JimKongIl's Blog

Since you didn't address anything I said in my last PM, I've copied it here for you to read again.

No one with self respect would surrender unconditionally before even seeing terms. That's what this is about. Iron has no choice but to attack Gramlins. Before you say it, unconditional surrender is not a choice.

I know it's not a choice, but what comes after it most certainly is.This isn't very different than an alliance saying: take it or leave it.The only difference is, we're offering a choice: after you surrender, either take our term(s), or don't. It's a clear path to peace either way. Whether it be peace with our term(s) or without, the choice is clear. IRON could end this right now, without even chosing to take our term(s), yet they refuse. They refuse the INSTANT path to peace. They refuse even the path that would've resulted in peace before Easter! Before the Easter Sunday Accords were even signed!That is not the action of an alliance seeking peace; they are merely seeking to capitalize on the PR blitz by known idiots such as Jonathan Brookbank, TheBigBad, BigWoody, IronChef, Alterego, BobJanova, etc. It is the move of a cold alliance with no principles.It's unabashed aggression and violence, not peace...and you're supporting it.

I thought I addressed it when I said that unconditional surrender is not an option for IRON for reasons that should be obvious. Anything that comes after than precondition is largely immaterial.IRON is not seeking to capitalize on anything they are just seeking peace and find the concept of unconditional surrender unreasonable.

I think what Gramlins is asking for is a state of complete submission then they will tell IRON/DAWN what their punishment is. Am I wrong, Matthew?

You are wrong, and what's more, I've told you this myself at least 5-6 times. We're not asking for any state of submission AT ALL, and you know it. Why do you make a statement you KNOW is false?

We apparently disagree on how this term should be interpreted. My take is that no warrior or warrior alliance would ever surrender unconditionally prior to delivery of terms. I believe that 75% would never surrender unconditionally and the 25% that would have dishonored themselves.Just because you told me how you interpret unconditional surrender it doesn't mean I know my interpretation is false. I would never surrender unconditionally prior to terms out of principle. Admission of guilt is easy.

My take is that no warrior or warrior alliance

Wait, what? "Warrior" or "warrior alliance"? What is this, Conan the Barbarian? There are no "warriors" here. This is a game, lol.

Just because you told me how you interpret unconditional surrender it doesn't mean I know my interpretation is false.

Yeah, but since we're the ones asking for it, doesn't our interpretation trump others, including yours? We're not asking you to do the thing that you've said you don't want to do, heh.Once more, for clarity:You, and IRON, say: "We don't want to do X"We say: "Cool, we don't want you to do X either, we want you to do Y"The problem here, is that IRON is coming back with: "NO YOU WANT US TO DO X!!!"And we say: "No, we don't want you to do X at all"And IRON says: "We're not going to do X!!!"And we say: "Cool...we don't want you to!"Etc...

My take is that no warrior or warrior alliance

Wait, what? "Warrior" or "warrior alliance"? What is this, Conan the Barbarian? There are no "warriors" here. This is a game, lol.

Yes, this is a game. If words like warrior have no place then neither do words like violence or crime or dishonor. You can't have it both ways.Simply put, IRON will not be surrendering unconditionally. No amount of debate will change that. It is non-negotiable.So the question is where do you want to go from here?

Yes, this is a game. If words like warrior have no place then neither do words like violence or crime or dishonor. You can't have it both ways.

Uh...Does the word "warrior" (with all the nobility that you impart to it) have any place in the real world? In any system of justice? No.That word has meaning in two contexts: Dungeons & Dragons, and the movies.Not in an online geo-political simulator. Violence, Crime, and Dishonor are all politically viable terms.Anyway, what do you think of this post:

I don't feel one shred of remorse or guilt, nor will I ever. Did we make a huge strategic blunder? Absolutely. Are we a group of morally bankrupt people? Absolutely not. Gre, you will see no surrender, allocution, contrition, amends, remorse, guilt, shame, apology or w/e from IRON. There is no need to argue this anymore. Personally, I think we should take the offer of white peace off the table. Not to make demands for reps, but to completely destroy you. You arrogant pricks.

