The Zigur Posted January 28, 2014 Report Share Posted January 28, 2014 If NPO's got a gig coming up, who are we to refuse to spot a bro? Creatine just doesn't cut it nowadays. It's all about the marginal gains. One more set, NPO, okay, bro? You're lookin' as ripped as one of Hulk Hogan's shirts. Great job bro Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luckao Posted January 28, 2014 Report Share Posted January 28, 2014 (edited) Great job bro Yea, bro? You should grab a towel and hit the bench some time. The long-winded drivel tells me that the cardio's there, but we need to put something more substantial on you. Two rules to remember when you bench with The Luckster, bro. Bring a towel Don't talk Good luck, bro. Edited January 28, 2014 by Luckao Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted January 28, 2014 Report Share Posted January 28, 2014 You have just conducted a spy operation against the nation of Kamel. In the attack your spy efforts were successful as your spies were able to gather the following information about the nation: Total Money: $1,408,947,418 you can't tell me this is an abnormal nation down here in the low tier, I've yet to find one below 250 mil, so I am not really sure those 16 nations are going to make or break NPO's recovery. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted January 28, 2014 Report Share Posted January 28, 2014 Yea, bro? You should grab a towel and hit the bench some time. The long-winded drivel tells me that the cardio's there, but we need to put something more substantial on you. Two rules to remember when you bench with The Luckster, bro. Bring a towelDon't talk Good luck, bro. This is R&R getting in over their head in December: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BmU8PCq5h0&sns=em Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorSoul Posted January 28, 2014 Report Share Posted January 28, 2014 This is R&R getting in over their head in December: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BmU8PCq5h0&sns=em I think you're going to need to go ahead and bow to Luckao's superior wit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luckao Posted January 28, 2014 Report Share Posted January 28, 2014 Yea. get down and do it. Also, why don't you give me 10 push-ups whilst you're down there, Gandhi. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted January 28, 2014 Report Share Posted January 28, 2014 Yea. get down and do it. Also, why don't you give me 10 push-ups whilst you're down there, Gandhi. Sure you wanna go toe to toe?http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZSv4HlyfIo&sns=em Too much weights, not enough speedwork. Useless prick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luckao Posted January 28, 2014 Report Share Posted January 28, 2014 Sure you wanna go toe to toe?http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZSv4HlyfIo&sns=em Too much weights, not enough speedwork. Useless prick. Woahhhh, bro. You trippin'? Put the 5s down and take a breath. How about we let sense prevail by working our great muscle of all - the brain. That's right, kids. The brain is also a muscle. Don't forget to exercise yours by doing your homework, turning off the TV every now and then, and not engaging in senseless acts of violence. Have a great day. Kind regards, Luckao Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schattenmann Posted January 28, 2014 Report Share Posted January 28, 2014 (edited) Its good of Farrin to post this, if nothing else so everyone knows where people stand as opposed to rumors. White Majic.... If this isnt about trying to 'cripple' NPO post war.. then here's what I don't get. Why are you signalling NPO out? Theyve taken as much damage as anyone else? They were not the cause of the CB that started this war. They've done nothing but honor their MDP and conduct themselves as we expect an alliance with honor to conduct themselves. So, why do THEY get the unusual terms? And dont say its because they've 'hid people in pm'. I dont see you demanding those terms of any other alliances that have nations in pm. (I wont get into the hypocrisy that you ALSO have those nations, since thats a different topic i suppose.) What annoys me personally (and im just speaking personally here) about your stance is not that as victors you are demanding terms.... you have a right to demand what you want and we have a right to refuse them and we see where things end up. No, its the BS you are coating it in. We all know its not because you think your terms are reasonable (if you did it would have been what you demanded of everyone). We all know its not because of your CB. And we all know its not because of anything NPO has actually done. Heh, one thing you could always respect MK for... like them or hate them... is they called a spade a spade. Are you doing this as an excuse to drag the war out? A lot of your side has stated they want the war to go into February. Are you just offering ridiculous terms (I wont get into the whole 'not allowed to surrender bs you pulled earlier) since you know they wont be accepted and you get the war length you want? Is it to try and cripple NPO post war cause you view them as a