Jump to content

Rush Sykes

Members
  • Posts

    3,329
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Blog Comments posted by Rush Sykes

  1. As soon as I get my time machine built, I'll refuse to help CnG and the rest of you guys when TOP helps. I'll also take GATO, Genesis, STA, NpO, CCC, NV, DT, NoR, TCI, and RoK. Now see how your war comes out.

    In other words, imagine if our coalition had Duckroll and TOP. You lose.

    Alot of us sacrificed to put you guys were you are now. All we wanted in turn was to still be part of your little group, and instead you kicked us out. You know there was once this red alliance who done that. Then they were put on their ass. Just some food for thought.

    Omni my friend, you are simply among my favorite people on the game. I would do nearly anything I could to help you.

    That being said, there is next to nothing about this stance that you were "kicked out" of this side. The fact of the matter is... Polaris was shown the door. You get no argument from me about that. Anyone allied to Polar, and travelling down that road with them, has only themselves to blame. Polar was not just obliviously let go by all the central ties for no reason. Quite the opposite. It was with VERY good reason. Going all the way back to Polar threatening Athens over the Ni! incident. Continuing with Polars ridiculous behavior at the start of, and during, Bi-Polar. Further continuing with their attack on a LOST nation over a one month old gather intel spy op conducted by a newbie nation, with no consideration given to the government of LOST, or to CnG as a whole. The signing of the treaty with Legion, without telling a single ally about it before time, then the reassurances to their allies that Legion are a good ally, and an overall asset to have. I sit, and I look now, at Polar burning, in what even I, find to be a less than terrific CB, and I see the ally that they crapped on all of their other allies for, doing nothing to help them, while those whom were crapped on, burn for them. The problem is not with the people presently fighting Polar, it is with the arrogance of Polar thinking they have to inject themselves into matters that do not concern them, and that they can, with impunity, take militaristic actions against allies of mine, with no repercussions. I am sorry that IAA chose to ignore the totality of they way Polaris has treated so many throughout this planet of ours.

  2. This was a quality show. And in it, mpol echoes alot of everything I have said to anyone in NPO, who has ever asked me. I have sat and watched as other alliances from the continuum days, from the 1V days, have come clean, and said to the alliances that they wronged, "we did it because basically nobody could stop us, and that you didnt deserve it, was irrelevant to us."

    NPO has failed to navigate this chasm. Hawk talks about a willingness to work with other alliances, and while I do agree, that they have shown it, what is unclear, is how much of it is looking to actually mesh with the world, and how much is just to tie them to enough power on the other side, that it makes killing NPO, a politically difficult move. Until the attitude of ignoring their past, and pretending like it will just go away, ends within the highest levels of Pacifica, the general feeling towards them will not change. Until they put a stop to a constant barrage of OWF propaganda against alliances like MK and Athens, those overtures will fall on deaf ears.

  3. Sorry but if GR and whoever else didn't want us to roll CCC maybe they should have counselled them against attacking an MDoAP partner of ours. You don't get to turn around and cry foul over something like that.

    While you are , in the coldest light of day, at least partially correct, you are smart enough to know, this coalition has teetered and tread carefully from day 1 concerning allies of allies and who can and should hit who, out of consideration and deference to varying treaty conflicts. And while your rationalization is not incorrect, it was a rather bad move ( and a move which your gov says , and I also believe, was an oversight and a mistake). If your gov acknowledges it as an oversight, it is disingenuous to lay blame at the feet of GR on this.

  4. I acknowledge that you are a great player, and should I make a blog for "best CN players", you would be there. As a leader though?

    Also, Londo would probably fall under the "best CN players" category for me, rather than "CN Leaders". He's a good player and pretty cool guy, but as a leader? Perhaps more of a follower?

    Before you go hating on me, a follower is just as important as a leader, for a leader can't lead without a follower.

    Londo was at the head of an alliance, that spent literally its 18 months of existence, either being rolled, or threatened to be rolled, by the powers that be of that time. Through all of that , he kept it together, and GREW Athens into prominence. If that doesnt qualify as a LEADER, then your criteria, is severely flawed.