I told you that all IRON feels is regret for having lost the war. They don't want peace, they want to win. If they could violently start a war again, they would....but all they'd care about is winning...

Yes, this is a game. If words like warrior have no place then neither do words like violence or crime or dishonor. You can't have it both ways.

Uh...Does the word "warrior" (with all the nobility that you impart to it) have any place in the real world? In any system of justice? No.That word has meaning in two contexts: Dungeons & Dragons, and the movies.Not in an online geo-political simulator. Violence, Crime, and Dishonor are all politically viable terms.Anyway, what do you think of this post:

I don't feel one shred of remorse or guilt, nor will I ever. Did we make a huge strategic blunder? Absolutely. Are we a group of morally bankrupt people? Absolutely not. Gre, you will see no surrender, allocution, contrition, amends, remorse, guilt, shame, apology or w/e from IRON. There is no need to argue this anymore. Personally, I think we should take the offer of white peace off the table. Not to make demands for reps, but to completely destroy you. You arrogant pricks.

I told you that all IRON feels is regret for having lost the war. They don't want peace, they want to win. If they could violently start a war again, they would....but all they'd care about is winning...

I strongly disagree. I have a great respect for the code of the samurai and I believe it has a place in CN. If you want to laugh out loud at that statement, feel free. As for Schmoo's post, I think he is entitled to his opinion. You can't force someone to feel guilty, if you disagree with what IRON did then your ONLY recourse is to take it to the battlefield and defeat them. Gramlins accomplished this and it should have ended there. I disagree with the "completely destroy you" comment but I am not surprised by it. I think you underestimate the growing resentment over being held hostage on the battlefield. I think there are similar sentiments within Gramlins to beat IRON so thoroughly that they are unable to fight effectively a year from now. War is a part of this game. It is within the rules. People should feel guilty for using multis or spying but they should not feel guilty for playing the game.I have respect for Gramlins but sadly I feel your unwillingness to compromise in this conflict will in fact destroy you.I don't understand the surprise at IRONs attacks on Gramlins and warlike rhetoric when Gramlins refuses to let them off the battlefield. Like I said on the forums you have forced IRON to go through you to get peace.Again, what options are Gramlins left with if IRON resolutely refuses to surrender unconditionally? Is this reason enough to allow your own alliance to be dismantled?

I strongly disagree. I have a great respect for the code of the samurai and I believe it has a place in CN. If you want to laugh out loud at that statement, feel free.

No laughing, instead I will just use it against you:

War is a part of this game. It is within the rules. People should feel guilty for using multis or spying but they should not feel guilty for playing the game.

If a warrior ethos such as bushido has a place in the game, then so does a system of justice. While we may not be the world police, and while we have said many times that we cannot force the players behind the screen of their computers to feel a certain way, we can in fact demonstrate that alliance is in fact contrite, and we should do so, because like in the bushido code, we must uphold our values, even until death. IRON certainly does not share the bushido way, as evidenced by their starting this war. It is against the concept of rectitude for them to have behaved so.I doubt that you expected me to come back with actual knowledge of bushido, but I have studied jujutsu for 46 years. I am the Kuraizume of the Sokatsudan Daito-Ryu Aiki no Jutsu Shinshukai. Your lecture on warrior codes is pretty much lost on me, because I know them better than you. This isn't a medieval Feudalism simulator, it's a geo-politics simulator. I agree that all 7 of the bushido principles are good here, but that doesn't make you a warrior, and it doesn't negate the principle of justice.

I don't understand the surprise at IRONs attacks on Gramlins and warlike rhetoric when Gramlins refuses to let them off the battlefield. Like I said on the forums you have forced IRON to go through you to get peace.

