i would like to offer peace talks for woto

[The Zigur]

Right, because NPO is a menace and is poised to be making threats. Sometimes, I begin to think that you may one day get it, then you say something stupid, and I remember that you are, in fact, as dumb as you lead us to believe.

 

NPO is poised to be a future threat. If NPO's desire was granted to effectively achieve a coalition-wide white surrender, Pacifica's upper ranks and tech, and general political capital, would almost guarantee it would be able to rebuild for war and maintain it's coalition as a power sphere to be utilized a few months down the road.

 

This is why NPO refuses to cooperate and continues to hold it's allies hostage. NPO will utlilize any means to preserve it's position to counter-attack from later. If NPO had to surrender last after the other fronts do, it could no longer be taken seriously as a political power, as it was unable to hold their effective coalition together yet again. Any potential PM terms is just a precautionary measure on the part of Polar coalition.

Edited January 8, 2014 by Tywin Lannister

[Neo Uruk]

Why do people keep saying NPO is holding its allies hostage? You lot are trying to hold our ally hostage, and we're simply not down for that.

[The Zigur]

Why do people keep saying NPO is holding its allies hostage? You lot are trying to hold our ally hostage, and we're simply not down for that.

 

Polar coalition does not desire to hold NPO hostage, it desires to remove NPO as a long term threat. This is why nobody has advocated reparations. Pacifica is trying to establish itself as a dominant coalition power like it did in Equilibrium. Alliance leaders like Steve Buscemi and Rayvon are also desperate to hold onto political power and relevance, and are hanging onto that shred of hope that NSO coalition can remain a political bloc to rebuild from if a coalition surrender is achieved.

 

Is NPO literally holding it's allies hostage? Maybe not, but they are effectively holding the membership of each alliance hostage with their effective puppet regimes in place.

 

If NG and other alliances sincerely desired peace, they would accept the surrender terms already offered. But instead they chose to play the political game, despite the fact that they are in a state of defeat.

Edited January 8, 2014 by Tywin Lannister

[Krzyzewskiville]

Is NPO literally holding it's allies hostage? Maybe not, but they are effectively holding the membership of each alliance hostage with their effective puppet regimes in place.

This line is sure to go over well with our allies.

[Letum]

I feel my other posts already provided sufficient information on the topic, and I didn't think it warranted a further response. Before I bow out of this topic I will say this. You seem like a smart guy, and should know that entering in defense of an ally is often a pretense to going in for other reasons. If you think there were no other self-serving agendas from other parties, bar NpO and their CB, then you are deluding yourself.

Certainly, people can enter a war for other reasons, and there are different Agendas for different parts of the coalition. How does this in any way address the point?

Whether an alliance has a self-serving Agenda and whether it is actively using its strength to impose harsh terms are two independent things. An alliance can impose terms without it being part of their Agenda, and an alliance can have a general Agenda in a war without imposing terms on its front.

Just because you keep repeating that TOP/NpO are the main culprits responsible for the terms you received, doesn't make it true. In fact it's pretty hilarious watching you make argue certain points, when we know what the truth is -- objectively.

 
I have never mentioned either TOP or NpO as being the main culprits here. In fact, TOP is the alliance in the opposing coalition I have the least issue with.
 

NPO is poised to be a future threat. If NPO's desire was granted to effectively achieve a coalition-wide white surrender, Pacifica's upper ranks and tech, and general political capital, would almost guarantee it would be able to rebuild for war and maintain it's coalition as a power sphere to be utilized a few months down the road.

This is correct. Diminishing the NPO's potential to be a future threat is a very rational move for anyone concerned about said threat.
 

This is why NPO refuses to cooperate and continues to hold it's allies hostage. NPO will utlilize any means to preserve it's position to counter-attack from later. If NPO had to surrender last after the other fronts do, it could no longer be taken seriously as a political power, as it was unable to hold their effective coalition together yet again. Any potential PM terms is just a precautionary measure on the part of Polar coalition.

How exactly are we holding our allies hostage?

[HM Solomon I]

Maybe not, but they are effectively holding the membership of each alliance hostage with their effective puppet regimes in place.

