Waterana

As an NPO member any of the terms that continue to damage us after any peace is accepted make the whole lot unacceptable. That includes killing our banks, the restrictions on who can pay the tech reps, and to some extent, how our internal aid slots are used. Long as our enemies are getting their monthly requirement of vengeance money, how we use the rest of our slots for internal aid is none of your business. And please, don't bother going into a huge bile ridden diatribe on how 'NPO did it first, so deserve it', been there, heard that. The tech reps payment restriction is not to punish the high tech nations in some sort of benevolent plan not to punish the small nations as has been touted, but simply to strip all our high tech nations of their tech and at the same time dump our AS to get us out of sanction. Small nations like mine are much more able to pay tech reps quickly and easily without damage to our bigger nations, guess that's why we'd not be allowed to. Just for the record, it isn't our governments 'pride' that is preventing these terms from being accepted. It is the overwhelming rejection by the BR of the NPO. Yes, we have seen the full document, it is posted on our forum with page after page after page of replies that can be summed up in two words, hell no. We know these terms are not payable under the war to our bank nations and other restrictions, will lead to nothing but more war due to violations because we can't meet the monthly reps payment requirements or one of 1001 other reasons (the massive loopholes will ensure that), and are geared to cripple us to the point of massive member loss and even disbandment. Continuing to fight is the much better option for our nations at this point. It won't damage them or our alliance nearly as much as those terms would.

I'll be honest, the GATO peace mode thing is one of the NPO actions I personally regret, a lot. Wasn't in NPO when that war started, was taking a 6 week holiday in Valhalla so missed the bulk if it (the war started only a couple of days after I left). I can't and won't defend it, and have managed up to tonight not to raise the subject, but had to tonight as someone answering one of my previous posts did, so couldn't ignore it. That is the reason my answers on this subject are shaky. I'm not dismissing what happened, but the peace mode term affects my own alliance, and I'd be a pretty miserable person if I didn't put the NPO's interests first. Yes, that term hurt GATO, not denying that in the least. The payback term will hurt the NPO, so we've chosen to say no to the surrender terms that include it.

I never said they couldn't do it. I said surrender terms have never to my knowledge, by us or anyone else, included extra weeks of war enshrined within the terms themselves that take place after the terms are signed to nations that under other parts of those terms will be not be allowed to defend themselves (no hostility allowed) and be disarmed. They can also not receive any help from the rest of us. Shooting fish in a barrel. Is that what we did to GATO? My post was aimed at you, not your alliance.

I've never 'kept saying it'. This is the first time I've discussed the GATO subject and have only said it once. You need to get that double/triple/whatever vision checked.

From the attitude and amount of bile in your posts, I doubt anything I say would be acceptable to you and would just be fobbed of as 'whining', so won't bother. We don't want or need your sympathy.

For that one offense as it was only ever threatened to one alliance (and never acted on), then yes, I do believe in this case GATO are the only ones who have any right to 'punish' us for it. For the other terms, no I don't feel that way. The tech thing confused me because hizzy said something about us setting the precedent, but I couldn't remember us ever doing that particular term to anyone else, so asked him for examples. I'm not saying we should get off scot free or get white peace, nor that we've never done anything to deserve the beat down we're getting now. The Karma side fighting us need to understand however that they can try to force any terms on us they wish, and use any excuse they wish, but we also can choose to say no, which we did. They may feel justified in demanding we hand over our banks so they can dump our AS, but we don't agree to that so they aren't going to get the chance to do it. As I've said in a past post, those nations are member of the NPO and our government has a duty of care to all our members. By rejecting those terms and remaining at war, the better option, they are doing just that.

Yes, we did it to GATO, and our Emperor apologised to them for it. Not that most of the ardent haters care. As I said in the quote above, our Karma opponents don't want to kill our banks because of GATO. That is only the catch cry they keep throwing out to justify it. Doesn't matter much anyway, as the terms have been rejected and our banks will remain safe in peacemode until they are free to emerge without the threat of war hanging over their heads. Personally, I consider myself to be fighting to ensure their protection now.

