A War on Terror: GOP Retaliates in Defense of Neutrality

[Rooman33]

Gentlemen,

 

before anything else; allow me to reintroduce myself. I am, first and foremost, an \m/ alumni. I have in past years written several defenses of raiding practices; I was among the first to make mock of the moralists of WAEGIS and company, and in general, I believe myself firmly established in the pro-raiding, anti-neutral camp.

 

That being said...I absolutely applaud the GOP's actions in this conflict; not because my ideals align with theirs, but out of admiration for their courage under fire; their willingness to 'go to the mat' for their convictions. I did not think much of the Green Old Party before the events of this conflict; I have since changed my opinion considerably. Myself and several others of the old UJP persuasion have laughed off shedding tech and infra; we have born the punishment for our own convictions. A popular meme amongst some in the past was Friends>Infra. While the phrase has been put to bed, I am glad to see the spirit of it has not gone out of the Cyberverse. It was a similar spirit which animated Ivanelterrible in his conflict with Chris Kaos; it is also akin to my fellow Vox Populans, especially those who bore their cross in public and took the hits from a 'Verse which did not respect their ideals.

 

This is the best of all possible conflicts; one in which both sides fight for their convictions. It breathes meaning into a realm that is otherwise fraught with meaninglessness. My only quibble is this: Respect the opponent! This is not like the wars against alliances of ill repute; when the gathering of truly despicable men were stomped out with righteous fury. You may look upon each other through the sights of a gun, but for the love of Admin, do not give in to despising the enemy. The GOP has acted in a classy way, and I again applaud the courage of their conviction.

 

Boys, there may come a time when, as a raider, we find ourselves on opposing sides in battle; but do not think that I will grant you anything less than the respect you have proven you deserved.

 

I look forward to seeing more of this behavior in our cynical Cyberverse. You give an old \m/ember hope that there are still opponents worthy of fighting.

 

 

Respectfully,

 

\M/argrave.

 

This comment made my night! Thanks for taking the time to post it.

[enderland]

Is that why DBDC is still actively recruiting nations to hit us? Because we're no match for them? :smug:

 

You guys are doing a heck of a lot more recruiting towards that cause than DBDC could ever do themselves.

[ditchboy00]

Just out of curiosity and I mean no offence here but does part of your alliances way of life include not bothering to keep a cash reserve for emergencies such as that you now find yourself in?  In my alliance it's written law that we have an ample warchest. 

At least he didnt do a Christrian Trojans and leave one neutral alliance to join DBDC after he realized that they were the side with the high tier advantage.

[renegade4box]

Replying to the rooman wall of text:

 

If you're proud of the infrastructure record, you must be really proud of the other CN records you have made that will probably never be broken:

 

Greatest 30 Day Nation Loss 10/4/2013 Rooland -168,770 Greatest 14 Day Nation Loss 10/4/2013 Rooland -171,770

[Lurunin]

I'm fucking loving GOP right now....they have more fighting spirit than 90% of the fucking war alliances on Bob

[JoshuaR]

But this idea that we were defacto protected by Umbrella I find a little laughable 1) because Umbrella, yourselves, has tried bullying us before when some of your nations attacked someone on our AA and basically told us to stuff it when we came to talk to you about it (pssst... one of those attacking nations was you, JoshuaR). I believe your AA literally threw the phrase "do something about it" at us. We had absolutely no reason to think Umbrella has ever given a damn about our security or prosperity. Quite the opposite, given the way you handled that ordeal. And 2) DBDC has attacked us NOW - and without cause. They, themselves, have said here in public and in private on IRC that MQ wasn't really an alliance and that they have/had no formal treaty with them. And yet, funny, I don't see that "defacto protection" from Umbrella you mentioned kicking in. 

I attacked Tandem after he fled Legacy during war, with Legacy's approval to hit a war deserter out of their range. He was not in my definition a member guaranteed protection from the GOP, but instead a Legacy war deserter, a nation hiding on the GOP AA and well-deserved of being attacked.

 

Other than that, I HELPED you with your warchest issues by destroying your infrastructure once your grand experiment had failed. I have had no issue with the GOP.

 

Our alliances were going to do war games prior to learning that they were disallowed. That does not appear, to me, to be the mark of two enemies, but rather signified that we were getting along just fine.

 

More to the point, VE fought bravely for us in a losing war and are respected allies.

 

To your point about protection. We won't help protect an alliance that declared an offensive war, even if it is in their charter to do so.

[CubaQuerida]

At least he didnt do a Christrian Trojans and leave one neutral alliance to join DBDC after he realized that they were the side with the high tier advantage.

First of all, your comment has absolutely nothing to do with what you quoted, and adds literally nothing to the conversation.

 

Secondly, why are you taking cheap shots at someone who is not even taking part in this discussion?

[Samwise]

Gentlemen,

 

before anything else; allow me to reintroduce myself. I am, first and foremost, an \m/ alumni. I have in past years written several defenses of raiding practices; I was among the first to make mock of the moralists of WAEGIS and company, and in general, I believe myself firmly established in the pro-raiding, anti-neutral camp.

 

That being said...I absolutely applaud the GOP's actions in this conflict; not because my ideals align with theirs, but out of admiration for their courage under fire; their willingness to 'go to the mat' for their convictions. I did not think much of the Green Old Party before the events of this conflict; I have since changed my opinion considerably. Myself and several others of the old UJP persuasion have laughed off shedding tech and infra; we have born the punishment for our own convictions. A popular meme amongst some in the past was Friends>Infra. While the phrase has been put to bed, I am glad to see the spirit of it has not gone out of the Cyberverse. It was a similar spirit which animated Ivanelterrible in his conflict with Chris Kaos; it is also akin to my fellow Vox Populans, especially those who bore their cross in public and took the hits from a 'Verse which did not respect their ideals.

