KinKiac

Good point! The longer this war goes on the more damage everyone as a whole is going to take. I seriously hope people are still at the negotiating table, but I fear that those on TPF's side are now going to want to get reps for TPF. If that is the case then the war is going to play out to a full scale global conflict before it is over.

Yeah, but NPO was also putting all its nations into PM, they were stalling, not deliberating. No comparison.

Who wants more drama? YOU leaked logs. YOU started the drama. YOU turned your back on your allies to save infra. Im sorry dude but your credibility went out the window the moment you leaked the logs, faked or not. The fact that you decided to NOT defend your allies via e-lawyering, AFTER telling them you would support them, says a lot. Especially your former protectorate. That also gives you motive to fake the logs, but I really dont care if the logs are faked or not. What YOU are doing is stoking the flames of a worldwide conflict. Do you think your alliance is going to get away from this conflict now without being attacked and badly hurt? (no that is not a threat, just pointing out something I think is obvious) YOU just ensured that your alliance will NOT be neutral in this conflict. If your alliance ends up getting rolled for this, your alliance mates will all have YOU to blame. Great job, brilliant political move*tongue-in-cheek*. If you wanted to go to war, why didnt you just defend RoK and save your honor? Now you get to go to war without honor. Ill say it again, great job! *that last sentence was sarcasm in case you didnt get it You try too hard. Not to mention you are highly biased. No one is going to listen to you but those who are already on your side. If this thread is such a waste of time, then stop posting here. If they prove nothing, then why is your alliance posting them to your general membership? The authenticity of the logs have been questioned and can not be trusted either way. So again, why post them to your alliance if you can not verify the authenticity? Also, why would you accept logs from someone who has motive to lie?

Yeah i was only half serious with the war crimes label. But I didnt think that war crimes encompassed a specific set of acts, but rather anything considered "out of line" or "unacceptable" during war time. Of course each side would see things differently. As such any time the term war crimes is used, whether here on PB or in other worlds(apparently it has never before been used here on PB), there tends to be a certain amount of controversy surrounding it and whether or not the actions were war crimes and thus punishable[OOC] Bush Cheney?[/OOC] It seems that the whole argument over the CB seems to be that TPF, and some of her allies, consider TPF's attempted spying or whatever you want to call it to be in line with acceptable war time tactics. Others dont see it that way, as TPF was not actually at war with Athens directly, not to mention spying is frowned upon regardless. This is by many considered to have not been an acceptable tactic. That is what reminded me of the term war crimes, as war crimes are punished after the war in question is already resolved, sometimes years later, for things done during war which are considered "unacceptable" during the time of war. I cant say I agree with going to war over such acts here on PB but the term seemed to fit, at least it did when I wrote it. Notice the "lol" in my post though, I was laughing at how much our world sometimes mirrors itself to that of another. EDIT: grammar

Actually I did, which is why Im not quite understanding the posts from TOP. You'd think they were the ones accused of being cowards or infra herders. The whole OP was great satire, whether or not it is true is irrelevant, when is satire ever 100% true. @Doitzel - I think your skills are being wasted in such a small alliance. You need to be in an alliance with some drama going on, like NSO maybe, lol. On second thought that might not work out so well,

Ever heard of "war crimes" Fair enough, my bad. I figured I posted that so late that by the end of the thread Id be putting my foot in my mouth, but oh well. If that is the case I stand corrected on that point. IRON has no reason to be ridiculed for not defending an MDoAP partner as that is explicit in the treaty. props to Doitz for the great taunt though, you gotta give em that. As for TPF and some of the other arguments going around, i think it boils down to whether or not we as a community are going to accept "war crimes" as a valid CB after the war in question. I have to admit I dont think I would be willing to take it that far. I kinda feel sorry for TPF in a way, but at the same time I am hearing that TPF has taken similar actions against others, so maybe a war with this sort of CB is justified. I really dont care. I dont hate TPF, nor do I hate IRON in any way. What I dont think is justified is bringing the whole planet to the brink of war over the "war crimes" of TPF(lol, war crimes). In which case I think that IRON may be doing the right thing in not defending TPF. If IRON doesnt jump in then I cant see this escalating any further. TPF will get beat down, hopefully not too bad, and we can all look forward to the next "real" conflict. Funny thing is though, we almost might as well do this now since the sides seem to be the same and the same people who fought with TPF and NPO still seem butthurt over the whole ordeal and if there is going to be another major conflict, the sides appear as if they will remain much the same, although the winners might not be the same next time, damn fence sitters have power over all of us, lol.

