GOD Declaration of War

[Shadow Slayer]

[quote name='Sardonic' timestamp='1341369867' post='3003016']
Yeah I should have assumed as much. Still doesn't quite make sense to me to commit NPL to that particular front, but whatever.
[/quote]

Not much makes sense to you, does it?

[commander thrawn]

Kill those communists.

[KainIIIC]

[quote name='Ardus' timestamp='1341368013' post='3002991']
You're right. Xiphosis wanted to cast them into permanent war to ensure they were [i]never[/i] relevant again. He repeatedly demanded assurances prior to DH-NPO that DH would go all the way. NPO is aware of its own relationship with GOD and doesn't need you trying to reconstruct it as somehow better than the deliberate efforts of the Kingdom to end our historic rivalry.

As for NPO steamrolling us... the Kingdom has dedicated itself to putting its past with Pacifica in the past. If they choose to resurrect it, that is their choice, for all the good and ill it will bring them. I do not fear Pacifica. That said, I can think of no better punishment for our present rivals and their incessant whining than to step aside and let the tyranny of the past return to rule over them. The thought of deliberately letting them be in charge again is tempting, but as a retired man, I'm free to entertain such wild thoughts.

My pomp isn't the only think you appreciate about me.
[/quote]

I've always thought that giving people a taste of their own medicine is the best recipe for revenge.

Who is down for a VietGOD?

[quote name='Ogaden' timestamp='1341356130' post='3002804']
You are literally the Bob Ilyani of the International
[/quote]

RoK's worst decision ever was removing Bob and Joe from power.

Edited July 4, 2012 by KainIIIC

[Cotillion]

[quote name='Shadow Slayer' timestamp='1341370411' post='3003023']
Not much makes sense to you, does it?
[/quote]
Alliance Name:Random Insanity Alliance

irony

and i dont even mean that in the mean way

[Groucho Marx]

[quote name='Ogaden' timestamp='1341356130' post='3002804']
You are literally the Bob Ilyani of the International
[/quote]

How exactly is this an insult?

[Ogaden]

[quote name='Emperor Marx' timestamp='1341373426' post='3003078']
How exactly is this an insult?
[/quote]
It's worse, it's the truth

[Thrash]

[quote name='Neo Uruk' timestamp='1341369303' post='3003009']
Please, enlighten me as to what NPO lost when they dumped you.
[/quote]

Where did I say anything to that effect?

[Tasuki]

[quote name='Thrash' timestamp='1341360297' post='3002904']
Right Hook & Uppercut.

Your turn, Brehon.
[/quote]

You never miss anything, do you?

[Brehon]

The deal of giving up the NS was NPO's choice. Does that change the fact it was a peace term no. But the NPO makes her own choices. The difference? DH put it up straight and clean. Funny, I know for a fact Xiph continued to work on keeping the NPO isolated, wanted us disbanded and had a nice right case in the reps of Karma. As I have said before 2 sides, one coin.

Doing MK's dirty work? Are you willing to say Invicta is doing SF's dirty work? And then are you apply that to every alliance that is on a side on this war. So tell me... is NATO doing RnR's dirty work since since they oA'd? Or have you dropped down to the level of D34th and are simply screaming because it didn't fall to a side you wanted?

I am sick of this type of crap. GOD had to defend its ally, NPO had to defend is ally, VE had to defend their allies. Those parties see it and they are the ones doing the fighting.

/ignores Thrash... the leader of the same alliance that swore up and down it would never work with SF.

[Litha Riddle]

[quote name='Thrash' timestamp='1341360297' post='3002904']
Right Hook & Uppercut.

Your turn, Brehon.
[/quote]

Dude, move on.

This stalking stuff is kind of creepy.

