Rush Sykes
-
Posts
3,329 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by Rush Sykes
-
-
DBDC are a threat to CN stability.
Since when did we care about stability?Sir, Tywinn's rants are ALL based on a false desire for stability.
-
The peace mode warrior arrives just in time!
Has a nation a year older than mine... check.
Has 60% the casualties I have... check.
Calls me a PM Warrior. Check.
Seems legit.
-
Considering the fact you'll bring this up no matter if the topic of the thread is about us or not has become redundant. I am pretty sure anyone who is even just a casual reader has been abundantly aware of your feelings of IRON's actions as of late. I would hope by now a thread could go quite a few pages before it's derailed by the same comments that are prevalent on all the threads, but alas, it seems not.
Anyway...back to the actual purpose of this announcement
This thread could certainly have gone without that if your member had not arrogantly essentially called other posters unintelligent.
-
It's ok Montosh....you have to learn that people only read what they want, or what they can spin around to sound intelligent. The intelligent people read through these people's BS
Considering your actions this past war, Im not so sure I would trot out the intelligent word as your gov prostrates itself to try to salvage any iota of face.
-
I am not gonna say that these guys are aliens... but....
-
I now remember why I specifically avoided planning or debating with Doch throughout my career on Planet Bob. He is clearly unable to wrap his head around a totality of an issue, instead, homing in on one word and hammering away at it over and over again, and his last reply is simply reflective of this. When I speak of normal behavior, to me, it is behavior that is the rule rather than the exception. It is something that happens more often than not. To him , normal apparently means that it happens at all.
With regards to deceiving allies, he ignores the two times now that I have said 98% of the time all goings on between allies are open and honest. The only time deception occurs is when the 2 alliances both sit within 1 chain of the top of the feeding pole, and the deception gets handed down FROM the top of the feeding pole. My love for MK is pretty well known to all, but the fact is, both in Athens and TLR, there were more than 5 occasions (that I can think of)... where MK stretched, preened, dressed the truth up to us so that we would lead our subordinate allies down specific paths, and sow specific distrust and discontent to those whom the central core opposed. It is a subtle way of achieving your goals, by leading a lower group of followers (and I mean lower in the pecking order, before you home in on that word and try to spin something else out of it) to a destination that inherently makes THEM more safe, and solidifies the safety of those at the top. It is not a "well tell them the sky is Red and not blue" kind of lie. The lies are almost ALWAYS an omission of details, because the inclusion of all details would harm your overall position. Sometimes you say things you dont mean, knowing that you do not mean it, and hoping and praying that a situation does not arise where it makes it obvious you never meant it. MOST of the time, this works out just fine. When it doesnt, that is when the power structure begins to fall apart, as the fringe strength behind the structure are pushed away. Then we elevate someone new to the top, and history repeats itself.
Edit: OOC: and to Krash who said that nations in the real world do not lie to their partners.... ask Germany about US recording the telephone calls of Germany's leaders, Germany asking us if we were doing it... The Obama administration saying it was preposterous... then when confront with proof that we DID in fact do it... we were all like... "wow, we didnt know this was happening, I am sorry, we will stop." So yes, this very really DOES happen in the real world. (END OOC).
-
Oh, I fully believe that there are alliances that are more than willing to lie to their allies on a regular basis. I just don't think it is as normal as your side is making it out to be. I mean, if that were the case, then why wouldn't IRON have just lied to NG about not honoring their treaty? Instead, they flat out told NG that they would not. Every alliance I have been in, if an ally has lied to us, it caused a rather huge stink since it was not normal behavior for any alliance to do so. I mean for pete's sake, let's take a look at Bi-Polar. Polaris lies to TOP (mind you, they are not allies at this time and in fact were still considered pretty unfriendly towards one another) and the ruckus that caused was huge. And again, I point out that they were not even allies.
So you and others can try and make excuses for NPO lying to its allies on a regular basis, but that is not typical except apparently among your alliances.
Show me where I said it was "normal"... show me where its "our side" and not just me, and maybe 1 other person who acknowledged what I said. Oh, you cant, and you wont because "your side" has a higher impact on the reader than simply mentioning 1 person who left the plotting realms of Gov because he didnt like what was being asked of him. Spin more Doch, spin more.