I have no idea how you get that from Doitzels post, but whatever, I guess you can spin it how you want Karma doesnt even exist any more. Why keep bringing them up, its not like it is in any way a coalition that still exists and that still holds power. I can think of at least 3 blocks, which currently have power right now, not all of them are friends, there is no one ruling hegemony, your argument is silly.

I have to admit I havent read the whole thread yet but there is a couple of things id like to respond to. Ok, let me get this straight. IRON has an MADP with TPF. An MADP includes "aggressive" actions. Spying is considered an aggressive action. Where's the O in MADP? It shouldnt matter if the CB was legitimate, you have an MADP with them. That is unless your MADP has a clause which states that spying against other alliances nullifies the A and the D, if so I apologize. So, what is it that you are deliberating on again? Basically what I get from your post is that IRON is trying to figure out if the CB is valid and IC, if so, they will not be defending their MADP partner, but if not they will be defending them? I didnt think their was any loopholes in an MADP? Honoring a treaty, and publicly defending their actions on OWF are 2 different things.

Umm... I think the idea was that it would be 1 "entire" alliance vs 1 other "entire" alliance. 30 alliances vs 1 was never a possibility, that is unless 30 alliances worth of nations decide to suddenly join either NSO or RIA, which is unlikely, as is any war at this point I imagine.

No, its probably not a big deal what you said. But it stills shows that you are willing give up info from former alliances once no longer tied to said alliance. Hence the remark about your character. And as for "claiming that the Order's were not harming their respective blocs", way to try to put words in my mouth. I never said that. I simply said that you and Echelon were dumb to even try. It would be like GLOF or 1TF trying to get NV expelled from AZTEC. Its just not going to happen, EVER, so why bother. Now, if the rest of 1V or BLEU had come to you with the idea, that would be a different story, but for Echelon to bring it up is just disrespectful to everyone else in the bloc considering you were not that big of a player in either bloc. Not only that, but friends stick together through thick AND thin. Do you know how many times Ive been to the bar with buddies who just cant let stuff go and get themselves into fights? I still don't think twice about defending them. Then, afterwards, back home, I will be like "yo bro, starting with that guy, not cool dude those guys would've, could've, should've, DID rip us a new one. Next time, don't be so dumb." and that would be that. We would still be friends and Id still stick up for them the next time. The same goes for BLEU. Im quite sure my mates in NV knew what was going to happen, they knew we could be in for some trouble if we stuck by Polar. But you wanna know what? We did anyway and there was absolutely NEVER any questions in anyone's mind about that or about who our loyalty was with. That's friendship, that's honor, something you and Echelon apparently know nothing about. Canceling your MADP and sitting out the war would have been one thing, still a crappy thing to do to a friend, but meh. Now, canceling and then going fight for the other side, that's a total betrayal, that's not easily forgotten.

No I wasnt taking what you said out of context, and I realize that both incidents didnt take place at the same time. What i was commenting on is the fact that twice, not once but twice, your alliance tried to expel what was probably the most influential member of the bloc you were in at the time. That has got to be one of the dumbest ideas I have ever heard, in both cases. I wasnt taking it out of context, the ideas were dumb regardless of the actions of the Orders or their intentions. The fact that you had the balls to even try or even consider trying, considering you were not that important nor influential an alliance in either bloc afaik, goes a long way to show what Echelon might do to a bloc they belong to in the future. The same goes for yourself personally, and the fact that you would so freely let the world know about such intentions, again goes a long way to describe your character. I know you are not politically tied to anyone so you can say what you want, but revealing things from your former alliance that are not public knowledge shows how little you respect your former friends.

