This war has been going on for a month and a half now and we all have seen various arguments being debated back and forth on these boards and some of them are just silly. Here are my thoughts on a couple brought forward by the TOP/IRON co.
1) If we let the NpO-\m/ war run its course then we would have ended up like this anyways
I must say this has been one of the weakest arguments put forth by TOP/IRON co. so far. No this could have been entirely stopped if they actually worked for peace. That was a mistake TOP/IRON co. took. TOP, you didn't need to enter this war... You could have stayed neutral and supported IRON's growth post-war as any conflicted ally would do. In this case you screwed up a lot. This war was never about "supporting" NpO's cause, it was always to bloody CnG and you guys know that. The moment NpO and MK were against each other we lost our biggest ally who could match you guys statistically and you took the opportunity to hit us. Okay fine, you could have let that war run its course and even if we were fighting each other, in hindsight that would have probably been better then preemptively attack a non-belligerent bloc in the current war in support of "the right side." I agree you wanted to support IRON but you should have let the course of the war bring you in, not start a new on a invalid CB. Now that onto the CB-
2) CB Is justified, Moral Standards are a CB
No, it is not justified. TOP has no right to force moral standards on us. NpO lost our support because it was doing exactly what we disliked, and that is force it's "standards" upon other alliances it dislikes. No one in this game has the right to force itself upon another. That is what Karma stood for.(Screw me I'm using the old Karma Line again) Moral Standards never have and will never be justifiable standards because everyone has their own set standard. It varies from alliance to alliance, bloc to bloc. for you guys hours of debating is what you want so be it. Do that yourselves, but thats not how CnG plays. We are a different group of players and you have no right to declare war on "community/moral standards."
3) CnG= Old Hegemony
Another weak argument brought up by TOP. The Old Hegemony, that name didn't come within six months or eight months. It took three whole years for NPO and co. to be labeled as a Hegemony. They were called such only because they hit others aggressively and then extorted massive amounts of reps. That was the characteristic feature about the old Hegemony which brought them that name. People had enough on being aggressively attacked that was what ended in Karma. In this case we are defending. However you argue, we are the defenders at the start of this war. We didn't hit anyone and then ask for reps, we are asking what we deserve to get back because of your preemptive strike. We didn't hit TOP then activate a dozen treaties and curbstomp TOP. We activated our Defense Pacts because frankly we were defending. We haven't done anything to compare ourselves with the old hegemony. We haven't aggressively hit alliances because we don't like them. It has never happened, so your argument cannot stand firm ground in this case.
And with that, I must end this post pretty quickly, lack of time..
EDIT: Screw me I know i'm late with compared to all the other war blogs, I never had time to write one up.
- Read more...
- 29 comments
- 495 views