Jump to content

jerdge

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    5,858

  • Joined

 Content Type 

Everything posted by jerdge

  1. jerdge
    Going back to this (just out of boredom) I'll point out that dictatorships can be and, quite often, are absolutely moralistic, at least in appearance. Fairness in international warfare is irrational, not moralistic. In fact it's even quite immoral, in that a national government finding itself at war, arguably has the moral obligation to maximize the damage dealt to damage taken ratio. Anything else would be folly and a betrayal of their own people. If instead CN was a sport then, yes, fairness in war would make sense.
  2. jerdge
    I can respect the effort made to present it, though the treaty itself is pretty standard (no offence meant), but professional at least. The conversation is admittedly more entertaining, or enough it anyway, and I didn't yawn this far! No ground has been broken, it's not like anyone took any significant risk... sometimes I wish you all treaty junkies went neutral, for a change. But who am I to ask? Congrats etc.
  3. jerdge
    I believe that, as of today, nukes have been "just another weapon" for well over a decade. (Your and mine age and arthritis permitting, high five to those of you that, without looking it up, can recall what major alliance enacted a war time policy in subversion of the then popular anti-nukes stigma.)
  4. jerdge
    The Legion should try be consistent with its own regulations (and they might be doing it, as far as I know, I didn't check). If they instead decided not to care anymore, well, that might hint at how bad this game has become. In other words, as Lucius is suggesting, it's maybe better to look for another, better game.
  5. jerdge
    DS and then DBDC evidently joined to help their allies and to get some action, maybe also to loot something (The DBDC people didn't loot anything and they probably knew it well in advance). They called it "defence", I see the point in challenging that choice of words but ultimately what matters is that alliances are free to do whatever they want and to call it however they want: what happens on the ground, and the consequences of it, matter more than the label slapped onto them. (In this specific case war was effectively recognized when me and Bundy found ourselves agreeing, in a private chat, that we were at war with each other. The GPA public recognition of hostilities came after that. Anyone can do whatever they want with this piece of information.) The GPA retains some capacity to defend itself, some of us indeed have a significant amount of money and enough stubbornness to use it. Just so that the next time people won't need to do spy ops to find the "obvious", my nation for one has enough money to fight until the lights of Bob go off, however far in the future that may happen. I don't however think that any of this influenced anyone's decisions, I imagine that our opponents didn't want to keep us in a prolonged fight we were not interested into, mainly because at this point everyone knows everyone, and nobody wants to be too dickish towards their neighbors/acquaintances/friends. Also, they're not that active either, they could definitely do something else with their time. I agree with JA that the general entertainment would benefit from stuff being properly announced, however most of us don't see the point anymore / are lazy/uninterested... it is what it is. Last but not least, Neutral Menace ITT.
  6. jerdge
    You're literally arguing that stuff, that's not healthy.
  7. jerdge
    Yay peace! It was a clean fight, people have been reasonable, it could have been much worse. Good SDI makers over there in Doombirdcaveland, by the way. We decided not to call in our allies...
  8. jerdge
    You're welcome! What do you mean with "something stupid", anyway? I'm a bit slow, I might need some guidance to get the full nuances of your prose.
  9. jerdge
    FL is correct on this, in their fight with us they're by far the underdog. We're pummeling them, I tell you! Especially at the top the- er... nevermind
  10. jerdge
    But I still enjoy the OWF, so... It's a waste of time I don't dislike.
  11. jerdge
    It's just that your "logic" didn't add up. There's no truth anyway. None in general.
  12. jerdge
    I am of the opinion that reparations are a waste of time, the GPA waives the ones offered by Kashmir. Thanks anyway for the kind gesture and for the meme numbers.
  13. jerdge
    As stated from the beginning, the GPA wasn't interested into any war (more below) and we were just recognizing that one had been declared against us, or that was how it looked anyway. Then, regardless of how different people feel we had reached that point, the war was undoubtedly real. Still, as I said, the GPA isn't interested into war. I was contacted by Jason8 and informed that they wanted to end it. Since we weren't interested into continuing something we're in general not interested into, it would have been just a bit weird not to quickly find an agreement over it. That's how we got to this announcement, which text wasn't agreed upon beforehand but which overall reflects also our views over this conflict: it can be wrapped up. I think that Kashmir signing the GPA DoN would go a long way to re-establish mutual trust, which admittedly recently has been compromised. Then, what do I mean with the GPA not being interested into war? Well the Agency would have been disbanded years ago if it wasn't for the stubbornness of its current membership, that decided and still wants to just continue to exist until the lights go out. However most of us, basically everyone but two or three, is totally inactive in normal times. War interferes with our desire to not have CN on our daily schedules, we prefer not to have it. It's an off game issue and as such no in game dynamic or reason can affect our dislike for what we perceive as a waste of our time.
