Jump to content

Cessation of Hostilities


Recommended Posts

[quote name='Princess Doomee' timestamp='1327278599' post='2905071']
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 [u][b]we have other fish to fry.[/b][/u] [/quote]

Can we get any spoilers? :awesome:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 300
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

[quote name='KahlanRahl' timestamp='1327329683' post='2905487']
Argue about it? There's nothing to argue about. It's pretty black and white there, chief. FAN signed the document [i][b]acknowledging [/b][/i]that you lost, defeated by the aforementioned coalition. I'm not usually one to push a point with delusional, arrogant folks such as yourself, but for $%&@ sake man. [b]You lose[/b]. You were beat down on your own suicide mission. Like previously stated, it isn't even in fine print, and has nothing to do with our choice of words in this notice. Go back and re-read what [i]you signed[/i], then come back and talk about who was the victor here. Perhaps you can smooth out your own reputation before the cement dries. <_<
[/quote]

The terms of the agreement ending the war are fairly clear - FAN neither surrendered nor did they admit defeat. The reason it is fairly clear is because the wording "admits defeat" is used elsewhere in the same document; obviously, if FAN's admission of defeat was the purpose of the terms, that is the wording that would have been utilized and agreed upon. It was not.

The portion you are referring to is, at best, a unilateral pre-amble expressing the opinion of the original poster. There is nothing in the post that suggests the wording in this portion of the post was agreed upon by those signing the "terms".

I neither like FAN nor NPO, but this looks like a sad end-run by Mary and Brehon around the fact that they couldn't get FAN to surrender or admit defeat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Krack' timestamp='1327346358' post='2905641']
The terms of the agreement ending the war are fairly clear - FAN neither surrendered nor did they admit defeat. The reason it is fairly clear is because the wording "admits defeat" is used elsewhere in the same document; obviously, if FAN's admission of defeat was the purpose of the terms, that is the wording that would have been utilized and agreed upon. It was not.

The portion you are referring to is, at best, a unilateral pre-amble expressing the opinion of the original poster. There is nothing in the post that suggests the wording in this portion of the post was agreed upon by those signing the "terms".

I neither like FAN nor NPO, but this looks like a sad end-run by Mary and Brehon around the fact that they couldn't get FAN to surrender or admit defeat.
[/quote]

In allowing their enemies to declare victory over them, Fark and FAN admitted defeat. That's how English works, buddy. Look up the definition. Hell, I'll do it again.

Victory: [color=#222222][font=arial, sans-serif][size=2]An act of defeating an enemy or opponent in a battle, game, or other competition.[/size][/font][/color]
[color=#222222][font=arial, sans-serif][size=2]
[/size][/font][/color]
[font="arial, sans-serif"][size="2"][color="#222222"]If it was FAN's goal to damage NPO, then sure, they were successful internally, but for all intents and purposes, they [i]lost [/i]this war. If their goal was to do damage whilst still losing the war, they still lost. I know, it hurts to admit it, but that's why we're all here. Use your drool towel to dry your tears and cry it out, babe. It'll be okay. [/color][/size][/font]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Ernesto Che Guevara' timestamp='1327346685' post='2905643']
In allowing their enemies to declare victory over them, Fark and FAN admitted defeat. That's how English works, buddy. Look up the definition. Hell, I'll do it again.

Victory: [color=#222222][font=arial, sans-serif][size=2]An act of defeating an enemy or opponent in a battle, game, or other competition.[/size][/font][/color]
[color=#222222][font=arial, sans-serif][size=2]
[/size][/font][/color]
[font="arial, sans-serif"][size="2"][color="#222222"]If it was FAN's goal to damage NPO, then sure, they were successful internally, but for all intents and purposes, they [i]lost [/i]this war. If their goal was to do damage whilst still losing the war, they still lost. I know, it hurts to admit it, but that's why we're all here. Use your drool towel to dry your tears and cry it out, babe. It'll be okay. [/color][/size][/font]
[/quote]

Nope. The terms are clear. All parties involved recognize FARK admitted defeat and FAN did not. I know this because I read them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Krack' timestamp='1327347676' post='2905657']
Nope. The terms are clear. All parties involved recognize FARK admitted defeat and FAN did not. I know this because I read them.
[/quote]

