New Polar Order Declaration of War

[Ameroca]

Ok, so how come GOONS (which I was a part of, mind you) hit PM so fast? Why frown upon NSO for doing the same?

 

Yeah, you were part of GOONS. You would have literally seen our orders. Which telling people to jump into peace mode was never a part.

 

I mean, I'm sure you still have all those PMs saved in your forum message box, and can make me eat my words really easily.

[Roadie]

Former enemies working together can be near unstoppable...

 

 

:P

 

Why do they have tails? Might as well just be ponies. 

[Krashnaia]

Wow, alliances that care to build up a decent CB?

 

Is this going to become a trend?

[Rebel Virginia]

....every one except Rey and Junk and that other annoying idiot)

Hey, Grubbie, I have a name.

 

 

Wow, alliances that care to build up a decent CB?

 

Is this going to become a trend?

It would seem actual CBs are a thing of the past, unless of course mere words constituent "grievous harm." In that case, you'd be wise to watch what you say.

Edited November 2, 2013 by Rebel Virginia

[Ch33kY]

Step 1 complete: Rebel Virginia has whinged about the CB.

Step 2 will see him breaking off from his alliance to create a one-man front in order to inflate his sense of purpose.

[Rebel Virginia]

Step 1 complete: Rebel Virginia has whinged about the CB.

I'm sorry bud, but I have not protested Polar's CB. For me to do that would require a CB to protest against.

[TurnipCruncher]

Wow. So far, someone from an unrelated alliance gets owned by the usual arguments only to be saved by the introduction of HoT's "special" brand of debate. Pretty much the quickest descent into the autistic spectrum I have seen in a DoW thread. Go and do some fighting or something. I'm eager to see the bitter post-war fallout.

[Nick GhostWolf]

I'm sorry bud, but I have not protested Polar's CB. For me to do that would require a CB to protest against.

 

No, you are refusing to accept the CB.  The obligatory "THE CB IS BULLSHIT" circlejerk will settle down eventually, this war's gonna last awhile.  Besides, once you get around 8k of that NS knocked off you, you'll be in range to fight me (assuming one of your other guys doesn't start the nuclear hellstorm with me first, which appears... well, likely.)  See?  Good stuff all around.  Think positive.

 

edit, of all the words to typo, it had to be the one that the filter was supposed to catch...

Edited November 2, 2013 by Nick GhostWolf

[WarGod0001]

It would seem actual CBs are a thing of the past, unless of course mere words constituent "grievous harm." In that case, you'd be wise to watch what you say.

 

You lot are impossible to please, apology, no apology. CB, no CB. I mean really, what is it going to take to make you happy? (lol, I can't even write that with a straight face) Do you have to write it and we just sign it?

[Rebel Virginia]

No, you are refusing to accept the CB.  The obligatory "THE CB IS BULLSHIT" circlejerk will settle down eventually, this war's gonna last awhile.  Besides, once you get around 8k of that NS knocked off you, you'll be in range to fight me (assuming one of your other guys doesn't start the nuclear hellstorm with me first, which appears... well, likely.)  See?  Good stuff all around.  Think positive.

 

edit, of all the words to typo, it had to be the one that the filter was supposed to catch...

I refuse to accept the CB because it does not exist. You see, what you have against is comments from a few members, and perhaps a desire of some to see your alliance burn. However, dislike does not constituent any real harm. There is no real wrong done against your alliance. You are declaring a war because we do not like you, and that is all you have. Sentiment has not been used as a CB since NPO's days, and even they figured out it was too fishy to fly with the rest of the world.

 

But still, you are right. Partially. The CB will have little practical consequences in the immediate. Your allies will still support you in this. What you might be wise to consider is how this will affect you in six months, a year, maybe two...

 

 

 

You lot are impossible to please, apology, no apology. CB, no CB. I mean really, what is it going to take to make you happy? (lol, I can't even write that with a straight face) Do you have to write it and we just sign it?

I really do not care much about Bi-Polar these days, but if you are going to apologize can you please do it without saying that your throwing your ally under the proverbial bus was completely justified? That kind of defeats the purpose of an apology, and also frankly is kind of insulting.

Edited November 2, 2013 by Rebel Virginia

[Nick GhostWolf]

I refuse to accept the CB because it does not exist. You see, what you have against is comments from a few members, and perhaps a desire of some to see your alliance burn. However, dislike does not constituent any real harm. There is no real wrong done against your alliance. You are declaring a war because we do not like you, and that is all you have. Sentiment has not been used as a CB since NPO's days, and even they figured out it was too fishy to fly with the rest of the world.

 

But still, you are right. Partially. The CB will have little practical consequences in the immediate. Your allies will still support you in this. What you might be wise to consider is how this will affect you in six months, a year, maybe two...