 

This is the best of all possible conflicts; one in which both sides fight for their convictions. It breathes meaning into a realm that is otherwise fraught with meaninglessness. My only quibble is this: Respect the opponent! This is not like the wars against alliances of ill repute; when the gathering of truly despicable men were stomped out with righteous fury. You may look upon each other through the sights of a gun, but for the love of Admin, do not give in to despising the enemy. The GOP has acted in a classy way, and I again applaud the courage of their conviction.

 

Boys, there may come a time when, as a raider, we find ourselves on opposing sides in battle; but do not think that I will grant you anything less than the respect you have proven you deserved.

 

I look forward to seeing more of this behavior in our cynical Cyberverse. You give an old \m/ember hope that there are still opponents worthy of fighting.

 

 

Respectfully,

 

\M/argrave.

 

Thank you for posting. It is appreciated. :) People are trying to spin this that we declared because we were bored, and I think that's because they can somehow use that to further declare neutrals down the road. You and I are in agreement that boredom isn't the motive here, and I'm glad that someone can appreciate our willingness to put ourselves on the line to defend our way of life. I would like to say that personally, I'm having a great time. My alliance mates are having a great time. Most of us haven't been in an alliance war in years, and that's if some have even been in an alliance war at all. This is actually willij's as well as our MoD Earl's first. They grow up so fast. :wub: And you would think a neutral alliance who has never fought in an alliance wide war would be ready to give up the fight by now because they're horrified that their infrastructure is gone. However, we knew the price we'd pay going in, and we'd do it all over again. Why? Because what good am I if not to defend my brothers? We may be small in numbers, but our devotion to each other will not be broken.

 

You guys are doing a heck of a lot more recruiting towards that cause than DBDC could ever do themselves.

 

I was under the impression that we had only reached out to other neutral alliances, who the GOP believes should have an interest in this matter.

 

I'm fucking loving GOP right now....they have more fighting spirit than 90% of the fucking war alliances on Bob

 

:D Perhaps send a diplo over after this is over? [url=http://z8.invisionfree.com/Green_Old_Party/]Our forums[/url]

 

I attacked Tandem after he fled Legacy during war, with Legacy's approval to hit a war deserter out of their range. He was not in my definition a member guaranteed protection from the GOP, but instead a Legacy war deserter, a nation hiding on the GOP AA and well-deserved of being attacked.

 

Other than that, I HELPED you with your warchest issues by destroying your infrastructure once your grand experiment had failed. I have had no issue with the GOP.

 

Our alliances were going to do war games prior to learning that they were disallowed. That does not appear, to me, to be the mark of two enemies, but rather signified that we were getting along just fine.

 

More to the point, VE fought bravely for us in a losing war and are respected allies.

 

To your point about protection. We won't help protect an alliance that declared an offensive war, even if it is in their charter to do so.

 

On the Tandem issue, both the GOP, Umbrella, and Legacy are in agreement that it was the GOP's Internal Affairs department that dropped the ball in the first place by admitting him without going to Legacy to ensure he was free to be accepted. (I was taking a break from office at that point.) However, the fact that neither Umbrella nor Legacy came to us prior to your firing upon him showed your disregard for our sovereignty. (And between you and me, and well the rest of Bob, had it been me in charge of Internal Affairs, if you had come to us prior to firing upon him, I would have cut him loose to you. There's is no greater dishonor than desertion.) That did leave a bad taste in our mouths.

 

Later Umbrella reached out to us for War Games, and I daresay we were (and still are) flattered that you thought of us. While interacting more with Umbrella we came to understand why our protectors would chose you as their allies and we do hope to further establish a relationship with Umbrella. We're still neutral, but that doesn't mean we can't interact with Umbrella and have a good time getting to know each other further. :)

[enderland]

I was under the impression that we had only reached out to other neutral alliances, who the GOP believes should have an interest in this matter.

 

You misunderstood me. Your alliance actions (and Rooman33's posting) are the primary cause for DBDC gaining more nations. 

 

Pointless political grandstanding and a leader who insists on posting foolishly on the OWF does not help your cause in the slightest bit for many of us sitting on the sideline watching.

[Rooman33]

You misunderstood me. Your alliance actions (and Rooman33's posting) are the primary cause for DBDC gaining more nations. 

 

Pointless political grandstanding and a leader who insists on posting foolishly on the OWF does not help your cause in the slightest bit for many of us sitting on the sideline watching.

 

More spin. DBDC had 10 or 11 members when they first attacked us. The nations that attacked us initially were not able to overrun us as I suspect they thought they would be able to, and that's when their ranks doubled as they went out - like Sam said - and recruited a bunch of people to help them out. In fact, their ranks swelled to over 20 at one point. They've even messaged our members begging them to switch to their AA. But as I look at their roster now, it looks like they're back down to 17 - only four of which have joined in the past four days when most of this OWF back-and-forth has taken place. And most of those are MQ refugees as I understand it. So, nice try. 

 

That's not to say they're not allowed to recruit people to their cause, obviously. Sam was simply pointing out that for all their bullying tactics, they had to run out and recruit a lot of help just to beat up on (if the discussion from their supporters here is to be believed) an "idiotic" "SimCity" "weak" neutral alliance that "doesn't know how to fight." 

 

And my posting here, like my fighting on the battlefield, has been in defense.

 

I merely responded to falsehoods and propaganda put out by folks who thought we'd be weak willed enough to let DBDC run roughshod over us in a single round of fighting; and pointed out the factual numbers of the damage we've been able to do; and explained why those who were flailing about to make propaganda of my (lack of) warchest were missing the point.