Well yeah dude....Say that we were C&G, and IRON came to us and said: "Okay, we lost, what are your demands?" and we said "800billion tech!", and IRON said: "No". They would be stuck in war then too, and they would have to go through C&G to get peace. Now there might be an outcry because the demand of 800billion tech is so high. Okay, but what if the demand was: Surrender in a way that shows you deserve punishment for your actions. Then either agree to terms that would take less than a day to complete, or enter a state of white peace.Okay, so they don't know what our term(s) are. Well, they know that it can be completed in a day. They know it's not tech or $ reps. They know it doesn't include disbanding or viceroys or wonder decom. They know that they will have full peace if they complete our term(s). They know that we will consider them guilt-free (unlike the ESA alliances, who believe that IRON will just keep being dicks and attacking people). And more importantly than any of that: they know that if they don't accept our term(s), then we'll just enter a state of white peace! Not as good as full peace, but come on now.Instead, they offer the CN version of white peace, and crow about it. That's retarded.

Is this reason enough to allow your own alliance to be dismantled?

Have you ever even looked at bushido? The Samurai Code? You should know better than to even ask this question.

I fully support this statement. Morally/ethically Gramlins can be whatever they want to be. It's a game and we can play it anyway we want to. It's obvious we don't care about your moral high ground. You can't force it on us and you appear to be very weak at persuasion. Might doesn't make right, but might will win the war. I also believe the white peace offer should be taken off the table. I'm looking forward to nuking Ram and Matt when they drop within range. I would be outraged if they accepted white peace days before I could declare on either of them. It's not that I want reps. I want Gre to be totally destroyed, every nation to be bill locked and ZI'd. Only then will I be prepared to rebuild and prepare for the next war. With white peace on the table gramlins has the ability to control when the war ends. I don't want them to have that power. I want IRON/DAWN to decide when the war ends. Let's take the offer off the table.

Welcome to the world of IRON and their allies. Peaceful indeed.

I strongly disagree. I have a great respect for the code of the samurai and I believe it has a place in CN. If you want to laugh out loud at that statement, feel free.

No laughing, instead I will just use it against you:

War is a part of this game. It is within the rules. People should feel guilty for using multis or spying but they should not feel guilty for playing the game.

If a warrior ethos such as bushido has a place in the game, then so does a system of justice. While we may not be the world police, and while we have said many times that we cannot force the players behind the screen of their computers to feel a certain way, we can in fact demonstrate that alliance is in fact contrite, and we should do so, because like in the bushido code, we must uphold our values, even until death. IRON certainly does not share the bushido way, as evidenced by their starting this war. It is against the concept of rectitude for them to have behaved so.I doubt that you expected me to come back with actual knowledge of bushido, but I have studied jujutsu for 46 years. I am the Kuraizume of the Sokatsudan Daito-Ryu Aiki no Jutsu Shinshukai. Your lecture on warrior codes is pretty much lost on me, because I know them better than you. This isn't a medieval Feudalism simulator, it's a geo-politics simulator. I agree that all 7 of the bushido principles are good here, but that doesn't make you a warrior, and it doesn't negate the principle of justice.

I don't understand the surprise at IRONs attacks on Gramlins and warlike rhetoric when Gramlins refuses to let them off the battlefield. Like I said on the forums you have forced IRON to go through you to get peace.

Well yeah dude....Say that we were C&G, and IRON came to us and said: "Okay, we lost, what are your demands?" and we said "800billion tech!", and IRON said: "No". They would be stuck in war then too, and they would have to go through C&G to get peace. Now there might be an outcry because the demand of 800billion tech is so high. Okay, but what if the demand was: Surrender in a way that shows you deserve punishment for your actions. Then either agree to terms that would take less than a day to complete, or enter a state of white peace.Okay, so they don't know what our term(s) are. Well, they know that it can be completed in a day. They know it's not tech or $ reps. They know it doesn't include disbanding or viceroys or wonder decom. They know that they will have full peace if they complete our term(s). They know that we will consider them guilt-free (unlike the ESA alliances, who believe that IRON will just keep being dicks and attacking people). And more importantly than any of that: they know that if they don't accept our term(s), then we'll just enter a state of white peace! Not as good as full peace, but come on now.Instead, they offer the CN version of white peace, and crow about it. That's retarded.

Is this reason enough to allow your own alliance to be dismantled?

Have you ever even looked at bushido? The Samurai Code? You should know better than to even ask this question.