  5. In this blog, Schattenman, the voice of freedom throughout planet Bob, sides againt a free economy. The market is driven by supply/demand. Tech sellers are harder and harder to come by nowadays, and the long time buyers are too lazy to do the footwork associated with finding them. Hence, it is a sellers market. They cant $3mil/50. There is literally no shortage of buyers at that price, I say more power to them.

  6. So it's OK if you aid rogues as long as they're roguing small alliances?

    The arrogance on display here is breathtaking.

    /me pinches Haf's cheek. You sir, are sooo cute. Try as you may, you do not set Athens' policy. If RED is not an alliance, by our standards, then SWAT is not a rogue. Hence, we have a total non-issue here. But, you are still cute as a button.

  7. Well, I have looked. Long and hard, to find any active treaties that RED holds. I haven't found any. A quick check of their forums, was able to find no posts in their "spam" section since Oct. 25th. My point is, Londo could not be guilty of aiding someone roguing an alliance, if the alliance being hit, does not constitute an alliance as per Athens' guidelines. So, if anyone out there actually holds a military level treaty with RED, and they want to come talk to me, I will work it out in a satisfactory manner for them. If, however, as I seem to have found, they hold no military level treaties, and as they clearly sit at less than 15 members, then SWAT, is simply not viewed by Athens as a rogue. We, in that case, do not recognize RED as an alliance(as they fall within our raid guidelines... others may recognize them, and kudos to them, but we do not). Hence, it is simply Londo aiding a friend at war. The standard of treaties and X number of members to be an alliance, is not a standard that Athens started, it is a community established standard(varying from AA to AA), and we have no problems playing by such a standard. So, as I said, I would gladly work this out with RED, or a protector, should they seek me out, but as it stands now, I can find no treaties of military level for RED, and they are less than 15 members. Carry on.

  8. Can mindless people please stop pretending like STA either protected, or had any interest in protecting GGA? They simply said , what amounts to "\m/ cant raid you, but anyone else can." That, my friends, is NOT protection, by any stretch of the imagination. What they did, and successfully, was dress down \m/'s attempt at being relevant, but they did NOT, I repeat NOT... protect GGA from anything.

  9. Here we are a year and a half after NPO apparently paid their dues both on the battlefield and months after they finished paying their dues in cash & tech. People are still bringing up their past actions from nearly 3 years before that. So 2 years from now if you get a beatdown and hit with the biggest reps ever you will only have another 18 months minimum. Just like with NPO people are keeping a mental note of who is doing what these days. When friendships and treaties break and the time is right you will receive your forgiveness and then some.

    While you do make a somewhat valid point, the notion that NPO is still "the target" in everything everyone does, is flawed. In my personal opinion, NPO is on an even keel. My indifference towards them results from the fact that we have next to nothing in common politically, ideally, or game-play wise. Still though, an interesting response.

  10. he was spied (more than once) and threatened (with some messages) by TENE so he was fighting them, then Rok attacked with 3 nations a member of the NSO without saying a word to the NSO, they refused to prove or investigate who were in the right or who started it ..., the aid wasn´t the most polite move but looking at Rok actions before they can´t blame NSO for that...

    the original post looks very interesting but its so long so I didn´t read it all, anyway this is interesting too :P

    Prove that he was spied more than once? Only 1 exposed spy op exists. See, TENE claims that he spied on them 1st(successfully, in game of course), and the stance from NSO is prove it. That knife has blades on both edges.

    To Haf: I agree with you that the exposed spy op is a valid CB against the one nation who committed it, and had Sedric engaged that nation and stayed that course, I would be fine with what he did. However, he hit the guy, peaced out, then hit others guys. That, through his own action, makes him a rogue, not a defender.

  11. You know what? I actually agree with you on your assessment. Acts of war do not immediately place you in a state of war. Acts of war are what bring about a casus belli. For example, World War I started immediately because of the assassination of Franz Ferdinand. This was an act of war. This gave Austria-Hungary the casus belli it needed to declare war on Serbia. (also I have no clue if this place is OOC or not, but whatever)

    Therefore, when Sedrick was spied upon, he was given a casus belli to declare war on those that spied on him.

    So by your definition... one exposed spy op constitutes a valid Casus Belli against an entire AA?

×
×
  • Create New...