Sabcat Posted June 14, 2012 Report Share Posted June 14, 2012 No regrets. That's how I describe my actions. I'm perfectly happy with the situation as it stands. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted June 14, 2012 Report Share Posted June 14, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Sabcat' timestamp='1339669743' post='2983217'] No regrets. That's how I describe my actions. I'm perfectly happy with the situation as it stands. [/quote] Thank you for giving up on your delusions that you didn't start this conflict, though it is saddening to see how little you care about the position you have put all of your allies in with your actions. Edited June 14, 2012 by Penlugue Solaris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hereno Posted June 14, 2012 Report Share Posted June 14, 2012 [quote name='Penlugue Solaris' timestamp='1339669842' post='2983218'] Thank you for giving up on your delusions that you didn't start this conflict, though it is saddening to see how little you care about the position you have put all of your allies in with your actions. [/quote] We're down with it, man. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted June 14, 2012 Report Share Posted June 14, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Hereno' timestamp='1339669973' post='2983219'] We're down with it, man. [/quote] You aren't the ones in an awkward situation as a result of their actions. I do wish to see just how down with it you are though. Edited June 14, 2012 by Penlugue Solaris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shahenshah Posted June 14, 2012 Report Share Posted June 14, 2012 (edited) Solid CB, Roll them hard NoR. Also lol, few people oppose what they believe to be a bad CB by MK, but ALSO oppose a rock solid CB of NOR. Edited June 14, 2012 by shahenshah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berbers Posted June 14, 2012 Report Share Posted June 14, 2012 [quote name='Penlugue Solaris' timestamp='1339670031' post='2983220'] You aren't the ones in an awkward situation as a result of their actions. I do wish to see just how down with it you are though. [/quote] It's funny, MK does something just as bad or worse and get's the support of all kinds of allies (and allies of allies ironically), yet LSF doesn't get the same? Is that how this works? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabcat Posted June 14, 2012 Report Share Posted June 14, 2012 [quote name='Penlugue Solaris' timestamp='1339669842' post='2983218'] Thank you for giving up on your delusions that you didn't start this conflict, though it is saddening to see how little you care about the position you have put all of your allies in with your actions. [/quote] I don't believe I ever had any delusions or ever tried to present things as anything other than they are. The only thing that you have said, the only point you have made that I have any interest in is the idea that we have tried to drag allies into something. I have answered that, I'm sure at some point Int can confirm what I have told you. The rest of the things you have said only serve to demonstrate that the cause of this war, what is being fought over has eluded you. It's far less complex than you seem to imagine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted June 14, 2012 Report Share Posted June 14, 2012 [quote name='berbers' timestamp='1339670320' post='2983223'] It's funny, MK does something just as bad or worse and get's the support of all kinds of allies (and allies of allies ironically), yet LSF doesn't get the same? Is that how this works? [/quote] Did I state my support for MK's actions? Also, are you saying that NATO has the same feelings on their allies attacking people as do MK's allies? I doubt it somehow. [quote name='Sabcat' timestamp='1339670324' post='2983224'] I don't believe I ever had any delusions or ever tried to present things as anything other than they are. The only thing that you have said, the only point you have made that I have any interest in is the idea that we have tried to drag allies into something. I have answered that, I'm sure at some point Int can confirm what I have told you. The rest of the things you have said only serve to demonstrate that the cause of this war, what is being fought over has eluded you. It's far less complex than you seem to imagine. [/quote] Addressed and pretty clearly not the case, continue though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hereno Posted June 14, 2012 Report Share Posted June 14, 2012 [quote name='Penlugue Solaris' timestamp='1339670031' post='2983220'] You aren't the ones in an awkward situation as a result of their actions. I do wish to see just how down with it you are though. [/quote] LSF's allies are in no way, shape, or form, victims of LSF's actions, and no offense intended, but I think I'm in a more credible position to make a statement regarding that than you are. By the way, the ones who stuck INT and the rest of CNG in an awkward situation were MK. If you actually cared about LSF's allies being stuck out in the rain, and weren't just looking out for your friends in Nordreich, you would've adopted a position more reflective of this fact. But I can't fault you for