 

By the way, to date, the GOP has the same 26 nations on our roster that we started with. I can't say that will always be the case, but I've been exceptionally proud of how well the GOP has held the line against an overwhelming force - and a renowned bully. 

 

Replying to the rooman wall of text:

 

If you're proud of the infrastructure record, you must be really proud of the other CN records you have made that will probably never be broken:

 

Greatest 30 Day Nation Loss 10/4/2013 Rooland -168,770 Greatest 14 Day Nation Loss 10/4/2013 Rooland -171,770

 

Am I proud that I've sacrificed more for my AA than any nation in history? Or that even though most anyone else would have hid in PM in my situation before war started, or rolled over when DBDC hit them for no reason, I went into war to absorb damage for my GOP family and still delivered ~200k NS in damage to our enemies in two weeks of fighting --- all with no warchest? You're damn right I'm proud. 

 

I attacked Tandem after he fled Legacy during war, with Legacy's approval to hit a war deserter out of their range. He was not in my definition a member guaranteed protection from the GOP, but instead a Legacy war deserter, a nation hiding on the GOP AA and well-deserved of being attacked.

 

Other than that, I HELPED you with your warchest issues by destroying your infrastructure once your grand experiment had failed. I have had no issue with the GOP.

 

Our alliances were going to do war games prior to learning that they were disallowed. That does not appear, to me, to be the mark of two enemies, but rather signified that we were getting along just fine.

 

More to the point, VE fought bravely for us in a losing war and are respected allies.

 

To your point about protection. We won't help protect an alliance that declared an offensive war, even if it is in their charter to do so.

 

We had already gotten the all-clear from Legacy and they had told you not to attack [I still have the logs], and we told you all that the first night of your attacks on him. You kept attacking, and told us to "do something about it." More egregious is that you would hit our AA at all without even trying to talk to us about it. That's how little you thought of us. And now we're supposed to believe we had some sort of defacto protection from an alliance that saw fit to attack our AA on a whim, themselves? Highly improbable. 

 

And about this current affair, we declared an retaliatory action... on MQ who had, in our opinion, declared defacto war (jihad) on us. We purposefully did not take offensive action against DBDC - who has no formal relationship with MQ and had not publicly declared "jihad" on neutrality. They attacked us, because they wanted to and they knew no one would/could intervene and they (mistakenly) thought we would just roll over. Like I said. we're less than surprised to see Umbrella sitting this one out. Such is your right. Notice we're not knocking on your door asking for help - despite the fact that you're one of the few alliances that actually has the firepower to help with our attacker's upper tier. But let's not pretend anything we did or didn't do would have changed your willingness to defend us. I realize the whole "you've only yourself to Blame GOP, there was never any danger to you" narrative falls apart if you lose the underpinnings that Umbrella - in any universe - would have protected us. But even if everyone takes you for your word and me for mine, the fact of the matter is WE felt threatened and we didn't/don't agree with your analysis, and so we took retaliatory action against the most overt and public threat to neutrality we've ever seen (the War on Peace at least has all the trappings of a staged CB). We're proud of our involvement, we're proud of our continued involvement, and if we had to do it again and/or fight for many months more, we would and we will. 

 

It seems everyone highly under-estimated our resolve and our willingness to defend ourselves. That was a mistake.

Edited October 6, 2013 by Rooman33

[renegade4box]

The level of delusion in your posts in astounding. Do you seriously believe the things that you're writing? I honestly wouldn't mind if you wanted to jump on the bandwagon like the other 10 alliances and used that are your reason for any involvement. But pretending like you were "defacto" attacked and in need of protection just shows an amazing lack of awareness. MQ from the start was supposed to be a 2 week last gig for people that were quitting, DBDC jointly jumped in for the same time for boredom reasons. Our gimmick was the "jihad on neutrality". The fact that you can't understand this is pretty insane. 

 

At the same time, it doesn't really surprise me coming from an alliance that thinks you're bona fide neutral even if you have treaties, proxy allies, and intervene in foreign wars. 

[Rooman33]

The level of delusion in your posts in astounding. Do you seriously believe the things that you're writing? I honestly wouldn't mind if you wanted to jump on the bandwagon like the other 10 alliances and used that are your reason for any involvement. But pretending like you were "defacto" attacked and in need of protection just shows an amazing lack of awareness. MQ from the start was supposed to be a 2 week last gig for people that were quitting, DBDC jointly jumped in for the same time for boredom reasons. Our gimmick was the "jihad on neutrality". The fact that you can't understand this is pretty insane. 

 

At the same time, it doesn't really surprise me coming from an alliance that thinks you're bona fide neutral even if you have treaties, proxy allies, and intervene in foreign wars. 

 

MQ posted a "call to Jihad" on neutrality, stating that TDO was just "the first" neutral alliance on their list. They then named their AA "Mushqaeda" and flooded the OWF with talk about wiping neutrals off the map. Then they actually attacked a neutral alliance, for no other reason than the fact that TDO is neutral. This "JK guys, MQ was only supposed to exist for two weeks" narrative only popped up once they started losing. Their declaration to wipe neutrality off the map was, we felt - and still feel, a direct threat to us. The most obvious and overt threat to neutrality that has ever existed. And any rational, objective person who reads their declaration of "jihad" can't honestly say otherwise. 

 

We have absolutely no political obligations to any other alliance. And so we cannot be said to have "treaties" or "allies." We are politically detached and indifferent to foreign affairs which do not impact our own sovereignty and security - we are politically neutral. Unlike other neutral alliances, however, we made sure our charter allowed us the ability to respond to threats like this should they ever occur (a la the more than three-year old Don't Tread on Me doctrine). And, with MQ, it occurred. If anyone is "diluted" here, it's the folks who are trying to peddle the claim that MQ and DBDC did not pose an extrapolatable threat to neutrality. 