[AmbroseIV]

[quote name='Sardonic' timestamp='1341324684' post='3002511']
I'm going to take a wild guess and say that this is a pathetic attempt by SF to punish INT for not being with R&R on this conflict.
[/quote]

This reminds me of CNIB the other day; when you were asked what you thought XX/SF were doing by hitting MK. You laughed, said you had no idea and that we probably had no idea either... just for AirMe to say "nah, I think they're avoiding allies and chaining more alliances into the war" which was true enough at the time.


Keep up the good work — I enjoy your creative take on things.

[quote name='alyster' timestamp='1341328197' post='3002540']
No it was SF's idea to use Valhalla to attack INT the moment INT defended LSF. This is the reason your miserable side still clings onto the petty LSF war.
[/quote]

Yes, it would have been in SF/XX's best interests for a war to erupt between C&G/DR... but we spent the week before the NoR/LSF conflict came to the OWF (while it was still simmering) guaranteeing NATO/INT that we would fulfill all obligations to them, so you're stretching a bit far.


R&R didn't have any desire to fight DR and Trot's right when he says XX/SF prefer to fight a war against the people who're constantly working to undermine us, but it didn't look likely to work out that way. It'd be more accurate to say that people cling to the LSF conflict because DH/C&G were forced into a (real or exaggerated) act of desperation and they can smell blood — a mess of your own making... though I guess it ties in with the "we'll orchestrate our own downfall" rhetoric.

[Neo Uruk]

[quote name='AmbroseIV' timestamp='1341416973' post='3003412']
This reminds me of CNIB the other day; when you were asked what you thought XX/SF were doing by hitting MK. You laughed, said you had no idea and that we probably had no idea either... just for AirMe to say "nah, I think they're avoiding allies and chaining more alliances into the war" which was true enough at the time.


Keep up the good work — I enjoy your creative take on things.
[/quote]
Well when your blocs are known for shooting themselves in the foot, you can't really blame anyone for saying you probably don't know what the $%&@ you're doing.

[AmbroseIV]

[quote name='Neo Uruk' timestamp='1341417480' post='3003413']
Well when your blocs are known for shooting themselves in the foot, you can't really blame anyone for saying you probably don't know what the $%&@ you're doing.
[/quote]

I'll cop that (as should anyone who's been in two consecutive losing wars, though there's a line you have to walk between insulting us and giving DH credit) but for his predictions on PB and his understanding of this war... and everything in between, it seems like a fair call to say that your Pilot doesn't know what he's doing either.

[Ogaden]

[quote name='Brehon' timestamp='1341380839' post='3003235']
I am sick of this type of crap. GOD had to defend its ally, NPO had to defend is ally, VE had to defend their allies. Those parties see it and they are the ones doing the fighting.

/ignores Thrash... the leader of the same alliance that swore up and down it would never work with SF.
[/quote]

The difference here is Invicta and GOD were defending their ally from unprovoked and unjustified aggression, whereas your actions enable unprovoked and unjustified aggression. Essentially you are stating, by activating your optional defense pact, that you endorse Non Grata's unjustified war of aggression against us.

Actions have consequences, and actions are statements.

[Schattenmann]

[quote name='Brehon' timestamp='1341380839' post='3003235']
The deal of giving up the NS was NPO's choice. Does that change the fact it was a peace term no. But the NPO makes her own choices. The difference? DH put it up straight and clean. Funny, I know for a fact Xiph continued to work on keeping the NPO isolated, wanted us disbanded and had a nice right case in the reps of Karma. As I have said before 2 sides, one coin.

Doing MK's dirty work? Are you willing to say Invicta is doing SF's dirty work? And then are you apply that to every alliance that is on a side on this war. So tell me... is NATO doing RnR's dirty work since since they oA'd? Or have you dropped down to the level of D34th and are simply screaming because it didn't fall to a side you wanted?

I am sick of this type of crap. GOD had to defend its ally, NPO had to defend is ally, VE had to defend their allies. Those parties see it and they are the ones doing the fighting.