-
It is so cute watching all of these people act like.. 1) my alliance is so honorable, no way would we ever deceive an ally and 2) Obviously TLR and NPO make a regular habit of lying to allies.
Nobody makes a regular habit of it. Between wars, and during wars alike, there may be 1, 2 tops, instances where you are forced to do this. The difference between alliances who are successful and can work their way to the top or within 1 chain of the top, and alliances who will always be the honor seekers whos only goal is to defend allies, is the willingness to lead your allies much the same as you lead your alliance. 98% of all interaction between allies is truthful, and 100% open and honest. But EVERY alliance(if you are reading this, it includes your alliance as well) there will be that 2% of the time where you have to do something underhanded to someone you are quite close to.
-
Congrats I guess, and will you sell me tech?
-
Well, I think this post pretty much sums up why Pacificia and her pals are stuck in their current predicament.
- You admit that NPO was lying to everyone, and that such behaviour is their normal modus operandi.
- You state that lying to allies is, not only a necessity, but the right thing to do ("I would respect them less if they had not").
So, what we have now? Your sphere isolated because none of you can be trusted. The people NPO lied to, seeking payback. And on top of that, your pals are now playing the victim and pretending to have the moral high ground.
I value your honesty here. I do not think that lying to friends is the way to "play the game", but at least you admit it openly, instead of attempting to feed us !@#$%^&*.
If I may give you an advice, dump the people who think lying to friends is right, and stick to people who do not screw their partners. You may not win all the wars, but, hey, it's not like your way has allowed you to, either.
This is yet another poor soul who thinks this lying to allies is confined to NPO. And this could not POSSIBLY be happening in the righteous coalition that they were all just a part of. It is completely hilarious. Let me tell you bold faced, because it is clear you lack the ability to understand.... I have allies that lie to me. You have allies that lie to you. Your own gov lies to allies. What part of "it is part of the political positioning game" here on Planet Bob do you not get. Alliance govs have a 1st responsibility to their own alliance, not to their allies. More often than any one of us can count, there arise times when their responsibility to their own alliance deems it necessary to withhold, alter, or flat out lie, with information to allies, allies of allies, coalition partners. Nobody is immune from it. Not NPO. Not TLR, Not MI6. Nobody.
-
I knew it... But I thought you loved me Thrash. :(
Yeah others have said it already but love how you are trying to lecture someone when your alliance was on the other side of the war.
And there we have it. Rush knows that NPO lied to him (that is what being less than 100% honest means) and yet still believes everything NPO says. So, if you know that NPO lied to you and TLR, you did not know what was "really going on" either. And again, Auctor stated that a lot of the alliances talked amongst each other (I know, heaven forbid the lessor alliances talk to one another) and most likely found out that NPO was the main one pushing terms against Umbrella.
But hey, keep on imagining whatever it is you are imagining. Apparently, despite NPO lying to you (and you knowing this fact), you still believe everything NPO says. Man, talk about being good little sheeple.
When did you become so clueless? I know its a shock to you... allies HAVE to lie to allies. I dont believe everything anyone says, I form my own opinion, but I do so knowing that lies can come from anywhere. Once again, it is WHY I left high gov, I am simply not cut out to be shady and duplicitous with my allies... with fringe alliances, or allies allies, I can be shady and duplicitous with the best of them, but not with my own allies. It is not who I am, it is why I am now not in that position. None of this, however, makes me wrong in pointing it out to others. But by all means, continue to completely be oblivious is it to what I am actually saying. It is your M.O. these days.
-
You only know what you were told as well. This line of logic leaves everyone right and everyone wrong.
No, it really doesnt. There is a reality the comes more to light in the post-war machinations. At the time, any one of us could have been wrong, or right, in what we interpreted.
-
To clarify, I was GK of GLoF and there was substantial contact between Brehon himself and TOP front.
There is a chasm of difference between "being in contact with"... and knowing what is REALLY going on.