The peace nation thing applies only to GATO, who aren't one of the alliances at war with us. If GATO want to declare on us and make that term their part of the surrender terms, then I'd understand and accept their right to do so, but not a group of fear and vengeance driven alliances acting in their name, especially as GATO themselves have requested they be kept out of this. Besides, wanting to kill our banks has nothing to do with what we did to GATO, that is just the excuse being used. It is to knock down their strength and get us out of sanction. We already know that. I'm not calling you a liar, but can't think of us using the only high tech nations can pay tech reps in any set of terms we've given other alliances. Do you have any examples of us ever doing that?

Exactly. Which is why those terms were rejected by our government. Our opposition doesn't seem to get it. Surrender terms are supposed to be a better alternative for the defeated alliance than staying in the war so they want to accept them. Those terms make remaining at war the much better option for our nations and alliance overall, so the Emperor said 'no thanks' and we keep fighting. When an alliance surrenders it is supposed to mean peace, not a continuation of the war. The restriction on who can pay tech reps is also another method of continuing to damage us (and Echelon for that matter) after terms are signed as only nations with a lot of tech can pay them. As buying tech is very expensive for them, they are forced to give up their own supply and significantly weaken both themselves and our alliance strength doing it. Small nations, such as mine, can buy rep tech cheaply and easily and not have the loss cost our own alliance its overall strength, which is why we'd not be allowed to.

Wish he would. Be a few less for us to worry about then

Our government were repeatedly told the terms were non negotiable. What you call propaganda, we call truth and getting our feelings out in the open. From our side of the fence, especially us normal members who aren't privvy to any of the back room stuff, we can only comment on what we see. What we see is a number of alliances fighting us determined to destroy our alliance out of fear and vengeance. You claim that isn't true, but we only have your word on that, and sorry, few Pacificans, if any, trust anything coming from the bit of Karma at war with us. We have had no reason to. It is actions not words that count, and so far actions by our slice of the Karma cake only point to wanting us dead and gone, with our without those terms. Yes our alliance has done some bad things in its past, and we acknowledge that, but anything the Emperor or IOs try to say on these boards is met with jeers and 'PR stunt'. We gave up the Moldavi doctrine. To us, control of the red sphere was the cornerstone of our alliance. That doctrine was a large part of our identity and losing it ripped a small bit out of the heart of every NPO member. That sacrifice also was met largely with jeers, jibes, sneers, and the usual cries of 'it's just a PR campaign'. Are you beginning to understand yet why we aren't on this board in sackcloth and ashes begging for forgiveness? Pacificans are constantly accused of being arrogant and too full of pride. I do have a lot of pride in my alliance, but that doesn't mean I don't think we do need to change and that I think everything we ever did was ok. The arrogance isn't all one way either. Plenty of those on the other side of the fence are displaying an incredible amount of it as well.

Us disbanding really is the only thing that would satisfy you and make you feel safe, isn't it? Fear and paranoia. We are isolated. The people in this thread aren't supporting us, they are speaking out against the alliances fighting us and Echelon handing out the kind of treatment they claim to despise and be fighting against. Our allies are gone, our blocs are gone, our political capital with practically every alliance is gone. I promise you, we aren't going to come looking for revenge, unless you expect us to wipe you all out on our own, because no alliance is going to be the least bit interested in allying with us after this mess. Not for a very long time if ever, but I guess your fear of us is so strong you really believe we are capable of doing it alone. That is working out so great for us now, right? The nations in peace mode aren't there to rebuild us into some revenge seeking super alliance that is going to sweep bob clean of all those we don't like. They will be used to rebuild our nations so rebuild our alliance, and pay reps if we get offered terms acceptable to our government. Fear of us 'coming for you' is stupid, panicking about us 'coming for you' is stupid, paranoia of us 'coming for you' is stupid. We are broken, we are beaten, I'm sure our government would be willing to accept terms that don't have a clause requiring more war for any of our nations. They have a duty of care to us, the members, not any alliance fighting us.

I'm not surprised Echelon aren't speaking up. The terms have them effectively muzzled.

I did answer it with what I know. You brought up Vladamir and the IOs, I'm not either so can't comment on something I know little about. Also wasn't in the NPO (was a barely interested indie at the time) for GW1 so stay out of most arguments concerning it.