/ignores Thrash... the leader of the same alliance that swore up and down it would never work with SF.
[/quote]
Brehon, NPO doesn't [i]have [/i]to do anything except stay Black and die. [i]Someone[/i]--TLR or NPO--made the decision to make your treaty non-chaining, and [i]someone [/i]made that decision so that one day that someone would not have to do something they did not want to do.

The matter of the fact is simple: You don't like GOD, GOD has been gunning for you (or you think GOD has been gunning for you); MK does not like GOD/SF, MK thinks SF/XX is a threat; MK delivered the opportunity for you to get in the GOD cage-match with certain victory that you want, and in exchange you've pulled a page out of the Bob Janova playbook and gone wholeheartedly to war while halfheartedly wringing your hands and claiming you have no choice. This is not the Hallmark Mystery Hour, here, nobody is stumped about what's going on. We've seen this one in the variation starring NPO as the villain, and it's a re-run with NPO standing in for Mjolnir.

As for Invicta and NATO etc, please, Brehon, [i]pleasssse[/i]. Don't make me laugh. You and your allies attacked SuperFriends, any allies of SuperFriends are defending SF whether they used aggressive treaty clauses to do it or not. Defending allies doesn't involve doing people's dirty work for them. No one in SF was plotting to get themselves attacked so they could use Invicta to defend themselves. What a ridiculous retort! You know what a ridiculous retort that was! Brehon!

As for the choice of terms, again, come one, Brehon. Sure, you [i]chose [/i]to let Doom House reduce NPO's NS by 60% rather than choosing to be at war forever. Right, just like CoJ--the smallest AA in your coalition--chose to pay GOONS the highest per capita reps and apologize to ODN rather than choosing to be at war forever. The fact of the matter is that DH nailed you because they saw you as a threat when you were still isolated, and how much more of a threat are you today: connected, with an Emperor with ambition for the first time in 3 years, stomped on for no reason, and GOD out of the way. Ardus just now in this very thread has referred to the Pacifican threat. What is the difference, then, between GOD and MK? MK is the only alliance that has acted on that threat. SF is an anachronism unable to maneuver in the modern world, MK is the threat, but you have hooked elbows to take care of the easy war and the easy sell first.

That's all, that's it. Hey, I'm not judging, I'm just narrating. I won't hold that D34th analogy against you, when there's no argument to be had, I expect that kind of reply.

[Jgoods45]

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1341423527' post='3003457']
Brehon, NPO doesn't [i]have [/i]to do anything except stay Black and die. [b][i][i]Someone[/i]--TLR or NPO[/i][/b]--made the decision to make your treaty non-chaining, and [i]someone [/i]made that decision so that one day that someone would not have to do something they did not want to do.

The matter of the fact is simple: You don't like GOD, GOD has been gunning for you (or you think GOD has been gunning for you); MK does not like GOD/SF, MK thinks SF/XX is a threat; MK delivered the opportunity for you to get in the GOD cage-match with certain victory that you want, and in exchange you've pulled a page out of the Bob Janova playbook and gone wholeheartedly to war while halfheartedly wringing your hands and claiming you have no choice. This is not the Hallmark Mystery Hour, here, nobody is stumped about what's going on. We've seen this one in the variation starring NPO as the villain, and it's a re-run with NPO standing in for Mjolnir.

As for Invicta and NATO etc, please, Brehon, [i]pleasssse[/i]. Don't make me laugh. You and your allies attacked SuperFriends, any allies of SuperFriends are defending SF whether they used aggressive treaty clauses to do it or not. Defending allies doesn't involve doing people's dirty work for them. No one in SF was plotting to get themselves attacked so they could use Invicta to defend themselves. What a ridiculous retort! You know what a ridiculous retort that was! Brehon!