Lol, just lol. As a member of one of these "puppet regimes" I can honestly tell you that you have no idea what you're talking about. Edited January 8, 2014 by HM Solomon I

[Robster83]

I have never mentioned either TOP or NpO as being the main culprits here. In fact, TOP is the alliance in the opposing coalition I have the least issue with.

 

Well then I don't know why you questioned me, because I was just clearing up the misinformation that some were trying to spread, in saying that it was NpO/TOP who were the driving force behind the quoted reps.

[Krzyzewskiville]

Well then I don't know why you questioned me, because I was just clearing up the misinformation that some were trying to spread, in saying that it was NpO/TOP who were the driving force behind the quoted reps.

The problem is, I've seen far more from your side alleging that we're spreading misinformation than any statements from our side about who is responsible. So it's feeling like self-propagating propaganda.

[Bob Ilyani]

 Alliance leaders like Steve Buscemi and Rayvon are also desperate to hold onto political power and relevance, and are hanging onto that shred of hope that NSO coalition can remain a political bloc to rebuild from if a coalition surrender is achieved.

 

I don't think anyone, whether they support enforcing some sort of terms upon the losing coalition or not, doubts that NPO, NSO and NG will remain, in some form or another, politically relevant in the post-war world. They're active and interested enough to rebuild, make new friends and continue to play the political game.

 

I don't really understand what you're going at here. Do you think holding NPO's banks in PM would kill Pacifica? Do you think a long-term war will cause NSO to disband? If you do, then you don't really understand how post-war politics works around here. I have no doubt that the alliances of the losing coalition, regardless of how crippled they are when peace is signed, will remain political players in the months, if not years, to come.

[Hereno]

 

Polar coalition does not desire to hold NPO hostage, it desires to remove NPO as a long term threat. This is why nobody has advocated reparations. Pacifica is trying to establish itself as a dominant coalition power like it did in Equilibrium. Alliance leaders like Steve Buscemi and Rayvon are also desperate to hold onto political power and relevance, and are hanging onto that shred of hope that NSO coalition can remain a political bloc to rebuild from if a coalition surrender is achieved.

 

Is NPO literally holding it's allies hostage? Maybe not, but they are effectively holding the membership of each alliance hostage with their effective puppet regimes in place.

 

If NG and other alliances sincerely desired peace, they would accept the surrender terms already offered. But instead they chose to play the political game, despite the fact that they are in a state of defeat.

 

Why are we all wasting resources on each other when the entire planet would be better served by giving an EZI sentence to this moron?

[The Zigur]

I don't think anyone, whether they support enforcing some sort of terms upon the losing coalition or not, doubts that NPO, NSO and NG will remain, in some form or another, politically relevant in the post-war world. They're active and interested enough to rebuild, make new friends and continue to play the political game.

 

I don't really understand what you're going at here. Do you think holding NPO's banks in PM would kill Pacifica? Do you think a long-term war will cause NSO to disband? If you do, then you don't really understand how post-war politics works around here. I have no doubt that the alliances of the losing coalition, regardless of how crippled they are when peace is signed, will remain political players in the months, if not years, to come.

 

You're correct of course, but from a strategic perspective I think that PM terms would not only have a certain justice about them, but would also set back NPO's political goals for a period of time. But terms or no terms, I personally feel that a decisive political victory in which there was no doubt who lost, would be a good thing.

[Neo Uruk]

Dear NPO,

Please return to the NPO Tywinn seems to believe you still are. Then EZI his sorry ass.

Thanks,

Rey the Great, Speaker for Planet Bob

[kerschbs]

 

I was valuable when I was wielding 3 million NS. Now my opinion is just one more amongst many. But I don't mind being your side's Goldstein.

 

You were never valuable. Don't kid yourself. 

[Dajobo]

This is becoming one of my favourite threads!

 

For those screaming "who's idea was this?", it was mine! I have no issue with saying when people wanted to demand reps, I suggested that a response to the offence that linked directly to the offence was a better option. There's no need for political double speak here because I think it's a totally reasonable stance.

 

Lets take a look at some facts shall we...

 

After two months war NPO still sits 4th on the sanction table with over 4.6m NS in Peace Mode. Over 3.5m of that have not even fought in this war. The thing is they do this every war, over and over and over. While they keep their top nations from ever fighting their loyal meat shields burn for them. Yes the allies on their side are not complaining, nor will they if they are decent allies because you don't do that to your ally during a war. Take a closer look though and look at the number of people who helped them last time who are now supporting this idea and ask yourself why?

