Ubermeir

[quote name='WalkerNinja' date='05 April 2010 - 06:36 PM' timestamp='1270506952' post='2249631'] Uber, Threats, trolling, and hostile sentiments expressed by regular members don't actually mean anything. That is one of the thing that this war has set in stone. Shardoon is a regular member. His posts don't mean anything, and you should not construe them as being indicative of TOP-policy. I am not a government member either. Things that I say do not count. We will bury you all. I am serious. You should take me seriously. ^You should not take this seriously. I am not a government member, and non-government members saying stuff like this should be disregarded. But you'll know the truth when I destroy you once and for all. ^Again. Gibberish. Please disregard. Except not really. Yes, really. Don't listen to a word I say. [/quote] Thanks, not really. I will go back to reading and not posting on the BBs, maybe. Congrats on peace, sort of, lol definately.

And all of this in a peace thread... The war lasted 68 appprox days. It seemed like it was won within the first month with all of the turtling going on. And now, after thinking that it went on a month too long I find myself thinking maybe it did not go on long enough...damn shame. o/ to all of my personal opponents and allies on a well fought and truly destructive encounter. It seems the seeds of mistrust are being sown anew, and without reason. C&G were attacked pre-emptively, won with help from allies and alliances that recognized this aggression and received reps for that attack. This is all justified excepting to nations who wish to make political hey out of it. It is you who twist the reality of the situation to cover for your past misdeeds, or to justify current ones. I am happy to let bygones be bygones and look to a better tomorrow. But that idea grows dimmer the more I read of this thread. o/ warriors, you have fought well.

Peace at last \o/

Seems that securing terms and signing a treaty to make those terms a reality are two seperate things. This war could have been done a long time ago. Overreaction to bump in road is making mountain out of inflamatory molehill. Everyone has been working towards peace, I expect so long as noone does anything ffoolish, holds tongue about way war started, that the status quo will find a way to overcome this unexpected turn of events.

o/ ODN Great looking Gov.

Alright, short and sweet, pre-emptive attacks are bad. Pay your reps and let's just move on. Peace is in your hands, sign the papers and let's move on. Or not, war is fun too.

[quote name='StevieG' date='18 February 2010 - 10:33 PM' timestamp='1266550405' post='2191222'] Peace mode, waiting to jump in. Understandable There was cause and reason It was Polars choice to start the war Fair enough TOPs cb or NpOs cb? TOP was pre-emptively going in for a number of reasons, primary reason was to win the damn war. [/quote] Polar \m/ was over. This was an aggressive act outside of norms, reason, or convention. It was an attack on alliances at peace, no treaty web to justify it, no nothing, it should come as no surprise that those attacked are rightously fighting. Bad CB is bad CB Bad spin is bad spin.

[quote name='sacramento' date='18 February 2010 - 09:26 PM' timestamp='1266546397' post='2190987'] There were clearly design plans for the war, CnG was just waiting its turn to enter. TOP just decided to skip the foreplay and get to the good part right away. Peace should have been reached as soon as \m/ and Polar made peace. Instead, CnG decided to continue the war. It was CnG choice to continue the war then. It is CnG choice to continue the war today. You can spin it all what you want, but that is not going to changes those facts. [/quote] Yeah, that whole skip the foreplay part there, that would be the part where a bunch of alliances attacked a whole other group of alliances who were at peace. Perhaps waiting your turn seems like a good idea right now? As does a little foreplay. As far as CnGs choice to keep fighting...I fully support it, as do many many many. When attacked without cause many choose to fight and fight hard, it is a choice, yes, the other choice appears somewhayt cowardly by comparison. I would say that it was the aggresors choice to start a war and it is CnGs choice to insure that others think twice before starting the same. Bad CB is bad.

Defense, by definition is not pre-emptive. As there was no preexisting state of war, C&G not at war, there can be no defense against a non-existant state. Sounds like so much spin.

Business, contractual, it is as good as selling guns or weapons.

o/ C&G o/ ODN

Congrats to New Gov. o/ ODN

Ha!

o/ GR o/ ODN o/ this treaty, it is Grrrrreat! A special thank you to all those who can put some things in perspective. A special ignore to those who can not. Lol Trolls.

o/ ODN o/ SLAP

Congrats to the elected. o/ democracy.

Impressive growth. And Congrats to those elected.

One could read the opening post and begin to disect the current power structure and recent events as it compares to ethics, as has aparently been done. I chose to take it for what it is and extrapolate to something better. The issue is raised not as a comentary on how much better Bob is, I believe, but where Bob itself should naturally go, with some self examinatin and prodding. The political landscape has been limited, the ethics of interaction defined by the few for the purpose of self-perpetuation. It may now be so ingrained as to be precedence, none the less a real examination by coalitons, blocs, alliances large and small, within their own structures and eventually between each other, preferably in a global setting/forum, as to what really is ethical, what can we do to attempt to set a guideline for behavior that is both basicly moral and interesting. There is much potential untapped in the political realm of CN. Language was the begining of the ability for the weak and oppressed to organize and defeat the powerful. Communication, and not unfounded rhetoric should be the basis for this world. There needs to be a larger body to judge veracity of Alliance actions. The Ethics will be created by all of those who partticipatee, or we can watch them evolve and devolve depending on the power who is in power and their needs.

o/ TR o/TFD Good to see.

Can I get a piece o dat? o/ Yankees ha!

You like to blow stuff up we like to blow stuff up. You like to blow stuff up in defense of allies we like to blow stuff up in defense of allies. Itls on.

o/ INT o/ TR o/ ODN o/ Orangey Goodness

O/ Invicta

It would seem the aggresor would bear the brunt of responsibilty for any and all subsequent hostilities, be they localized or expanded. The morality is inherent in the initiating act and not contingent on subsequent acts excepting as subsequent act might contain larger quantities of immorality, which at this point seems unlikely. Poor show IS, and get your own tech, tech raiding pfft.

o/ GATO o/ ODN o/ Democracy This is good.