As for the choice of terms, again, come one, Brehon. Sure, you [i]chose [/i]to let Doom House reduce NPO's NS by 60% rather than choosing to be at war forever. Right, just like CoJ--the smallest AA in your coalition--chose to pay GOONS the highest per capita reps and apologize to ODN rather than choosing to be at war forever. The fact of the matter is that DH nailed you because they saw you as a threat when you were still isolated, and how much more of a threat are you today: connected, with an Emperor with ambition for the first time in 3 years, stomped on for no reason, and GOD out of the way. Ardus just now in this very thread has referred to the Pacifican threat. What is the difference, then, between GOD and MK? MK is the only alliance that has acted on that threat. SF is an anachronism unable to maneuver in the modern world, MK is the threat, but you have hooked elbows to take care of the easy war and the easy sell first.

That's all, that's it. Hey, I'm not judging, I'm just narrating. I won't hold that D34th analogy against you, when there's no argument to be had, I expect that kind of reply.
[/quote]

C&G maintains a policy that states that all outside treaties must contain a non-chaining clause. So it was probably us.

[Brehon]

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1341423527' post='3003457']
Brehon, NPO doesn't [i]have [/i]to do anything except stay Black and die. [i]Someone[/i]--TLR or NPO--made the decision to make your treaty non-chaining, and [i]someone [/i]made that decision so that one day that someone would not have to do something they did not want to do.[/quote]

Here we go again. The non chaining was something requested, its something I am not fond of, you are either an ally or you are not. TLR et al are our allies. The way the chips were likely to fall they would by majority be on the aggressor side. I acknowledge that, I have stated it, I have not tried to hide from it. I find it funny how no one had that issue of non chaining when FARK hit NPO, but now when I do it on a side people don't like, its a giant travesty. So lets cut the !@#$ shall we.

[quote]
The matter of the fact is simple: You don't like GOD, GOD has been gunning for you (or you think GOD has been gunning for you); MK does not like GOD/SF, MK thinks SF/XX is a threat; MK delivered the opportunity for you to get in the GOD cage-match with certain victory that you want, and in exchange you've pulled a page out of the Bob Janova playbook and gone wholeheartedly to war while halfheartedly wringing your hands and claiming you have no choice. This is not the Hallmark Mystery Hour, here, nobody is stumped about what's going on. We've seen this one in the variation starring NPO as the villain, and it's a re-run with NPO standing in for Mjolnir.
[/quote]

I notice you continue to ignore the 2 sides one coin because its convenient for you to do so. As has become popular in CN to simply try to drive a single side of a point home so the other side is ignored. I believe if the roles were reversed you would be calling out anyone against SF. So while I get your point, SF is not innocent and people are quick to forget that just because DH is benefiting from this. The other comparisons are weak at best. To call out anyone as a villain in this is beyond silly. How you see the comparison of Mjolnir to NPO I just am not seeing.

[quote]As for Invicta and NATO etc, please, Brehon, [i]pleasssse[/i]. Don't make me laugh. You and your allies attacked SuperFriends, any allies of SuperFriends are defending SF whether they used aggressive treaty clauses to do it or not. Defending allies doesn't involve doing people's dirty work for them. No one in SF was plotting to get themselves attacked so they could use Invicta to defend themselves. What a ridiculous retort! You know what a ridiculous retort that was! Brehon![/quote]

I did not attack SF, so you can cut that !@#$ out right now. I stated from the get go, before anyone was in if an ally was attacked I would defend them. GOD by choice decided to hit NG. They believed (or so I have heard) an ODP wouldn't be considered an ally.... whoops, bad call. So I imagine the "you defended an attacker makes you by proxy an attacker" is going to follow. If that is the case, I am going to simply scoff at you. If you have something more to say by all mean use it.

