. Thus, I was a cynic, and his client deservered to be set free.

TOP-IRON, you hired Johnnie Cochran, didn't you? How long until you try the Chewbacca defense?

Also, one could wonder about treaty obligations with regards to TOP as well... Why didn't TOP defend Umbrella the moment they got declared upon?

The treaty likely has a non-chaining clause. Since Umbrella joined FOK via an aggression clause, it would not be a mandatory, instead, becoming an optional defense.

Same reason Umbrella isn't defending TOP now. Same reason FOK isn't defending Argent now. Etc etc.

What is an invalid CB?

One in a wheelchair?

I enjoyed reading this statement from the Serian Foreign Ministry.

The tortured logic, hyperbole and general indignation on display from those who would shout it down is interesting, and more than a little familiar.

The treaty likely has a non-chaining clause. Since Umbrella joined FOK via an aggression clause, it would not be a mandatory, instead, becoming an optional defense.

Same reason Umbrella isn't defending TOP now. Same reason FOK isn't defending Argent now. Etc etc.

Actually, they 'joined' us via a defense clause.

But yeah, non-chaining clauses... I find it quite sad to be honest. TOP mentioning they're assisting a party they're not tied to in any way or form, but declining to give their treaty partner that assistance. Could be just me ofcourse.

The cops catched a burglar who attemped to rob at my house.

At the trial, the burglar's lawyer arged that I was as bad as his client because I called the cops instead of offering a White Peace. Thus, I was a cynic, and his client deservered to be set free.

TOP-IRON, you hired Johnnie Cochran, didn't you? How long until you try the Chewbacca defense?

The closest thing to robbery in this game is a tech raid. It doesn't make sense how this war or how it started could be construed as one. If you're going to make a poor attempt at real life comparisons please at least spell out where the similarities lay.

So wait, has TOP et al offered peace and reparations for damages? Because otherwise I don't see why anyone in their right mind would let them off with white peace. This isn't one of those 'oops, my bad' scenarios.

If TOP were trying to roll you until you were 'no longer a threat', then yes. But they're not (they've offered peace any time you want it).

Your argument might hold some water if it didn't completely disregard factual accuracy.

1. Crymson, whilst in leadership, famously stated that TOP & co were taking this opportunity to "bloody up" Complaints & Grievances, in a time where we were perceived to be most vulnerable, because they saw us as a threat.

2. Crymson and other senior TOP members have also stated that they sought to continue this war against C&G until they no longer considered us a threat.

3. TOP only ever became interested in white peace the moment they saw the odds were against them.

4. Why in the $%&@ would we accept white peace after we've been aggressively attacked for absolutely no reason, by a bunch of conniving, underhanded miscreants?

5. If the positions were reversed, and C&G attacked TOP in the manner that they have attacked us, I bet we would still be subjected to your anti-C&G diatribes.

6. You're a joke and a gooddamn hypocrite with double standards depending on alliance affiliation.

The closest thing to robbery in this game is a tech raid. It doesn't make sense how this war or how it started could be construed as one. If you're going to make a poor attempt at real life comparisons please at least spell out where the similarities lay.

I was about to answer you seriously, when I realized that the nosense you just wrote can only mean you were just following up my joke by pulling a Chewbacca defense.

You almost got me. Congratz!

So wait, has TOP et al offered peace and reparations for damages? Because otherwise I don't see why anyone in their right mind would let them off with white peace. This isn't one of those 'oops, my bad' scenarios.

They were going to join the war in support of their allies and those they were in agreement with. In the planning stages determined weakening those lined up against them should get involved to be the better way to go about it. Peace was declared shortly there after with those initially involved unbeknownst to those who joined just a bit earlier that night. How isn't an "oops, my bad" scenario?

Your argument might hold some water if it didn't completely disregard factual accuracy.

1. Crymson, whilst in leadership, famously stated that TOP & co were taking this opportunity to "bloody up" Complaints & Grievances, in a time where we were perceived to be most vulnerable, because they saw us as a threat

2. Crymson and other senior TOP members have also stated that they sought to continue this war against C&G until they no longer considered us a threat.

