Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About sippyjuice

  • Rank
    Crazy Female Warmongerer
  • Birthday 11/07/1987

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Wouldn't you like to know

Previous Fields

  • Sanctioned Alliance
  • Nation Name
  • Alliance Name
  • Resource 1
  • Resource 2
  1. I am insulted and appalled that you would dare start a war against SF. You guys have committed the crime of breaking my perfect record of being leader during all global wars. It is written in section B, subsection J of Unwritten, Inane Rules for Warfare that "All wars must take place while sippyjuice is president of GDA." I am currently MoFA and GDA doesn't have elections for another month. I demand that you halt this insanity immediately until I can coup power and maintain my record, or I start tickle-torturing people.
  2. There's always war during my terms... Muwahahaha Good luck to Legion.
  3. UPN asked me to stay out of it, so I'm honoring that. Had they asked for help, I'd be Madame Kamikaze right now. I have new shiny nukes I want to test soon.
  4. Not recently. This is more of a comment on my terrible luck.
  5. Thank you so much for making me one of the only democratically elected leaders to only be president while significant wars are going on around Planet Bob. I sincerely appreciate the opportunity to refine my war leader skills many times over, and I am glad you didn't have the patience to wait until after my term was over in Planet Bob. After all, its not like Karma, Bipolar, and PB-NpO were enough to satiate my thirst for war. I hereby offer my services as a war predictor. Any time you want a war, just let me known and I'll run for president again. Sincerely, sippyjuice, President of GDA during every major idiotic war since 2009. /sarcasm x 1,000,000,000
  6. I am quite pleased we're in. Hopefully, we can do well.
  7. I will gladly contribute my feminine wrath to expel the farmville scum.
  8. CnG allowing NPO to join their block, then warring everyone else with the aim of ZI'ing everybody.
  9. 1.)But we have done deals with them on a regular basis in the past. Ramirus would come to us himself. That regular involvement led us to believe that this course of action was necessary. 2) Yes, we were. But it's foolish to hold that over our heads now. Most of the people that actively shared the relationship with NPO are gone. Plus, I assumed that the beating we took in Karma (we've never gotten to pre-Karma strength since then) was our punishment. If it's not, please feel free to let me know just what we are supposed to do to rebuild our alliance's image in your eyes.
  10. So apparently GDA's little announcement has caused quite a stir. Given that our announcements rarely go for so many pages, I guess we should be flattered. We at GDA had done tech deals with Grämlins often in the past. Given Grämlins recent war behavior, we felt that a statement of disapproval, as well as action, was necessary. You might or might not disagree with that. But really, this goes far beyond just Grämlins. It's about the idea of surrender. Asking an alliance to completely decommission their military, before even bothering to give surrender terms is a tactic that is both brutal and dangerous. Sure, Gramlins could have simply used it to give white peace. But still, for a period of time, the fate of your alliance rested entirely in the hands of someone who is looking out for their own benefit. With traditional surrender terms, you at least have a chance to bargain for a good position for your alliance, and you have the option of backing out. This tactic of unconditional surrender effectively takes two of the greatest tools of a surrendering alliance away. You don't like the terms? Too bad, you agreed to unconditionally surrender, and now you are backing out of that agreement. So now your alliance gets blitzed while undefended. I've heard people say that you could just simply buy military back. But still, it's a risky tactic. If your enemy is faster than you, you still get blasted. Not to mention, if part of the terms call for you to come down to DEFCON 5, guess what, unless it's after update, you are stuck in DEFCON 5 while you are attacked. It isn't just about us being on the opposite side, and taking a shot at the "enemy". If any alliance tried to introduce such tactics in a similar situation, I would certainly push for some kind of expression of disapproval. Now Grämlins, has had a shot to make their case. Had the Grämlins leadership made some kind of clarifying statement early on, it might have helped their case. But right now, all I see is a belligerent alliance intent on making some kind of statement. Which is really sad, considering where they came from. Now, I know that some of you out there, believe that we "former-hegemonists" as I have heard us called deserve this kind of treatment because of past crimes. All I have to say, I wasn't here for whatever happened in the past. My nation was barely six months old when the Karma War rolled around. All I know is what has happened now. And this new idea on surrender is not something I want to see become common, no matter what side of the treaty web you are on.
  • Create New...