 

We realize this isn't the standard approach to neutrality, and we have - from our inception - referred to our brand of neutrality as soft(line) neutral. Which simply means we don't align ourselves with nations, rulers, alliances, or treaty chains - we align ourselves to ever-present aspects of this world (neutrality, the Green Sphere, and conservatism). MQ declared a "holy war" on one of these spheres of interest, and by any reading of our three-year old DTOM, we obviously see that as a holy war on us. So we retaliated. 

[TBRaiders]

It hurts my belly to read your posts.  That can't be normal.

[renegade4box]

MQ posted a "call to Jihad" on neutrality, stating that TDO was just "the first" neutral alliance on their list. They then named their AA "Mushqaeda" and flooded the OWF with talk about wiping neutrals off the map. Then they actually attacked a neutral alliance, for no other reason than the fact that TDO is neutral. This "JK guys, MQ was only supposed to exist for two weeks" narrative only popped up once they started losing. Their declaration to wipe neutrality off the map was, we felt - and still feel, a direct threat to us. The most obvious and overt threat to neutrality that has ever existed. And any rational, objective person who reads their declaration of "jihad" can't honestly say otherwise. 

 

We have absolutely no political obligations to any other alliance. And so we cannot be said to have "treaties" or "allies." We are politically detached and indifferent to foreign affairs which do not impact our own sovereignty and security - we are politically neutral. Unlike other neutral alliances, however, we made sure our charter allowed us the ability to respond to threats like this should they ever occur (a la the more than three-year old Don't Tread on Me doctrine). And, with MQ, it occurred. If anyone is "diluted" here, it's the folks who are trying to peddle the claim that MQ and DBDC did not pose an extrapolatable threat to neutrality. 

 

We realize this isn't the standard approach to neutrality, and we have - from our inception - referred to our brand of neutrality as soft(line) neutral. Which simply means we don't align ourselves with nations, rulers, alliances, or treaty chains - we align ourselves to ever-present aspects of this world (neutrality, the Green Sphere, and conservatism). MQ declared a "holy war" on one of these spheres of interest, and by any reading of our three-year old DTOM, we obviously see that as a holy war on us. So we retaliated. 

You realize that we're in AA (IC) and that that was an IC post, right? I know it might be hard to understand since too many alliances don't actually make an effort to have an alliance character, but we actually did. Most normal people would catch the many dead giveaways from the post, i.e. that Mushlims weren't an oppressed minority in the Kingdom, that they didn't revolt to overthrow and destroy the Kingdom, and that the neutral alliances aren't conspiring together to "destroy the lands". I suppose anything that actually has more thought to it than "lol boobs and beer" would be too complex to understand for you guys. 

[Samwise]

You realize that we're in AA (IC) and that that was an IC post, right? I know it might be hard to understand since too many alliances don't actually make an effort to have an alliance character, but we actually did. Most normal people would catch the many dead giveaways from the post, i.e. that Mushlims weren't an oppressed minority in the Kingdom, that they didn't revolt to overthrow and destroy the Kingdom, and that the neutral alliances aren't conspiring together to "destroy the lands". I suppose anything that actually has more thought to it than "lol boobs and beer" would be too complex to understand for you guys. 

 

Our alliance's character is to defend ourselves when threatened. You say you had no intention of keeping this up for longer than 2 weeks. Who nuke rogues any alliance for no reason at all, and gets peace in 2 weeks? Meanwhile, we're well more than two weeks past your initial CB... and you're still here.

[renegade4box]

 Who nuke rogues any alliance for no reason at all, and gets peace in 2 weeks? Meanwhile, we're well more than two weeks past your initial CB... and you're still here.

People who are leaving? How is this so complicated that you guys literally cannot understand basic concepts? The reason some (note: there's already been at least a dozen who have quit) of us are still here is because we're returning the favor for interrupting our last week with a 900 nation-strong bandwagon.

[JoshuaR]

 

We had already gotten the all-clear from Legacy and they had told you not to attack [I still have the logs], and we told you all that the first night of your attacks on him. You kept attacking, and told us to "do something about it." More egregious is that you would hit our AA at all without even trying to talk to us about it. That's how little you thought of us. And now we're supposed to believe we had some sort of defacto protection from an alliance that saw fit to attack our AA on a whim, themselves? Highly improbable. 

My logs differ from yours. I won't pretend I wasn't in the mood to destroy things (in CC, as you can see, I was days away from using my enormous warchest to wreck havoc among my fellow citizens), yet as you can see I had full Legacy approval, even when I only joked about "pretend" evidence that he was a war dodger, I got "real" authority, which is of course even better. I have no further logs from Sarm, der rote baron, or any other Legacy official asking me to stand down.

 

 

Dec 15 21:47:23 <JoshuaR>    Der_Rote_Baron, are you gov in any way?

Dec 15 21:47:46 <Der_Rote_Baron>    Hey Josh, I am

Dec 15 21:47:56 <JoshuaR>    is tandem a war dodger who you seek retribution on?

Dec 15 21:48:00 <JoshuaR>    whom*

Dec 15 21:48:03 <Der_Rote_Baron>    I remember you from CC, that super fucking gay game waste of time game

Dec 15 21:48:11 <Der_Rote_Baron>    Pretty much, yeah

Dec 15 21:48:25 <JoshuaR>    lol. i'm gonna bring the apocalypse to CC come monday or so

Dec 15 21:48:31 <JoshuaR>    i have around 25000 dollars

Dec 15 21:48:40 <JoshuaR>    so we can hit him?