-
I'm fairy certain that TLR was not among them, either. So, everything you are "teaching" Auctor about, applies a lot better to your situation.
Except I am not telling him anything about his coalition. I am asking how all 5 of those statements can be true. I have no delusions.
NPO was in a shit position. I KNOW they were less than 100% honest with me. Thats how war works. Thats why I retired from among the plotters on this planet, I am not cut out to lie to allies, and to TRULY play the political game on Planet Bob well, you have to be able to lie to allies. I know NPO gov in some fashion lied to me and my alliance in that war. I would respect them LESS if they had NOT. It is a necessary part of winning a war. The point was, Auctor said I did not know what I was talking about because I was not in EQ. My counterpoint is allies have to lie to allies in war (same side or other side, it matters not), so what he presented as a factual reality, is something that needs looked deeper into. Sengokus other allies higher up in the coalition also lied to Sengoku, it was not with a bad intent, it is just a necessary evil to be a good player in politics on Planet Bob. It is , as I said, why I stepped so far back, I am not cut out to lie to allies with a straight face.
-
All those years going around being nice to people, and I could do no better than finish in the top 5 of nicest player voting for 4 years. Who knew all it would take for me to win an award was to care less about the broader game, and write a crotchety old mans review of alliances. *sigh*
I humbly accept, and I would like to thank Stewie for being the inspiring light of my life. For without Stewie, nothing would be possible.
-
I wasn't in Sengoku, first off. And yeah, I think I have some kind of idea what I am talking about as someone that was against the terms, wanted the war to be wrapped up, and was fairly vocal about it and took the things Brehon was saying at face value.
I'll grant you that it's fairly clear different things were being said to different people and a lot of retrospective ass coverage has gone on.
Welcome to coalition warfare. You still did not address my single question though, and if you were not one who thought this was the case, just say so, because i am old and dont remember names and faces too well...
Reconcile this for me...
Fact 1: TLR told NPO that we were not interested in exiting the war, till GOONS and MK were out.
Fact 2: GOONS and MK were not going to leave the war until Umbs terms were secured, and would almost certainly fight alongside Umb for the duration of any terms.
Fact 3: Not speaking for ODN or GATO or INT, but C&G, as an MADP , was not leaving the war until we all were leaving.
Fact 4: Everyone below NPO in the EQ coalition constantly tossed out the tag line that NPO were trying to influence terms to protect C&G.
Fact 5: C&G was in no way, no shape, no how, exiting that war under the terms you said Brehon supported.
Do you not see that those cant ALL be true? 4 of them Jive.. one does not. So reconcile it for me... how does an entire coalition blame NPO for "protecting" C&G, by offering terms C&G patently had up front rejected.
-
Brehon said he was proposing aid restrictions and would only wanted half the proposed period if Umbrella were to negotiate them down.
Consider this a free lesson to you , from me, about coalitions. Things are rarely what they seem. There is ALWAYS a centralized structure of 2, maybe 3, sometimes 4 alliances that really do make all of those decisions. Sengoku was not among them. I was in wars where Athens was not among them, one where TLR was not among them. In those situations, as the news filters down to the peripheral alliances, it is dressed, primped and preened, so as to make everyone think they have their own little say in what is going on, when the reality is, you do not. This is not meant to insult you, each alliance has a station within a coalition. If you think, as gov of Sengoku, that you had a clue as to NPOs intention, you are deluding yourself. Or are you yet another one who did not listen to a single bootleg episode and hear the number of times Brehon said he would never insist on a term other than a handshake and white peace?
-
As someone that was actually in Equilibrium......what? I'll give you that NPO didn't want to put terms on people other than Umbrella, but as someone that argued against the feasibility and desirability of further terms on Umbrella, NPO only came around to that well after it became clear Equilibrium wasn't going to last long enough to enforce anything. It's worth noting that part of the justification for the extended war terms on Umbrella was that they were explicitly modeled on the previous DH-NPO peace terms.
Perhaps they were secretly against them all along, but it was a pretty well kept secret if that's the case.