3. TOP only ever became interested in white peace the moment they saw the odds were against them.

When it comes to how the two entites were stacked up C&G members would be joining against them, thus in this war you were a threat. If you wish to take it out of context of this conflict and then use it as justification for continuing this war against TOP to eliminate them, you've now gone full circle where you should be able to understand TOP's motives outside of this war if those sentiments were present enough to cloud their judgement in this war. Essentially you'll be doing the same as them at its core - engaging in conflict to eliminate a perceived threat. The threat to you could very well be argued as limited to this war or others where you two are lined up against each other by matter of how the chips fall. That peace was offered at all by TOP blatantly runs counter to your claims and makes you appear about as paranoid as you claim they are no matter what you think of their motives for it.

4. Why in the $%&@ would we accept white peace after we've been aggressively attacked for absolutely no reason, by a bunch of conniving, underhanded miscreants?

There's plenty of answers to that question but obviously none of them will be satisfactory to you or anyone else when all that's wished for is blood due to your own paranoia rather then an understanding and moving beyond these regretful circumstances.

I was about to answer you seriously, when I realized that the nosense you just wrote can only mean you were just following up my joke by pulling a Chewbacca defense.

You almost got me. Congratz!

I called you on a situational comparison which doesn't compare and you go on to make a joke out of it and refuse a serious response as to what exactly you wished to convey. I'm more then willing to discuss events based on their merits but for you to cop out in such a way is quite simply ironic.

I called you on a situational comparison which doesn't compare and you go on to make a joke out of it and refuse a serious response as to what exactly you wished to convey. I'm more then willing to discuss events based on their merits but for you to cop out in such a way is quite simply ironic.

Sorry for overestimating your ability to comprehend a metaphor. Won't happen again.

Your explanation is as simple as both the burglar and TOP/IRON engaged willingly in an illegal act; breaking and entering a house to rob, mass attacking an alliance without any CB whatsoever.

The nature of the illegal act is pointless for the methapor. But I can use a murderer instead of a burglar if that helps you comprehend it better, as a murder is closer to the intentions TOP/IRON had ("bloody up" Complaints & Grievances when they are weak to disable them as a potential threat).

Anyway, the nature of the crime is not the important point here. Look at the moon, not at the finger.

Sorry for overestimating your ability to comprehend a metaphor. Won't happen again.

Oh, you didn't. I did indeed have an idea as to what you meant but your picking a metaphor which simply doesn't work (ie. didn't have anything to do with this presently conflict) had me wishing to confirm or correct it prior to responding in order to avoid confusion or misunderstanding due to your apparent lack of ability to state your thoughts with clarity.

Your explanation is as simple as both the burglar and TOP/IRON engaged willingly in an illegal act; breaking and entering a house to rob, mass attacking an alliance without any CB whatsoever.

The nature of the illegal act is pointless for the methapor. But I can use a murderer instead of a burglar if that helps you comprehend it better, as a murder is closer to the intentions TOP/IRON had ("bloody up" Complaints & Grievances when they are weak to disable them as a potential threat).

For an act to be illegal there must be a legitimate reference with which one can be prosecuted for. Nothing of the sort exists in the world of Bob and thus the principle you claim to be stating (ie. engaging in an illegal act) doesn't quite work here. That isn't even commenting on the many different illegal acts in real life do hold punishments which vary widely. Some situations which differ in only details also come up where that small difference no longer makes it an illegal act. Hence the importance and usefulness in using situations which match up not only in principle but in the type of situation and act themselves.

That new comparison - murder - also falls short for it implies killing C&G was their intent. I've seen nothing suggesting a desire to dissolve C&G, its member alliances nor anything of the sort.

Rather what we have is one great big melee; basically a gang assault. They wanted to help their old friend Ivan but saw Archon, Londo and their buddies in the C&G gang just down the block watching their friend, who also was in the gang. Knowing that they're watching and how they've traditionally rolled together Crymson and his friends in the CC gang decide to walk right up to Archon then swing one across the face and kicking Londo in the stomach. Understandably they're bewildered, they couldn't believe someone had the stomach to bring it to them and with the adrenaline rushing they just want blood. They knew they would have gotten involved if Cymson tried to get their buddy off Ivan but can't believe they wouldn't follow the norm. The norm is obviously would have (based on how they got involved) led to your opposing gang getting jumped from behind by you while they tried to help Ivan up.