 

 

 

I really do not care much about Bi-Polar these days, but if you are going to apologize can you please do it without saying that your throwing your ally under the proverbial bus was completely justified? That kind of defeats the purpose of an apology, and also frankly is kind of insulting.

 

 

Oh, I quail at the threat of having my pixels destroyed.  Whatever shall I do?  Two years from now it's conceivable that there will be at least two more major global conflicts, a bunch of infra will be burned, the GRL will go into the 90's, and I imagine that personally I'll still be Polar only with much more tech and a WRC.  Almost certain NSO will be around then too and if you're still butthurt about it in two years I'd bet money you'll go from SOME friends to NO friends.

[Aegon Targaryen]

I'm sorry bud, but I have not protested Polar's CB. For me to do that would require a CB to protest against.

 

Call me curious but what was NSO's CB when they were creating a coalition to roll polar?

[Rebel Virginia]

Call me curious but what was NSO's CB when they were creating a coalition to roll polar?

Our grievance goes back to Bi-Polar, and I must say it would be amusing if a Paradoxian such as yourself were to find issue with that.

[Aegon Targaryen]

Our grievance goes back to Bi-Polar, and I must say it would be amusing if a Paradoxian such as yourself were to find issue with that.

 

I don't at all. I just find it amusing that NSO is perfectly fine with using a CB that is a few years old but takes issue with Polar using one that is a few months old.

[Rebel Virginia]

I don't at all. I just find it amusing that NSO is perfectly fine with using a CB that is a few years old but takes issue with Polar using one that is a few months old.

The difference harm was actually done to us, whereas NpO is trying to claim that our words (and the words of an NG member, interestingly enough) have somehow harmed them.* Words do not constitute a CB. Actions do.

 

*On a similar note, NpO and their allies have in this very announcement claimed that we are bungling idiots and a collection of the most dangerous minds on the planet. Do let me know when you've made up your mind.

Edited November 2, 2013 by Rebel Virginia

[Nick GhostWolf]

The difference harm was actually done to us, whereas NpO is trying to claim that our words (and the words of an NG member, interestingly enough) have somehow harmed them.* Words do not constitute a CB. Actions do.

 

*On a similar note, NpO and their allies have in this very announcement claimed that we are bungling idiots and a collection of the most dangerous minds on the planet. Do let me know when you've made up your mind.

 

I'll let you beat that CB dead horse a bit more on your own time, you've only repeated yourself on your opinion the last four posts or so.

 

It's my understanding that some of the people rising to "protest" our declaration outside of NSO have attempted to portray NSO as a helpless victim, too stupid and weak to fight.  This is not Polaris' view.  We are fully aware you possessed the capability and desire to roll Polaris and that your plans were under way for exactly that.  You were, however, outmaneuvered in the treaty web because despite being strong and smart, we managed to be smarter and stronger and in a war that was inevitable, we were able to make the first strike.  We did, however, legitimately criticize some of the decisions of your leadership.  You're attempting to twist this to imply Polaris is somehow unintelligent, however it is NSO that was outsmarted.  That does not detract from the capability of the Sith.  These allegations of NSO being seen as incompetent are coming from your own people and those arguing against Polaris.  My question then becomes, are these some form of freudian slip implying a lack of confidence in NSO by your supporters, or merely propaganda to trump up a victim role to garner support?

[Branimir]

 ....be clear that there is a clear single agenda for Polaris, neuter the NSO.  If you want to make it about you as well, then pile in and feel free to do so, but it is not about you and I find it quite arrogant that you believe, like NG that we truly give a rat's arse about pursuit of any agenda involving you.  That is not to say I will be sad if you do attack me directly, but it is more a pleasant by-product rather than an implicit intention.  If you choose to believe differently then that is also fine, but it wont make it any more grounded in fact.

 

To war as you see fit, we have our eyes open, but be clear about the Polar agenda.  It is singular and defined.

 

I believe you in regards to my alliance. There is no reason I wouldn't. I was not questioning that. We may not be best of pals, but we are not enemies. But, when I see your DoW, when I put it on the map of treaty ties, and then those two layers I set in the political context and recent history of acting alliances and those potentially involved in this aggression it becomes somewhat unavoidable to come to the conclusion I already did. 

 

Certainly I can believe you, in what is your primary target. But this is coalition warfare. And you are not alone within it. This is of course, all my speculation from what I can see.

[AlmightyGrub]

I believe you in regards to my alliance. There is no reason I wouldn't. I was not questioning that. We may not be best of pals, but we are not enemies. But, when I see your DoW, when I put it on the map of treaty ties, and then those two layers I set in the political context and recent history of acting alliances and those potentially involved in this aggression it becomes somewhat unavoidable to come to the conclusion I already did. 

 

Certainly I can believe you, in what is your primary target. But this is coalition warfare. And you are not alone within it. This is of course, all my speculation from what I can see.