threat? Whatever it is, instead of feeding people sop that these are reasonable terms you would offer any alliance who did what NPO did (hint: you havent demanded it of anyone else) man up, cut the BS, and lay the cards on the table. ::snorts at tywin::. What was that? Did you literally just ignore every point I made and referred to someone elses post? Ohh. Another point of amusement. I know for a fact that both TOP and Umbrella (I was in a coalition gov with them last war) made it clear THEY would never accept any terms that included forced war for their nations or forced PM. I'm sure if you catch an honest one they admit they wouldnt accept the terms they are offering either. Now, nothing says they can't be hypocritical I suppose. But I still find it amusing when alliances start demanding terms of others they themselves would be outraged to accept. While you CAN do that... a *smart* alliance leader that finds themselves in a situation of demanding what they wouldn't accept will pause and go "hey, wait a second. Maybe long term this isn't the smartest bet for me." One other random note: Reparations have become a cultural no-no for us. But I ask. What is this other than trying to get the impact of reparations without using the dreaded word? No one wants to say they are demanding reps, cause of the OWF backlash. All well and good. But I ask you, what are terms except a way of getting reps without saying the word reps? Essentially what I see here, are people trying to do what got reps condemned but do it in such a way that they can spin it as being "terms, not reps". What happened to "we want a war to be a war. Everyone comes in, fights honorably, then we move on. We WANT people to be able to rebuild, because the last thing this world needs is drawn out terms that chase nations away, shrinks the community, and makes people hesitate more about actually fighting or doing anything interested." I would actually, again, have more respect for top/umbrella/polar if they actually came out and admitted some of this. This is great stuff. An anti-reps, anti-extended war rant coming from the guy who gleefully held his gun behind NPO and allies' heads while shaking us down for $2,000,000,000 in reps and an extended war. Peace Achieved4) All MCXA and ODN/BFF nations shall peace out their wars. MCXA shall then provide a list of ten nations in the 65k-plus NS range and ten nations in the 10k-30k NS range to engage in a duel with ODN and BFF. These nations may each be attacked for a length of time not to exceed one round of war by a like number of ODN or BFF nations (up to ten 65k-plus NS and ten 10k-30k ns). This duel shall not start until any wars currently active on the above nations are peaced out. All nations fighting may receive or send aid. For it before you were against it, huh? Go home. Edited January 28, 2014 by Schattenmann Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Opportunity Posted January 28, 2014 Report Share Posted January 28, 2014 Tell us all of these great lies. NoR happens to be one of the alliances he is talking about. He isn't lying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurunin Posted January 28, 2014 Report Share Posted January 28, 2014 Oh you'll be happy to know then that we've offered to accept terms that don't allow those nations to receive any aid, only send it. That was rejected by your coalition. i do believe the reason it would be rejected is due to NPO's actions in the past of cannibalizing their nations to boost up other nations. If these...32 was it? are allowed to send, not receive, what's to stop NPO from using the same practice they've used on a few circumstances in the past? then again, I'm not part of any peace talks, nor this war for that matter. just my .02 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goldie Posted January 28, 2014 Report Share Posted January 28, 2014 Farrin: The Walking Dude! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baldr Posted January 28, 2014 Report Share Posted January 28, 2014 From what I've heard, the offered terms require NPO nations who were in peace mode throughout the war to remain in peace mode for an extended period of time. That may not be entirely accurate, as I don't hang out in the back rooms and such, but that's my understanding.It seems to me that if NPO is required to do that, TOP should be required to do the same, considering half of their AA has been in peace mode the entire war. And TOP were the agressors, the ones that started the ware. NPO only joined due to treaty ties, to defend their ally. