Jump to content

Andy P

Members
  • Posts

    64
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Andy P

  1. [quote name='nippy' timestamp='1298320180' post='2640885']
    Nope. One chick and two dudes. God, you people are frightening. Don't [i]ever[/i] take a trip to Thailand...you'll be surprised in [i]the wrong way[/i].
    [/quote]
    I think you misunderstood Trinite there:
    [quote name='Trinite' timestamp='1298313310' post='2640783']
    I think you might be overestimating the amount of women in that picture. :ph34r:
    [/quote]

    Those things are neither male nor female... you cannot give genders to things...

  2. [quote name='Farnsworth' timestamp='1297515326' post='2630256']
    Not my work but it's fitting:

    [img]http://cdn2.knowyourmeme.com/i/000/099/185/original/12916104969-(n1292219311505).jpg?1297476553[/img]
    [/quote]
    :blink: What the heck have you been smoking?

  3. [quote name='fizzex' timestamp='1297056750' post='2623443']
    [...]
    and some rehashing:

    [IMG]http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u5/Kajdav/PuffinAnatomy.png[/IMG]
    [IMG]http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u5/Kajdav/Puffins_1-2.png[/IMG]
    [...][/quote]I like it, but... there are no penguins in the north, sorry about that. You should get polar bears instead ;) Remember, Polar Bears = only North pole, Penguins = only South Pole.

  4. [quote name='HeroofTime55' timestamp='1296876607' post='2619792']
    So you weren't even sure who you were going to be hitting. I suppose you could have been calling any one of us 'band-wagoners.' Thanks for this bit of information, it helps reinforce how devoid of reason or logic this move was. Renders your whole spiel in the OP worthless.
    [/quote]
    Not quite. The DoW would have been different.

  5. [quote name='KainIIIC' timestamp='1296857722' post='2619552']
    http://www.cybernations.net/search_wars.asp?searchstring=Declaring_Alliance,Receiving_Alliance&search=Open+Source+Alliance+Confederacy

    So is this the flavor of the week as MK/Umbrella have done, and have you engaged in hostilities with NAC as well? Or is this just a mistaken war?
    [/quote]
    That, dear sir, is a person not being able to differentiate between "possible target AAs" and "AA we declared war on". I shall tell him to send a peace offer asap.

  6. [quote name='saxasm' timestamp='1296832113' post='2619269']
    [img]http://img703.imageshack.us/img703/8982/propaganda.gif[/img]
    [/quote]
    Too fast, no time to read what's said. Had to download the pic and open it with an image editor to read everything without being interrupted by a new frame again and again. (well only the RV quote and the ingame PM)

  7. [quote name='HeroofTime55' timestamp='1296764466' post='2618034']
    A better analogy, is that your friend is beating up kids for their lunch money, when he goes after someone who is just a little too big for him. So you help him beat up the kid and steal his lunch money.

    As you stated, you did not have to enter because there was a clause in your treaty freeing you from any such obligations. Because of that, you are just as responsible for GOONS actions as GOONS themselves.
    [/quote]
    Can you link me to said clause?

  8. [quote name='sperry2442' timestamp='1296722452' post='2617556']
    Have fun annihilating ASU, when your done fighting that worthless excuse for an alliance maybe we can stop by and finish them of, AirMe would love to have another head for his mantel.

    I would wish you luck osa but you dont need it, have fun kicking there butt. :D
    [/quote]
    :( That's a bit too harsh, calling them worthless...

  9. [quote name='mhawk' timestamp='1296717124' post='2617436']
    I'm curious how a numerically superior force(DOOMHOUSE + committed treaty chains in) ambushing an alliance (NPO) out of the blue, with basically the sole purpose of beating them into oblivion is ok. However a numerically inferior force countering that aggressive alliance and targeting one alliance [b]initially[/b] is "cowardice" you can't condone. You join a side that is larger and highly aggressive with reprehensible goals and call us the cowards? Ok, GOONS are your treaty partners and you are going in to defend, we get that. However declaring alliances that [b]will[/b] be fighting greatly outnumbered in the near future against a purely aggressive attack, a group of cowards is intellectually lazy.
    [/quote]
    Idk if you didn't read the DoW or something, but we never stated we were ok with Doomhouse's action.

