generals3

Heh, it was a semi joke. We don't raid and our morale is still full! (and i'm also a bit confused with the "no ur losing" part. To who'm does the "u" refer?) As long as I have anything to throw at my enemy i'll keep on fighting.

Might as well raid em even if they do have a protector. There are probably not a lot of defensive slots left open in the "Whatever is the name of the coallition opposing Q", this would make it hard for the protectors to actually retaliate in any way.

The more they are the more we can bring down with ourselves :nuke: I actually feel stupid i didn't fill up my offensive slots before falling into anarchy.

Welcome to the battlefield. Let us lose our infra together.

Good luck with this guys o/ Deinos

Finally, my pixels were starting to rust. Let us have a great war and may the best lose the most pixels!

I approve of this message. o/ MW o/ Deinos

o/ Ucon o/ us No better way to celebrate the holidays than signing some paper work

I approve of this message o/ MW o/ VE

Go Mortal Crap! o/ MW o/ CRAP o/ Me

Mortal Wombat: Comes with Free Parking lessons [img]http://failblog.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/epic-fail-photos-fail-nation-shortcut-fail.gif[/img] And Fighting lessons too [img]http://chzallnighter.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/party-fails-iron-mans-adopted-cousin.jpg[/img]

Onwards to 10 mill, only 9 left.

[quote name='Garion' timestamp='1323718556' post='2875456'] Kill them with fire! Those guys in the photos, I mean [/quote] I agree, the choice of beer is so poor it cannot be forgiven.

[quote name='James Dahl' timestamp='1323487686' post='2871630'] There is no good reason for ever individually surrendering in an alliance war. I don't care if you're bill locked and your grandmother is bleeding to death on the bathroom floor, if that's the case, why do you give a damn if your nation burns? [/quote] Because some people don't want to waste their pixels [u]uselessly[/u]. There is a difference between being willing to lose them for your alliance and just letting your nation burn uselessly because you have some RL issues which prevent you from actually waging war. It is actually beneficial for your alliance for you to surrender seeing how all the pixels you would have lost would have been lost for nothing and now you get to keep them and put them to use next time.

Best leaked intel ever. EDIT: just in case: yes that was sarcastic.

For what it's worth: "The Return Of The Grudge" - war ?

It seems a lot of people didn't notice what smurf did there. Ah well, i thought it was funny.

Good luck Kaskus, good to see some people with balls and using straight to the point CB's. And have fun NG.

[quote name='Ridin High' timestamp='1320605173' post='2840330'] VE will not be targeting NSO. I know its convenient to ignore that fact, but you can't cover your ears and go "NYANYANYANYANNYANYANNYAN" about it forever. If MK attacks NSO, yes that would be unfortunate, but does my alliance have the physical means and political power to scare off MK? [/quote] It would seem wise to read the entire thread before making accusations like [i]"I know its convenient to ignore that fact, but you can't cover your ears and go "NYANYANYANYANNYANYANNYAN" about it forever."[/i]. VE clearly stated they were going to roll NSO as well as they are deemed as guilty as Legion in keeping this war going.

I'm not sure what to think of this announcement. If NSO and Legion want to have their little drama i say let them be , but this most certainly can become interesting.

[quote name='Tiber Septim' timestamp='1320231679' post='2836995'] So if Legion kept up an assault on us- it'd virtually be like starting a new war- CBless. [/quote] I must interject, that doesn't seem to make any sense at all. You not having any reason left to be at war doesn't suddenly end the war and you can only start a new war with someone if there isn't already a war ongoing. Like mentioned previously this strangely looks like a unilateral white peace. You not having any reason left to be at war merely means you [i]should[/i] peace out. EDIT: on top of that Legion itself isn't at war with you because they declared on Tetris but because you attacked them when honoring a treaty. So while you may have no reason left to fight they still do, they are fighting you because you declared on them, declaring peace with Tetris wouldn't suddenly change that fact.

Hail the Wombats o/

Now you ruined the surprise, no cake for you!

[quote name='Sabcat' timestamp='1319060925' post='2828816'] I was approaching the question from a different angle. [i]Was [/i]capitalism necessary, I don't believe it is now. From a Marxist perspective capitalism was not only necessary but inevitable. Is that right though? I don't know of any theorist that posits the development of communism (which in the Marxist sense is predicated on an industrial working class) without capitalism. The nearest I've read to it is "what is to be done" by Chervyensky(sp?) (not to be confused with Lenin's pamphlet of the same name) but his ideas are based on the idea of Russian peasants learning from the experience of the German working class and skipping the capitalist phase of development. In short could the productive forces unleashed by capitalism have been produced in any other way? edit for missing word [/quote] Well I think this is one of the questions one might never be able to answer... I mean it is obvious communism failed on that aspect as the communist economies started tanking while capitalist ones kept on growing (cold war era). The Fascist system did create huge growth however it was most certainly a non sustainable growth inflated by the "war economy". But looking at it from a somewhat objective pov I would guess that capitalism or at least a capitalist like system is the only one capable of unleashing maximum economic growth. Simply because it not only stimulates efficiency, hard labor and innovation with the "carrot" stimulant (Always allowing someone to have more) but also indirectly enforces it by making life very hard for those who actually decide not to even bother participating to the industrial machine. It is actually our human psychology which allowed capitalism to be so successful, if we weren't greedy or continuously desiring more, capitalism wouldn't have had the same effect. And this is also why I believe only a capitalist system can unleash the same economic power. Now off course I am neither a psychiatrist nor an all knowing being so I might be wrong but from what I have observed this seems to be correct.

[quote name='Sabcat' timestamp='1319021977' post='2828582'] An interesting discussion (although this probably isn't the place to have it) would be to argue whether capitalism was necessary. [/quote] Even if you dislike capitalism it was necessary. Because of the simple fact that economics isn't an exact science, you can't just come up with one good solution. Therefor you need to test and learn from the tests. And every economic model we've been through has shown strengths and weaknesses and from that we must learn and come up with a new model which will try to combine the elements which were "proven" good in certain systems and try to remove those other elements which ended up detrimental to the tested systems. Capitalism has shown many weaknesses over time but neither sides (pro & con) have yet to realize the answer is nor total change nor blind perseverance. And the same goes for communism, it had its pro's and con's but blindly rejecting or adopting all its ideologies is not the answer.