that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tromp Posted June 14, 2012 Report Share Posted June 14, 2012 (edited) Hereno, you should be more considerate of MK's precarious position here. The poor guys have so many minions to control, so many strings to keep separated from each other! Edited June 14, 2012 by Tromp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berbers Posted June 14, 2012 Report Share Posted June 14, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Penlugue Solaris' timestamp='1339670670' post='2983225'] Did I state my support for MK's actions? Also, are you saying that NATO has the same feelings on their allies attacking people as do MK's allies? I doubt it somehow. [/quote] I know you don't support MK's actions, you and DT are honourable fellows. Every AA has their moments, NoR bandwagoned in on the NPO pre-empt through activating it's FAN treaty, so they supported an act of aggression for a years old grudge. If you asked them about it, they would say "we support our allies". You are right however, NATO does not have the same feelings as MK's allies. Edited June 14, 2012 by berbers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted June 14, 2012 Report Share Posted June 14, 2012 [quote name='Hereno' timestamp='1339670734' post='2983227'] LSF's allies are in no way, shape, or form, victims of LSF's actions, and no offense intended, but I think I'm in a more credible position to make a statement regarding that than you are.[/quote] You would be if it wasn't clear Int is in a very awkward situation given the posts of two of their three MADP partners regarding this. I think their position has been made clear, and Int now has to make a very difficult choice. While they may not be "victims" they certainly are in an awkward situation. [quote] By the way, the ones who stuck INT and the rest of CNG in an awkward situation were MK. If you actually cared about LSF's allies being stuck out in the rain, and weren't just looking out for your friends in Nordreich, you would've adopted a position more reflective of this fact. But I can't fault you for that. [/quote] LSF deliberately started this, and anything that results is on them. My position is you are in a !@#$%* situation (or great if you view activating your oA clause on an alliance who was verbally slandered, attacked, and spied on to be ok). I honestly don't know what I would do in this situation, and I'm quite glad to be on the side with valid cause for their actions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owned-You Posted June 14, 2012 Report Share Posted June 14, 2012 Today I learned that LSF has absolutely no qualms with forcing The International to drag her CnG allies into a conflict it started. Even if it means burning significant bloc unity inside CnG, her closest allies most important treaty; because fascism. [i]That's certainly reasonable[/i]...[size=2] [/size] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subcomandante VL Posted June 14, 2012 Report Share Posted June 14, 2012 [quote name='Steve Buscemi' timestamp='1339655664' post='2983092'] I think this could've been better handled by having a debate-off between LSF-NoR. I could debate with Int as to why Ron Paul wins over communism too. We could be the opening act. [/quote] This, right here, was a severely underrated post. Also, the amount of people in this thread who are suddenly experts on the LSF-INT relationship is quite humourous. Please continue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berbers Posted June 14, 2012 Report Share Posted June 14, 2012 [quote name='Owned-You' timestamp='1339671593' post='2983234'] Today I learned that [s]LSF[/s] MK has absolutely no qualms with forcing [s]The International [/s] CnG to drag one of her [s]CnG[/s] members [s]allies[/s] into a conflict it started. Even if it means burning significant bloc unity inside CnG, her closest allies most important treaty; because [s]fascism[/s] Dave93. [i]That's certainly reasonable[/i]...[size=2] [/size] [/quote] Fixed that for you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owned-You Posted June 14, 2012 Report Share Posted June 14, 2012 That's Inaccurate. It's been common knowledge for years! [img]http://forums.cybernations.net/public/style_emoticons/default/lol1.gif[/img] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hereno Posted June 14, 2012 Report Share Posted June 14, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Penlugue Solaris' timestamp='1339671505' post='2983233'] You would be if it wasn't clear Int is in a very awkward situation given the posts of two of their three MADP partners regarding this. I think their position has been made clear, and Int now has to make a very difficult choice. While they may not be "victims" they certainly are in an awkward situation. LSF deliberately started this, and anything that results is on them. My position is you are in a !@#$%* situation (or great if you view activating your oA clause on an alliance who was verbally slandered, attacked, and spied on to be ok). I honestly don't know what I would do in this situation, and I'm quite glad to be on the side with valid cause for their actions.