Jump to content

Dre4mwe4ver

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    902

  • Joined

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Dre4mwe4ver

  6. The Ass Accords

    in World Affairs (IC)

    Posted

    This is disgusting and the person who wrote it ought to be ashamed of himself.

    Verified as not a forgery.

    This policy leaves so many questions. If I like my ass, can i keep it? Will there be ass panels telling me what to do with my ass?

    Good questions. It's your ass. Do as you please, as long as it doesn't involve my ass without my consent.

  14. Of Sacred Texts and War

    in Alliance Announcements (IC)

    Posted

    My only disagreement with you (that matters on topic) is that it is silly to argue that support of an ally is different than support of their cause, and/or of the cause that brought them to war.  Your "defense" (which is offense) is allegiance to a cause.  Your mouth cannot separate your ass from its current reality.  You might reduce your thinking to that level, but that doesn't make it so, now you're out here in the world.


    It is just as "silly," if not more so, to suppose that you have the authority, by your definitions, to dictate the intent behind anothers' actions. When your interpretation of others' actions does not fit with the reality, while you are free to hold that interpretation and act upon it, it is not your interpretation that holds true. Does this declaration of war against an alliance of one coalition in defense of one in another act and serve as support for the latter? In its functionality, it most certainly can, I do not contest you there, but the intent and purpose of the action remains independent, as we are free to, and willing to exercise that freedom, to adjust the manner of our involvement based on our own interests, and no one else's. You claim this thinking is "reduced," but when you insist on polarizing parties into for or against and insist on binding their allegiance to coalitions, you strip away individuality and the sovereignty in favor of a mob mentality for the coalition. You dress it up to appear like more than it is by the blanket and mindless application the "causes" of each coalition, but you diminish the situation into nothing more than us vs them. And if the coalition serves their purpose, then that is most excellent for them. But if not, then you attempt to reduce them. You reduce them into something simpler. Bound into a binary, because that is easier to attempt to control. Slaves to the coalition. And when we refuse to be simplified, refuse to comply with your broken vision, you condemn us with "you might reduce your thinking," but perhaps all this reduction has left you confused as to who truly is "reduced."

    And regardless of it all, look all of you at Walsh's example, which addresses the idea rather than the man.

    I'm rubber you're glue...
    Any more fifth graders in the audience?

    The idea, indeed.

  15. Imperial Decree from the New Pacific Order

    in Alliance Announcements (IC)

    Posted

    Pacifica has not actively pursued any hostilities with TSC to date, from now on we shall. Various justifications aside, the purpose of this announcement is to clarify in exact terms the current status of NPO-TSC relations. It was kept short and simple to accomplish that purpose.

    If it were meant to serve that purpose, then I'm not sure if it was too short, too simple, or not enough of each, as the "exact terms" of "the current status of NPO-TSC relations" is now by Imperial Decree: "the New Pacific Order hereby declares war on The Sandstorm Confederacy." Thank you for the clarification.

  16. Imperial Decree from the New Pacific Order

    in Alliance Announcements (IC)

    Posted

    ImperialFlag.png

    New Pacific Order Declaration of War


    In accordance with the "I'm Afraid I Just Blue Myself - The Are You My Cousin? Accords" and the "Everything. Must. Die. WAR Pact", the New Pacific Order hereby declares war on The Sandstorm Confederacy in support of it's allies in Sengoku and Umbrella.

    Letum,
    Emperor of the New Pacific Order
    Dungeon Master of Order

    Frawley,
    Imperial Regent of the New Pacific Order

    Lord of Darkness,
    Imperial Officer of Military Affairs of the New Pacific Order

     
     

    Three reasons for the inclusion of the relevant treaties in the OP.

    Firstly, we had not explicitly clarified our position on the Sandstorm Confederacy as of yet, and secondly that they provided specific exemption for Pacifica in the Recognition of Hostilities posted in regards to Umbrella and Sengoku.

    Given that, and the fact that the same treaties were used by Sengoku and Umbrella in their respective DoW's it would follow that this is simply a recognition of a preexisting fact.


    "The New Pacific Order hereby declares war" doesn't look an awful lot like "simply a recognition of a preexisting fact." Word to the wise would be to pick one story and stick to it. I recommend the OP that has those proud signatures from your government attached, but I can see how the fact that it's contradictory to everything else your coalition is attempting to claim as true makes it the less than preferable choice, so the attempts to lawyer yourself out of this one is understandable.
×
×
  • Create New...