Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 263
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

TPF and NEW are more than welcome to sanction my nations. However, in such actions, much like declaring war on a nation, they'd be making an aggressive move. An act of war. This is their right.



Aggressive move? Really? isn't it you are the first using sanction which had an impact to several NEW nation who are now still on war with Mortal Wombat nations? What made you a defensive on that? Not to mention that you put the sanctioned without proper notice too us prior the sanction.



Seems like you're helping NEW enemy to me. In my view you're start an aggresive declaration to NEW
.



I don't have love nor hate toward both NSO and Kaskus, their problem is not my concern. But the sanctioned given is disappointing.

Its seem that some people are desperately panic atm
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  Not to mention that you put the sanctioned without proper notice too us prior the sanction.



Seems like you're helping NEW enemy to me. In my view you're start an aggresive declaration to NEW.

 


After the stunt you pulled with aiding Kaskus I wouldn't be particularly inclined to inform you either. You have no room to whine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

After the stunt you pulled with aiding Kaskus I wouldn't be particularly inclined to inform you either. You have no room to whine.

As far as I know the aid things was resolved, otherwise NSO will decorate NEW war screen at the moment. and vice versa. But I guess that some people still hold grudges. Carry on, I guess

PS. I am far from whining..just stretching up that its not an aggressive if NEW decide to sanctioned NSO back. Its in defense to your sanction that had impact to some of our nation that are involved in other war.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In b4 TORN/DB4D arranges a non-nuclear war with NSO's allies...Oh, that's right, we defend our allies at all costs.

 

As would we have, champ. There was never a question of BFF or Int defending NEW for the cancellation period; the negotiations with NPO were in the event that NEW declared an aggressive war against them. Had NEW been hit by NPO or NG, we'd have defended to the last man until NEW got out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The sanctioned had direct impact to our nation....BFF? we're not asking nor objecting of your involvement. It should be big difference

Lol Chax, stop spinning the world using edited log :P

 

This has nothing to do with any logs you claim I've edited. Stop avoiding the issue at hand and offering cute (albeit rather simple) replies. 

 

I will agree though, if the sanction was done for actions NEW has committed during a legitimate alliance war (as I believe is the case in this circumstance), a sanction is unwarranted and sort of a dick move. Good luck in resolving that, NEW. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aggressive move? Really? isn't it you are the first using sanction which had an impact to several NEW nation who are now still on war with Mortal Wombat nations? What made you a defensive on that? Not to mention that you put the sanctioned without proper notice too us prior the sanction.



Seems like you're helping NEW enemy to me. In my view you're start an aggresive declaration to NEW
.



I don't have love nor hate toward both NSO and Kaskus, their problem is not my concern. But the sanctioned given is disappointing.

Its seem that some people are desperately panic atm

Aggressive. Yes. It was an aggressive action we took towards Kaskus in applying the sanctions, and so in turn would be an aggressive action if any one [not going to keep specifying TPF and NEW repeatedly as senate seats are a position that's obtainable by any one within the sphere] were to sanction my nations in return. This is a situation between NSO/NPO/SL and Kaskus; one we are in due to a series of choices by Kaskus. "Aggressive action" does not apply only to the first to take an action. To use an analogy from the other world as your friends so love to do, just because you've punched me in the face first it does not make my punching you in the face in response a non-aggressive action. It is still aggressive by nature, by way of causing intended harm.

I'm sincerely sorry it had an impact over NEW nations, an unfortunate fallout and one that's beyond my control. But make no mistake of this fact: there's absolutely no reason why I should have or would be expected to speak to NEW beforehand. We do not answer to you any more than you answer to us. Any use of your senator you make, you don't need to clear it with us first. I spoke to TPF because they are my White sphere ally, their opinion matters to me. I spoke to NPO, I spoke to SL and I spoke to NG because they are my allies and their opinions matter to me. NEW is not my ally, and while I'm willing to listen to and entertain your opinions - they don't ultimately matter to me at days end. This is not a slight of any sort towards NEW, just a simple fact of the nature of relationships. If one day we find ourselves sharing a friendship, then your opinion will matter to me and I'll gladly discuss any decision in more detail with you prior to making it.

If NEW wishes to make these actions against Kaskus as actions against them - that is NEWs choice. It's been determined multiple times now that there's no existing treaty. This means there is no "legal obligation" to help Kaskus, making you a third party interjection just like in that previous aid situation that prolonged the war. Who knows, if you guys hadn't made that choice - maybe I wouldn't have had to make mine.

Every choice has a reaction. I stand tall with every decision I make, and I'm prepared to take accountability for my choices.