 

Why would people want to see the practise of keeping their top nations from fighting, and growing larger and larger at the expense of everyone else stopped?

 

I'll be quite clear on this. This is not some vendetta or act of spite or revenge. We didn't ask for reps because we don't want reps. We have no desire to profit at NPO's expense and we have no desire to punish them for defending an ally. We do however want to see a practice that happens over and over and over addressed. This business of using other peoples NS to fight while you forever protect your own is disgusting. NPO will keep these nations in peace mode for as long as it takes during war without complaint, because a reduced profit is nothing. They will happily keep them in Peace Mode for a few more months as well if the war hasn't ended, and still wont have any complaint.

 

So tell me if the war went for a few more months what effect will it have on those nations hiding in peace mode?

Tell me how much aid will they send to there members or allies over that few months from peace mode?

 

Now do the same maths on if there was peace tomorrow and those same top nations stay in peace mode.

Will they collect more or less as the GRL falls?

Will they send less aid?

 

So when you add it all up the only difference is the world will still be burning one way and their allies still falling further and further.

 

The was some other point raised about alliances who may not actually care about the terms using their power to support those who do.

Absolutely Polaris is using it's power and position to help those alliances who do wish to impose these terms. Those same alliances used theirs to help us remove a threat and we have a debt to them for that. I make no apology for it either as it's the right thing to do. Why would many of these alliances even help us when they aren't allied to us if we weren't prepared to try and help them see there goals reached as well?

 

 

In summery I personally suggested this term because I think it is appropriate. I hope it sets a precedent as well for the future!

The ironic thing is I suggested the idea as it's one I'd have no issue with receiving as well if we did the same.

While Polaris personally doesn't care about the terms, we will do all we can to help them be applied.

[the rebel]

Why do people keep saying NPO is holding its allies hostage? You lot are trying to hold our ally hostage, and we're simply not down for that.

 

Its funny how your opinions change, like piss in the wind. To suit what alliance you have hopped too by the time a war comes around.

[kerschbs]

This is becoming one of my favourite threads!

 

For those screaming "who's idea was this?", it was mine! I have no issue with saying when people wanted to demand reps, I suggested that a response to the offence that linked directly to the offence was a better option. There's no need for political double speak here because I think it's a totally reasonable stance.

 

Lets take a look at some facts shall we...

 

After two months war NPO still sits 4th on the sanction table with over 4.6m NS in Peace Mode. Over 3.5m of that have not even fought in this war. The thing is they do this every war, over and over and over. While they keep their top nations from ever fighting their loyal meat shields burn for them. Yes the allies on their side are not complaining, nor will they if they are decent allies because you don't do that to your ally during a war. Take a closer look though and look at the number of people who helped them last time who are now supporting this idea and ask yourself why?

 

Why would people want to see the practise of keeping their top nations from fighting, and growing larger and larger at the expense of everyone else stopped?

 

I'll be quite clear on this. This is not some vendetta or act of spite or revenge. We didn't ask for reps because we don't want reps. We have no desire to profit at NPO's expense and we have no desire to punish them for defending an ally. We do however want to see a practice that happens over and over and over addressed. This business of using other peoples NS to fight while you forever protect your own is disgusting. NPO will keep these nations in peace mode for as long as it takes during war without complaint, because a reduced profit is nothing. They will happily keep them in Peace Mode for a few more months as well if the war hasn't ended, and still wont have any complaint.

 

So tell me if the war went for a few more months what effect will it have on those nations hiding in peace mode?

Tell me how much aid will they send to there members or allies over that few months from peace mode?

 

Now do the same maths on if there was peace tomorrow and those same top nations stay in peace mode.

Will they collect more or less as the GRL falls?

Will they send less aid?

 

So when you add it all up the only difference is the world will still be burning one way and their allies still falling further and further.

 

The was some other point raised about alliances who may not actually care about the terms using their power to support those who do.

Absolutely Polaris is using it's power and position to help those alliances who do wish to impose these terms. Those same alliances used theirs to help us remove a threat and we have a debt to them for that. I make no apology for it either as it's the right thing to do. Why would many of these alliances even help us when they aren't allied to us if we weren't prepared to try and help them see there goals reached as well?