But fighting yourself into bill lock at 10 days into war is not good fighting performance is it?

Dude, look at my posts. Im not here to bad mouth \m/. Im not spouting propaganda, there has actually been ZERO mention of any of these events in our home forums(Im NV btw not Polar), and Im not judging anyone, just pointing out an observation. As for the Polar and \m/ being 2 totally different situations, I believe that was admitted to earlier on in the thread, but you cant blame former Polar's for trying to defend NpO when former \m/ members try to say that Polar's effort was pitiful compared to \m/'s which is what started this whole argument. Oh and I didnt have to give you mercy as I wasnt around at the time, and I didnt get any mercy(I was hammered in the NoCB war along with the rest of BLEU even though I had only been in NV for maybe 2 months at the time, previous to that I was in NFL, an NPO protectorate) and I never changed a single bit as Ive never had a reason to. Maybe you should do your research before spouting ad hominem attacks against someone you dont know.

I think Penkala is also neglecting the fact that Polar didnt seek terms after just one round of war. If Polar had asked for terms after the first round, Im pretty sure the response at that time would have actually been "lol die, Polar" dont you think?

Yeah, normally friends are honest and upfront with each other, not hiding things. @Caffiene or Echelon - In the end, the result was that you turned your back on what was an MADP partner on the eve of war because of some bad info. Who was it that gave you that bad info? Was it Polar's enemies? The same ones you were trying to get into bed with? Then you join said enemies? Come on now. It seems to me that you are trying to make excuses and defend Echelons actions when what you should be doing, is apologizing for such actions. Oh and surprise surprise, you've now sent a diplomat to NV, AFTER this thread called you out on the fact that you hadnt tried to make ammends with some former BLEU members. Thats a pretty damn big mistake we're talking about here. If I were to murder your family, then 2 years down the road asked for forgiveness for my "one solitary mistake", would you be so quick to forget about it? @ChairmalHal - I cant believe you are trying to relate what you did, which was give private info to your former alliance's enemies as you left, to what Doitzel did. Doitzel stood up for what he believed in. He left the alliance for the exact same reason he started VOX. Comparing what you apparently did, by your own admission I dont actually know anything about that, with what Doitzel did is laughable. The 2 situations say 2 totally different things with regards to character. Doitzel threw himself into the flames to defend what he believed in, you did nothing of the sort. Wait wait wait, did you just say that you had considered trying to get NPO expelled from 1V and in the same breath that you had also considered trying to get NpO expelled from BLEU. WOW! You just did more to hurt my opinion of Echelon(and yourself for that matter) than this entire thread. Congrats!

While I can see where you are coming from, in the end, as many have pointed out you are not going to cause any damage. These alliances are at NO risk. They risk nothing and you risk it all. I do not agree with tech raiding, but I also dont agree with attacking a nation that did not attack me or my alliance mates. It does not matter if the nation who attacked me or my alliance mates is in an alliance, if his entire alliance is not actually attacking me or my alliance, then i have no beef with them. I do have a beef with the nation attacking me, however. That is who i am going to hit, not his buddies and not other guys in his alliance, for one he could have just been ghosting, which would have meant that it had nothing to do with said alliance. Anyway, the point I want to make is that you should have learned something by now and here it is: When someone raids you and is in an alliance, in most cases the alliances that approves of tech raiding have policies that state if you "bite of more than you can chew", you are on your own. Therefore, if you had wanted to punish the raiders for their "immoral" behavior, the best way to do it would have been to triple team the guys attacking you, and only them. You would have actually stood a chance and would have done enough damage to the attacker to make him think twice before trying to raid your alliance again. If you had gone ahead and made it all public, as you have done here, you would have also deterred others from tech raiding your alliance, save for an alliance that decides to organize an alliance wide tech raid anyways. 15 guys doesnt do much to deter a 100 man alliance if it were to really come to that. But, that doesnt happen very often as it is kinda frowned upon by most of CN, even more so than raiding in general. In the end, a 15 man alliance CAN NOT DO ANY SIGNIFICANT DAMAGE to a 100 man alliance, the math just isnt on your side. 15 nations can however, can do a lot of damage to 3 guys, the guys who originally attacked your alliance. If you really want to make a stand next time, keep this in mind. The 15 of you could have possibly nuked the !@#$ out of your raiders and done a heck of a lot more to deter future raiding than this stunt will ever accomplish.

