Jump to content

Lenex

Banned
  • Content Count

    159
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Lenex

  • Rank
    no matching nation
  • Birthday 05/24/1989

Contact Methods

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

Profile Information

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

Previous Fields

  • Sanctioned Alliance
    Orange Defense Network
  • Nation Name
    WBAF89
  • Alliance Name
    Optional Defense Network
  • Resource 1
    Uranium
  • Resource 2
    Wine
  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. Wait, MK does not control ever facet of planet bob? What are you smoking?
  7. 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.
  8. "I find it interesting that the same people who argued that Athens attacking TPF over a 6 month old CB was wrong are the same people that are now supporting an offensive war with no cause other than "they looked at us funny" against C&G." Oh, you. . How dare you point out their hypocrisy!
  9. That sir, is called paranoia. How can you conclude they would have joined \m/'s side of the war when they had just as many treaties to NpO's side of the war? Yes, there were hateful things coming from the MK camp to NpO, and for good reason. MK did not like being put into the position that they were being put into, have you seen the treaty cancelled yet? No. Will it get cancelled? Most likely, but the fact is, it is pure paranoia and pure speculation on your part with no tangible evidence to conclude that they would have joined \m/'s side of the war just because you say they would have. TOP and IRON should have stayed neutral and they wouldn't have had to worry about it.
  10. Yep I agree, thanks Grub for making TOP look like such hypocrites. Endless hailing for keeping up the standards of the community, and than they turn around and declare without a shred of evidence. In fact CnG had people on both sides of the war and it would be more reasonable to conclude they would have remained neutral. So yeah, them standards of the community and stuff are really high on TOP's agenda.. Irony .
  11. Yep, good read OP. Completely agree.
×
×
  • Create New...