Dec 15 21:48:45 <Der_Rote_Baron>    I wish I could contribute but that game challenged my ability to stay lucid

Dec 15 21:48:56 <JoshuaR>    he is considered as having run from war?

Dec 15 21:49:05 <JoshuaR>    and so sorta an enemy of you guys?

Dec 15 21:49:08 <Der_Rote_Baron>    I don't think Tandem is our problem anymore, he's not wearing our flag anymore right?

Dec 15 21:49:31 <JoshuaR>    well, if you pretend he's your enemy for running during war

Dec 15 21:49:36 <JoshuaR>    then we have your approval for a quick hit

Dec 15 21:49:49 <Der_Rote_Baron>    We don't have to pretend

Dec 15 21:50:07 <Der_Rote_Baron>    Sarm was not happy with him and he did his own thing, he's all yours

Dec 15 21:50:41 <Der_Rote_Baron>    We approve

 

 

Of course, I am nothing if not merciful and granted peace after only a day or two as per the usual for a raid instead of inflicting the full damage of war that Tandem escaped. I must say, I am very impressed to see him among your ranks still.

 

[Zero-One]

Later Umbrella reached out to us for War Games, and I daresay we were (and still are) flattered that you thought of us. While interacting more with Umbrella we came to understand why our protectors would chose you as their allies and we do hope to further establish a relationship with Umbrella. We're still neutral, but that doesn't mean we can't interact with Umbrella and have a good time getting to know each other further. :)

 

I have no dogs in this fight, however, I will note this.  I have had the pleasure of doing the war game during the-above-mentioned stint with two fine GOP gentlemen (Earl of Emyn Arnen and Pewterpirate55) and I could say that they had conducted themselves honorably.  I was surprised at their level of communication and war knowledge (for a neutral alliance  ;)).  If they are any indication, it reflects well on their alliance.  While I may not necessarily agree with GOP leaders' decision and actions, I do admire the conviction of GOP as a whole.  Fight on gents.  War is fun!  :ehm:

[enderland]

 

 

More spin. DBDC had 10 or 11 members when they first attacked us. The nations that attacked us initially were not able to overrun us as I suspect they thought they would be able to, and that's when their ranks doubled as they went out - like Sam said - and recruited a bunch of people to help them out. In fact, their ranks swelled to over 20 at one point. They've even messaged our members begging them to switch to their AA. But as I look at their roster now, it looks like they're back down to 17 - only four of which have joined in the past four days when most of this OWF back-and-forth has taken place. And most of those are MQ refugees as I understand it. So, nice try. 

 

That's not to say they're not allowed to recruit people to their cause, obviously. Sam was simply pointing out that for all their bullying tactics, they had to run out and recruit a lot of help just to beat up on (if the discussion from their supporters here is to be believed) an "idiotic" "SimCity" "weak" neutral alliance that "doesn't know how to fight." 

 

And my posting here, like my fighting on the battlefield, has been in defense.

 

I merely responded to falsehoods and propaganda put out by folks who thought we'd be weak willed enough to let DBDC run roughshod over us in a single round of fighting; and pointed out the factual numbers of the damage we've been able to do; and explained why those who were flailing about to make propaganda of my (lack of) warchest were missing the point.

 

Am I proud that I've sacrificed more for my AA than any nation in history? Or that even though most anyone else would have hid in PM in my situation before war started, or rolled over when DBDC hit them for no reason, I went into war to absorb damage for my GOP family and still delivered ~200k NS in damage to our enemies in two weeks of fighting --- all with no warchest? You're damn right I'm proud. 

 

 

I don't even know where to start with this pile of ridiculousness.

 

Let's start with your inability to understand how damage and warchests are related. You keep throwing this 200k NS claim, which is frankly stupid for several reasons. First of all, if you look at the nations who declared on you, all of them are at or nearly above their prewar NS amounts over the week in war with you, with the exception of Timmehhh - who is simply an inexpensive infra buy away from returning to where he was at. Which means when you tote this 200k NS claim it's completely meaningless because the nations you did it too actually were gaining NS fighting. Your net damage was minimal to DBDC (not just you, either, as most of them were in multiple wars).

 

But let's pretend this didn't happen and you did actually drop your DBDC opponents by 200k NS over the weeks of war. Your claim of being able to do this still shows foolishness because they all have the ability to rebuy their losses nearly instantly. Your 200k NS damage was not permanent damage, because you never removed their cash reserves, which means in one month, it's not even going to matter how much damage you did as everyone will be at or above their pre-war NS levels. Meanwhile your nation will take years to return to where you were prior to this war. 

 

This brings me to another point on warchests. You don't seem to realize one of the primary value in warchests is sustainability in a war and ability to rebuy at the end of it. DBDC will not be affected by your crusade. You (and anyone in GOP/DBDC without a meaningful warchest - hopefully the rest of your alliance mates who have equally had their nations destroyed have more than you) will be permanently affected and be feeling the damage of this war for a long, long time. And yet you are going around acting super proud of it. lol.

 

By parading your clear misunderstanding of the above on the OWF you are convincing others you have no clue how war works in CN. Sure you might be able to fight well individually but your understanding of the long term implications of war is completely and utterly inaccurate.

 

 

Unfortunately, it doesn't stop there. You also don't seem to get that TDO was attacked almost assuredly because they demonstrated incompetence as an alliance, for example allowing people to raid them and not even responding as an alliance. Not "just because they were neutral" - they were neutral and clearly incompetent as an alliance.