I never lectured you on warrior codes. I can't match your Bushido and Jujitsu knowledge, I only have a decade in Judo and I'm merely 3rd Kyu in Shotokan Karate so compared to you I am a novice. I won't insult you by trying to discuss the issue.

I fully support this statement. Morally/ethically Gramlins can be whatever they want to be. It's a game and we can play it anyway we want to. It's obvious we don't care about your moral high ground. You can't force it on us and you appear to be very weak at persuasion. Might doesn't make right, but might will win the war. I also believe the white peace offer should be taken off the table. I'm looking forward to nuking Ram and Matt when they drop within range. I would be outraged if they accepted white peace days before I could declare on either of them. It's not that I want reps. I want Gre to be totally destroyed, every nation to be bill locked and ZI'd. Only then will I be prepared to rebuild and prepare for the next war. With white peace on the table gramlins has the ability to control when the war ends. I don't want them to have that power. I want IRON/DAWN to decide when the war ends. Let's take the offer off the table.

Welcome to the world of IRON and their allies. Peaceful indeed.

People get hostile when you try to force them into unconditional surrender. That shouldn't be a surprise. You don't seem to think or admit that unconditional surrender is an act of weakness, but most of CN does, including DAWN, including myself. I wouldn't underestimate the growing anger towards Gramlins over this situation. I retract my statement that I will not take the offensive against Gramlins. If it becomes clear that is the most effective and self-respecting avenue to peace for IRON/DAWN and I feel diplomatic efforts are exhausted then I will take it.

If it becomes clear that is the most effective and self-respecting avenue to peace for IRON/DAWN and I feel diplomatic efforts are exhausted then I will take it.

Don't worry man, no one really believed you were "in it for peace" anyway. You're a warmonger like the majority of the AA you're ghosting, and no one thought any differently. You just saw for yourself the kind of diplomatic efforts DAWN's government is capable of...IRON's government hasn't made any diplomatic efforts at all except to have Matt Miller strutting around the OWF acting macho.If you really believe that IRON desires peace, why don't you ask them why they didn't take it 10 weeks ago?

If it becomes clear that is the most effective and self-respecting avenue to peace for IRON/DAWN and I feel diplomatic efforts are exhausted then I will take it.

Don't worry man, no one really believed you were "in it for peace" anyway. You're a warmonger like the majority of the AA you're ghosting, and no one thought any differently. You just saw for yourself the kind of diplomatic efforts DAWN's government is capable of...IRON's government hasn't made any diplomatic efforts at all except to have Matt Miller strutting around the OWF acting macho.If you really believe that IRON desires peace, why don't you ask them why they didn't take it 10 weeks ago?

I still am in it for peace. They didn't take it 10 weeks ago because your offer sucked and no one would accept it, not even you. If you wanted peace you would take it right now. By the way, I am not a ghost. I applied and they accepted. Do you see any point in continuing this discussion? Its obvious I won't change your position and you won't change mine.

I still am in it for peace. They didn't take it 10 weeks ago because your offer sucked and no one would accept it, not even you.

They took the offer that cost them 135,000 tech, but not the one that costs them nothing (indeed, it gains them quite a bit).They took the offer that keeps them under terms for 6+ months, but not the one that releases them almost immediately.They took the offer that assumes they're going to continue being dicks again in the future, but not the one that relieves them of guilt.The Easter Sunday Accords was the offer they should've refused. The Grämlins would never have agreed to the ESA, but yes we would definitely accept our current offer, knowing only what IRON knows about it (which is basically everything, heh).

If you wanted peace you would take it right now.

We don't have the ability to take peace, because peace. Besides, the bank robber doesn't offer the cops peace...you have your metaphors mixed up.

By the way, I am not a ghost. I applied and they accepted.

Yeah, because they like having a big nation they can use for PR purposes. Come on now. You're talking about an alliance that takes -anybody-....that doesn't make you IRON. It makes you a meat-puppet.

Do you see any point in continuing this discussion? Its obvious I won't change your position and you won't change mine.