NATO, by their own words took an oA in. Not a defense, but an oA onto MK - keep up here. Invicta certainly used their odp with CSN (you know the horrid type of treaty I activated with NG /rolls eyes at the masses). But when I reference, particularly Invicta, there was a process that was started a year ago (or a bit longer). So regardless how YOU want to look at it, both followed a path. A path which was very clear to see. There is not a doubt I feel SF used NATO do get licks on MK, thus using them. There is not a doubt I feel SF is using NATO as fodder. There is not a doubt Invicta is being used as the same. You don't like that I feel that way, you get to learn to live with it. These are not new concepts, nor did they surface for this war. This war simply confirmed them. Don't worry I expect this to be ignored as you try to tell me NPO is doing the same thing. I did not say there was SF plotting to get attacked so Invicta could defend them, do not put words into my mouth. Stop throwing !@#$ on the wall to see what sticks, you are better than that.

[quote]As for the choice of terms, again, come one, Brehon. Sure, you [i]chose [/i]to let Doom House reduce NPO's NS by 60% rather than choosing to be at war forever. Right, just like CoJ--the smallest AA in your coalition--chose to pay GOONS the highest per capita reps and apologize to ODN rather than choosing to be at war forever. The fact of the matter is that DH nailed you because they saw you as a threat when you were still isolated, and how much more of a threat are you today: connected, with an Emperor with ambition for the first time in 3 years, stomped on for no reason, and GOD out of the way. Ardus just now in this very thread has referred to the Pacifican threat. What is the difference, then, between GOD and MK? MK is the only alliance that has acted on that threat. SF is an anachronism unable to maneuver in the modern world, MK is the threat, but you have hooked elbows to take care of the easy war and the easy sell first.[/quote]

There was still a choice. Were all the choices good no. It was a losing coalition and so we had to deal with !@#$%^&*. Its all part of it. As for the rest and comparing; you are just ignoring the two sides of a coin reference I have made many times. I am VERY aware NPO was hit because it was seen as a threat. There is not a doubt SF was seen as a threat. There is no doubt MK will be seen as a threat. Then there will be another, and another and another. Its the cycle we go through in CN. Do I expect at some point in time the NPO will be hit again because its a threat... yup, without a doubt. What does that change? Absolutely nothing.

[quote]That's all, that's it. Hey, I'm not judging, I'm just narrating. I won't hold that D34th analogy against you, when there's no argument to be had, I expect that kind of reply.
[/quote]

You aren't narrating, you hide behind that line and attitude as if you are above everyone else. You are judging as you always do whether you want to admit it or not. In your "quest to educate" CN that is all you do - "judge". So be it that is your personality. As for you deflecting the D34th analogy, don't run, answer it. Tell me how much would you be spitting if it was MK getting its !@#$ pushed in or jumped? Or better yet, how much would you be spitting if you actually stopped judging, acting as jury or calling people out for the education of the masses. Instead actually get out there and started doing something vs commentating from the sidelines. That is directly and exactly why I compared you to D34th.

[berbers]

[quote name='Brehon' timestamp='1341444993' post='3003649']
NATO, by their own words took an oA in. Not a defense, but an oA onto MK - keep up here. Invicta certainly used their odp with CSN (you know the horrid type of treaty I activated with NG /rolls eyes at the masses). But when I reference, particularly Invicta, there was a process that was started a year ago (or a bit longer). So regardless how YOU want to look at it, both followed a path. A path which was very clear to see. There is not a doubt I feel SF used NATO do get licks on MK, thus using them. There is not a doubt I feel SF is using NATO as fodder. There is not a doubt Invicta is being used as the same. You don't like that I feel that way, you get to learn to live with it. These are not new concepts, nor did they surface for this war. This war simply confirmed them. Don't worry I expect this to be ignored as you try to tell me NPO is doing the same thing. I did not say there was SF plotting to get attacked so Invicta could defend them, do not put words into my mouth. Stop throwing !@#$ on the wall to see what sticks, you are better than that.
[/quote]

Yep we oA'd in, it's in our DoW thread like 6 times if Schattenman wants to go read it. I don't feel like we are being used as fodder though, as the original request from the coalition was to counter someone, we just didn't happen to have the appetite for that as it would have impacted an ally we love to much <3.

