Jump to content

Vladimir Poutine

Members
  • Posts

    139
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Vladimir Poutine

  1. 7 hours ago, AlmightyGrub said:

    Ah, the sweet delicious smell of the tears of others.  I find it highly amusing that you forget all those times Polaris has been rolled by overwhelming force and cry like it isn't our right to sign a treaty with an alliance we want to.  Death to you all, scurry away under your rocks, nothing will save you if you just intend to gnash your teeth and lament to the 4 winds.

     

    To all that know who you are, you have reaped what you have sown.  Enjoy the destiny you chose for you chose it...or don't you realize that?

    "Death to you all"

     

    That's NPO if I've ever heard it. You've become Pacifican lackeys, Regardless of how much you deny it, you are their pawns, doing their bidding, going against everything you stand for, or claimed to stand for. I have never felt more betrayed in my life. $%&@ Polaris, and $%&@ you Grub.

     

    Go ahead and warn me.

  2. As much as I want to continue to debate this point with you, Chim is right in that this is irrelevant. Drag it up somewhere else.

    It was my original intention to simply point out to you and others who share the view that Oculus is not an aggressive bloc that some may perceive the Oculus attack on MI6 as an aggressive action taken by Oculus. I have not stated support for either side of this argument, I simply stated that it could be used by some as evidence that Oculus is not the non-belligerent bloc it repeatedly claims to be.

  3. Even if you wanted to debate your perception of the events that followed, you legitimately cannot deny that MI6 was being antagonistic. Even if you think that is a weak reason to go to war, that is still a reason nevertheless.

     

    But that is still a perception of events that is emphatically wrong. The fact of the matter is that Oculus didn't hit MI6 for "no reason". Oculus had reasons, and acted upon them. If you choose to ignore those reasons for the sake of your public perception; fine ignore them. But that's called being delusional.

    I can neither confirm nor deny the public's perception of MI6, nor can I comment on the nature of it, as I was a member of MI6 at the time of these events and not a member of the public. It is true that I can only speculate on Oculus' decision to go to war with MI6, as I was not a member of the government of any Oculus or inner-circle Oculus alliance at the time. However I can comment on the public's perception of your aggressive action against us, as I was a part of this public because, as already stated, I was not in Oculus government. And the general perception of the non-Oculus public seems to be that the war was unjustifiable and that Oculus attacked MI6 either to eliminate us while we were isolated as a potential future threat to their monopoly on power, or because they simply did not like us. The general consensus amongst the non-Oculus public is that this war was an act of aggression by Oculus and therefore something to be condemned.

  4. Do you get to decide what somebody else does for what reason? Or does the person who is actually doing the thing gets to decide why they are doing the thing? Truly a confounding philosophical dilemma. 

    Naturally, I cannot physically make a decision for another person and/or group as to whether or not they do something. I am not capable of mind control.

     

    I do not understand what whether or not I have the capacity to control others' decisions has to do with my post, however.

  5. Could you perhaps provide proof that that happened? I'm really interested in the history of this place.

    I am not going to get into that argument again. If you want a history lesson, I suggest you either ask someone who cares, or go back a few pages in Alliance Announcements and World Affairs to find the relevant information.

  6. IVe no issue with that actually, considering they werent allies.

     

    Ive no issue with TPF hitting NPO here either.  I DO have issues with talk of the war going on for years.

     

     

    I am in an alliance that during my time in it has acted properly.  IF I had an issue with my alliances actions I wouldnt be in it obviously.

     

     

    So yeah.  Again. I actually approve of wars that are started because of 'i dont like you.'  I was fine with it when TPF did it now.  I was fine when MK did it in grudge war.  I'm always going to be fine with that.

     

     

    I get TPF is now playing coy and refusing to give a clear answer on eternal war on principle. But ive seen now a few statements about wars going on over a year (whether they can pull it off or not is another question).  That to me is the no-no.  Not the aggressive action.

     

     

    edit to add: And I wasnt around for the goons thing to answer your question there.  Im not qualified to argue about it one way or another.  If you want to talk about say DH-NPO going forward i'm well versed.  Slightly less well versed but present for bi-polar and karma.

    I believe TPF has represented their views and purpose in this war rather well. They intend to fight until they do not have any money remaining, then delete. I refer you to the post below as an example.

     

    My statement is pretty clear. I have several billion dollars. I will launch nukes until it's gone. Then my nation is gone. If anyone doesn't like it, I do not care in any way, shape or form. I don't care about honor. I don't care about the future. The future is non-existent beyond the limit of my war chest. It may not amount to much in the grand scheme of things, but it pleases me to do this. Once NPO pre-empted us with 0 reason last war, they bought this ticket from my nation.

     

    That is my feeling, this is how it will play out in my nation.

     

    Obviously one post does not represent the entire alliance, but I believe this sentiment is echoed throughout TPF. I am not sure where you are confused about this issue.

  7. A common enemy can be a powerful force in uniting alliances, its very possible both are using each other for a mutual goal. Where that goal lies is yet to be see, but if Oculus' goal is to establish themselves as the current Hegemony without leaving any doubts; I can imagine where this is leading.

    Indeed a common enemy can be a powerful force in unification of alliances. However when dislike for one another exceeds the amount of dislike for that common enemy things become more difficult. That, and not recognizing who that enemy is.

  8. Too much salt in this thread.

     

    For those of you who had fun in this war, you're the real winners!

     

    For the those of you who actually fought, enjoy all the XP.  Surely those maxed out generals will come in handy!

     

    Enjoy your break and Merry Christmas!

    Thank you, ZeroOne, and I wish you the same.

  9.  

    Hubert has been going on like this at me in-game for the duration of the war. He was of the opinion that because he could nuke me every day whereas my nukes were being blocked that he is a superior warrior and demanded I hand over the leadership of the STA. I, of course, as a man of honour gave him full leadership of the Singaporean Tennis Association. I look forward to the sleeping giant that is Singapore rising through the ranks of world tennis under Hubert's skilled leadership.

    I've said it before, but Tyga, I love you.

  10. real tough war guise

     

    good work!111!!!!!

     

    i dont know why members of either side are even bothering to say it was a good fight, call it what it is: your predetermined curb stomp by the hegemony is completed and we'll see you again next year

    I enjoyed the war. I thought it was a good fight.

     

    Good to have peace at last. Now we can move onto other things.

×
×
  • Create New...