Prince Yvl

Not totally sure I follow, but if you're saying that the idea that Pacifica is the bad guy was decided by others who are just as bad, then... you're wrong. As ES said a couple pages back, the practice of EZI is entirely too cruel, not to mention their consistent willingness to go to war with their own allies (as opposed to diplomacy) - Pacifica and their allies have done more than enough to be accurately labeled as being "bad." I won't deny that most alliances have done something wrong at some point or another (and I'm from NAAC, so I'd know a thing or two about that, given our early days) but the idea that because they were once bad they shall always be bad is outright ignorant, as my former alliance proved. I'm willing to believe that even Pacifica will one day become a reasonable alliance - following the removal of Moo, at least. As for the rest of ye - I really can't believe that you'd be willing to assume that they were cowards over the idea that Pacifica was up to it's old tricks and alienating their allies again.

Indeed, pointing out the obvious. Though one point of yours is severely flawed - for you to think that Moo is capable of learning life lessons is like believing that a rock can learn another language. They are imitating, not learning.

By all means, tell us. Because at this rate, it won't matter how many times you've said that it was just a coincidence - your allies (whom the world had warned you about how many thousands of times) have gained enough of a bad reputation that even the most absurd lies will stick, let alone a fairly well educated guess. And so long as you withhold this information from Planet Bob (Out of respect for Pacifica I assume) then you will share their stigma. I, for one, would be willing to believe you once the proof is posted. I was a big fan of IRON back before GW3, and would love to see them restored to their former glory.

When the man's right, he's right.

Huh? When did grudges ever influence Karma to go to war? Also, why are we discussing this anyway? I'm kinda lost.

Them dragging this out is just better for me - more people will start listening to my "Move em to gray" term.

Close. It's more because IRON's full name is a pain in the $@! to type out when trying to view their statistics.

I still don't trust you guys but... good luck.

I want. I WANT. I love every alliance in this treaty.

Tch. I was hoping that they would have to go without treaties for a while longer - you know, get them to remember what the "I" stands for. Course they'll probably be under the terms of this surrender for a while anyway since NPO still doesn't seem to show any signs of surrendering.

Fellow Karma nations, please don't hit the guys when they're surrendering, even if they haven't posted in the thread. It's bad form. You see them waving the white flag unarmed, just because they haven't signed a piece of paper doesn't mean they're still a threat worth wasting your missiles on.

I really don't say this too often, or lightly, but... I love you guys.

Hell. War's over, everyone go home.

It's fair, but I still was looking forward to joining you guys in battle. I owe you alot, and was hoping to repay this debt in this war. Oh well, some other time.

Sorry, I couldn't get through even half of it without throwing up. All I can say is that it's laughable that you'll be able to rebuild the way you did during the first Great War.

Dude, they can only be so awesome. Talk about unreasonably high expectations, sheesh.

Whew, I was afraid that we might not be able to see you on your knees grovelling for a bit there, Failhalla.

Say they WERE, indeed, using this "strategically," though everything I've been hearing says otherwise. It's still a damn poor strategy. Not one of Karma's alliances let their guard down. NPO got pummeled, nations surrendered within hours, not to mention all of TORN. The political loss of the Coalition of Cowards is nearly immeasurable - there's still no proof (which should be easy to come by) that you AREN'T a team of cowards and flip-floppers, and any future allies will think twice before joining your side. There was absolutely no benefit in this "strategy," and it likely cost you the war.

Are you guys ever going to join a war on the winning side?

Is it really your place to say that?

We haven't let our guard down. Though I like the rest of your analogy.

Pretty much the problem with all this. Y'all have gone back on your word not once, but TWICE now. First you were allies, and you bailed on that. Then you were neutral, and you bailed on that. Just keep digging.

B-b-but... why us? W-w-we never did anything to you... we're only trying to defend our fwiends... WAAAAAHHHHHHHAHAHAHA no seriously bring it.

I was talking about the people who abandoned US. Kowalski, this announcement indeed should not have been made.

Oh, now you're just LOOKING for reasons to be mad. We did indeed have the same problem, though they didn't make a topic about it - our reaction was "Oh well." We don't bear any ill will to them, nor will we bear any ill will towards wherever they go next.