Gotta love noobs and/or the ignorant, lol Umm, I think it will be kinda hard for you to attack from hippy mode wont it? EDIT : Oh and Hi Bomber. Edit: wait a minute, this all started form a tech raid? LOL. Have fun guys

@ Il Impero Romano Just 2 weeks? is that all they deserved? To be basically crushed? Cant say Im impressed here. Assuming that KD did lie, you punish an entire alliance(possibly 2 if the Mafia had decided to join) over a possible lie? But thats the thing, you jumped the gun, you didnt look into it. Instead, you allowed your allies to just attack and fully supported them in doing so, thus assuring that UED would be crushed. Im sure KD felt quite "assured" by your statement. Finally, you are actually willing to listen to some reason instead of blindy following the conclusions of your ally. No, no he didnt. He didnt play it well at all. If he had actually created a !@#$%* account with an actual target list in there, then he would have played it well. In this case he made a very obvious mistake in trying to fake the link. That is unless he "knew" WF would not do any research and just jump the gun and go to war? That would be the only way he "play it well". Im sorry dude, I know our alliances are allies but this whole situation makes you and Wf look bad, especially if you stick to your guns(when I say that I mean in your claiming that going to war was the correct choice of action considering the "evidence" at the time.) Im sorry but "someone" Im not claiming to know who, was a little to quick to go to war, and it displays a flippant attitude towards what would almost certainly be the destruction of a small inexperienced alliance. This is going to hurt your relations with other alliances, no matter how you look at it. (Im not referring to your relations with NV but rather some of the other leaders that have decried your actions) Side Note: I know this has probably already been resolved and would just like to say i didnt get past the last post of yours i quoted before posting this. I just had a few things to say while I still had time.

AGORA!!!! Thats it! Thanks. I really couldnt for the life of me remember what the name was. And, I think you're right, there are definitely some differences, major differences, between this and Agora. I do think there is some similarities though. When Agora was formed it excluded NpO, the largest blue team alliance. Now this Solidarity is excluding the largest red team alliance. (I know technically they are not "excluding" NPO but Agora kept saying the same thing about NpO and former BLEU signatories too.) In the end, I think this will serve a similar purpose, which is contradictory to its stated intentions. I think that by creating their own bloc rather than joining and helping to better the existing one, that they will in fact be contributing to the instability of the sphere, just as Agora did with blue.

I just had to make this comment. Do you know what this reminds of me of? It reminds me of when MCXA et al decided to create, umm damn what was its name...... (Oh well, Im sure most of you know what Im talking about), and then tried to say its intention was to bring stability and unity to the blue sphere. lol. I think everyone remembers how well that went.