I will agree though, if the sanction was done for actions NEW has committed during a legitimate alliance war (as I believe is the case in this circumstance), a sanction is unwarranted and sort of a dick move. Good luck in resolving that, NEW.

I'm having difficulty understanding this. If NEW has committed actions during a legitimate war, then sanction would be unwarranted and dickish? I would think it'd be the other way around, if NEW did not commit actions during a legitimate war then sanctions would be unwarranted. Regardless, no sanctions have been applied to NEW nations making it a moot point.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ITT: Sanctioning a rogue is an aggressive action against any alliance who had a member who might have been trading with that rogue. Ugh, please think before you post. As Rayvon said, nobody is particularly happy that there was a side-effect in hurting NEW's trades, but it really isn't something that could be helped. Hell, I'm sure that NSO/SL would be more than happy to work with getting NEW people in trade circles with our members who are without if it were to be mutually beneficial.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

New is new, kaskus is kaskus
We dont care about what happen to kaskus in their war.
It just canceling the trade is affecting directly to new member trade.
And you call its okay.....
Cuih cuih cuih.....

Chicken pok pok pok.......... :kabur:

Edit:
Ps. We are now in war with int and mw
Bcause the sanction, some member can not purchase nuke, just because of the senate sanctioning kaskus nation

Edited by wukong
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ITT: Sanctioning a rogue is an aggressive action against any alliance who had a member who might have been trading with that rogue. Ugh, please think before you post. As Rayvon said, nobody is particularly happy that there was a side-effect in hurting NEW's trades, but it really isn't something that could be helped. Hell, I'm sure that NSO/SL would be more than happy to work with getting NEW people in trade circles with our members who are without if it were to be mutually beneficial.

 

Except that Kaskus aren't rogues. 

 

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

 

Unhappily noboby can repress me.  :smug:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except that Kaskus aren't rogues. 

 

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

 

Unhappily noboby can repress me.  :smug:

I like how you claim it's a lie as if the truth you believe in is objectively true despite your complete lack of involvement in the situation (aside from some side show ramblings).  So far their dealings with us have been contrary to any well reasoned course of action.  Sounds rogueish to me.  However, that could be entirely dependent on your point of view.  We think of them as rogues because we see they have nothing to fight for and continue fighting anyway.  You think of them not as rogues because you think they have something to fight for.  But like I said, you have no place in this war, so your opinion doesn't matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like how you claim it's a lie as if the truth you believe in is objectively true despite your complete lack of involvement in the situation (aside from some side show ramblings).  So far their dealings with us have been contrary to any well reasoned course of action.  Sounds rogueish to me.  However, that could be entirely dependent on your point of view.  We think of them as rogues because we see they have nothing to fight for and continue fighting anyway.  You think of them not as rogues because you think they have something to fight for.  But like I said, you have no place in this war, so your opinion doesn't matter.

 

My complete lack of involvement as you said make me see the things more clear, things that NSO can't see because the arrogance is blurring your eyes. You say Kaskus has nothing to fight for, but of course they have, they're fighting for what they believe to be a reasonable end for this war. NSO needs to remember that they are who declared war on Kaskus, the fact that NSO had a proper reason for that doesn't change the fact that NSO is who started the war, this is other factor that makes Kaskus not to be considered a rogue, since rogues are those who attack nations and start wars without any cause other than personal vendetta and this isn't the case here. 

 

You say my opinion doesn't matter and among all the lies you said in your post, incredibly this is the biggest one. Sooner or later you'll discover like GOONS did that OWF opinion does matter a lot. 

 

Edited by D34th
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except that Kaskus aren't rogues. 

 

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

 

Unhappily noboby can repress me.  :smug:

Fortunately you can't .gif anybody into submission

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fortunately you can't .gif anybody into submission

 

I, unlike MK, don't have as objective in cyberverse make people become submissive to me or anyone else, on the contrary, I hope that more people become independent thinkers and stop toeing the party line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
You say my opinion doesn't matter and among all the lies you said in your post, incredibly this is the biggest one. Sooner or later you'll discover like GOONS did that OWF opinion does matter a lot. 
 

Can't say we've discovered any such thing. Sorry to deflate your self-importance.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My complete lack of involvement as you said make me see the things more clear, things that NSO can't see because the arrogance is blurring your eyes. You say Kaskus has nothing to fight for, but of course they have, they're fighting for what they believe to be a reasonable end for this war. NSO needs to remember that they are who declared war on Kaskus, the fact that NSO had a proper reason for that doesn't change the fact that NSO is who started the war, this is other factor that makes Kaskus not to be considered a rogue, since rogues are those who attack nations and start wars without any cause other than personal vendetta and this isn't the case here. 