[quote name='Mary the Fantabulous' timestamp='1327213778' post='2904536']
We, the Avengers Coalition, come before you today to announce [b]our victory over[/b] the forces of Fark, the [b]Federation of Armed Nations[/b], and the Nuclear Proliferation League.
[/quote]


What was that you said about reading comprehension?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Krack' timestamp='1327351051' post='2905686']
Was that the portion "signed" by FAN? I bet it wasn't.
[/quote]

Their signature is on that post, it's a reasonable and logical conclusion that their inclusion in this peace is due to their defeat. They're always welcome to keep warring if they feel otherwise, but as it stands they have been defeated. And please, I don't want to hear a strawman about how NPO should have kept them at war to achieve a "true" defeat or whatever the hell crazy spin FAN and friends want to spew. Leaving the conflict in this nature is a defeat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Mary the Fantabulous' timestamp='1327213778' post='2904536']
[center]
[/center]We, the Avengers Coalition, come before you today to announce our victory over the forces of Fark, the Federation of Armed Nations, and the Nuclear Proliferation League. This conflict was not something entered into lightly, as we all knew the potential risks and costs, but it was done with deliberate and full force all the same. Together we brought vengeance to our enemies and together we now move forward from that vengeance and bring peace and order back into the world once more.





Signed for [b]Federation of Armed Nations[/b]:
(SotPK) Servers of the Poison Koolaid;
Jack Tarr,
MrSmyth
Congress Critters;
Travis,
RichieRich3902,
JRLott,
Malcolm Lee,
Rusty Shackelford

[/quote]


[quote name='Krack' timestamp='1327351051' post='2905686']
Was that the portion "signed" by FAN? I bet it wasn't.
[/quote]

Are you blind or just stupid?


Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Leet Guy' timestamp='1327351252' post='2905687']
Their signature is on that post, it's a reasonable and logical conclusion that their inclusion in this peace is due to their defeat. They're always welcome to keep warring if they feel otherwise, but as it stands they have been defeated. And please, I don't want to hear a strawman about how NPO should have kept them at war to achieve a "true" defeat or whatever the hell crazy spin FAN and friends want to spew. Leaving the conflict in this nature is a defeat.
[/quote]

No, it's not. It's neither a reasonable or logical conclusion. The terms agreed upon by the parties is clearly the section included in the quoted portion below:

[quote]Fark admits defeat to the combined forces of the New Pacific Order; The Last Remnants; Non Grata; Olympus; Boards Alliance Of Protectorate States; The Imperial Order; Nordreich; The Order Of The Paradox; Deck of International Card Experts; Goon Order of Oppression, Negligence, and Sadism (:((); Europa; and Open Source Alliance.

Federation of Armed Nations agrees to end hostilities against the combined forces of the New Pacific Order; The Phoenix Federation; NATO; and AOD Brigade.

Fark and FAN agree to not re-enter the ongoing global conflict on any front.

These terms become effective when GOONS and NPL agree to terms that end their conflict.[/quote]

Because the wording "admits defeat" is utilized regarding FARK, and is no where to be found regarding FAN, the plain meaning of the agreed upon terms is that FAN did not admit defeat. When it's distilled down to the pertinent language, your "logical conclusion" becomes ludicrous.

[quote]
Fark admits defeat to the combined forces. Federation of Armed Nations agrees to end hostilities against the combined forces.[/quote]

Words have meanings. These words mean that NPO, TPF and NATO were willing to accept any language to get out of this war with FAN. And they certainly don't mean they "defeated" FAN - if they did, it would say "FAN admits defeat ..."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Krack' timestamp='1327352668' post='2905699']
Words
[/quote]

But in allowing the OP to use the term "declare victory over", they are implying that they are victorious, ergo somebody else was not. FAN and Fark lost this war. Not winning is called losing. The case is not that the Avengers won and FAN unwon, they lost, and whether or not you and their other little myrmidons want to admit it is entirely up to you. It's just hazardous to your health to continually pretend something doesn't exist when it really does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would just like to point out that you cannot e-lawyer reality. Reality simply is. And the reality is that FAN and FARK lost this war, badly. If some of them have some kind of maturity issue with admitting reality, they are free to run and hide in some hole, wishing it could all go away. It won't change anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='evil uncle tom' timestamp='1327302555' post='2905340']
Does this mean myself and the wife can crawl out of the bunker now?