It was NATO's decision 100%, and the one we felt caused the least amount of treaty conflict. Brehon, you have done everything anyone could have expected of you in this war, Schattenman just picks the underdog and fights for them everytime regardless. Yes MK's decision was bad to start this war, but NPO's decision to help it's allies was the right move. Can you imagine your front if NPO wasn't around to soak up VE? Allies you consider good friends would have taken a ton more damage, and how could that be right?

And to Schattenman: Reserve your scorn for those who started this war, not those who refused to sit on the sidelines while their allies fought.

[Max Power]

SF was seen as a threat? This is seriously news to me. The rest I'll just go with what Brehon said unless more is needed. NPO defending NG's aggression, so to speak, is completely legitimate though, and I'm sure NPO and NG were giddy when they found out they'd be fighting GOD.

[Rush Sykes]

[quote name='berbers' timestamp='1341445943' post='3003657']


It was NATO's decision 100%, and the one we felt caused the least amount of treaty conflict.
[/quote]

I dont really care one way or another what NATO does or does not do. But THAT sentence, berbers, is absurd. Deep down, Brehon knows its absurd too. You did not choose to hit MK because it caused the least amount of treaty conflicts. You have to think everyone in the universe is stupid if you think that ship will sail. You chose that path BECAUSE it created some whopping treaty conflicts, and because you knew 100% that you could not be countered because NPO would defend you. YOu knew that the only real options to counter you without NPO defending you , was TLR, GATO or NG, all 3 of which would have to make a difficult decision to counter an attack against an NPO ally, after Brehon had made the statement that any ally countering any other ally will not be viewed favorably.

Like I said, I dont care what you did or did not do. But do not pollute the reality with rubbish like that sentence, for Admin's sake, man up and admit you were playing treaty web chess.

[Sir Humphrey]

[quote name='Rush Sykes' timestamp='1341458665' post='3003755']
I dont really care one way or another what NATO does or does not do. But THAT sentence, berbers, is absurd. Deep down, Brehon knows its absurd too. You did not choose to hit MK because it caused the least amount of treaty conflicts. You have to think everyone in the universe is stupid if you think that ship will sail. You chose that path BECAUSE it created some whopping treaty conflicts, and because you knew 100% that you could not be countered because NPO would defend you. YOu knew that the only real options to counter you without NPO defending you , was TLR, GATO or NG, all 3 of which would have to make a difficult decision to counter an attack against an NPO ally, after Brehon had made the statement that any ally countering any other ally will not be viewed favorably.

Like I said, I dont care what you did or did not do. But do not pollute the reality with rubbish like that sentence, for Admin's sake, man up and admit you were playing treaty web chess.
[/quote]
No, sorry, you are absolutely wrong in every respect. The treaty conflict was forced by [i]your[/i] side, and we were forced to respond to it the best way we could. We did not choose to create a treaty conflict, but chose a path to minimise such conflict given the scenario with which we were presented. We did so with no expectation regarding NPO's support and/or whether we would or would not be countered. That much should be evident from our DoW thread.

Edit: I realise that your side and others within SF were playing treaty chess, but our intention was only ever to defend R&R as best we could, which in this instance was to oA against MK. Yes, it is not legally defence as per our treaty, but the only reason for our involvement is that our MD was triggered in the first place (notwithstanding the non-chaining clause, as we had a pre-war understanding that we would defend R&R).

Edited July 5, 2012 by Sir Humphrey

[D34th]

[quote name='Brehon' timestamp='1341380839' post='3003235']
Or have you dropped down to the level of D34th and are simply screaming because it didn't fall to a side you wanted?
[/quote]

You can keep acting like if I criticized alliances just because they aren't in my side when that's simple not true since "[i] I am on nobody's side, because nobody is on my side[/i]". I criticize alliances based in their actions and if you don't like to hear the truth, sorry but I'll keep telling it, or screaming like you like to say. The worse part is that you instead of man up and admit and accept the consequences of your actions you keep trying to deny something that only the mindless drones can't perceive: After two beatdowns NPO put their tails between it's legs and now are doing the same job alliances like NoR, FAN and others did to MK when they decided to isolate and later roll you, the exactly same thing they're doing now with SF/XX using your alliance instead of NoR/FAN this time to do their dirty work.

