Ernesto Che Guevara Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 [quote name='Krack' timestamp='1327356788' post='2905752'] Yes, we know - it's my insatiable enjoyment of showtunes. [/quote] You disgust me, sir. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Princess Doomee Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 Let's get the facts straight once and for all. It should really help if you know the reality from the fiction here. The part in the quote box in Mary's original post was agreed to by FAN prior to this thread. The part circled in red was [b]NOT[/b] seen by FAN until this thread went up. What does this mean? Nothing other than Mary getting one last jab in but at least now you know the facts. [IMG]http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb245/Jack_Tarr/avengers.jpg[/IMG] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernesto Che Guevara Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 [quote name='Princess Doomee' timestamp='1327360102' post='2905786'] Let's get the facts straight once and for all. It should really help if you know the reality from the fiction here. The part in the quote box in Mary's original post was agreed to by FAN prior to this thread. The part circled in red was [b]NOT[/b] seen by FAN until this thread went up. What does this mean? Nothing other than Mary getting one last jab in but at least now you know the facts. [/quote] I honestly cannot believe you're trying this angle. Oh wait, this is FAN we're talking about, of course I can believe it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin32891 Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 I'd like to say again. NPO congrats on your victory over FAN. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanilla Napalm Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Princess Doomee' timestamp='1327360102' post='2905786'] Let's get the facts straight once and for all. It should really help if you know the reality from the fiction here. The part in the quote box in Mary's original post was agreed to by FAN prior to this thread. The part circled in red was [b]NOT[/b] seen by FAN until this thread went up. What does this mean? Nothing other than Mary getting one last jab in but at least now you know the facts. [/quote] This image just keeps coming to mind through this thread: [img]http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lfpdnlLeyK1qz8uqoo1_500.jpg[/img] Edited January 23, 2012 by Vanilla Napalm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordDarknessOfLight Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 [quote name='Princess Doomee' timestamp='1327360102' post='2905786'] Let's get the facts straight once and for all. It should really help if you know the reality from the fiction here. The part in the quote box in Mary's original post was agreed to by FAN prior to this thread. The part circled in red was [b]NOT[/b] seen by FAN until this thread went up. What does this mean? Nothing other than Mary getting one last jab in but at least now you know the facts. [IMG]http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb245/Jack_Tarr/avengers.jpg[/IMG] [/quote] I thought I had terrible reading and comprehension... Congrats on your victory NPO! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krack Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Princess Doomee' timestamp='1327360102' post='2905786'] Let's get the facts straight once and for all. It should really help if you know the reality from the fiction here. The part in the quote box in Mary's original post was agreed to by FAN prior to this thread. The part circled in red was [b]NOT[/b] seen by FAN until this thread went up. What does this mean? Nothing other than Mary getting one last jab in but at least now you know the facts. [/quote] As I suspected. Letum and Erneto Che Guevara, your apologies can begin now. I will be over there [i]not[/i] holding my breath with this look on my face. NPO, TPF and NATO couldn't get FAN to surrender, so they took the best deal they could ("please stop shooting at us") and unilaterally declared victory to a chorus of hailing nincompoops. Cute. Edited January 24, 2012 by Krack Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gizmo Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 [quote name='Krack' timestamp='1327364290' post='2905841'] As I suspected. Letum and Erneto Che Guevara, your apologies can begin now. I will be over there [i]not[/i] holding my breath with this look on my face. NPO, TPF and NATO couldn't get FAN to surrender, so they took the best deal they could ("please stop shooting at us") and unilaterally declared victory to a chorus of hailing nincompoops. Cute. [/quote] Really?? You are going to run with that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Humphrey Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Krack' timestamp='1327364290' post='2905841'] As I suspected. Letum and Erneto Che Guevara, your apologies can begin now. I will be over there [i]not[/i] holding my breath with this look on my face. NPO, TPF and NATO couldn't get FAN to surrender, so they took the best deal they could ("please stop shooting at us") and unilaterally declared victory to a chorus of hailing nincompoops. Cute. [/quote] Did you look at the war screen before posting this? FAN was barely launching any wars at TPF or NATO, [i]plus[/i] NPO was launching more wars at FAN than vice-versa. So we were hardly asking FAN to "please