 

You are kidding yourself if you thought people cared enough about you to attack you prior to this. Especially since you aren't even neutral in the CN sense, being a protectorate and all. Prior to your act of political grandstanding, you had minimal risk of being attacked because no one cared about you.

 

However... you as an alliance have been parading around on the OWF convincing others you also have no clue how politics work in CN. GOP for whatever reason are convinced all this posturing and patting yourself on the back and destroying the top tier of your alliance is good for your alliance overall security. You felt threatened? I'll give you that. But what you blatantly did not consider was the obvious outcome of making people more likely to rogue/attack you in the future. Because now you the GOP has collectively convinced a great many people of its incompetence as an alliance in understanding the political world of CN.

 

Is this fair to most of GOP, that their leader is on a campaign to convince the rest of the world of his naivety? No, probably not, but that's just how this political environment works.

 

I don't even know why I bother to write this. Maybe, just maybe, you'll pull your head out of the sand.  

[Rooman33]

I don't even know where to start with this pile of ridiculousness.
 
Let's start with your inability to understand how damage and warchests are related. You keep throwing this 200k NS claim, which is frankly stupid for several reasons. First of all, if you look at the nations who declared on you, all of them are at or nearly above their prewar NS amounts over the week in war with you, with the exception of Timmehhh - who is simply an inexpensive infra buy away from returning to where he was at. Which means when you tote this 200k NS claim it's completely meaningless because the nations you did it too actually were gaining NS fighting. Your net damage was minimal to DBDC (not just you, either, as most of them were in multiple wars).
 
But let's pretend this didn't happen and you did actually drop your DBDC opponents by 200k NS over the weeks of war. Your claim of being able to do this still shows foolishness because they all have the ability to rebuy their losses nearly instantly. Your 200k NS damage was not permanent damage, because you never removed their cash reserves, which means in one month, it's not even going to matter how much damage you did as everyone will be at or above their pre-war NS levels. Meanwhile your nation will take years to return to where you were prior to this war. 
 
This brings me to another point on warchests. You don't seem to realize one of the primary value in warchests is sustainability in a war and ability to rebuy at the end of it. DBDC will not be affected by your crusade. You (and anyone in GOP/DBDC without a meaningful warchest - hopefully the rest of your alliance mates who have equally had their nations destroyed have more than you) will be permanently affected and be feeling the damage of this war for a long, long time. And yet you are going around acting super proud of it. lol.
 
By parading your clear misunderstanding of the above on the OWF you are convincing others you have no clue how war works in CN. Sure you might be able to fight well individually but your understanding of the long term implications of war is completely and utterly inaccurate.
 
 
Unfortunately, it doesn't stop there. You also don't seem to get that TDO was attacked almost assuredly because they demonstrated incompetence as an alliance, for example allowing people to raid them and not even responding as an alliance. Not "just because they were neutral" - they were neutral and clearly incompetent as an alliance.
 
You are kidding yourself if you thought people cared enough about you to attack you prior to this. Especially since you aren't even neutral in the CN sense, being a protectorate and all. Prior to your act of political grandstanding, you had minimal risk of being attacked because no one cared about you.
 
However... you as an alliance have been parading around on the OWF convincing others you also have no clue how politics work in CN. GOP for whatever reason are convinced all this posturing and patting yourself on the back and destroying the top tier of your alliance is good for your alliance overall security. You felt threatened? I'll give you that. But what you blatantly did not consider was the obvious outcome of making people more likely to rogue/attack you in the future. Because now you the GOP has collectively convinced a great many people of its incompetence as an alliance in understanding the political world of CN.
 
Is this fair to most of GOP, that their leader is on a campaign to convince the rest of the world of his naivety? No, probably not, but that's just how this political environment works.
 
I don't even know why I bother to write this. Maybe, just maybe, you'll pull your head out of the sand.  

 
Oh, we're well aware of how warchests work. That's why our nations tend to have quite sizable ones, at my behest, thank you very much ;)
 
And for someone who feels the need to lecture me on the mechanics of warchests, you seem to skip over the fact that that ~200k NS I've done by myself in damage (and the damage done over and above that by my mates) has to be bought back. From where? Their warchests! The top tier of DBDC may well purchase their way back to pre-war NS levels, but they're denting their warchests to do it. Which makes them less war capable (by whatever degree), which makes them less of a threat to neutrality as a whole.
 
Meanwhile, the damage I was able to do is all a net positive for us. By all accounts, I should have been in PM when we countered MQ, protecting my NS like most anyone else in my position would have been doing. What's more, all that damage they directed at my otherwise useless nation in this fight? That's damage that would have been directed at our more war-ready nations with sizable warchests. Not sure how you fail to grasp that basic concept. I was completely willing to shed my own NS and take a chunk from our attacker's hide because my nation strength was expendable in our eyes.
 
When people foolishly come to the OWF to try to misrepresent our cause or our methods, I correct the record. It has nothing to do with "grandstanding" or political ignorance. Stop trying to smear us and rip us down and I stop replying. It's that easy.
 
DBDC attacked us. We told them that if they attacked us, we would treat them like any other alliance. They don't get special treatment just because they have a few really powerful nations in their top tier. They don't get to just tech raid us and walk away. We're not TDO. I knew what taking this stand would mean to me and the other two nations in our top tier. I laid it all on the line any way. Yeah, I'm proud of that. Besides, it brings me down to an NS range where I can actually fight with and besides the meat of my alliance. As we saw when DBDC sent four top 15 nations after me -- floating out in front of the rest of my alliance by 100k NS put me in a bad position. 
 