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Opportunity Posted January 28, 2014 Report Share Posted January 28, 2014 NPO only joined due to treaty ties, to defend their ally. That's the thing... the reason for the war has been neutralized, yet the conclusion of the war seems to hinge on the actions of an alliance that simply acted honorably on a treaty. The NpO coalition is really overstepping their bounds here. They should simply offer white peace and walk away now that they have accomplished their original goal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trimm Posted January 28, 2014 Report Share Posted January 28, 2014 That's the thing... the reason for the war has been neutralized, yet the conclusion of the war seems to hinge on the actions of an alliance that simply acted honorably on a treaty. The NpO coalition is really overstepping their bounds here. They should simply offer white peace and walk away now that they have accomplished their original goal. Yknow, people keep saying this, and it is flat wrong. Alliances enter into a coalition for multiple reasons, and just because Polar got what it wanted vis a vis NSO doesn't mean that theirs was the only desire driving this coalition. And given the way NPO acted towards the coalition in EQ, that should not be an unfamiliar concept to anyone in Pacifica. Nor should the fact that EQ left a whole lot of people with some axes to grind where the Order was involved. It is politics people, not a popularity contest. NPO sowed into the wind last war, now here comes the whirlwind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Izuzu Posted January 28, 2014 Report Share Posted January 28, 2014 If NPO had approached the war as its peers did, it would have received the same treatment as the others- we have been ready to peace them out since mid december. You didn't and so there was disagreement on how to handle you. That you have terms has nothing to do with who you are, only how you have fought the war. So the alliance that has received more damage and dealt more damage than any other alliance in this conflict has not fought to an adequate standard? More than 85% of its nations have engaged in battle, but is not fighting to an acceptable standard? And, of course, this is an alliance that is not (based on the original CB) central to the conflict? Let's just cut the bullshit, shall we? Jeez, with all the butthurt, you'd think we were pushing for disbandment or some !@#$. Get the hell over yourselves Pacifica. The issue is that a supposedly secondary combatant, that entered via a MDP is the focus of riciculously harsh terms. I understand that this entire war was aimed at us, but has it ever been acknowledged as such. (Forgive me, but I don't often wear my wading boots and don't have occasion to traverse the cesspool that is the OWF, so I may have missed the statement of NPO being the primary target of this whole engagement.) It's really kind of funny. I was an extremely vocal defendant of Djabo and Polar back in the VE conflict (Roq actually cited me individually for the preempt action Pacifica.) And now I see Djabo pulling the same kind of crap that was lobbed against him and Polar back then. Ironic, eh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holy Ruler Posted January 28, 2014 Report Share Posted January 28, 2014 Polar, being the coalition voice in negotiation logs I've seen here, come out looking like petty bullies. Also, lol at the 'but you can keep 33 nations from aiding and recover' argument. We know they can, but why should they? We will see who blinks first because we will all stand by NPO until they feel they want to peace out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minion Rouse Posted January 28, 2014 Report Share Posted January 28, 2014 So the alliance that has received more damage and dealt more damage than any other alliance in this conflict has not fought to an adequate standard? More than 85% of its nations have engaged in battle, but is not fighting to an acceptable standard? And, of course, this is an alliance that is not (based on the original CB) central to the conflict? Let's just cut the !@#$%^&*, shall we? The issue is that a supposedly secondary combatant, that entered via a MDP is the focus of riciculously harsh terms. I understand that this entire war was aimed at us, but has it ever been acknowledged as such. (Forgive me, but I don't often wear my wading boots and don't have occasion to traverse the cesspool that is the OWF, so I may have missed the statement of NPO being the primary target of this whole engagement.) It's really kind of funny. I was an extremely vocal defendant of Djabo and Polar back in the VE conflict (Roq actually cited me individually for the preempt action Pacifica.) And now I see Djabo pulling the same kind of crap that was lobbed against him and Polar back then. Ironic, eh? You admit to being uninformed and yet you still make accusations about the things you are uninformed about. It has been stated that even though NPO was not the focus of the initial declaration, they were still the main target of many members of the coalition, excluding Polaris. And if it was solely up to Dajobo, there would not have been any terms. But such is the fate of a coalition leader. Get stuck with the blame regardless of guilt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farrin Xies Posted January 28, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2014 (edited) The mighty Emperor of the New Pacific Order is wearing no clothes, no clothes at all, all his cronies clamber to tell him how wonderful he looks today, but still he is naked. This thread contains no ''clarification of policy'' just another naked drive by displaying his rather unimpressive assets. The New Pacific Order is clearly winning the war, and should not under any circumstances surrender