stop shooting at us", given we were the ones doing most of the shooting at FAN. Edited January 24, 2012 by Sir Humphrey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krack Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 [quote name='Sir Humphrey' timestamp='1327364732' post='2905846'] Did you look at the war screen before posting this? FAN was barely launching any wars at TPF or NATO, [i]plus[/i] NPO was launching more wars at FAN than vice-versa. So we were hardly asking FAN to "please stop shooting at us", given we were the ones doing most of the shooting at FAN. [/quote] I didn't have to look at the war screen. I read the agreed upon peace terms instead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Humphrey Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Krack' timestamp='1327365034' post='2905848'] I didn't have to look at the war screen. I read the agreed upon peace terms instead. [/quote] You mean, you read what you wanted to into the peace terms instead, out of an apparently willifully ignorant position. I am not concerned with claiming victory over FAN. My concern is that FAN attacked our MDP-level treaty partner in support of its coalition partner in Fark. This same coalition partner did admit to being defeated, and FAN's ability to support it was limited. Consequently, our operation to defend NPO was a success, and the Fark/FAN attack on NPO can only be described as a failure (even though Fark was presumably aware of the likely result beforehand). Edited January 24, 2012 by Sir Humphrey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jrenster Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 I always thought FAN were the type of people that didn't give a rats ass about what some document said, and that's why they don't sign treaties. I guess I was wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krack Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 [quote name='Sir Humphrey' timestamp='1327365391' post='2905849'] I am not concerned with claiming victory over FAN. [/quote] That's lucky for you because you can't. [quote]My concern is that FAN attacked our MDP-level treaty partner in support of its coalition partner in Fark. This same coalition partner did admit to being defeated, and FAN's ability to support it was limited. Consequently, our operation to defend NPO was a success, and [b]the Fark/FAN attack on NPO can only be described as a failure[/b] (even though Fark was presumably aware of the likely result beforehand).[/quote] Maybe, maybe not. My guess is that they accomplished the goals they set out to accomplish (even if objectively, those goals seem at best, unconventional and at worst, stupid.) However, reading the peace terms, NATO really can't declare victory over anyone (as you are not named in the coalition defeating FARK and did not achieve victory over FAN). You defended NPO and got FAN to stop shooting at them - Kudos. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brucemania Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 Thank god there is a thing called Narcotics Anonymous for people whom believe Krack is not a problem Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ControlVolume Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 What do people hope to gain by claiming they won in a clear defeat? What is the motivation for this flavor of willful delusion? I really want to know. It can't be that they look better in the eyes of others or that people respect them more, because the only realistic thing that happens is that people think they're even larger idiots than previously. It actively damages their reputation and standing, and yet they persist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernesto Che Guevara Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 [quote name='Krack' timestamp='1327364290' post='2905841'] As I suspected. Letum and Erneto Che Guevara, your apologies can begin now. I will be over there [i]not[/i] holding my breath with this look on my face. NPO, TPF and NATO couldn't get FAN to surrender, so they took the best deal they could ("please stop shooting at us") and unilaterally declared victory to a chorus of hailing nincompoops. Cute. [/quote] You're not convincing anybody. Plus, I don't know who this Erneto guy is. Clearly you didn't quote my name correctly, ergo you lost this argument by your standards. Remember when NPO won Karma? Their goal was to pass power to another sphere, they just don't want you to know it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krack Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 [quote name='ControlVolume' timestamp='1327366487' post='2905858'] What do people hope to gain by claiming they won in a clear defeat? What is the motivation for this flavor of willful delusion? I really want to know. It can't be that they look better in the eyes of others or that people respect them more, because the only realistic thing that happens is that people think they're even larger idiots than previously. It actively damages their reputation and standing, and yet they persist. [/quote] I'm far more interested in learning why NPO would settle for an agreed upon "cessation of hostilities" when it so obviously wanted to be able to declare victory (as evidenced by the shallow boasting pre-amble of the original post, followed by the deafening silence of the NPO leadership when the inconsistencies between the non-agreed upon pre-amble and the actually agreed upon peace terms were pointed out for all to see). [b]Pre-Amble:[/b] We won! [b]Actual Terms:[/b] Well ... we beat FARK, but we had to settle for white peace with FAN. [b]Peanut Gallery[/b]: No, clearly FAN agreed to what Mary said in the pre-amble! FAN's signatures are there at the bottom. We defeated them!!!! [b]FAN:[/b] Nope, we only agreed to the peace terms and had no knowledge of the pre-amble until Mary posted it on the OWF. We signed the peace terms - the one that agreed to a "cessation of hostilities". In other words, you stop shooting at me and I stop shooting at you. [b]Peanut Gallery:[/b] Boo-hoo! Why won't those mean FAN people just admit they lost?!?! We didn't want to fight anymore! OWF's highest form of comedy in action. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Kremlin Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 So does this mean FAN is still at war? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schad Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Joe Kremlin' timestamp='1327367472' post='2905864'] So does this mean FAN is still at war? [/quote] Good question. If they feel that the terms as presented do not reflect those which were agreed to, the logical course of action would be to declare them void and reengage. Edited January 24, 2012 by Schad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scorponok Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 [quote name='Schad' timestamp='1327367783' post='2905866'] Good question. If they feel that the terms as presented do not reflect those which were agreed to, the logical course of action would be to declare them void and reengage. [/quote] I agree. Sounds like fun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Humphrey Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Krack' timestamp='1327366259' post='2905854'] Maybe, maybe not. My guess is that they accomplished the goals they set out to accomplish (even if objectively, those goals seem at best, unconventional and at worst, stupid.) However, reading the peace terms, NATO really can't declare victory over anyone (as you are not named in the coalition defeating FARK and did not achieve victory over FAN). You defended NPO and got FAN to stop shooting at them - Kudos. [/quote] By definition, if you attack someone and end up defending rather than attacking, your attack is a failure (i.e. it is no longer an attack, but a defence). So, no, it does not depend on what goals they set out to accomplish, because they did not accomplish anything. We, on the other hand, did accomplish the goals that we set out to achieve, which is a fact that you apparently no longer dispute (given your incorrect statement before that we only agreed to peace to stop FAN shooting at us). I'll also point out that FAN was only countered by TPF and NATO, whereas Fark was declared on by TLR, TOP, NoR, TIO, NG, Oly, BAPS, GOONS and Europa. Some may have been ghost decs and most of those alliances fought multiple wars, so the actual numbers aren't clear (i.e. I'm not attempting to de-legitimise their victory). But we would have been justified in calling in more help if we had needed it (we didn't). Edited January 24, 2012 by Sir Humphrey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krack Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Joe Kremlin' timestamp='1327367472' post='2905864'] So does this mean FAN is still at war? [/quote] That's a curious question ... has NPO, TPF, or NATO breached the peace terms ("a cessation of hostilities")? [quote name='Sir Humphrey' timestamp='1327368102' post='2905871'] But we could have called on more help if we had needed it (we didn't). [/quote] Huh. Maybe if you had, you might have won. Edited January 24, 2012 by Krack Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brucemania Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 (edited) [quote]Princess Doomee, on 22 January 2012 - 06:30 PM, said: If she wishes to believe she was victorious so be it. NPO made it worth our while to end this war now and we agreed as we have other fish to fry.[/quote] I think if someone actually has read the whole thread and even specifially what Jack had already mentioned you would know the answer of FAN still being at war. Edited January 24, 2012 by brucemania Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Izuzu Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 It is really pretty simple: Fark lost and admitted defeat. FAN lost and did not admit defeat. The analogy with FAN is like with a guy who picks a bar fight, gets pummeled into the ground, has his ribs kicked in, his teeth knocked out, his jaw broken, and his nose crushed, but who refuses to say "uncle". At some point the fun of beating the living !@#$ out of him fades and you walk away, leaving him prostrate on the floor and in need of urgent medical care. The poor, incapacitated slob may require months of hospitalization, but he can hold his head high and state truthfully that he didn't admit defeat. So it is with FAN. Congratulations, you purveyors of quality gun pron. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Humphrey Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 [quote name='Krack' timestamp='1327368115' post='2905872'] Huh. Maybe if you had, you might have won. [/quote] Huh. Maybe if you didn't keep throwing up straw man arguments when I address your previous points, you might have won ... some respect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.