So our allies such as Valhalla and GGA who were equally accused of many terrible 'crimes' throughout their histories and under the logic of some of you are just as much aggressors, walk away with light terms, but Echelon gets nailed to the wall? Like I said, drunk on power certainly applies to some of the Karma alliances in this war. Echelon aren't being punished for their 'sins', they're being punished for declaring on the wrong alliances in defence of us, and peeving people off for not surrendering soon enough. Besides, I thought all the bad stuff was our doing and our allies just puppets doing what NPO told them to do? Then, by that logic, all the alliances that declared on us in defence of OV are also aggressors. Can't have your cake and eat it too in this. Either a defence treaty is a defence treaty or it isn't, but either way, it applies equally to both sides. The only aggressor in this war, any part of it, is the NPO. Because from all the blurb at the beginning of this war, I was under the impression all Karma alliance were united in one thing. Wanting the hegemony gone, and not repeating it's 'mistakes'. Obviously I was wrong about that because over the last few weeks, all I'm seeing is parts of Karma rapidly becoming indistinguishable from the old hegemony. The king is dead, long live the king.

You have a point actually. I will watch my wording from now, and be sure to state something along the lines of 'karma alliances at war with *insert AA*". They are giving Echelon these terms because those karma alliances who were at war with them have the upper hand and are drunk on power. I know they are trying to spin it different, but that is the whole of why an alliance that entered to defend an ally, nothing more or less, is now being treated so badly.

It's easier than typing out 90 (or however many there are) alliance names that are on that side. Besides, they came up with the name, not us. Don't blame us for using it.

The defence clause wasn't optional. Am I the only one who remembers the cries of outrage from Karma when our allies canceled their treaties with us right at the beginning of this war, and looked like they weren't going to come to our defence? They were called cowards, dishonourable, back stabbers, and many other gems. Karma goaded them into entering the war, and now harshly punishes one, just one, for daring to do what they were being insulted into doing. On top of everything else, Echelon is being accused of being an aggressor and starting the war. Seems revisionist history and amnesia are rife in this 'brave new world'.

I'm going by member posts over time Ivan. If I'm wrong about NSO, then I do apologise.

Anyone who thinks Frostbite, or even Polar alone for that matter, are defending the NPO here needs a reality check. All 4 alliances in that bloc don't like us. Will go so far to say at least 2 despise us. The fact there are some ex Pacificans within those alliances doesn't automatically mean they are in any way sympathetic to what is happening to NPO now. Again, take off the tin foil hats people. I read the OP as Grub calling out some Karma alliances and carpeting them for their actions in relation to the stated ideals of what Karma was supposed to stand for. He is free to correct me if I'm wrong on that. The Frostbite alliance members I've seen posting in this thread are, mostly, making the same arguments.

And that was us, the NPO. We fired the first shot. Not Echelon. No amount of wordplay will change that. It doesn't matter which side they were on. Echelon entered the war under the defence clause of a treaty with us after we were attacked by OV's defenders. Trying to demonise that and make them look like aggressors just make anyone saying it look stupid. Who they attacked is irrelevant. GOD were one of many alliances hitting the NPO. They were a valid target for any one of our allies.

They're already abusing it. The Echelon terms are proof of that. Same cart, new driver.

He's in Legion

Did you seriously say that? Have you read the terms? We've been gaining AS for days now, and there is no reason we can't continue to do it. Karma has hurt us about as much as it can at this point. Only thing that can hurt us more is accepting those impossible to honour terms and allowing them to destroy our banks. A resumption of war would quickly follow. We aren't dictating the terms, we're rejecting them, as we were supposed to do when they were offered to us. Or perhaps I'm wrong there and we were supposed to accept them. Only way Karma can get our banks is if we hand them over. Well that isn't going to happen. Karma get to suck it up and keep fighting, or come up with something else. The choice is theirs.

Lots of 'us' and 'we' in there for a loose coalition, and the part of it fighting us denying they were ever a part of Karma. Last time I looked, MK weren't involved in our front of this war, nor our surrender terms. Did I miss a DoW or something?