cowen70

They can do what they like in regards to giving out peace. It is when they make an attack (veiled or blatent) on those who make reperations a condition. As for the supposed goals of Karma, as far as I am aware its proportionality not white peace everywhere with fluffy bunnies and pink bows. More information stating their displeasure at the other alliances. Wholly unneccessary but their choice, giving reasonable motives for a verbal retaliation from those involved.

I believe the trouble is with the supposed moral outrage not the white peace. See above. Who made the OP? I'm not really involved but most of your statements didn't seem to have a whole lot to do with what the people who are posting substantive cases for hypocricy are saying.

You joking? Not often I look at Youwish's posts and think they are good but that seemed like a genuine (and very nice) post not a lame recruitment attempt.

FAN would have died had NPO not committed all those other actions that led to this war. The arguement that NPO could face eternal war if it continues being a hippy does not mean that those who would do that entirely karma like action would end up in the same position as NPO as that would presume that they too would commit to all those other actions, that all those other variables were to fall into place. I think that is assuming a bit much, clairvoyance isn't real.

did NPO offer adequate proof enough to persuade FAN to come out of peace mode and fight? No they merely said they'd discuss peace after a proper bit of war. That they wouldn't discuss it until a proper fight had been had. So its the old switcheroo, delicious.

This war is not the first time I've fought against them. I was against them in the Legion war. Again there is nothing here to impugn me on try as you might. Things I talk about are generally things I do. No doubt I'm human and I make mistakes but I'm not worried about someone pointing them out, just you haven't picked any yet. Well lobby that an AA should be attacked and you'll be seen as a strong advocate of it and attract a strong response. I certainly didn't suggest that you had stated you would be leading attacks on PC if you look back on my posts and what was actually said. I said maybe you should... and yes that is a line NPO used to use and one that people eventually followed to wonderful success. It seems like it works, people should join AA's and work towards establishing their desired goals and fulfilling their moral convictions on Planet Bob or at least accepting subjectivity or relativity and stop shouting them down on the boards. Either way it behooves people to act not talk or we'll end up in the mess we were when NPO had power.

I don't alliance hop, that stigma can be saved for those people who would jump arbitrarily for no reason. My AA's have been transitory to a certain extent yet up until defcons disbandment it was an evolution from one main core group transiting to another then merging and forming an even larger core stable group and DefCon was good, really good place to be. Even still the group still holds, we still hold a good friendship and will one day end up in the same AA again of that I have no doubt. Once again I urge you pick on the nose, its at least firmer ground than your poor personal attacks. As for changing policy, I don't imagine you'll have to much to do in Gramlins (they seem predisposed to rationality) but it took some rather major events to swing Polaris from the NPO blood brother, and it certainly wasn't your urging. Should I add ineffectual to the list of suspect character assasinations I seem to be building? Though in truth I don't truly believe any of them, but certainly the idea that PC should be attacked raises my hackles for something so insignificant but it seems PC is the AA people love to hate and while lots of people (like TPF) love to talk of attacking them few do. And not because they are particularly large or well connected, they don't actually desire to be so from what I know of them. All I know is I respect them for their blunt no nonesense talk and consistency and anyone can add my meagre NS to the opposition of those that go against them and with that sir I wish you peace as I shall impugn you no longer.

Indeed you did I just realised I am in fact kicking around 3 years old. You might not go off a whim but you certainly don't act much to move towards your alleigances or if you do, you do it so slowly as to make it worthless. A less cynical person might suggest that you are just migrating with the winds of change. I will merely hint that it has suggestions of it. If your convictions don't suit the AA your in and it is the case that you stick with them despite it then I apologise, you just don't believe in what you espouse so freely strongly enough to be moved by it. I'm not sure which is the more damning conviction. As for my history I have always seeked to move in the direction which my convictions take me. My affiliation with TPF was accidental in happenstance that I struck such a strong bond with DC particularly ZZZ that I merged into an AA that was allied with TPF. We all agreed that honour demanded that since we knew a war was coming up we would fight for them but it wasn't where we wanted to be and we'd damn well shift when it was honourable to do so. As for attacking PC I have just finished two wars with them and will pursue more at my leisure, as well as having fought god knows how many wars with their protectorates nations who declared on me and who I declared on. Seriously if your looking to attack integrity your barking up the wrong tree, I suggest picking on my looks. I have a big nose and I'm slightly overweight.