You like to say that you are in this war to defend an ally so let me use an analogy to see if you understand what you are doing:

MK is bored and decides to rob a bank and ask NG to help them. You know the plan and if you were a truly friend you would advice NG to not rob the bank since this would be the only way to in fact help them, but aside from not giving an advice to NG you decided to shot the cop when NG was being arrested. Now you can claim you did the only right and honorable thing to do because NG is your friend and friends just help friends not matter what, but just those with mental problems or a criminal behavior will agree with you. You can claim that all of you have escaped this time, but sooner or later everyone needs to pay for their crimes and I'll be gladly screaming "I TOLD YOU SO" when the time comes.

[AmbroseIV]

[quote name='Rush Sykes' timestamp='1341458665' post='3003755']
But do not pollute the reality with rubbish like that sentence, for Admin's sake, man up and admit you were playing treaty web chess.
[/quote]


I can see how you might infer that, but you're being too cynical.


NATO pledged to support us however they could, but when R&R was countered by GATO/TLR... they weren't going to be forced into hitting any of NPO's direct allies. They declared on MK because it was the only viable and least conflicted path they saw to support R&R — it was a decision made independent of anyone outside NATO/R&R government and, actually, with the expectation that someone [i]would[/i] be willing to counter them (I think we were all hoping for GOONS... who wouldn't?) and that NPO wouldn't be a factor given their numerous ties to the other side.


So... to imply that NATO made a manipulative call couldn't be more wrong.

[Schattenmann]

[quote name='Brehon' timestamp='1341444993' post='3003649']
Here we go again. The non chaining was something requested, its something I am not fond of, you are either an ally or you are not. TLR et al are our allies. The way the chips were likely to fall they would by majority be on the aggressor side. I acknowledge that, I have stated it, I have not tried to hide from it. I find it funny how no one had that issue of non chaining when FARK hit NPO, but now when I do it on a side people don't like, its a giant travesty. So lets cut the !@#$ shall we.[/quote]
I haven't got any idea which "people" you're talking about in this segment, but it isn't me. Don't assign OWF zeitgeist to me.

[quote name='Brehon' timestamp='1341444993' post='3003649']I notice you continue to ignore the 2 sides one coin because its convenient for you to do so. As has become popular in CN to simply try to drive a single side of a point home so the other side is ignored. I believe if the roles were reversed you would be calling out anyone against SF. So while I get your point, SF is not innocent and people are quick to forget that just because DH is benefiting from this. The other comparisons are weak at best. To call out anyone as a villain in this is beyond silly. How you see the comparison of Mjolnir to NPO I just am not seeing.
I did not attack SF, so you can cut that !@#$ out right now. I stated from the get go, before anyone was in if an ally was attacked I would defend them. GOD by choice decided to hit NG. They believed (or so I have heard) an ODP wouldn't be considered an ally.... whoops, bad call. So I imagine the "you defended an attacker makes you by proxy an attacker" is going to follow. If that is the case, I am going to simply scoff at you. If you have something more to say by all mean use it.[/quote]
Brehon Janova, thou dost protest too much. You picked your side. Your mouth can say whatever it wants, but your hands are writing the checks. People do what they [i]want [/i]to do, and so much more the Emperor of Pacifica does what he wants to do. You are part and parcel to Doom House's unwarranted aggressive war against Superfriends because you want to be.