Congrats to all.

After the first week your side got it together and kept steady pressure on me, and on the wife as well. Good job. I was realy liking the war at low infra, it cheap to fight and survive. My hat is off to the Nato and TPF guys that had there hooks in,[i][b] I gave them a fight all the way down the best I could.[/b][/i]

See you guys around. Good luck to all.
[/quote]

Yes you did. I kept worrying that you might Hulk up and do a modified Poison Clan reverse-slope mobile defense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Ernesto Che Guevara' timestamp='1327353069' post='2905700']
But in allowing the OP to use the term "declare victory over", they are implying that they are victorious, ergo somebody else was not. FAN and Fark lost this war. Not winning is called losing. The case is not that the Avengers won and FAN unwon, they lost, and whether or not you and their other little myrmidons want to admit it is entirely up to you. It's just hazardous to your health to continually pretend something doesn't exist when it really does.
[/quote]

Your premise is supported by everything [u]but[/u] the agreed upon language ending the war. There is a difference between "admitting defeat" and "agreeing to end hostilities" - one means you lost, the second means you agree with the other side that neither one wants to continue fighting. It's not even a subtle difference.

As for the language used in the pre-amble - "We, the Avengers Coalition, come before you today to announce our victory ..." - unless you believe someone in FAN has control of Mary's OWF account, or that FAN speaks for the "Avengers Coalition," what you have stated on the matter makes no sense. Why would someone from FAN sign an announcement of the Avengers Coalition? Why would someone in FAN be represented by Mary's remarks? They wouldn't.

Now, if you're trying to tell me that FAN signed the remarks at the top of the post (the pre-amble)? That's something completely different. It makes no sense, but hey, maybe they did. Mary could clear this up very quickly. Did FAN sign the terms found in the quoted portion of the original post, or did they sign the entire post (including the section beginning with "We, the Avengers Coalition ..."?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Krack' timestamp='1327353863' post='2905714']
Your premise is supported by everything [u]but[/u] the agreed upon language ending the war. There is a difference between "admitting defeat" and "agreeing to end hostilities" - one means you lost, the second means you agree with the other side that neither one wants to continue fighting. It's not even a subtle difference.

As for the language used in the pre-amble - "We, the Avengers Coalition, come before you today to announce our victory ..." - unless you believe someone in FAN has control of Mary's OWF account, or that FAN speaks for the "Avengers Coalition," what you have stated on the matter makes no sense. Why would someone from FAN sign an announcement of the Avengers Coalition? Why would someone in FAN be represented by Mary's remarks? They wouldn't.

Now, if you're trying to tell me that FAN signed the remarks at the top of the post (the pre-amble)? That's something completely different. It makes no sense, but hey, maybe they did. Mary could clear this up very quickly. Did FAN sign the terms found in the quoted portion of the original post, or did they sign the entire post (including the section beginning with "We, the Avengers Coalition ..."?
[/quote]

[img]http://cf.badassdigest.com/_uploads/images/13791/giorgiofeat__span.jpg[/img]

Honestly, we have no way of knowing. I guess we'll just have to go with the crazy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Bob Janova' timestamp='1327353354' post='2905704']
FAN may not have 'admitted defeat' but they clearly lost and this kind of sophistric tosh is just that, tosh. There's no shame in losing, but there [i]is[/i] shame in denial.
[/quote]

Swwwwweeeeeettttt - the king of e-lawying has entered the room to tell us which e-lawyering counts and which does not. Bob, nobody cares about your opinion. Nobody. The people whose behinds you kiss on an hourly basis make fun of you behind your back for being a kiss@#$. Please restrict your OWF comments to your role as chief TOP apologist; I'm certain they'll do something requiring an apology (and necessitating your services) soon if you just give them a chance.

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...