My nation is a fair bit older than that you obviously looked at the wrong nation. I'm 1049 days old edit: And also a fair bit weaker...having looked at my nation after so many nukes and GA's I know you talk the talk but you have acted in AA's that have brought about the thing which you now fight against in your current AA. You then target PC for fighting against TPF and targeting protectorates a fairly minor crime in comparison to the things you have participated in, either directly or through support. So you now have yet another position dictated by your AA where you will rail against a new AA. You make a good poster boy, and most definitely a more eloquent one than me as I've noted and admired your debating skills. I just don't admire your consistency.

I didn't bring anything up I merely said they had supported Q by aligning themselves with you and that is true and I view that as valid (until people surrender, its a weak arguement to assume that is not a qualifying factor) I did not bring up anything about my past actions I was discussing AA's, you brought me up, and I'm happy to continue that despite the fact that its not relevant.

All I did was quit but I always supported defcon and its decision to support TPF in the war but I did certainly urge us to find alternative treaties and drop TPF like a stone after. I made it no secret that I despised Q I betrayed no one and was nothing but honest in my opinions including posts on the OWF in which I did not hide my opinion. And yes I sought information about the coming war since TPF would give us none, but I did so with the full knowledge and disclosere of others, merely trying to gain information others weren't willing to impart depsite holding it. In other words if TPF wanted to use as meatshields I wanted to know when it would occur so I could prepare us, you didn't like it. Baaw!

Oh indeed I made a point he didn't like so he decided to bring up defcon which have nothing to do with this. I'm okay with that, we can either sideline it here or create a new thread. I'm happy to drag TPF through the mud in whichever fashion he chooses.

You mean you forcibly disbanded us because we wanted more information and you weren't willing to give it. All I did was quit because I expected to be ZI'd by you even though it was clear that we were going to honour our treaty obligations though I was certainly eager to find more honourable ones after obligations had been met since i had nothing but loathing for TPF's tactics. I for one have never aired my distaste for TPF over these actions but since you have yes TPF are despicable and we all thought it which is why DC merged into TOOL and not TPF despite the fact that you were the ex protectorates. TOOL have honour TPF do not. Yes we despised you but yes we were going to help protect you despite feeling utterly betrayed even if your past actions left a bad taste in our mouth. Being a protector does not give you a carte blanche for all actions and you never protected my AA, only one I merged into. Edit: I know exactly what AA he was in which is what makes his comments amusing.

Funny you weren't threatening and declaring on NPO not so long ago and you weren't threatening NpO or other nations for heinous actions. For actions against FAN you didn't declare war. I know you were present during these actions. Perhaps if you do declare war against PC you will finally prove you have the courage of your convictions. I urge you to do it since it would be a victory for you personally no matter what occurs afterwards. It will certainly prove your not secretly hoarding pixels while posting rhetoric on the boards.

Hang on............is this thread the biggest bag of fail ever? They are a protectorate of TPF, PC went to war with TPF and its logical to hit anyone and everyone who is likely to back them up until the point they surrender. If they don't like it they shouldn't be supporting or allying including getting protected by people with the bullying tactics of Q. I'm sure they won't be forced to disband or pay tens of thousands of tech or get a viceroy yet they certainly aligned themselves with an AA who have supported these actions. I'm playing the worlds smallest violin.

The last AA you decided was worthy of your friendship was NPO so your judgement is surely trustworthy! I don't get how NPO is evil, immoral or whatever other buzz word you want to use but the fashion has developed to assume that the people who supported ''insert buzzword for morally objectionable Bob action'' are innocent. If IRON had any sense it would create a new reign of terror and run every act of terror through a proxy called N(insert random diget)O and then claim innocence and no doubt the new Karma coalition would forgive them as well Could happen!