[quote name='Brehon' timestamp='1341444993' post='3003649']NATO, by their own words took an oA in. Not a defense, but an oA onto MK - keep up here. Invicta certainly used their odp with CSN (you know the horrid type of treaty I activated with NG /rolls eyes at the masses). But when I reference, particularly Invicta, there was a process that was started a year ago (or a bit longer). So regardless how YOU want to look at it, both followed a path. A path which was very clear to see. There is not a doubt I feel SF used NATO do get licks on MK, thus using them. There is not a doubt I feel SF is using NATO as fodder. There is not a doubt Invicta is being used as the same. You don't like that I feel that way, you get to learn to live with it. These are not new concepts, nor did they surface for this war. This war simply confirmed them. Don't worry I expect this to be ignored as you try to tell me NPO is doing the same thing. I did not say there was SF plotting to get attacked so Invicta could defend them, do not put words into my mouth. Stop throwing !@#$ on the wall to see what sticks, you are better than that.[/quote]
If you truly, actually micro-examine each treaty within a global war rather than examine the over-arching reality, you are patently silly. You are in the aggressive coalition, which started a war of annihilation for annihilation's sake. You are an aggressor. But you understand that, whether you play coy or not, elsewise there would have been no declaration of not-support.

[quote name='Brehon' timestamp='1341444993' post='3003649']You aren't narrating, you hide behind that line and attitude as if you are above everyone else. You are judging as you always do whether you want to admit it or not. In your "quest to educate" CN that is all you do - "judge". So be it that is your personality. As for you deflecting the D34th analogy, don't run, answer it. Tell me how much would you be spitting if it was MK getting its !@#$ pushed in or jumped? Or better yet, how much would you be spitting if you actually stopped judging, acting as jury or calling people out for the education of the masses. Instead actually get out there and started doing something vs commentating from the sidelines. That is directly and exactly why I compared you to D34th.
[/quote]
Look upon me, Brehon, I am the Presbyter of the Cult of Justitia. You are correct: Our order stands above the shuffling world. From one side of your mouth, you say you must do what you do not want to do, from the other side of your mouth, you condemn me for acting in fulfillment of no will but Justitia's. Isn't it frustrating, isn't that why you must resort to base mockery? Our hands are bound by no man, as are yours, we are Free to act when we will, or not to act when we will not. What is your action for action's sake, when it is against your will? But we act only in accordance to one will: The Will of Justitia, which is just. Any alliance can be as our order, if it will take its own freedom.
But we are your friend, Brehon, who is Free to say to you the things that others cannot, or dare not. The things you do not wish to hear, but which must be said. And so too, free to act for you when we must. Do not mistake us.
You ask very many hypotheticals, and what if it were MK getting jumped? But you debase Justitia's Cult with that question, for there is little-to-no room for the pettiness of personalities in the calculations of high ideals. Your question, rather, should be what would the Cult of Justitia do when the tables are turned on the wicked. And we have answered that question in our interactions with Pacifica for these 3 years. If MK finds its "!@#$ being pushed in" there is no question as to why; it's crimes are infamous and overdue for justice. But if MK finds itself under attack again and again with no cause--as Pacifica was by DH, and as you are now doing to SF--then you know very well--better than anyone--that Justitia's scales shall tip in the Kingdom's favor, and if needsbe, Her sword will follow. That is the nature of Justitia's Cult, which so frustrates you today, but which may well bless you tomorrow.

[KainIIIC]

To the moralists: Why is this war any different from, say, War of the Coalition? Other than the fact that, I guess, MK (the hegemon) initiated the war, this is basically starting a war for the simple reason of starting the war, replacing MK with Val/TOP/GGA and SF/XX for the Polar groupings. Why is this war any different from TOP/IRON v. Polar? That war was done simply to roll Polar (geez, this seems to be a trend here). And furthermore, how exactly are alliances like IRON, TIO, TPF (d34th's own ally), GATO, The Brain, etc's actions are any different from what NPO has done? They're fighting for their allies, plain and simple. That's coalition warfare. You all are just whining out of your ass because MK has the power to do things, while SF has enough enemies to merit a lot of alliances to jump in against them. That's just the way it goes, folks.

although I will say the comparison with Bobby J is pretty funny