Jump to content

Lenex

Banned
  • Posts

    159
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Lenex

  • Birthday 05/24/1989

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=364540
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Interests
    Running, PC Gaming, Military / Military History ( USA )
  • Location
    Washington State
  • Gender
    Male

Previous Fields

  • Sanctioned Alliance
    Orange Defense Network
  • Nation Name
    WBAF89
  • Alliance Name
    Optional Defense Network
  • Resource 1
    Uranium
  • Resource 2
    Wine

Lenex's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

  1. That was a good read Delta, and I whole heartily agree. Planet Bob is full of these type's of arguments amongst other places of discussion.
  2. Why should I care what Ben Franklin said over two hundreds years ago? Lest you forget things change, the people of today and their actions of today are not the same as they were when he said that.
  3. Oh so people are going to be held responsible for their illegal action's online now you say? Kinda like real life? Wow!
  4. Its great that you think we have the moral high ground, but CnG is not keeping TOP and IRON in perpetual war to eliminate them as a threat just because they attacked us. We offered them terms that wouldn't even repair 50% of the damage they have done to all the alliances involved. They're stalling, not us.
  5. Bob you really have no clue what you are talking about. Just sayin.
  6. [quote name='Haflinger' date='09 March 2010 - 08:36 PM' timestamp='1268196119' post='2220541'] Uhh.. UPN is allied to the alliances still fighting how exactly? [/quote] Well they've got an MDoAP with us. If thats what you were asking, if not, sorry if I misunderstood.. Err UPN does.
  7. Welcome to the most dysfunctional sphere on planet bob.
  8. Wait, MK does not control ever facet of planet bob? What are you smoking?
  9. [quote name='Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz' date='17 February 2010 - 07:55 PM' timestamp='1266465321' post='2188776'] No, you're missing his point. Had they or Grub been [b]genuinely[/b] concerned with achieving peace and de-escalating the conflict (as claimed in the OP), given that they had advance warning of the impending attack and knowledge that the Polar-\m/ peace was nearing a successful conclusion, surely someone should have approached TOP & co. to either stall or stand-down the attack? Unless of course there wasn't a genuine desire for peace or a de-escalation of the conflict, of course. Which is fine in my books, to be honest - just !@#$@#$ own it and be honest, instead of playing with around with this out-and-out !@#$%^&*, for $%&@s sakes. [/quote] Well in reality, a certain somebody in MK was putting in more time than I think you know to secure peace with \m/ and Polar. Certain people were not cooperating obviously. There is no game being played when Archon said they were trying to secure peace, they were.
  10. [quote name='Kzoppistan' date='17 February 2010 - 01:51 PM' timestamp='1266443513' post='2188028'] As soon as you move against a neutral party involved in a business transaction, you are an aggressor. And before any one goes bananas, yes, [b]I am aware that many people consider tech dealing to be a form of aiding. I do not.[/b] If some one wants to cut their opponents off from from an economic asset, and are willing to attack an uninvolved party to do it, so be it. But be honest about it. [/quote] That is a matter of opinion entirely, and I am quite sure Franklin and VoC can find plenty of other places to sell tech to.
  11. [quote name='Jaguar1' date='15 February 2010 - 10:01 PM' timestamp='1266300105' post='2184927'] How did Jag miss the announcement on the ODN forums stating that we were now going to be using a smarmy attitude in an attempt to prevent people from giving us !@#$? ODN has always been full of smarmy *********. We just weren't outspoken about it. [/quote] I am actually confused as to what attitude Jones is talking about. I see no difference in the way people post that can be directly related to us joining CnG. I think peoples perception has changed, and they perceive what is said here in a different manner based on us joining CnG. I think it is not us who has changed but it is Jones' perception of us that has changed.
  12. Yes because it is fair to grant white peace to a coalition who attacks an un-involved bloc, out of paranoia and extreme opportunism. Now it is CnG's miss-doings, whoops sorry, it is the Hegemony V2.0's fault for not allowing peace, when this other coalition has stated they want to see CnG eliminated as a threat. Not only did they attack an uninvolved bloc, they took advantage of the bad relations between the general member's of CnG and Polar, to assure a victory for themselves when they attack CnG. If that is not pathetic, I honestly do not know what is. It is very opportunistic and shows great cowardice.
×
×
  • Create New...