 

 

In summery I personally suggested this term because I think it is appropriate. I hope it sets a precedent as well for the future!

The ironic thing is I suggested the idea as it's one I'd have no issue with receiving as well if we did the same.

While Polaris personally doesn't care about the terms, we will do all we can to help them be applied.

 

You do realize that the majority of NPO's nations over 100k (pre war) have fought in this war right? Your post would make sense if they had hid their entire upper tier in PM, but that is not the case. 

 

Besides that, let's not pretend that NpO hasn't done this same thing in the past (or isn't doing it now in this war.) 3 of your top 4 nations haven't fought a war yet in this war, and in previous losing wars people like President Pierce never used to leave peace mode. We aren't idiots Dajobo, these arguments aren't fooling anyone.

[Dajobo]

 

You do realize that the majority of NPO's nations over 100k (pre war) have fought in this war right? Your post would make sense if they had hid their entire upper tier in PM, but that is not the case. 

 

Besides that, let's not pretend that NpO hasn't done this same thing in the past (or isn't doing it now in this war.) 3 of your top 4 nations haven't fought a war yet in this war, and in previous losing wars people like President Pierce never used to leave peace mode. We aren't idiots Dajobo, these arguments aren't fooling anyone.

We keep our senator and there will always be a few who for one reason or another cant fight. Nobody has an issue with that in any alliance.

 

Lets see that majority number tested though :D

 

Kingdom of Dark is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013.
Dorsai is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/2/2013.
Española is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013.
Sludgeville is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013.
Magusland is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/4/2013.
Wilsonovia is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013.
Urth. is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/1/2013.
Tiamathia is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/2/2013.
aodhtopia is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/1/2013.
Cyrene is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/2/2013.
Delray Beach is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/3/2013.
Empire Of SVB is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/2/2013.
soviet new france is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013.
p.o.i is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/2/2013.
Land O Chile is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/2/2013.
Suttonia is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013.
ROMA CAPUT MUNDI is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/3/2013.
Itally is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013.
Nevindia is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/1/2013.
Cirith Ungol is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/1/2013.
NeoTokyo II is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/10/2013.
Cuatela is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/30/2013.
Shai Halud is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013.
NewHeavens is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/1/2013.
Wirdian is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013.
Portland is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/2/2013.
Hamlin is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/2/2013.
Polish Sausage is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/10/2013.
Hvamsfjordhur is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/3/2013.
Jasmines Jewels is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/1/2013.
Time and Space is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/2/2013.
Hyperborea is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/2/2013.
Time and Space is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/2/2013.
Hyperborea is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/2/2013.
Nidaj is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/2/2013.

[Letum]

I praise you, Dajobo, for having the moral tenacity to stand up for your beliefs in public. I have no moral qualms against harsh reps (only practical considerations against obvious damage to my alliance), however I would like to eenquire about parts of your argument I don't find logical:

 

I'll be quite clear on this. This is not some vendetta or act of spite or revenge. We didn't ask for reps because we don't want reps. We have no desire to profit at NPO's expense and we have no desire to punish them for defending an ally. We do however want to see a practice that happens over and over and over addressed. This business of using other peoples NS to fight while you forever protect your own is disgusting. NPO will keep these nations in peace mode for as long as it takes during war without complaint, because a reduced profit is nothing. They will happily keep them in Peace Mode for a few more months as well if the war hasn't ended, and still wont have any complaint.

I would like to ask how exactly does this argument of "not fighting" reconcile with us doing 9m of damage to your coalition, or indeed how does it account for the large majority of our top tier nations who did indeed fight (2/3).

After all, I would assume that "avoiding damage" only becomes relevant to the people defending us from damage if said avoiding of damage means also avoiding dealing out damage; but since our ability to deal our large levels of damage is quite aptly demonstrated, that would not be the case there. I would assume for example, that this is why there's no issue with TOP having kept 1/3 of their alliance in PM since the start of the war; their Damage ratio is so good, that it doesn't really matter, does it?

If instead "avoiding damage" is disliked because there is a certain level of damage desired in the context of removing future threats, and failing to do so leads to other ways of trying to pressure an alliance (including longer wars), then I can better see the logic in your reasoning.