whilst they remain in a winning position. Resolve is strong within their circle of allies, morale is unprecedented, and onwards they march to certain victory united under the banner of Farrin. Talk of surrender should be pushed aside and all should gaze upon the beautiful new clothes of the Emperor who leads his charges to glory. Everyone is having so much fun I will be surprised if there is ever a resolution, for why would you end a war you are clearly winning, why would you end a war in which everyone is celebrating their freedoms to remain in peace mode and apparently enjoying it and why would you ever under any circumstances consider seeking surrender terms when you are wearing such a pretty suit. I look forward to seeing the terms the New Pacific Order is prepared to offer the New Polar Order when we inevitably surrender, I just hope Farrin finds some even newer clothes by then. Well, we did offer white peace...[ooc]So, is it considered an OOC attack to put down my "assets?" :P[/ooc]Edit: Typing be hard Edited January 28, 2014 by Farrin Xies Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoskia Posted January 28, 2014 Report Share Posted January 28, 2014 Can we not do this Seeing the crocodile tears of Pacifica? No, I can't pretend that I'm blind and I don't see their crocodile tears. It is not my fault that they decided that their high tier nations were simply going to spend the war in Peace Mode and then get white peace. I can't be blind and ignore the cynism in the words of Farrin Xies & Red. Yeah, I got that they want to get out of this war with their "banks" untouched... it's not going to happen. If it's not war, then it's the terms that will touch them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted January 28, 2014 Report Share Posted January 28, 2014 Seeing the crocodile tears of Pacifica?No, I can't pretend that I'm blind and I don't see their crocodile tears. It is not my fault that they decided that their high tier nations were simply going to spend the war in Peace Mode and then get white peace. I can't be blind and ignore the cynism in the words of Farrin Xies & Red.Yeah, I got that they want to get out of this war with their "banks" untouched... it's not going to happen.If it's not war, then it's the terms that will touch them. You probably belong in MI6 more than Polar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Letum Posted January 28, 2014 Report Share Posted January 28, 2014 Yeah, I got that they want to get out of this war with their "banks" untouched... it's not going to happen.If it's not war, then it's the terms that will touch them. We have counter-offered terms that only "touch" the nations in peacemode (i.e, no tech received). The other side insists on trying to push terms that damage the 250 other nations in the NPO instead, so that rather invalidates the point that it is about "peacemode". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted January 28, 2014 Report Share Posted January 28, 2014 I think the discussion should really be about how poor leadership has put NPO in such a bad position politically. If NPO truly did not desire the Umbrella terms during the last war, Brehon should have allowed another alliance to present them. Unfortunately, Brehon's hubris overruled any moral qualms he had about harsh terms. You cant shrug that responsibility off on someone else. Stepping down does not erase his embodiment of the Order at the time of the negotiations. Farrin has revealed a similar weakness, and when he steps down, Red probably will too. Again, the Emperor embodies the Body Republic, and the lack of core philosophy and good leadership will haunt NPO for years to come. This is the price of returning to Moo style leadership. Hungering for the power and glory of old without understanding what actually enabled it is a recipe for destruction and failure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azaghul Posted January 28, 2014 Report Share Posted January 28, 2014 So the alliance that has received more damage and dealt more damage than any other alliance in this conflict has not fought to an adequate standard? It's a bit disingenuous to throw out facts like this without mentioning that NPO is the 2nd biggest alliance in this war, and by far the biggest on the losing side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Ilyani Posted January 28, 2014 Report Share Posted January 28, 2014 From what I've heard, the offered terms require NPO nations who were in peace mode throughout the war to remain in peace mode for an extended period of time. That may not be entirely accurate, as I don't hang out in the back rooms and such, but that's my understanding. It seems to me that if NPO is required to do that, TOP should be required to do the same, considering half of their AA has been in peace mode the entire war. And TOP were the agressors, the ones that started the ware. NPO only joined due to treaty ties, to defend their ally. Holy shit, I haven't heard something so dumb on the OWF in a while, and that's saying a lot given the contents of this thread. You do understand there are victorious and defeated parties here, yes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.