TehChron

You're right. I am better than to let him keep talking...And while I may not recognize you atm (Im guessing due to a different account name?), you certainly seem to know me well enough to show you know your stuff. The long, and short answer to why I let him keep talking was because I havn't had the chance to really cause someone to make a mockery of themselves in about a year. So I wanted to flex those muscles a bit in case I was too rusty when going to somewhere that actually mattered and trying it there. My fears were unfounded.

Hahahaha. I'm so sorry. But that last sentence made me laugh. You do know that at the current rate, Karma as a bloc will no longer exist? That it may not even exist now? That's Tyga's point.

Clearly my strengths are not based in nationstrength. But if you feel like taking me on in my playing field, you're more than welcome to use your face as my personal mop.

If you feel I deserve retribution for advocating the complete dissolution of your alliance and taking direct part in constant harassment of your home, then do whatever you feel you can. And Im sure more alliances would jump in to wipe out Valhalla than defend them if such a free-for-all were to occur.

Trace has always done good work from what ive known of him. Take care.

I never thought I'd live to see this happen. Guess I was wrong. I sincerely wish the best of luck to both my Old Home, and my Former Brothers. May you both come out of this in one piece.

Really? There were only three options for peace? Im frankly shocked. Did you receive a list of what surrender terms Valhalla would consider beforehand, or something? As I said in this post here, terms can be harsh, yet fair. Based on what Ive seen, you folks were completely uninterested in fair terms of punishment for Valhalla's many transgressions. I suppose it's your perogative, though, as no one else's feelings mattered, and if they want to punish Valhalla themselves, they can do so after you stop protecting them.

If you want I can quote and link to the posts where such offenses may have been Inferred.

You know, I was here for the first reps imposed after a war in this game. And you know who it was levied against? The NAAC. You know why PWII occurred? Because the NAAC had been spying on us and actively attempting to start a war against us. Not one they knew they could win, but one nonetheless. And don't try and argue that no one is that stupid, you've never met TheBlitz. Ultimately, Ivan decided against enforcing reps after we won. We simply let them off on their lonesome, and created the New Polar Order instead of bothering with them. We frankly didn't care what the NAAC did after we curbstomped them as punishment. They went and did their own thing, and then GWI happened because of random stuff. And reps were not enforced as a part of that war, as a matter of fact, all that was requested was that Ivan apologize, and we were left to our own devices as well. In both cases, they were moves that came back to cost the ones who showed "mercy". Ivan resigned his position to Dilber, who then proceeded to create the foundations for WUT which would lead to our victory in GWII. The NAAC got back up and took its potshot at Pacifica during the conflict, lead by more competent individuals than TheBlitz. Now for the bolded part. What many of you guys dont seem to realize is that the NPO used to be the epitomy of "tough yet just". Reps were imposed after Ivan's reign, but the thing is, Ivan Moldavi was the kind of leader who would put that kind of neccessary thing on the table to shame and humiliate those who had wronged his people, and therefore bring about justice. Even if they were never actually enforced. If you think that by cowering away from being "tough yet just" you are being truly righteous, than you are delusional. A person can demand restitution and not lose his honor. Your entire justification for your actions in this peace agreement is a farce.

Huh...Heheh. He needed someone else to suggest the idea a year ago, and it was still ignored.

His strawmans regarding those who disagree with the terms is spam. And frankly arrogant as hell. "OMG, we do anything more than a slap on the wrist and its the slippery moral slope for us!!!" Frankly, if you don't trust yourselves to have any self-control, then you have no position playing up the moral high ground to begin with. If dislike "extortion", then really give Valhalla a proper term of the ceasefire, and don't even make them a protectorate. Honestly. You're protecting these guys while they rebuild just so they can strut around again afterwards? That's insulting. Your terms amount to a White peace by the general consensus of anyone who has ever bothered looking in the OWF for the past 3 years. And you use strawmans and logical fallacies to defend and tar those who would call you out for it. Egos in this game sure are something...

Because NSO has competent leadership. Why do you ask, if the answer should be obvious?

Someone who's posts almost consist entirely of strawman spamming is level-headed? Good lord, no wonder I havn't been banned yet. These terms are weak, hope Valhalla earns them later, but it's not what they deserve right now. The protectorate thing is overkill, even if you think reps are "wrong", throwing them to the wolves seems like a fair compromise.

Never said anything about a threat. Just said I hoped for people who felt wronged may have deserved a chance to get their dues. But for those who think that the Order will be a threat after this...They wont be.