 

So tell me if the war went for a few more months what effect will it have on those nations hiding in peace mode?
Tell me how much aid will they send to there members or allies over that few months from peace mode?
 
Now do the same maths on if there was peace tomorrow and those same top nations stay in peace mode.
Will they collect more or less as the GRL falls?
Will they send less aid?

The cost of peace terms is not measured by comparing it to the cost of continued war; it is measured by comparing it to the cost of peace with no terms.

If we are going to start determining the "harshness" level of peace dependent on if it is worse than continued war or not, then no peace would ever be harsh, because nobody would accept a peace that is worse than a continued war.

If you honestly disagree that the imposition of aid restrictions is harsh and punitive, then I should refer you to the reaction of the people on the losing side of the previous war when aid restrictions were offered as a possible term.

 

Absolutely Polaris is using it's power and position to help those alliances who do wish to impose these terms. Those same alliances used theirs to help us remove a threat and we have a debt to them for that. I make no apology for it either as it's the right thing to do. Why would many of these alliances even help us when they aren't allied to us if we weren't prepared to try and help them see there goals reached as well?

You are correct, there is nothing morally wrong about this, just as there is nothing wrong about imposing harsh terms in the first place. I am glad someone has the backbone to stand up for what they believe in in public, rather than just try and dodge all responsibility out of fear of bad PR.
 

In summery I personally suggested this term because I think it is appropriate. I hope it sets a precedent as well for the future!
The ironic thing is I suggested the idea as it's one I'd have no issue with receiving as well if we did the same.
While Polaris personally doesn't care about the terms, we will do all we can to help them be applied.

You might just get to set a precedent, at least until this happens too many times and people get tired of it. I'm afraid however that it probably won't be used the way you envisage and forced PM will just be applied across the board (first to nations that cycle, and then to any nation in an upper tier). But regardless, that is a far off thing, and not relevant to this situation.

 

Lets see that majority number tested though

At the start of this war, NPO had 60 nations over 80k NS (total 611k tech) and 106 over 50k NS (total 852k tech)

Now this is: 22 over 80k NS (total 213k tech) and 39 over 50k NS (total 303k tech)

[Mogar]

Arcades hiding in PM? I'm disappointed.

[Hereno]

convoluted feces here

 

1. TOP has more nations in long-term PM than NPO does and they're both on the "winning side" and don't use banks.

2. You don't give a fuck about NPO's allies. Get bent, turd.

3. We're not going to let you treat our allies like shit for defending us and your strategy of trying to divide a coalition more united than yours is dumb.

4. Thank you for admitting that this is just you all trying to get at NPO and had nothing to do with NSO being a threat to anyone.

[The Zigur]

 

1. TOP has more nations in long-term PM than NPO does and they're both on the "winning side" and don't use banks.

2. You don't give a $%&@ about NPO's allies. Get bent, turd.

3. We're not going to let you treat our allies like !@#$ for defending us and your strategy of trying to divide a coalition more united than yours is dumb.

4. Thank you for admitting that this is just you all trying to get at NPO and had nothing to do with NSO being a threat to anyone.

 

1. Such attitude

2. Very mad

3. So defeat

4. Wow

Edited January 9, 2014 by Tywin Lannister

[Krashnaia]

Well, last Global War was way, way shorter than most of the people around here wanted it to be. So it makes sense that the current war lags way, way longer than the average Global War.

 

I also think that reps are retarded, and in this case, that reps aimed at discouraging the use of Peace Mode are double retarded. Because Peace Mode provides over 50% of all the debate during any Global War. Without it, what would we be arging about? The OWF would surely die.

[Jesse End]

We keep our senator and there will always be a few who for one reason or another cant fight. Nobody has an issue with that in any alliance.