  10. [quote name='KainIIIC' timestamp='1296712527' post='2617278']
    By the way, ASU didn't exactly 'bandwagon in', they rolled with us through the Terra Cotta Pact. Also, good luck on that lower-tier.
    [/quote]
    You have no treaty with NPO. If you had an MDAP with someone who had at least an MDP with NPO, I'd not have called it bandwagoning. As it stands, you didn't even have an oA clause, much less a non-optional one. That and GOONS already had 9 AAs against it at the time you declared.

  11. [center][img]http://img842.imageshack.us/img842/4687/osaxfwar.png[/img]
    [size="6"]Open Source Alliance Announcement[/size][/center]

    When I saw the DoW of Doomhouse against NPO, I was outraged. And I still condemn that action. OSA's treaties are non-chaining for a reason, and this is it.

    That being said, a tactic now popularly referred to as 'the iFOK manoeuvre' has been pulled once again, and to a greater extent than its namesake strike. Eleven AAs have declared on GOONS our allies, while none have declared on either Umbrella or MK, alliances who have equally attacked the NPO without provocation. The coordinated and selective attacks against our faithful allies represent a level of cowardice I cannot condone. A number of these alliances, including the Atlantic Sphere Union, have done so without any treaty compelling them to do so. While in other circumstances we might laud their initiative and values, we abhor their bandwagoning opportunism as much as we express our displeasure with Doomhouse's original actions.

    While I personally do not often appreciate the public persona adopted by GOONS, they have been excellent allies and fast friends to OSA for a long time. We have often had cause to be grateful for their assistance (like preventing allies from being hit in the past and sending someone over to help with a programming project) and never once have they taken advantage of our relationship or taken us for granted. Given that history, and our own sense of responsibility, we cannot in good conscience ignore an obligation in treaty that was always interpreted in our favour by the other party.

    And so, pursuant to 'A Very Basic Treaty' the Open Source Alliance recognize that a State of War exits between it and the Atlantic Sphere Union and shall persist until GOONS have achieved peace.

    May the lights of Richard Stallman and Linus Torvalds shine upon OSA and her allies, and may the proprietary operating systems of our enemies crash.

    Signed,
    Andy P of Nolishiwan, President of OSA
    MD Hammer of Hogwarts, Minister of Defence
    Inflixta of Usael (aka Netjr), Minister of External Affairs
    Jack Ryan of Marisopa, Minister of Internal Affairs
    maxwell little of Hypertechnologies, Minister of Economics
    Nolissar of Ripoaria, Vice-President

  12. [quote name='The MVP' timestamp='1294988537' post='2574857']
    What bothers me is that FAN did act in self-defense. Why must FAN take it upon themselves to open up diplomatic doors to a nation who is affiliated to an AA that acted hostile towards one of their nations and by proxy FAN itself? Why does it have to be FAN's job to approach MFO about these unprovoked attacks, shouldn't it be MFO's? Has MFO took it upon themselves to take responsibility into their own hands and message FAN to apologize or reach an agreement? If so I understand but why does FAN have to? I don't like the precedent, to be quite honest, of getting attacked then it falls on me to take on diplomacy when I've been wronged to begin with.

    FAN's response is when this idea of it's okay to wrong an alliance and now the alliance has to take it upon themselves to go to the alliance that provoked the attack to begin with ends.
    [/quote]
    It used to be precedent that when attacked by a single nation (more so if the attack consisted of spying instead of real war), one goes to the gov of the respective alliance and demand either reps or the releasing of the aggressor nation to be punished by the attacked. Especially with a small and rather inactive AA one cannot demand they check their screens every day. Besides doesn't everyone normally just check the war screen? (*takes note to never miss the spy reports screen ever again*)

×
×
  • Create New...