Probably not, because you're a warmonger and I'm not. Your position is to support those who would drive to war for absolutely no reason, and not feel the least bit of guilt for it. You're no better than the worst tech raider. If this situation ends in the Grämlins demise IRON will happily replace it's tongue in NPO's $@!, and continue being a !@#$%* amoral !@#$%^& alliance, and MK will quickly get its wish fulfilled to beat down IRON/NPO/TOP all over again.

If you wanted peace you would take it right now.

We don't have the ability to take peace, because peace. Besides, the bank robber doesn't offer the cops peace...you have your metaphors mixed up.

Do you see any point in continuing this discussion? Its obvious I won't change your position and you won't change mine.

Probably not, because you're a warmonger and I'm not. Your position is to support those who would drive to war for absolutely no reason, and not feel the least bit of guilt for it. You're no better than the worst tech raider. If this situation ends in the Grämlins demise IRON will happily replace it's tongue in NPO's $@!, and continue being a !@#$%* amoral !@#$%^& alliance, and MK will quickly get its wish fulfilled to beat down IRON/NPO/TOP all over again.

You aren't the cops. Its ridiculous that I even have to say that.And I'm glad you mentioned MK since them beating down IRON/TOP/NPO is what this whole thing is really all about. Unless you have more insults to get off your chest, I'll let you get back to your 28 man seppuku.

And I'm glad you mentioned MK since them beating down IRON/TOP/NPO is what this whole thing is really all about.

Well I dunno why you want IRON/TOP/NPO to get beat down yet again....you should join MK.

It's time to determine whether you were telling the truth or not Jim. If you were, you'll vacate the IRON AA as soon as possible. If not, you'll make up some excuse not to.Last night, the Grämlins offered to drop our demand of unconditional surrender. We are currently working with our allies to pursue an amendment to the Easter Sunday Accords which establishes IRON's culpability in starting the war. All of C&G is in support of our amendments, most of our other allies' first reaction to it is support, but they need official government votes, or whatever.IRON, so far, has rejected it outright.

[23:35] <DVDCCHN[iRON]> just to inform you, the option of the preamble addendum to the ESA has been rejected by the IRON Council

We're still working with our allies and others for peace, despite IRON's continued aggression.

It's time to determine whether you were telling the truth or not Jim. If you were, you'll vacate the IRON AA as soon as possible. If not, you'll make up some excuse not to.Last night, the Grämlins offered to drop our demand of unconditional surrender. We are currently working with our allies to pursue an amendment to the Easter Sunday Accords which establishes IRON's culpability in starting the war. All of C&G is in support of our amendments, most of our other allies' first reaction to it is support, but they need official government votes, or whatever.IRON, so far, has rejected it outright.

[23:35] <DVDCCHN[iRON]> just to inform you, the option of the preamble addendum to the ESA has been rejected by the IRON Council

We're still working with our allies and others for peace, despite IRON's continued aggression.

Could you provide me the specifics of what was offered and what is still on the table as far as Gramlins are concerned?

I need to know the facts before making a decision. Please let me know what the amendment says.

I need to know the facts before making a decision. Please let me know what the amendment says.

Are you in IRON government? This is a negotiation between leaders.C&G, Umbrella, Polaris, STA, Sparta, and a few others have stated their support, the rest are waiting for it to go through official channels in their .gov, but most have said it'll pass with ease.The main point between you and I is, you said that you just wanted to see negotiation because the unconditional surrender demand wasn't "right" according to you. We're negotiating. Almost everyone on "our side" supports the changes we've proposed and no one is against them. Once again:A] You said if we dropped the unconditional surrender and negotiated, you'd drop your support of IRON.B] We're dropping the unconditional surrender, and we're negotiating.Ergo, by the commutative property, you should drop your support of IRON.Q.E.D.

I need to know the facts before making a decision. Please let me know what the amendment says.

Are you in IRON government? This is a negotiation between leaders.

If that's your way of telling me to stay out of it then why bother me with posts like these.

If that's your way of telling me to stay out of it then why bother me with posts like these.