 

 

It is indeed foreseeable that such an overlay will lead to assumptions that will by coincidence and circumstance be proven, it is equally true that circumstance is sometimes beyond our control even with the greatest of efforts.

 

We will do what needs to be done but only what needs to be done, I fully expect you to do the same.  There is no dishonour in doing what you are obliged to do and no account could be held in that respect.

 

Good luck comrade.

[Starfox101]

Well this got amazing fast...

 

Question, how exactly is a threat "dealt with"? One would usually conclude that the objective of war is to remove the other side's physical ability to be a threat, but when they don't have that physical ability in the first place...

While they may have been smashed by The Legion at one point, NSO has done a hell of a job rebuilding under Rayvon the last few years. They have also eaten what, 3-4 alliances? There isn't a shortage of quality members and it's a stretch to paint them as having no physical ability. Even the smallest ant can hurt you, and the NPO of all people should know that best.

 

As per rationale from the casus belli presented, NSO and NG are a threat to the safety of NpO due to their actions. But only on NSO war is declared, on the much smaller "partner in crime". Doesn't entirely make sense, on glance. That isnt answering the threat.

 

We can understand why, once looking at the treaty web. NSO is more exposed-- easier target. From there, we see that a broader logic has been involved in this DoW. One that reflects thinking in terms of coalition warfare and wants to induce a specific chain of events. Obviously, this is an opening move in a coalition war, nothing more nothing less. This is about far more, then just NSO.

 

 

And? Its fine, smart, and going to be fun. So hence nothing bad,... but just own it. Ok? Lets not pretend to be dumb here, this world of ours is old (maybe too old) and we all have been around the block more then once. We can see what and why happened, and now lets just make it happen without this side show which fools nobody and isn't really necessary.

Well, this is just from my personal opinion, and point of view, but, I think things with NG have cooled off lately given that their Anti-Polar front broke off and attacked us. You may remember the eternal Army of Bear Force One, but I understand if you have forgotten. Either way, we've already come to blows with the militant wing of NG, and I'm sure we will end up meeting them again right here very shortly. Don't you worry, now.

 

Oh how cute...deflection by humor...so very quaint of you cake boys. I like that. You're now the Cake Boy Coalition.

This may be one of the worst insults of all time. What the hell is a cakeboy? Given that GATO hasn't started an offensive war since Dinosaurs roamed Planet Bob, I really don't think you have any grounds to call people whatever warped variation of pansy you've come up with. 

 

Then you wonder why nobody takes you seriously.

 

 

Hey, Grubbie, I have a name.

 

 

It would seem actual CBs are a thing of the past, unless of course mere words constituent "grievous harm." In that case, you'd be wise to watch what you say.

Come on now, RV. Given that alliances in the past were attacked for merely speaking out against Pacifica in public, don't pretend this is something new. If anything, it requires a great more poking and prodding to get attacked these days. The lease is considerably shorter. When you look back at every major war, this is one of the most solid CB's. Were you not in the attacked party, you would clearly be able to see this.

 

Our grievance goes back to Bi-Polar, and I must say it would be amusing if a Paradoxian such as yourself were to find issue with that.

Were you even in NSO then? You must still be mad at the NPO, also.

 

Hell, let's bring CATO back to ravage GATO. After that, let's reform LUE and get revenge for GW3. Lastly, we can reform NAAC and they can jump in on your side. After all, if we're all going to stay mad for multiple years over old ass events, it's only fair. I don't see how a three year old grudge is a stronger CB when compared to an alliance actively plotting against you a mere months ago...

[WarGod0001]

I really do not care much about Bi-Polar these days

 

 

Our grievance goes back to Bi-Polar, and I must say it would be amusing if a Paradoxian such as yourself were to find issue with that.

 

 

So which one is it? ? You don't care or you still have a grievance?

[Centurius]

You can call Cakeboy all you like, you will be sitting on your irrelevant arse until someone orders you to do something, at about that time your loosely collected pile of turd coloured turd will try to puff their chests and pretend to be tough  like the big boys.  It won't work, you have never scared anyone, ever.

 

Your logic is so circular and self-serving it astonishes even me.  I had long thought you had half a brain and now I find you are short that by half.

Now now grub, that is implying GATO is even active enough to have chest puffers 

[the rebel]

ITT: a CB and what it really means is only valid, if the defenders and their coconspirators say so.

[Starfox101]

ITT: a CB and what it really means is only valid, if the defenders and their coconspirators say so.

So it is unusual for the "wronged" party and friends to complain, and the attacking party to defend it?

 

Welcome to CN. This is par for the course.

[Aegon Targaryen]

Have we ever had an alliance that has been attacked acknowledge the CB used as being valid? :P

[the rebel]

So it is unusual for the "wronged" party and friends to complain, and the attacking party to defend it?

 

Not at all, its just been a long time since I've seen people stating conspiracy theories about the "real" reasons someone started a war, when the given reason is the most logical reason :P