Those who started the fighting peaced out and went their separate ways. We have TOP/IRON now willing to go their separate ways with C&G but the later want to continue the fight, making more of it then it needs to be. Now it's become a feud without cause that couldn't be settled.

But anyway, the nature of the crime is not the important point here. Look at the moon, not at the finger.

Soon as the finger starts pointing to the moon and not mars.

Not in it, voted 1. (Kidding)

For an act to be illegal there must be a legitimate reference with which one can be prosecuted for. Nothing of the sort exists in the world of Bob and thus the principle you claim to be stating (ie. engaging in an illegal act) doesn't quite work here.

Yes, we have it. In Planet Bob we have the Forums, more or less our "international community".

And, at this point of the debate, the lack of legitimacy of TOP/IRON's DoW is beyond doubt. Because no one, not even the leaders of those alliances, attemps to defend the legitimacy of their DoW. At most, they try to justify their illegitimate act, but don't contest the illegitimate nature of the act itself.

There was no Casus Belli, and everyone acknoweldes that.

Rather what we have is one great big melee; basically a gang assault. They wanted to help their old friend Ivan but saw Archon, Londo and their buddies in the C&G gang just down the block watching their friend, who also was in the gang. Knowing that they're watching and how they've traditionally rolled together Crymson and his friends in the CC gang decide to walk right up to Archon then swing one across the face and kicking Londo in the stomach. Understandably they're bewildered, they couldn't believe someone had the stomach to bring it to them and with the adrenaline rushing they just want blood. They knew they would have gotten involved if Cymson tried to get their buddy off Ivan but can't believe they wouldn't follow the norm. The norm is obviously would have (based on how they got involved) led to your opposing gang getting jumped from behind by you while they tried to help Ivan up.

Those who started the fighting peaced out and went their separate ways. We have TOP/IRON now willing to go their separate ways with C&G but the later want to continue the fight, making more of it then it needs to be. Now it's become a feud without cause that couldn't be settled.

So Londo and Archon call the cops, and Crymson goes to jail for agression. That's how Law works. "Crymson, you acted like an idiot and now you pay que consequences". If Londo or/and Archon sues him, he gets to pay a fine, and maybe serve a time behind bars. And you can call Londo or Archon an hypocrite or a cynic if you like, but Law, legitimacy, are in their side. They have full right to act like they did, and the Society acknoweldes it. End of the story.

Anyway, what you wrote is rubbish.

In your description of the conflict between the NpO and \m/, you fail to notice that NpO had ties with CnG - ties that have led them to actually DoW TOP in the present conflict. CnG was more interested in NpO and \m/ white peacing out, than escalating the conflict and losing the ties with NpO due to the stupid minor point they where arging with \m/.

TOP and IRON, on the opposite, had been willing to beat CnG from long ago. That has been acklowelded by their leaders. "They were a threat and so we wanted to blood them dry and destroy all they stand for".

NpO was a wilcard, through. TOP and IRON weren't sure what stance would the Order take in case of global war between them and CnG. The war between NpO and \m/ led them to think that they could attack CnG and the NpO would back them up.

So, you can see, that in the NpO-\m/ conflict, CnG was actually attemping to stop it and prevent it from escalating, while TOP and IRON wished to fuel it into a Global Conflict.

TOP and IRON did push the button. Time to pay for your free agression. Next time, try to act like a civilized guy who is part of a civilized world, instead than like a cavernicole in the jungle or a gang leader in the Bronx.

Yes, we have it. In Planet Bob we have the Forums, more or less our "international community".

That's akin to skipping the arraignment and going right before the grand jury to decide guilt or innocence, not going to reference such as a codified book of law.

And, at this point of the debate, the lack of legitimacy of TOP/IRON's DoW is beyond doubt. Because no one, not even the leaders of those alliances, attemps to defend the legitimacy of their DoW. At most, they try to justify their illegitimate act, but don't contest the illegitimate nature of the act itself.

There was no Casus Belli, and everyone acknoweldes that.

At the time certainly there was a lot of assumption on their part and that hasn't changed. However, if it's being truthfully relayed in the thread Neverender posted by those he had an "on the level" chat with then their previous assumption was correct: C&G would have gotten involved if CC jumped in for NSO against GOD thus making the whole uproar over the CB moot. They were caught off guard when they were going to roll.

