Jump to content

Polaris Delenda Est


Salmia

Recommended Posts

[quote name='William Bonney' timestamp='1322285698' post='2851791']
[img]http://www.mun2.tv/files/images/mun2-images/news/daily-dos/daily-dos-the-break-up.jpg[/img]

Happy hunting, friends
[/quote]
[color="#FF8C00"]Oh, thank you! Such a inspiration for propaganda.[/color]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 310
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

[quote name='Tygaland' timestamp='1322285081' post='2851748']
Again, I'll ask in the hope you answer the question I actually asked. How exactly was the pre-emptive strike on C&G and more specifically MK aiding Polar's cause?
[/quote]

It doesn't really matter if it actually aided Polar's cause or not. IRON and TOP were granted the confidence of being allowed to do their pre-emptive strike, and Polar went ahead to betray that confidence. Whether or not Polar intended to betray them, or what Polar's intentions were are inconsequential in my opinion. It's the act of backstabbing, not the intent of backstabbing, that counts. And for the receiving end of the blade, IRON and TOP only need to see the act of backstabbing to justify themselves for vengeance.

Also have fun with this IRON.

Edited by Jrenster
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The IRON hammer falls.

[quote name='stockhunter' timestamp='1322282960' post='2851517']
I hope IRON get's their rumps handed to them. They suck and should be wiped off the face of CN.
[/quote]

Don't worry you'll eventually get your chance to do just that. We haven't forgotten about you traitors you know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Jrenster' timestamp='1322287542' post='2851856']
It doesn't really matter if it actually aided Polar's cause or not. IRON and TOP were granted the confidence of being allowed to do their pre-emptive strike, and Polar went ahead to betray that confidence. Whether or not Polar intended to betray them, or what Polar's intentions were are inconsequential in my opinion. It's the act of backstabbing, not the intent of backstabbing, that counts. And for the receiving end of the blade, IRON and TOP only need to see the act of backstabbing to justify themselves for vengeance.
[/quote]

I wasn't querying the deception, just the claim in the DoW that IRON and TOP were aiding Polar's cause by pre-emptively striking MK and the rest of C&G. Am I to conclude this claim was a fabrication seeing as no one can actually tell me how it is true?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Tygaland' timestamp='1322288003' post='2851872']
I wasn't querying the deception, just the claim in the DoW that IRON and TOP were aiding Polar's cause by pre-emptively striking MK and the rest of C&G. Am I to conclude this claim was a fabrication seeing as no one can actually tell me how it is true?
[/quote]

If I remember right STA members were pretty unhappy with Polaris's actions in BiPolar. It is pretty funny to see you defend them now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Tygaland' timestamp='1322288003' post='2851872']<br />I wasn't querying the deception, just the claim in the DoW that IRON and TOP were aiding Polar's cause by pre-emptively striking MK and the rest of C&amp;G. Am I to conclude this claim was a fabrication seeing as no one can actually tell me how it is true?<br />[/quote]
Are you asking for someone to point you a way to e-lawyer out of defending NpO by claiming this is a result of their own actions? Or are you merely being intentionally obtuse just to maneuver yourself into a position of martyrdom to claim the high moral ground as you Arctic folk tend to do so often?

In other words... do something about it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Tygaland' timestamp='1322288003' post='2851872']
I wasn't querying the deception, just the claim in the DoW that IRON and TOP were aiding Polar's cause by pre-emptively striking MK and the rest of C&G. Am I to conclude this claim was a fabrication seeing as no one can actually tell me how it is true?
[/quote]

I see. Then yeah, that's a valid point. I suppose there's the logic that Polar had some sort of noble cause in that war (which they thought they did) that IRON and TOP supported and figured that CnG would be on the opposing end of that cause. That's the only thing I can see them saying. Otherwise, I'm not going to put words in their mouths.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Tygaland' timestamp='1322288003' post='2851872']
I wasn't querying the deception, just the claim in the DoW that IRON and TOP were aiding Polar's cause by pre-emptively striking MK and the rest of C&G. Am I to conclude this claim was a fabrication seeing as no one can actually tell me how it is true?
[/quote]
It was meant to be part of a wider coalition front which was headed by Polar and that is how it was planned. Planned with Polar's involvement and approval. Certainly it may have aligned with a few of our own goals but our actions were indeed intended as support for Polar and their war.

Honestly though, think whatever you want, you're going to do so regardless.

Edited by Shan Revan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='masterbake' timestamp='1322288444' post='2851898']
If I remember right STA members were pretty unhappy with Polaris's actions in BiPolar. It is pretty funny to see you defend them now.
[/quote]

It seems I'm speaking a foreign language again. We were annoyed with their behaviour back then, yes. We are friends and allies and worked through our difference of opinion. However, my question here, which remains unanswered, is how TOP and IRON pre-emptively attacking C&G was to further Polar's cause as claimed in the DoW. Can you assist me with this?

[quote name='Michael Malone']
Are you asking for someone to point you a way to e-lawyer out of defending NpO by claiming this is a result of their own actions? Or are you merely being intentionally obtuse just to maneuver yourself into a position of martyrdom to claim the high moral ground as you Arctic folk tend to do so often?
[/quote]

No, I'm actually asking for the basis for the allegation in the DoW with regards to TOP and IRON only hitting C&G pre-emptively to further NpO's cause. I'm not sure how you reached your couple of conclusions from the question I asked. Then again, people do persist in dribbling on with their own unrelated nonsense rather than answer a fairly simple question so I'm not surprised to be confronted with such stupidity here.

[quote]
In other words... do something about it?
[/quote]

Not sure how this relatesd to the above but we will be doing something about it. Do you think a DoS is a bit brash?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Tygaland' timestamp='1322285081' post='2851748']
Again, I'll ask in the hope you answer the question I actually asked. How exactly was the pre-emptive strike on C&G and more specifically MK aiding Polar's cause?
[/quote]

Why are you riding a line of argument that even only the most hardcore apologists and cronies on your own side of this current affair would subscribe to? It takes about one quarter of a brain to see how ridiculous is the path of claims you're taking here.

Edited by Crymson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Jrenster' timestamp='1322288489' post='2851905']
I see. Then yeah, that's a valid point. I suppose there's the logic that Polar had some sort of noble cause in that war (which they thought they did) that IRON and TOP supported and figured that CnG would be on the opposing end of that cause. That's the only thing I can see them saying. Otherwise, I'm not going to put words in their mouths.
[/quote]

At last, someone reads what I actually said.

No one was at war with MK and C&G at the time so the attack on them was completely unrelated to the war underway at the time. I believe NpO held a PIAT or something with MK at the time so I don't think attacking MK was advancing anything but TOP and IRON's cause.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Crymson' timestamp='1322288984' post='2851931']
Why are you riding a line of argument that even only the most hardcore apologists and cronies on your own side of this current affair would subscribe to? It takes about one quarter of a brain to see how ridiculous is the path of claims you're taking here.
[/quote]

So, you have no answer to the question and instead attack the person who asks it. Well played.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Shan Revan' timestamp='1322288752' post='2851921']
It was meant to be part of a wider coalition front which was headed by Polar and that is how it was planned. Planned with Polar's involvement and approval. Certainly it may have aligned with a few of our own goals but our actions were indeed intended as support for Polar and their war.

Honestly though, think whatever you want, you're going to do so regardless.
[/quote]

Polar were not planning to hit MK or C&G, they had no reason to. TOP and IRON wanted to hit C&G, it had nothing to do with Polar whether they said they were ok with your plan or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...