  14. jerdge
    Not that I know of. Once a conflict is over, it's over. Everyone is free to do whatever they wish. Freedom means responsibility and consequences. We too are free to follow our rules, according to which we formally recognize hostilities with an alliance affiliation in order to inform people that, to us, they're collectively responsible for the hostilities they started. This too entails responsibility and consequences. I feel that clarity and transparency serve us better in the long run.
  15. jerdge
    Listen, I didn't give your latest posts a second look, they earned my indifference. Life's too short to waste time on trash. If and when I'll find a post of yours worth of a serious response, you'll get a serious response. The war just started. Some know how to fight, some don't much, most probably don't care. The GPA has been closed to new members for a long time and I don't see it changing anytime soon. But thanks for your offer, I know that it's just your usual kindness, I appreciate it.
  16. jerdge
    I'm not backtracking, I gave Kashmir the benefit of doubt, it's just SOP. They didn't really want peace, I found out about it. That's all.
  17. jerdge
    Until the next episode I guess.
  18. jerdge
    (A new day is starting here and I won't have time for you people for the entirety of it. Have fun.)
  19. jerdge
    It's GPA policy to consider the other party's explanation of what happened worthy of a diplomatic effort to de-escalate things. Then you have Kashmir telling us that they're not going on an offensive and they need to talk with SW, and then send three more attackers two hours later. I'll let you work out by yourself who backtracked and who's being aggressive here.
  20. jerdge
    In talks with Kashmir I learned a bit more about their stance on this issue. While they contact SW and decide what to do, I committed to ask our members not to involve other Kashmir nations. Also hello Doom Squad.
  21. jerdge
    Neutral cowardice etc. I even already hid in Peace Mode! Appalling. But seriously, a good talk and some jabs are the only thing maybe left here worth spending my time into. I'm sure that, you or someone else, it will be worth it.
  22. jerdge
    Nooo! Anything but not nukes, please! whatwillwedonow.gif (Since you styled it so much 2007 I thought of replying in kind, here hoping you appreciate it.)
  23. jerdge
    Kashmir attacked, the GPA did not. To this moment, the only Kashmir nation at war with GPA nations is SirWilliam's, Kashmir's Owner, and he's the aggressor. Yes, Kashmir is responsible for the actions of its Owner. We haven't escalated anything, we have only publicly clarified where we stand. Then people, you included, started to cry because of my big threatening words. There's a saying about not going into the kitchen if you can't take the heat, but this is on par with not being able to take the heat of the kitchen's refrigerator. It's true, anyway, that I didn't came to Kashmir's servers to say the same things I posted here. Not wanting to spend more time then what was strictly needed played a role in that, along with the intent to timely publicly clarify what was happening and our views about it. I knew that Kashmir would have had the opportunity to have its say, anyway, which in fact it definitely took advantage of. If it made a difference, I apologize, I'm not known for being infallible, for sure. But, does it make a difference? Is Kashmir willing to disown SirWilliam's aggression? Since it was needed to make a point about it, Kashmir might want to also explicitly explain its stance about the issue.
  24. jerdge
    According to your post actual attacks don't matter, while saying that an alliance is responsible for the government members it chooses is an aggressive move. At the same time, those attacking without provocation are those that you would be "defending", and from those they attacked, on top of it. I mean, you have the allies and the activity (more than us for sure, at least) and the firepower, I don't know why you thought that you needed to conquer some souls here. Boredom? But if you go for it, make a freaking effort at least! It's embarrassing to see such "logic" fall flat on its face at the first step you try to take, and I can't believe that this is the best you can do. This trainwreck of post of yours notwithstanding, the GPA is always open to diplomatic solutions, it has always been like that, it will always be. Yawn. I don't even know why I need to say it.
  25. jerdge
    SirWilliam is government in Kashmir and, although incorrectly, he cited DWs in his war reason. Al told me that Kashmir wasn't invited. When a government member of an alliance intentionally attacks the Agency, without provocation, the GPA holds the entire alliance responsible for it. Our recognition of hostilities covering the whole of Kashmir provides the Agency with the legal justification to initiate aggressive military action, or other hostile measures, against any Kashmir nation. It doesn't necessarily mean that other Kashmir nations will be involved in combat due to our intervention. What will happen and what we'll be doing is yet to be seen, obviously I'm not going to share it here. SirWilliam didn't approach us with any issue, he simply declared war to support, without request, DW's aggression. Or he's just opportunistically intervening for his own personal gain and he just put together the first excuse he could come up with. Whatever the case, not that I really care, he didn't talk with us beforehand. Everyone's entitled to their own opinion, however I feel that, by providing this recognition of hostilities, we're being waaay more diplomatically considerate and respectful than SirWilliam/Kashmir.
×
×
  • Create New...