But they arent. Defeat is an incredibly galvanizing force in itself. Having the entire world go against us, having a so-called neutral party stab us in the back? Damn right the NPO was gonna stand back up and wtfpwn those CoaLUEtion dirtbags that took us down a peg. Light terms with folks who dont deserve them are inherently subjective. They are almost never practical. I mean San Francisco surrender rare.

Grub. The NPO is a shell of it's former self. After this war, unless by several acts of extreme pity and penitance, will the alliance gain the capacity to rebuild itself to anything resembling it's past glory. Dont try and prop up the boogeyman when even the children who once cowered in fear of him are laughing in open mockery. I've never said that the issue wasnt revenge. Of course it is. But regardless of axes to grind, regardless of all other bullcrap, there is a difference between a near-white peace and a proper punishment. Much like there is a difference between a proper punishment and an extremely harsh one. I amuse you? Thats cute. I don't particularly care. I don't know anything about the rest of the crap that occurred, but what I *DO* know about, is what Valhalla did. When I find out what other alliances did I will rail just as hard in their surrender threads if it seems to me that they are getting off easily. I cant seek revenge. I wasnt wronged. So sadly, your accusations of seeking it are frankly unfounded. The fact that folks pretend they have the moral high ground by giving a lax punishment is what Im angry about. And then they further compound the issue by acting like jerks about it. That's it. Ive also said my piece about what can be done to mollify those who want their revenge.

If you want to prove me wrong, there's a simple solution: Drop the protectorate clause. You dont do reps, but you leave Valhalla to the wolves to let them mete out some proper street justice. That's fair. And considering the state you left them in, they'd be able to handle themselves by the time MK and STA are able to get around to it.

Do so, and maybe next time people wont be up in arms over them. Clearly your efforts in working with allies need work.

Defeating them only to give them a quick and easy exit from the damage of the war is not doing anyone a favor. Your decision to allow that to happen is based on your ego. Sorry to break it to you. You aren't the only one who put their nation on the line. Apparently you only came in because you were asked to, the people you spat in the face of followed orders not to take the retribution they had a right to, and entrusted that to you. That trust was betrayed. By you. Congratulations.

Well, I didnt know this was the TPF peace thread. How silly of me.

Right. As if behavior outside of this war does anything to indicate what their behavior would be like...outside of this war. And you had no right to punish Valhalla for previous crimes, is that right? Then why the hell didn't you let those who had the right to punish them do so? Insofar as "bias" goes? And claiming you folks arent? If you got your head out of your self-serving rectum for a moment, you would see that your obsession with "being better" than everyone else, this fetish for a deluded sense of "righteousness", you would see that your own egos clouded clearly clouded your judgement of what the the proper terms for this alliance should have been. Claiming that you folks are not the ones who did anything wrong, but those victims calling for justice are the ones in the wrong...Is a strawman. Which you've been building at and claiming as a response this entire time.

Wow. You condescending !@#$%. Read this post here. Good god.

Perhaps if MK and STA hadnt first found out these ridiculous terms from the public announcement, you'd have a point regarding this "private channels ftw" line. But considering not, you'll need a new line to defend yourself. The fact of the matter is, by making this situation occur, without any thought of the consequences, you guys made this situation. YOU made Karma look weak, not those complaining about the terms. You brought this about through your own arrogance and sense of self-righteousness.

'Twas not. In all honesty, even Valhalla thinks you guys let them off the hook easily. And folks who are sufficiently punished to get up and immediately say "We would have taken worse, but you guys let us off easy. Thanks!" Don't straw man me. You didnt take the feelings of Valhalla's victims into account period when making these terms. MK sure as hell wasn't informed, and they and Tyga are folks I think would have been informed beforehand if you honestly gave a crap about showing empathy to those wronged by Valhalla. Pain brings about empathy through understanding. Valhalla did not experience pain. If Valhalla hates you, then so be it. They started the fight, and you finished it. There was nothing to feel guilty about, or to feel as if you needed to make a point by slapping your allies in the face just to show how much more "righteous" you are than they are. What you did was not the right thing. Being blind due to bias and hate is one thing, but crying foul from you being unbeliavably lax is in no way, shape or form being blinded by hate. Dont try and strawman your way out of this travesty of justice.

"In light of the crimes they have committed, we find it appropriate that these terms be enforced as well" Impartiality and empathy never lead to hypocrisy. Deluding yourself into thinking your own ego is what is right does, quite often. That crap don't fly, buddy. Playing magnanimous is still just spitting in everyone's face. Ill go to sleep tonight, wake up tomorrow, and still think what was done was a load of !@#$%^&*. Because it was. And because what you did was such an insult, that is where the anger comes from. I find it hilarious that your measuring stick for "acceptable terms" is what you would take yourselves. That's marvelous. Thanks for making me laugh.