saxasm

I am fairly certain that we hold no such treaty.

For what it's worth, I'd agree with you on that. Unfortunately, most of us agree or disagree with such things mostly based on political convenience, so yeah, no one will listen.

In order to understand what you mean by independent, since that definition was hardly obvious, which of the following alliances would you say are independent: DS, GPA, NPO, NpO, Invicta, SNX, IRON, WTF, FTW?

I think you're going to need to clarify why optional aggression means someone isn't independent. I mean, Polar holds 14 treaties, all of which have oA clauses? Does this mean you're everyone's puppet?

If we're doing slowpoke memes now:

For those of us keeping track, that is actually 54.4%, not 80%. 80% and 54.4% are not, in fact, equal to each other.

First world problem? Given the contents of Tywin's ideology, I think second world problems might fit, as well.

Purely pragmatically, it is usually good if your rhetoric contains at least a semblance of truth. Your propaganda only works if people could at least entertain the idea of it being true. As it stands, a blind man could see through it. I agree that you don't need to reveal every plan, but perhaps it is better to not say anything if saying something is actively hurting you?

You've documented an absence of liking them. Are you certain that counts as documenting a dislike? </e-lawyer>

Someone should give this post an award, because it is no doubt the post least connected to reality posted this entire war. In fact, here is a sketch of such an award: (It represents how far away your posting is from the reality the rest of us inhabit.)

So Polar thinks 8.9 million is zero. I guess that explains why the counters are so infrequent so far -- the entire war has been doing less than no damage to everyone involved, so why would anyone need help with it?

Unfortunately, we have discovered a devastating countermeasure to weaponized OWF posting -- the ignore button. More of us ought to learn to use it against Tywin.

You know, I think it is mainly you and your side who are trying to create a narrative of AZTEC and NPO or C&G inevitably turning on one another. I'm not sure if your wishful thinking about the future really qualifies as rumours.

Interpretation is left as an exercise for the viewer.

I didn't think it possible, but that is actually even less clear than the last one. Wow. Edit: Also, the arrow still says DS hit NpO, instead of the other way around.

I've actually read all the posts in here. I even got someone to reply to my post. I feel like a success.

To be fair, Invicta is also a party to that same treaty, and I don't think anyone has particularly objected to them hitting us. We haven't even moved their embassy from the "Allies" section...

My nation began its existence right after the end of Karma, so my first war must have been Bipolar. I was in CCC, who were and are allies of Polar. I think we fought FOK in the first part of the war. Since I was some junior FA type of person at the time, I was the first one to react to Polar's peace deal, which happened the day after we declared. I somehow wound up in a query with some gov person there, and said something akin to "I suppose there's no point to us fighting anymore, is there?". The person sensibly interpreted this as a ceasefire proposal, which I hadn't intended it as. And that is the story of how I accidentally negotiated a ceasefire in a war.

Should your arrow between NpO and DS really be pointing in that direction?

None of what you said was in any sense true, even including your hyperbole. Polar has not lost more wars than your average alliance, and the wars you have fought have not in fact always had the same sides. Your narrative of Polar being unusually persecuted by some specific grouping is false no matter how you twist your words. (Also, for the record, I've spent a significant majority of my time on Bob as a direct ally of Polar. Could you please drop the "everyone who opposes me is stupid, everyone on my side is super-smart" rhetoric? It's been done to death, and given the amount of times the sides have changed in our world by now, it should be obvious how absurd it is.)

It is amazing just how little truth underlies the truthiness of this statement. I mean, it sounds reasonable if you don't really think about it. However, let's look at the wars Polar has fought, to see how true it actually is: This ongoing war. I'll grant you that you are losing this one. Disorder. In case you don't remember, Polar started that wars, and enforced terms at the end of it. I don't think you can by any stretch call that Polar being rolled. Also, I count three alliances that were on your side that have already entered on the opposite side this war. Are you certain that the sides of war never change? Equilibrium. Not only was Polar on the winning side for this war, you were even on the same side as a bunch of the alliances you are currently being attacked by. Remind me again how Polar has always fought the same alliances? I'll grant you that you were rolled in Grudge. However, that war was started by two alliances who aren't involved in this war yet, and one of them is currently allied to you. Are you certain that Polar has been getting constantly rolled by the same people? PB-NpO is a rather good example for your case. That, I will grant you. Perhaps you got so beaten up then that it turned into ten curbstomps in a row in your memory? Bipolar. As I recall this war, you were on the winning side. I think you'll recall this war, too, if you think really hard about it. Digging really far back, there's also the so-called Karma War, in which there was indeed an npo getting rolled. Unfortunately, that was the NPO, not the NpO. All the evidence I can find points to the NpO in fact being on the winning side of this war, too. Going back to WotC, a large majority of alliances involved do not exist, but yes, Polar did lose. Is this the ghost that haunts you so? I won't bother to go back before then, because it is ancient, and Polar did not lose any war before then other than the very first Great War, which is going back a bit far even for Polar memories. In summary, these "ten rollings by the same people on Polar" are in fact a total of four lost wars in Polar history. One of which happened in mid-2006, one of which happened in 2008, one of which happened in 2011, and the most recent Polar surrender was in early 2012. The common denominators between the opposing sides are scarce. A paranoid mind might say that they were all for the same reason, but most won't believe that. Grub, are you really sure that Polar has been rolled ten times? You've barely fought ten major wars.

What is that maroon blob supposed to represent?

For the record, our treaty with Fark is an NAP, and our treaty with R&R is a PIAT. And, for what it is worth, all of those treaties were in the works well before the war started. They were just rushed through the final stages because of the war.

It was just too stupid not be made yet.

I'm pretty certain none of us have any nice things.