[/quote] The truth of the matter is that MK made a choice. MK chose to fabricate a CB against CSN, to use that CB against CSN, and to do all of this knowing that as a direct result of their actions, they would be forcing the CNG bloc into the "awkward position" you talked about. These are facts, and none of the same claims can be made with any validity against LSF. Beyond that, you don't know nearly as much as you seem to be taking credit for about the relationship between LSF and her allies. If you know about all of the "due diligence" NoR supposedly gave LSF before unilaterally deciding the two alliances were at war, you should know that this situation has been common knowledge amongst the involved parties for quite some time now. That certain members (Rush) of CNG alliances are so eager to hop on MK's false CB and wish for LSF to be destroyed right out in public shows exactly why MK thinks they'll end up succeeding in their manipulation. However, as I am not a member of an alliance in CNG, nor am I allied to one, I do not know what CNG will ultimately end up doing. Edited June 14, 2012 by Hereno Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nikita Ilyich Lenin Posted June 14, 2012 Report Share Posted June 14, 2012 Rogues, what rogues? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted June 14, 2012 Report Share Posted June 14, 2012 (edited) ignore, too tired for this Edited June 14, 2012 by Penlugue Solaris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centurius Posted June 14, 2012 Report Share Posted June 14, 2012 Former members of LSF attacked Nordreich en masse, fact. Members of LSF aided the rogues, fact. When confronted by this, and unlike what any sane alliance would do, rather than fixing the issue and stopping the aid to rogues the closest thing LSF has to a government itself aids one of the rogues, look another fact. These three facts combined give Nordreich the most solid reason to respond with force against those that have wronged them and makes it fall fully under optional aggression for any of LSF's treaty partners. Nice try at spinning though Xiph, but if I were you I wouldn't quit my day job Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hereno Posted June 14, 2012 Report Share Posted June 14, 2012 [quote name='Centurius' timestamp='1339678527' post='2983293'] Former members of LSF attacked Nordreich en masse, fact. Members of LSF aided the rogues, fact. When confronted by this, and unlike what any sane alliance would do, rather than fixing the issue and stopping the aid to rogues the closest thing LSF has to a government itself aids one of the rogues, look another fact. These three facts combined give Nordreich the most solid reason to respond with force against those that have wronged them and makes it fall fully under optional aggression for any of LSF's treaty partners. Nice try at spinning though Xiph, but if I were you I wouldn't quit my day job [/quote] You consider two people to be "en masse"? Man, I never knew y'all were so sensitive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sir pwnage Posted June 14, 2012 Report Share Posted June 14, 2012 Hmmm... on the one side, we have a clash of cultures, involving one of our closest allies, that has been years in the making. On the other; MK beats up a weaker alliance, part III Choices choices... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scandalous Rumour Posted June 14, 2012 Report Share Posted June 14, 2012 [quote name='Hereno' timestamp='1339678884' post='2983296'] You consider two people to be "en masse"? Man, I never knew y'all were so sensitive. [/quote] It could be one. the rest of LSFs behaviour would still have been just as belligerent. I don't like them being in this position but they do seem to have served themselves up to NoR on a plate. hell maybe thats what they want, it'll be fun whatever happens. SR. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magicninja Posted June 14, 2012 Report Share Posted June 14, 2012 Well tbh I would like LSF and MK to take me to dinner....because I like to be wined and dined before I get $%&@ed. That said I'm pretty much down for whatever even if everyone knows I would prefer the SF stomp. It is what it is. If Int wants us to roll we'll roll. That's CnG for you. I'm sure by now Most of who we would be against in that war know we do not approve of what LSF has done. We even get along with a great deal of them for the most part. That is the part that sucks to me. I would much rather be scrapping someone I didn't like. For GATO it's pretty much the IAA defending Polar when we hated Polar and were friends with SF at the time. Not something we care to do but not something we'd shy away from for a friend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Illustrious Posted June 14, 2012 Report Share Posted June 14, 2012 Sorry just had to clarify some things here. [quote name='Centurius' timestamp='1339678527' post='2983293'] Former members of LSF attacked Nordreich en masse, fact.[/quote] en masse = two nations. x f d [quote name='Centurius' timestamp='1339678527' post='2983293']Members of LSF aided the rogues, fact.[/quote] Only four nations of forty one aided the two nations that attacked NoR. Anyways, these are still facts but at put the true numbers along with them at least. 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.