I just had to reply to this, I know its an old post but I just had to fix it. -SethB was fed spied info from BC -BC feeds TPF info on SethB accepting said info (your own emperor has been quoted as saying "who doesnt accept info" I might add) -TPF uses said info to bully out a confession saying it will make things "easier" -Once SethB slips that yeah he did accept some info(after said bullying and bringing in Moo to the channel) -Suddenly Mhawk (good cop) steps out of the way and Moo (bad cop) starts making ridiculous demands, pounding his chest and such, threatening to destroy OV, knowing full well that he is also threatening VE along with C&G(please dont try and tell me that NPO had no idea OV's allies would stick up for them, you are just insulting your leader's intelligence by doing so) -VE is like WTF? -Then, during negotiations, NPO and TORN decide to attack, without a DoW, and without notice -A group of alliances who are fed up with NPO and their ruthless tactics and bullying decide enough is enough, although at this point they(Karma) arent powerful enough to necessarily stop said aggression, but declare support regardless -NPO's arrogance pisses off more people then NPO expected to the point where even some of NPO's allies are like "we dont got your back on this one, you've gone too far this time" -Then through the magic of linking treaties NPO and anyone who supported them get rolled with an intense hatred that only years of oppression can conjure up <fast forward a little> -TPF states, "we wont accept peace till our allies get peace" -NPO accepts peace -TPF is offered terms far more lenient than they deserve -TPF turns down said terms on the basis that they dont want to pay PC a darn cent. Did I get right? Guess what TPF, when NV was pre-emptively attacked in the war last fall, we had to pay reps to the alliances that attacked us for no reason. We didnt want to, in fact many of us were furious that we had to pay anything, to anyone, but we did. Why? Because continuing to fight a losing battle just to save our pride would have been dumb. We were not in any shape to "help" our allies militarily in any way. Just like TPF has been incapable of doing anything but cheering from the sidelines for most of this war. Actually I take that back, TPF has fought bravely through most of this war, although the last month or so has been pretty fruitless imo. Wake up and just take the terms already. Edited for spelling and change of heart

(sigh) lol I dont even have the energy to read these silly arguments that I have seen so far from NPO members. At this point Im not going to reaed more than the first few pages of this thread as I have seen enough from just that. NPO, Stop saying the reps will cripple you. You offered to pay more, so you can obviously afford them as they are. Stop saying Karma is as bad as you. You've handed out worse. Stop saying Karma is going to use the terms to re-declare. That is what you would do. Its called projection. Stop saying that 3 months of war has wasted away your warchests. We've seen your top 50, and we know that many have 1-2 billion in reserve. Stop saying that no one spoke up until recently and therefore didnt care. No one spoke up for fear of getting curbstomped, heck I didnt even post on OWF until recently due to my opinionated and argumentative nature. Most of the time if a hot topic came up we would see many posts from Gov members saying "no one under XXX rank can post in this thread" YOU were the reason for such posts. Stop playing the victim. You started this war. Stop trying to tell us that 2 weeks of war would ZI your top 50 and decimate their warchests. You turtle, you defend. Its cheap to do so and would barely touch a 1 billion dollar warchest. Stop neglecting to mention in your arguments the fact that the reps are going to be lowered once the war period is over "based on your ability to pay." If you cant afford it they will be lowered. As it stands right now, you are capable of paying MORE than what is asked and have offered such. Stop trying to get out of having your banks fight in this war. Either they fight and end this for the rest of you, or your lower nations keep getting hit and as such are prevented from rebuilding, just so your banks can keep their infra and tech. Stop trying to say that for you friends> infra, which is why you keep fighting. If friends are greater than infra then get your banks out of peace mode. By keeping your banks in PM you are effectively stating(through actions) that their infra is more important than allowing the rest of Pacifica to start rebuilding. And, finally, Stop saying that if you were to follow the terms you would be left defenseless and open to attack. You already ARE defenseless AND open to attack. It doesnt get any worse.

that may be the case, but I wasnt talking about the status quo, I was talking about you. You admitted this was in poor taste. So, to better word my question, why would you do something that you feel was in poor taste? Interesting. While I do disagree, I appreciate the honest answer.

I have 2 questions for Ivan, if he is even listening. Why would you authorize a stunt that you admit was in poor taste? Do you think it is OK to mass message entire alliances, neutral or not, for recruitment purposes?

But people are saying they can not react to an aggressive and disrespectful act with aggression. Being a politically neutral alliance does not mean a damn thing with regards to how an alliance has to react to a situation like this. While I will admit chances are they wouldnt, but it doesnt mean they wont, and if they had attacked the NSO, or at least declared, that would not make them not neutral anymore. What in the hell does that mean? Are you saying your true passion and feelings lead you to act in a disrespectful manner? Your post is nonsense, just like all the other posts citing the "passion" of the sith. Many of you have shown your true colors here, and I personally have lost a lot of respect for an alliance that I previously held in high regard.