And sympathizers of the neutral raiders keep saying "there wasn't a threat, there wasn't a threat." Anyone who's been paying attention can attest otherwise. Putting aside that neutrals have been threatened, bullied, poached, and outright attacked at an increasing rate over the past year or so - when an alliance declares in the OWF that they are declaring jihad on neutrality, we take them for their word. There has never been a more clear cut aggression against neutrality.  
 
And if you think the usual MO of trying to drive a wedge between me and my alliance will help end this conflict any sooner - you know, before we rip through DBDC's middle and lower tiers - you're barking up the wrong tree. I'm merely representing the general sentiment of our AA. Samwise, willij, CVT and others have all posted here affirming our stance. So trying to discredit me with lies, spin and misrepresentation isn't going to get anyone anywhere - certainly not with the rest of the GOP. My AA understands, agrees with, and respects our strategy. Simply because it would be more convenient for DBDC to get to attack us for a couple weeks and walk away without repercussions, doesn't mean that our unwillingness to bow to their convenience makes us ignorant of politics. Quite the opposite. Our cards are all on the table. That's how we operate. 
 
And, by the way, the GOP is led by a triumvirate. Our triumvirate voted unanimously to go to war against MQ - it wasn't just me. So, this is hardly "my crusade." And with DBDC, we're merely fighting back an enemy that attacked us completely without cause. And we will determine our own measures for success - and what we want to get from this war. And we will not let others outside our AA tell us how we will fight, when we will fight, or how long we will fight. The GOP was founded on that very principle. 
 
Really, it doesn't matter why I did what I did, or why our AA has made the choices we have. I'm simply replying here to counter the false accusations and nonsense being spewn about us. Judging from the notes in my inbox, many people throughout this world appreciate our stance, our fighting spirit, and our honesty. I could send anyone else from our AA here to represent our interests and our stance would remain the same. You know why? Because we're a grouping of good and honest people. We mean what we say. We did what we thought was right, and we're proud of the fight we're putting up and will continue to put up. DBDC asked for this fight when they attacked us. Now we're giving it to them. What's the problem?

EDIT: Was in a rush earlier. Went back through to sweep up some typos.

Edited October 7, 2013 by Rooman33

[enderland]

I hope for your sake it won't hurt too bad when reality catches up to you.

[AlmightyGrub]

 -romantic tripe-

 

Until your desire to be relevant overtook your commonsense nobody really knew who you were.  That worked in your favour.  Now people know and understand who you are you are a target just like everyone else.  Welcome to the club.

 

Until your desire to be relevant overtook your commonsense you were assumed to be neutral.  That worked in your favour.  Most of us don't bother with neutrals, not out of some respect for the way you live your life but due to the fact we have actual enemies to align against.  You however are not neutral at all, you have been pretending to be so, more by isolation than political style, and you have revealed yourself as a definate non-neutral.  I am not sure what your alliance is besides naive, but you do not qualify as neutral.

 

Until your desire to be relevant overtook your commonsense nobody had been exposed to your peculiar style of diplomacy.  That worked in your favour.  You have provided an insight into your alliance and your leadership that was best left hidden.  You want to justify yourself but instead you have continually proved clueless at this level of diplomacy.  You remind me a lot of a former leader of the NADC.  He was arrogant and clueless and eventually his aliance was destroyed and he was removed from office.  Something to consider really.

 

Until your desire to be relevant overtook your commonsense there was no point to the way you developed your nation, except of course pure statistics.  Now you don't even have those.  Fighting a war you were incapable of fighting, fighting a war you had no stake in, and doing so without any cash at all doesn't make you brave, it doesn't make you noble and it certainly doesn't make you smart.  What it does do is expose you as a completely clueless leader.  Your own nation is in relative ruin, you have lost more than most nations will ever have.  Admitedly you have it because you are a collector and obviously don't understand what its value is, but even so, you had something that could have been used to project a defensive position.  Now you have a nation in tatters, one that can not recover, you have no cash to fight, cash you will not be allowed to recover in the short term.  You have created the perfect target nation for the higher end of Bob.  The perfect target for tech raiding at the highest levels, you have made the day of so many. 

 

I hope you like this war concept, there are a lot of people who are sufficiently disenfranchised who will enjoy playing with you.

 

You didn't think through the totality of your actions, that's fine, you were isolated and clueless, but it is extremely amusing to see that day after day you thump your chest and wave your flag.  Your alliance is a disgrace for allowing you to represent them, if they are even remotely competent you are hardly the poster child for that competence.  If they are nice guys, you do them an even greater disservice because you are a try-hard, wannabe tough guy who has wandered so far out of his depth.

 

It is simple, realize that you have made a colossal misjudgement and stop trying to self-justify and maybe people will forget about that huge target now painted on your back.  Everyone will go back to what they were already planning and you can drift back into irrelevance where you belong.  Keep on talking yourself up and your alliance draws more and more attention to itself, more of your nations are saved for later consumption by large disenfranchised nations looking for fun, and the threat to your alliance grows disproportionately to your actual value.  The alternative is to keep posting, I for one love drawing attention to you but can only do so if you keep feeding me posts such as this one. 

 

Onwards to irrelevance.

[Rooman33]

Until your desire to be relevant overtook your commonsense nobody really knew who you were.  That worked in your favour.  Now people know and understand who you are you are a target just like everyone else.  Welcome to the club.

 

Until your desire to be relevant overtook your commonsense you were assumed to be neutral.  That worked in your favour.  Most of us don't bother with neutrals, not out of some respect for the way you live your life but due to the fact we have actual enemies to align against.  You however are not neutral at all, you have been pretending to be so, more by isolation than political style, and you have revealed yourself as a definate non-neutral.  I am not sure what your alliance is besides naive, but you do not qualify as neutral.