If we ignore the crazy anti karma propaganda and take it to mean what goes around comes around then MK should be demanding something proportional to their AA size to duplicate the reps you were forced to pay out. If 82k tech was x% of your total tech then the people who took it should pay x% of their total tech, similarly with the money though since no one knows war chest sizes I'm sure another formula could be worked out. I sincerely hope that happens, though I don't think forced wonder dismissals etc are worth it. Considering how fast soldiers can be bought its a bit meaningless keeping them artificially low (since if they wanted to go to war they could buy them all in one day)

Didn't you also follow this guy around in his DoE as well? Have you taken up the post of protector of the red sphere and the NPO, I mean to be fair they need all the help they can get/

Sigh. Evolution of behaviours and interactions happen naturally. Try and force them or whine them into existance and see what happens. I don't see the problem, an old hatred was fostered mutually and one side ended up losing. Its no big deal its just stuff.

If there was a vote stating the OP was useless at making topics would you a. ridicule him or b. ridicule him. Needs more controversy!

Yes that is a most worthy but most frequently misunderstood point.

Because we all know how well Aut's last venture went Goodluck Stig, I think you'll do it this time I really do. I'll be pleased to see your success.

Well we do agree on a little more but I am troubled by the seeming never ending casting of negativity on TFO for what was a relatively painless affair that ended in reasonable reperations, obviously would have went smoother if we had waited for a full representation of our government but for all the negotiations started badly they did not end badly. There was a time when some AA's would have demanded wonders be destroyed and reperations would not even remotely be paid for and that was that, take it or become FAN. Honestly if a rough and bumpy negotiation is the worst crime TFO has ever committed then we're way ahead of a vast proportion of CN and we'll only improve from there. As for Poison Clan I was a member there for some time before TFO, I am perfectly happy with their actions and quite knowledgable of their government, having known one of them a long time in CN and getting to know the rest of the upper government during and after my stay there I can comfortably say I am happy with their direction and confident that I can support their actions. I have actually been on the side where I was allied to an AA that I didn't support and it left me feeling very uncomfortable. If philosophically you differ from your allies in a big way then I don't see how that can make for a good military or even diplomatic relationship. If I had to give my opinion of MDP's I again find myself in agreement with PC. One of the defining opinions I came across in my time there was the fewer MDP's the better. I don't think its easy to align yourself comfortably with a lot of AA's and retain your integrity, and those few that you do sign should be very close to your ideology.

It was taken care of was it not and within the same day? That is pretty quick considering some negotiations can last days and yes people can get called away, I believe it happened with NPO just recently due to some external issues that interrupted communication. Indeed they do matter as the alliance is ran in part by me as well as other members like Jens, ditka and THD. I was absent during the beginning of the negotiations which is when a problem occurred but it was resolved quickly was it not? I do believe the negotiations finished that same session. We are not an alliance ran by a singular person, the focal head of power runs the AA in consultation with the rest of gov not inspite of them. You provide military support to one of the AA's who has extorted people in the past. If you do not support their actions and philosophy then why are you allied to them. Surely you consider the actions of the people you ally yourselves to when you sit down and discuss treaties? Knowing what they have done in the past and what they are likely to do in the future based on that. Or did you slap on a pair of blinkers hold your hands over your ears and shout ''lalalalalalalala'' when people talk about the hegemony's past actions (that isn't just NPO, that is TPF as well)? One small slice of agreement then between us.

You had a problem with one person briefly within the negotiations, not with me or the other people in TFO so I wonder exactly what it is you think I need to learn? I don't have problems with people in negotiations. I didn't particularly feel the same kind of idealistic and fanatical fervour others do around white peace and I don't apologise for that. TFO faced superior numbers and asked for a reasonable amount of reperations that does not even remotely bear comparison to the extortion that was common under the hegemony (something which TSI has indirectly supported through affiliation and military support of a Q alliance). Considering our limited involvement in the Avalon war I certainly don't think reperations will be asked for.