 

You say my opinion doesn't matter and among all the lies you said in your post, incredibly this is the biggest one. Sooner or later you'll discover like GOONS did that OWF opinion does matter a lot. 

 

Your lack of involvement doesn't make you more objective.  It might have if your blatant distaste for the sith hadn't gotten in the way, though I doubt it.  There is no arrogance in the sith, this is a rather ignorant accusation.  You say that Kaskus is fighting for a reasonable end to the war, but they could have reasonably avoided the war with no bad blood to begin with.  NSO may have the OWF declaration, but to declare war after being wronged is not quite the same thing as declaring war with the intent of wrongdoing.  NSO isn't blood thirsty, but we will do what we have to do.  Kaskus' actions against us and their refusal to resolve it peacably makes them the offender, regardless of who wrote the DoW.  All you could say in their defense is that they're niave, but that's no excuse for imprudence.

 

Your opinion doesn't matter though.  This, along with the rest of my post, is true.  Your first mistake is that you think the OWF matters to the sith.  Why would we care when all our allies support us?  NSO is a group with strong bonds among our friends.  The wishy-washy OWF and all it's paradoxical opinions can shove it. 

 

Your second mistake (though admittedly I doubt it was your intent) is that you seem to be making the claim that you speak on behalf of the OWF.  Who was the arrogant one again?

Edited by Pyroman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your lack of involvement doesn't make you more objective.  It might have if your blatant distaste for the sith hadn't gotten in the way, though I doubt it.  There is no arrogance in the sith, this is a rather ignorant accusation.  You say that Kaskus is fighting for a reasonable end to the war, but they could have reasonably avoided the war with no bad blood to begin with.  NSO may have the OWF declaration, but to declare war after being wronged is not quite the same thing as declaring war with the intent of wrongdoing.  NSO isn't blood thirsty, but we will do what we have to do.  Kaskus' actions against us and their refusal to resolve it peacably makes them the offender, regardless of who wrote the DoW.  All you could say in their defense is that they're niave, but that's no excuse for imprudence.

 

Your opinion doesn't matter though.  This, along with the rest of my post, is true.  Your first mistake is that you think the OWF matters to the sith.  Why would we care when all our allies support us?  NSO is a group with strong bonds among our friends.  The wishy-washy OWF and all it's paradoxical opinions can shove it. 

 

Your second mistake (though admittedly I doubt it was your intent) is that you seem to be making the claim that you speak on behalf of the OWF.  Who was the arrogant one again?

 

My distaste for the sith comes from your actions in this war, if you take a look at the first pages of your DoW you'll see me as a supporter of your cause. You say Kaskus could have avoided this war and that's true, the same way Moldavi could have avoided to create NSO and free us from it's stupidity, talk about how things could had been is pointless, I'm talking about the present and the future, not about things you can't change anymore. By your logic Kaskus is the offender because they don't want to accept the surrender terms you want to give to them?  Give them white peace and I'm sure they will be glad to accept your offer, if not you can count me again as a supporter of your cause. Now why NSO don't want to give them white peace? Because NSO is arrogant, you should look at your past and see your alliance requested the same terms from Legion and they gave it to you because they aren't arrogant or naive to need a admission of defeat to understand that they defeated you(well in that case they defeated you alone and in a fair fight, Legion don't had to call allies and/or use senate sanctions to achieve it). 

 

 


Can't say we've discovered any such thing. Sorry to deflate your self-importance.

 

GOONS change in raid policies proof otherwise. Note that I said it changed because of OWF pressure, not only because of my person, I'm just among those who criticized your policies. 

 

You can keep saying my opinion doesn't matter, the same way you repeating that unicorns exists don't will make them suddenly become a real animal. OWF matters to all alliances with may be the only exception being grey council, you're just being a fool thinking otherwise. Also I never said that I speak on behalf of OWF, I speak on behalf of me and only me. 

Edited by D34th
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I, unlike MK, don't have as objective in cyberverse make people become submissive to me or anyone else, on the contrary, I hope that more people become independent thinkers and stop toeing the party line.

But you would have them submit on this issue of the Senate.  You would have them submit to the belief that white peace is a fundamental right.  All but the neutrals seek the submission (or perhaps merely consent) of others to their respective wills.  Were it independence of thought you desire, every difference of opinion would be your treasure and triumph.  It is clear here that you do not so cherish your difference in opinion with the Sith.  You lament it.

 

As an aside, I am no longer a member of the Kingdom.

Edited by Ardus
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.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...