 

Lets see that majority number tested though :D

 

Kingdom of Dark is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013.
Dorsai is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/2/2013.
Española is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013.
Sludgeville is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013.
Magusland is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/4/2013.
Wilsonovia is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013.
Urth. is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/1/2013.
Tiamathia is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/2/2013.
aodhtopia is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/1/2013.
Cyrene is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/2/2013.
Delray Beach is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/3/2013.
Empire Of SVB is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/2/2013.
soviet new france is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013.
p.o.i is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/2/2013.
Land O Chile is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/2/2013.
Suttonia is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013.
ROMA CAPUT MUNDI is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/3/2013.
Itally is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013.
Nevindia is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/1/2013.
Cirith Ungol is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/1/2013.
NeoTokyo II is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/10/2013.
Cuatela is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/30/2013.
Shai Halud is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013.
NewHeavens is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/1/2013.
Wirdian is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013.
Portland is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/2/2013.
Hamlin is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/2/2013.
Polish Sausage is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/10/2013.
Hvamsfjordhur is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/3/2013.
Jasmines Jewels is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/1/2013.
Time and Space is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/2/2013.
Hyperborea is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/2/2013.
Time and Space is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/2/2013.
Hyperborea is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/2/2013.
Nidaj is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/2/2013.

 

Let's do the same thing with TOP

 

Loli Loli Loli is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013.
Bauhaus is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013.
Kanto is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013.
Malatose is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013.
GoGoGadgetNation is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/30/2013.
Whiffle Land is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/30/2013.
Lan Castor is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/2/2013.
Ruushian is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/1/2013.
Nation of Jenko is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/30/2013.
Douala is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/30/2013.
Crunch is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/30/2013.
Stenzania is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/30/2013.
Aishwarya is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/30/2013.
Belegost is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/26/2013.
Ragedom is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/1/2013.
Procrastinator is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013.
Roman Federation is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/30/2013.
Teutonica is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013.
Republic of Valinor is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013.
Malinas is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013.
Khesed is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013.
Vakadonia is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013.
Murmurandia is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013.
Outer Heaven is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013.
Gomorrah is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/30/2013.
CaffeinatedContinent is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013.
Hillbillia is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013.
Slapper Nation is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/30/2013.
Nation of Amestris is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/18/2013.
3 Headed Monkey Land is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/1/2013.
Nova Quintus is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013.

 

TOP has 52 nations in war mode, 50 in peace mode for 49% in peace mode

NPO has 202 nations in war mode, 87 in peace mode for 30% in peace mode

 

Since you're here, let's also compare NPO -> NpO wars vs NpO -> NPO, just for fun

 

612 wars declared by Pacifica against Polar since Nov 3, 2013

330 wars declared by Polar against Pacifica since Nov 3, 2013

[Gumpper]

 

Facts and shit

Shhh Shh...

 

Jesse we don't just throw facts and figures out there.  That might allow people to think for themselves.. We need to lure them in with speculation and mis direction...

 

Edit:  Too fucking long

Edited January 9, 2014 by Gumpper

[Schattenmann]

I can appreciate the altruistic and enthusiastic overtures of an eager greenhorn, but if NPO is looking for a Master Negotiator then I would suggest OsRavan. Os has the time on hand, he is a great friend to Pacifica, and he has an excellent record of negotiating, which I can attest to personally:

[18:05] <OsRavan[ODN]> Sorry, an unofficial peace thing just isn't going to happen. If you want out of the whole war im willing to listen as I said. And I dont think we will make it unussualy difficult for you to surrender. But 0 interest in pretending we are not at war when we are.
[18:06] <Schattenmann> OsRavan, GOONS wants $400,000,000 and a 5-act, 20-scene Shakespearean play. It's not happening. (from a 20-nation AA)
[18:08] <OsRavan[ODN]> Our stance is pretty simple. When you are ready to surrender we will help you get out as painlessly as possible. Until then we will fight as hard as we can. Can't get more straight forward than that.
[18:18] <OsRavan[ODN]> based on goons demands you will likely have to pay something
[18:19] <Schattenmann> How much do you think CoJ owes GOONS?
[18:20] <OsRavan[ODN]> no clue, ive no connection to GOONS. I dont know what damage you have done to them what they are asking of others etc etc. Not really my buisness tbh. But ive led a dozen peace negotiations. If you try to run back and forth between all the alliances you want to surrender to you wont acomplish much. Sit down with everyone in a room, make it clear what you think you want to give

The Negotiations
[18:40] <OsRavan[ODN]> so simply pay the 400 mil then

And let's not forget the offer to end the EQ war with 100,000 tech from ODN.

We can have this whole thing signed, sealed, & delivered within 2 days with the patented OsRavan Give-This-Man-His-Money Negotiating System.

Edited January 9, 2014 by Schattenmann