So Londo and Archon call the cops, and Crymson goes to jail for agression. That's how Law works. "Crymson, you acted like an idiot and now you pay que consequences". If Londo or/and Archon sues him, he gets to pay a fine, and maybe serve a time behind bars. And you can call Londo or Archon an hypocrite or a cynic if you like, but Law, legitimacy, are in their side. They have full right to act like they did, and the Society acknoweldes it. End of the story.

Cops assumes an entity outside of the fray with an impartial view coming through to handle the situation and restore order. Rather what we have here is Londo and Archon attempting street justice and in the process both sides receiving far more wounds then necessary. Street justice by the very term and what it means is contrary to any form of legitimacy so far as we've been speaking.

Now, don't mistake me, I'm not saying they can't do this or don't have the right to. Everyone has the right to do whatever nad all that jazz. What I'm saying is that in doing it, the claims made about the other sides psychology have now become apparent in themselves with claims they're doing it different but really, right now, it's not. There comes a point where when the aggressor wishes to stop, wishes to end their act of aggression but what were the defenders say no, we're not going to let you go. That's when the roles get switched and now since C&G wishes to keep CC in the war after they showed a desire for peace, C&G and their friends have become the aggressors in this conflict.

Anyway, what you wrote is rubbish.

In your description of the conflict between the NpO and \m/, you fail to notice that NpO had ties with CnG - ties that have led them to actually DoW TOP in the present conflict. CnG was more interested in NpO and \m/ white peacing out, than escalating the conflict and losing the ties with NpO due to the stupid minor point they where arging with \m/.

TOP and IRON, on the opposite, had been willing to beat CnG from long ago. That has been acklowelded by their leaders. "They were a threat and so we wanted to blood them dry and destroy all they stand for".

NpO was a wilcard, through. TOP and IRON weren't sure what stance would the Order take in case of global war between them and CnG. The war between NpO and \m/ led them to think that they could attack CnG and the NpO would back them up.

I didn't fail to notice anything. I was summing up what's been happening in a real life sense since the initial set of conflicts began with regards to the controversy over the still ongoing war between CC + C&G. None of what the war was originally about that has any sort of impact on what kind of illegal act this would be classified as in the real world - the topic of our debate.

However, because you wish to bring it up, the second line of yours just goes to show that the other side suffers from the same sort of paranoia. If they felt so threatened one would think they would have manufactured an event or at the least take such an action before. There certainly has been occasions where a war between the two sides would have occurred, specifically with TOP lined up against C&G. An example of the paranoia the C&G side experiences there are a number of posts throughout this forum by a number of individuals (though by no means the majority) where they consider TOP's actions in the Karma war of no nuclear war as something set directly at harming C&G that they may have a better post war position. Just like with TOP's reaction, there probably is some sort of legitimacy behind the view but if their intention was to tear down C&G there have been many more opportunitiest until now. That isn't to mention you're picking and choosing only a single one of their reasons for war as if there couldn't be more then one. They named more then that in their DoW. The picking and choosing reasons is just another example of paranoia. C&G and their friends aren't looking at the reason for this falling out nor are they looking to fix it but are acting out of their own paranoia now. What's there to feel pity for or sympathy with? I can understand how both sides feel but I'm not going to root for either side and say they're perfect when they're not. Both sides screwed up, bad. Both sides are paying for it. One side has expressed a desire for this to end and the other hasn't. If it was ended, only then could we see if it could be avoided again or if the feelings for both sides would remain.

So, you can see, that in the NpO-\m/ conflict, CnG was actually attemping to stop it and prevent it from escalating, while TOP and IRON wished to fuel it into a Global Conflict.

TOP and IRON did push the button. Time to pay for your free agression. Next time, try to act like a civilized guy who is part of a civilized world, instead than like a cavernicole in the jungle or a gang leader in the Bronx.

I don't doubt they were trying to stop the war from escalating and it's unfortunate that such news never reached TOP, IRON and the rest of CC. I find it disingenious to blame them for wishing to escalate it though as everything up until that point certainly looked as if the war was going to last and peace wasn't attainable. By the alliances originally involved's own testament provided in these very forums, even peace came about suddenly. Without TOP and IRON being notified of the talks even taking place let alone that a settlement was being reached, I don't see it as very reasonable saying they had an inherent desire for it to become larger but I suppose that's something we have to leave to them to explain.