You say "WHAT".. then proceed to not really challenge anything I say. NPO did want the extended war in some form, NPO did NOT want the aid restrictions that were posed alongside of them. The reasons were simple... if you "extend the war", then you extend the time before the aid restrictions would start. NPO knew that C&G would not agree to these terms and exit the war. On one hand you all went !@#$% on NPO by accusing them of catering to C&Gs safety and not their own coalitions, so ask yourself... if they were more concerned with C&Gs safety, as you all liked to convict them of, how do you reconcile that with them being in favor of terms they were told up front by C&G, that WE would not accept. There is only one logical conclusion where 2+2=4.
-
Don't kid yourself, NPO's opening bid for the end of EQ was no tech/aid to umbrella for months.
*sigh* My friend, you cannot in one post mention that you dont like THESE terms, say they are not YOUR terms, but the terms of other stakeholders, then harken back to last war and totally ignore the same fact in regard to NPO. Those terms were NOT NPOs terms, those were the terms demanded by their coalition partners. Those were terms that began NPOs falling out within its own coalition, because while NPO delivered the terms, their coalition knew they did not WANT those terms. If the excuse works for GOONS now(I am ok with this, because I take you at your word)... then you need to keep your perspective on the reversed positions of the last war. In addition, Umbrella in the last war, were the cause.. the catalyst... they committed the "wrong".. the "crime" that led to the war. They were not simply in on a defensive treaty. It barely even qualifies as a similar example.
-
Bring it mate. You make notes and so will I. Like I said, I am already betting on all you folk who claims white peace is the only way nowadays, breaking that same mantra the moment you win a war. Here we are, less than a day out and you are already proving me correct. Keep up the hypocrisy mate. It looks well on ya.
I was not going to comment on this thread at all really, until I came across this post. I can assure you those of us who find these terms distasteful WILL absolutely wholeheartedly break this mantra even for alliances that enter only on defensive treaties. Not because we think its the right and proper thing to do, but because true retribution will demand it. Reps were once the way to end a war. It morphed to white peace, you lot have morphed it again. When those who say NPO should have gotten white peace, do something other than give white peace in the future, it will be one of the few times in this games history where it will NOT be hypocritical, it will simply be ... them being what YOU made them.
-
Trying to sway them already...
Just to clarify, efforts to sway us for the next war began about 10 mins after the DoWs started flying in this war.
-
Rest well my friend.
-
I think we are missing that this is a war of survival, not a vendetta. NSO coalition was plotting and scheming to take down Polar. NSO was reduced sufficiently but time has revealed NPO's shenanigans and fact that they have not been reduced as a threat sufficiently. A few months of PM for a few nations will not cripple NPO.
You should really listen to the leaders of your own side and just stop. You literally do more harm than good with every word you spew.
-
Don't look at me, NPO already made a peace offer that would have been sufficient for GOONS, but we are not the only stakeholder. Other people's reasons in this war are their own, GOONS is in it to support allies, not some undying vendetta to hit NPO over, and over and over again. (It gets old)
Thats all well and good, and I appreciate your position, but you do seem to be quite frequently finger pointing at NPO, when the totality of your opinion suggests you should be finger pointing at those allies you are supporting.
But you did just say a mouthful. NPO made an offer... and that offer came after the initial terms. So we are in agreement that it is now your allies turn to make the next move in negotiation. Which is really the only point I have a contention with. Your coalition made an offer... NPO made their counter offer. Lets stop pretending and posting that it is now NPOs turn.
You were part of the coalition in the last war that was 95% unified in its exit stance, so you know where NPO allies are coming from this time. None of us are going to let them get shit on with terms by exiting and "trusting" those we know to be liars.
A Joint Announcement from Two Unlikely Alliances
in Alliance Announcements (IC)
Posted · Edited by Rush Sykes
What a moronic response. You know where infra heavy nations (11,999 is the most infra I ever had, and I had it ONCE AND I had 14K tech when I had it, this was prior to EQ.) have an advantage in accruing casualties? The 1st 5 days of a war. Infra is well on its way to being melted by then. Every time you post about this stuff, it really shows the ignorance have in regards to how wars work. Stop embarrassing IRON.