Because you said YOU would stay out of it, should we drop the unconditional surrender requirement and negotiate.We're doing both of those.And no one on the OWF is going to answer your questions either, heh. As I said, and Halflinger reiterated, talks are done behind closed doors, with the leadership of alliances.Honestly, I don't expect you to follow through with your word. I think you're a liar like most of the people in this game. I don't think you have any honorable qualities at all. So really I'm just preparing to rub your own lies in your face right now, should you indeed stick around and fight for IRON's "noble cause".

If that's your way of telling me to stay out of it then why bother me with posts like these.

Because you said YOU would stay out of it, should we drop the unconditional surrender requirement and negotiate.We're doing both of those.And no one on the OWF is going to answer your questions either, heh. As I said, and Halflinger reiterated, talks are done behind closed doors, with the leadership of alliances.Honestly, I don't expect you to follow through with your word. I think you're a liar like most of the people in this game. I don't think you have any honorable qualities at all. So really I'm just preparing to rub your own lies in your face right now, should you indeed stick around and fight for IRON's "noble cause".

I challenge you to find one person in CN who will claim I have ever lied to them. I have had extensive dealings with others as leader of an alliance and as a regular member. I would strongly recommend you do not refer to me as a liar again without proof to back that claim up.

I challenge you to find one person in CN who will claim I have ever lied to them. I have had extensive dealings with others as leader of an alliance and as a regular member. I would strongly recommend you do not refer to me as a liar again without proof to back that claim up.

I didn't say you were a liar. I said I think you're a liar. You made an assertion about your purpose in wearing the IRON AA, and I think that you are going to fail to do what you said you would. That would indeed make you a liar.So if you don't want to be a liar, then you ought to do what you said you would.

I challenge you to find one person in CN who will claim I have ever lied to them. I have had extensive dealings with others as leader of an alliance and as a regular member. I would strongly recommend you do not refer to me as a liar again without proof to back that claim up.

I didn't say you were a liar. I said I think you're a liar. You made an assertion about your purpose in wearing the IRON AA, and I think that you are going to fail to do what you said you would. That would indeed make you a liar.So if you don't want to be a liar, then you ought to do what you said you would.

What statement of mine are you referring to?

What statement of mine are you referring to?

1] Your assertion is that you are supporting IRON because of our demand for unconditional surrender, and our unwillingness to negotiate.2] It logically follows that if we dropped our demand for unconditional surrender, and became willing to negotiate, you would cease supporting IRON.3] Well we're dropping the unconditional surrender demand, and are negotiating. Almost every signatory of the ESA has agreed to amending it. IRON rejected it outright, because they're warmongering fools, but I'm still working with other, more reasonable alliances to get something settled. Everyone is on board with this: all of C&G. Sparta. Polaris. STA. Umbrella, etc. The rest are waiting for official internal decisions, but have assured me of their confidence.4] Everyone seems to want to end the war now, including Grämlins, except for your good and noble buddies (who were actually the only ones keeping it going all along, but w/e).Proof by syllogistic inference: IF JimKongIl is not a liar, THEN he will drop his support of IRON.Pretty simple.

What statement of mine are you referring to?

1] Your assertion is that you are supporting IRON because of our demand for unconditional surrender, and our unwillingness to negotiate.2] It logically follows that if we dropped our demand for unconditional surrender, and became willing to negotiate, you would cease supporting IRON.3] Well we're dropping the unconditional surrender demand, and are negotiating. Almost every signatory of the ESA has agreed to amending it. IRON rejected it outright, because they're warmongering fools, but I'm still working with other, more reasonable alliances to get something settled. Everyone is on bored with this: all of C&G. Sparta. Polaris. STA. Umbrella, etc. The rest are waiting for official internal decisions, but have assured me of their confidence.4] Everyone seems to want to end the war now, including Grämlins, except for your good and noble buddies (who were actually the only ones keeping it going all along, but w/e).Proof by syllogistic inference: IF JimKongIl is not a liar, THEN he will drop his support of IRON.Pretty simple.

If you want to end the war then accept the offer of white peace that is still on the table. I am getting very tired of this insulting dialogue.