 

Until your desire to be relevant overtook your commonsense nobody had been exposed to your peculiar style of diplomacy.  That worked in your favour.  You have provided an insight into your alliance and your leadership that was best left hidden.  You want to justify yourself but instead you have continually proved clueless at this level of diplomacy.  You remind me a lot of a former leader of the NADC.  He was arrogant and clueless and eventually his aliance was destroyed and he was removed from office.  Something to consider really.

 

Until your desire to be relevant overtook your commonsense there was no point to the way you developed your nation, except of course pure statistics.  Now you don't even have those.  Fighting a war you were incapable of fighting, fighting a war you had no stake in, and doing so without any cash at all doesn't make you brave, it doesn't make you noble and it certainly doesn't make you smart.  What it does do is expose you as a completely clueless leader.  Your own nation is in relative ruin, you have lost more than most nations will ever have.  Admitedly you have it because you are a collector and obviously don't understand what its value is, but even so, you had something that could have been used to project a defensive position.  Now you have a nation in tatters, one that can not recover, you have no cash to fight, cash you will not be allowed to recover in the short term.  You have created the perfect target nation for the higher end of Bob.  The perfect target for tech raiding at the highest levels, you have made the day of so many. 

 

I hope you like this war concept, there are a lot of people who are sufficiently disenfranchised who will enjoy playing with you.

 

You didn't think through the totality of your actions, that's fine, you were isolated and clueless, but it is extremely amusing to see that day after day you thump your chest and wave your flag.  Your alliance is a disgrace for allowing you to represent them, if they are even remotely competent you are hardly the poster child for that competence.  If they are nice guys, you do them an even greater disservice because you are a try-hard, wannabe tough guy who has wandered so far out of his depth.

 

It is simple, realize that you have made a colossal misjudgement and stop trying to self-justify and maybe people will forget about that huge target now painted on your back.  Everyone will go back to what they were already planning and you can drift back into irrelevance where you belong.  Keep on talking yourself up and your alliance draws more and more attention to itself, more of your nations are saved for later consumption by large disenfranchised nations looking for fun, and the threat to your alliance grows disproportionately to your actual value.  The alternative is to keep posting, I for one love drawing attention to you but can only do so if you keep feeding me posts such as this one. 

 

Onwards to irrelevance.

 

And we're being accused of "chest thumping" for...? Oh, that's right. We were just supposed to pretend we didn't notice MQ's threat and attacks on neutrality (like somehow we were magically protected from it all because of your ex post facto FA rationale), or all the other attacks on neutrals that've been escalating over the past year. 

 

And when DBDC attacked us without cause, we should have just kept our mouths shut, right? Just rolled over like good little hippies, and been happy with whatever limited engagement they felt inclined to allot us in order to save our precious NS? And when DBDC and MQ supporters flocked to the OWF to smear and misrepresent our alliance, to call us and our leadership ignorant, stupid, arrogant (for defending ourselves and not being ashamed of it), out of our depth, irrelevant, and to claim that our motivation in this engagement was ever anything more than defending neutrality -- we should have just sat silent and let you misrepresent us? Hm... no thanks. 

 

We have a pristine FA record of about five years - and I have been in leadership positions for pretty much the entirety of our existence. Efforts to paint our AA, or me - in particular, as opportunist noobs seeking relevance is deplorably desperate and easily refutable. These pages are littered with folks from a variety of alliances who've hailed our character and fighting spirit. Let's not pretend you're somehow the authority on what our reputation is or will be. 

 

"Target on our backs?" Really? That's supposed to make us feel more threatened than MQ's outright declaration of "holy war" on neutrals? Or more in danger than we already are/were looking down the barrels of half this world's top 10 nations? Yeah, I don't know who you think you're intimidating, here. We've already shown how willing we are to put everything on the line to defend ourselves and our right to exist in peace. Maybe you're hoping our resolve will give in. You'll find yourself sorely disappointed there, too. 

 

DBDC attacked us, and has been attacking us for two going on three weeks, for absolutely no reason other than they wanted to pad their stats and they knew if they attacked a second neutral alliance in two weeks, there would be little anyone else would/could do. We knew it too. We don't care much for bullying, and so we were not and are not going to rollover and just take their abuse, no matter how much you try to insult me, rip down the people in our alliance, or hurl threats our way. 

 

If you want, I can go get a few testimonials about our character, or my character. You know... from people who actually know us and would know what they're talking about, instead of some drive-by OWF intimidation... er, I mean, "analysis." 

 

As for "irrelevance." Fine by us. Anyone who cares to look at our five years existence can easily tell we're not glory hogs. We were perfectly content to avoid this trollpit until MQ gave us no alternative. The only reason I keep replying is because people keep trying to smear us. The smears stop, and I stop. Pretty simple. My posting here is all about preserving for the record an accurate account of our involvement in this ordeal. We will not let you all misrepresent our motives or our character. If you don't like that, there's not much I can do for you. 

Edited October 6, 2013 by Rooman33

[Rooman33]

As this thread is just being used to hurl personal insults at myself and my alliance, and we're a couple weeks past the OP, may I request a thread lock?

Edited October 6, 2013 by Rooman33

[Bob Ilyani]

As this thread is just being used to hurl personal insults at myself and my alliance, and we're several weeks past the OP, may I request a thread lock?

You know you can't take the heat when not only do you get out of the kitchen, but you try and get it shut down by the Department of Health.

 

As a sidenote, the moderation staff on this board haven't been filling thread lock requests for years. The topic of current discussion is completely relevant to the topic presented in the OP (i.e. GOP's hostile action against MQ) as well. So what are your actual grounds for wanting to get out of this, aside from a few calloused fingers and a thoroughly tarnished reputation?