brucemania Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 (edited) This is correct I believe. You have indeed had many of your upper tier who fought. That is why terms were offered that does nothing to those people. You have indeed had at least 150 fighting, out of a starting number of 270 ish from memory. How many others have had that percentage at least fighting? To answer your question, I suspect all of them. no actually you are saying that 33 have not fought .. meaning that even your memory numbers we have had 227 nations fighting ...then if you understand as well we have had so many nations fight when then any terms why not move on .. i mean even somewere before this war started someone from your AA mentioned that maybe war between us would help cure animosity between us too and after who knows maybe we can talk to mend differences .. but then here you go and give us terms which indicate something different. As well sure banks acquire tech ... they do need to defend themselves if they a rogue hits them. I mean simple easy explanation... but then i am sure one would not think even though one is not at war during a global conflict things do happen in peacetime as well. (Dajobo this off topic your post was refering to something said earlier) Edited January 30, 2014 by brucemania Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 Thoroughly comical though it may be, the propaganda geared toward making TOP appear a vicious puppetmaster is a tad flattering; we're glad so many people think so highly of our oratorical abilities. That said, trying to sway opinion by accusing alliances of being manipulated is exactly the sort of maladroit bumbling I'd expect from the poster to whom I'm currently responding; implying that people are mindless dunces isn't likely to make them feel friendly (of course, this would require them to care about what he says in the first place, and they almost certainly don't).I was joking; otherwise I would have said Feanor instead of SJ, Cent, and iat. Jesus Christ you need to lighten up. One side is using propaganda, the other side won the war.Leave it to your betters, kid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brucemania Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 Looking at the time stamps seems to support that it was a rage quit, even if Farrin played nice this time. figure the best reply to your posting is correcting something for you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 figure the best reply to your posting is correcting something for you Awesome photoshop skills bro. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brucemania Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 (edited) Awesome photoshop skills bro. bad posting deserves bad photo shop work ... just saying :).. and of course i am a genius :) Edited January 30, 2014 by brucemania Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 (edited) nvm Edited January 30, 2014 by Tywin Lannister Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshuaR Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 Caliph, you have disproved nothing. Grub of course has said it how it is. Those selected PM nations of NPO must either leave PM and fight, or NPO will be forced to take a penalty that will approximate that action. However, it's not reps because it's not at all exactly like how UMB PM nations were forced to come out and take their beating. It doesn't approximate the action. As I've said a million times already, fighting would have cost hundreds of billions whereas not fighting will cost about $10B ($5B not counting inflation if you want numbers we are all used to!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Hakai Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 Ha, what a waste of time. HEH! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YOLO SWAG Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 Ha, what a waste of time. HEH! Don't tell me you actually read all this drivel. :3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brucemania Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 nvm finally speechless we can rest in peace :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 finally speechless we can rest in peace :) Speechless in the face of the Modern Pacifican Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brucemania Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 (edited) Speechless in the face of the Modern Pacifican am i ever cute :) .. thanks :) .. and finally someone realizes we are the modern NPO and not the old :) And what i am saying to you is that in todays world one needs to move on meaning that thinking we are the NPO of old and forcing these terms on us it is not doing anyone no good. We learned after the DH war that we do need to change and become more open and not become the evil we once were but yet after that it still seems it is being held against and we are still paying for it one way or the other even after the record reps of Karma. And no i am not saying that these are reps being enforced currently but the terms still show the old draconian thought of yesteryear Edited January 30, 2014 by brucemania Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamthey Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 But just because the word reparation is out of favour these days doesn't mean the terms demanded are not reparations. No one is demanding the forced transfer of tech. That established, feel free to make yourself feel better by entertaining whatever semantic gymnastics you need to in describing what we're doing. I don't think there has ever been a surrender agreement, short of white peace, that didn't carry with it the resistance of the defeated party; that you don't enjoy your ally's circumstance is to be expected and has been duly noted by the powers that be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USMC123 Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 Is this thread is like the bad poster reunion or something? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Opportunity Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 Jesse, doesn't that also work the other way as well? Just because you think the terms are unreasonable does not make them so. I question NPO's motivations, I dont think you guys actually think these terms are terrible. I think you are just too prideful to allow a bunch of people you dont like tell you what to do. (which I dont blame them for, because I am the same way) The terms are terrible because NPO is only in this war from a MDP, and shouldn't be having special terms levied against it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brucemania Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 Calling a shovel a spade does not change a shovel into a spade. Reparations are material/financial in nature. That is the definition of reparations. These are peace terms. Terms of surrender if you will, because you have lost the war. I am not sure why this is a hard concept to grasp. Caliph just cause someone loses a war why should they be held on terms. Is the point of a war to win to make amends for wrong doings .. knock the crap out of each other then after have a beer and talk things out to work at better relationships and communication. As usually the cause of a war is bad communication to begin with. By imposing any terms does that not actually hamper alliances from moving on to different things. Are we not suppose to work on old held grudges work them out and move on. Maybe in the past terms or reps may have been warranted but is war in modern times a matter of correcting a wrong and then correcting by better communication then letting people move on to grow and prosper until the next conflict. By giving terms such as what is being done now not hamper the future causing more resentment and taking two steps back instead of that step forward. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Hakai Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 Don't tell me you actually read all this drivel. :3 I check in once in a while to make sure the BS is still going Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azaghul Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 Extortion is extortion whether it's 8 days or 80 days. That word is not applicable at all, and I think that you know it, which means you are being blatantly dishonest. The fact that you are NPO's leader just makes it worse. The dishonesty and crocodile tears from NPO in this discussion really makes it hard for anyone who might have been sympathetic of your situation to be sympathetic towards you. Or lenient, if they are the ones with that power. Refusing to take punitive terms as a matter of principle is one thing. That is something that I can respect. Your antics in this thread I can not. There is absolutely no extortion involved and you're being completely dishonest in even propagating this nonsense. To put it very simply, nobody is stipulating that the New Pacific Order pay anyone for any reason. There has been absolutely zero mentioning of reparations throughout the length of the negotiations by anyone except you. It's time to stop putting out these false analogies and relaxing the definition of words to fit whatever it is you hope to accomplish here. It's time to take these negotiations seriously and work toward a deal everybody can agree on instead of insisting on grandstanding upon falsehoods. Well said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brucemania Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 (edited) That word is not applicable at all, and I think that you know it, which means you are being blatantly dishonest. The fact that you are NPO's leader just makes it worse. The dishonesty and crocodile tears from NPO in this discussion really makes it hard for anyone who might have been sympathetic of your situation to be sympathetic towards you. Or lenient, if they are the ones with that power. Refusing to take punitive terms as a matter of principle is one thing. That is something that I can respect. Your antics in this thread I can not. Well said. I dont think he means extortion in the sense we have to pay out .. it is more that you are holding us at bay for terms that say we either do not use our money to rebuild for x amount of time ( the 14 to 20 bil in slot use ....or if we run like normal slot use maybe 10 to 15 or 16) regardless of the amount and if it is being payed out that is still a figure that you extorting unless we do not agree to your terms. extortion does not necessary mean something as a payout to get something but it can also be through action to get something as well .. meaning your holding a gun to our heads to achieve a end to this on your terms that are deemed a high cost cause effect the true peace does not come into fruitation until the terms are meet 4 months down the road Edited January 30, 2014 by brucemania Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azaghul Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 (edited) I dont think he means extortion in the sense we have to pay out .. it is more that you are holding us at bay for terms that say we either do not use our money to rebuild for x amount of time ( the 14 to 20 bil in slot use ....or if we run like normal slot use maybe 10 to 15 or 16) regardless of the amount and if it is being payed out that is still a figure that you extorting unless we do not agree to your terms. extortion does not necessary mean something as a payout to get something but it can also be through action to get something as well .. meaning your holding a gun to our heads to achieve a end to this on your terms that are deemed a high cost cause effect the true peace does not come into fruitation until the terms are meet 4 months down the road (bolding mine) Than it is not extortion. There is no "other sense" of the word. We are not deriving any direct benefit, thus it is not extortion. Edited January 30, 2014 by Azaghul Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brucemania Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 (edited) (bolding mine) Than it is not extortion. There is no "other sense" of the word. We are not deriving any direct benefit, thus it is not extortion. sure you are gaining benefit .. it means you are stunting our growth for the next 4 months and considering we are now having global conflicts every four to six months it seems.. it does give you the benefit of making us insignificant for that conflict if it affects as and we are in it. And no one gives terms if there is no benefit for anyone period. If you did not need some kind of benefit at all then there should be no probs to white peace for this. Personally i think you should go back and watch more Chubby Checker videos and learn to do the twist the right way. here i even found it for ya http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=im9XuJJXylw Edited January 30, 2014 by brucemania Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boston Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 (edited) Looking at the time stamps seems to support that it was a rage quit, even if Farrin played nice this time. Not sure what the time stamp relevance is. Hes at war not jerkin around, he brought what he had, it was rejected and he politely exited back to the drawing boards. In my opinion both sides were way too polite. In regards to Farrin's exit, it was business; why waste his or anyone else's time until he had their counter? Ohhhhh also build some of that infra stuff so people can then destroy it Edited January 30, 2014 by Boston Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 are people still unironically giving Tywin the time of day? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goldie Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 no actually you are saying that 33 have not fought .. meaning that even your memory numbers we have had 227 nations fighting ...then if you understand as well we have had so many nations fight when then any terms why not move on .. i mean even somewere before this war started someone from your AA mentioned that maybe war between us would help cure animosity between us too and after who knows maybe we can talk to mend differences .. but then here you go and give us terms which indicate something different. As well sure banks acquire tech ... they do need to defend themselves if they a rogue hits them. I mean simple easy explanation... but then i am sure one would not think even though one is not at war during a global conflict things do happen in peacetime as well. (Dajobo this off topic your post was refering to something said earlier) Definitely one of my favorite things about NPO. They have "banks" but those banks spend all war not aiding anyone. I'm as close as VE has to a bank, I sit in war mode and drop hundreds of millions in aid during a war. NPO has Senators they need to keep out of war so they can remain Senators. Well, red team's 100th biggest nation is 40k, and I'm pretty sure NPO could coordinate it with its members to not have senate options on. Meanwhile, I'm a Senator on a sphere that has an actual top tier, and I fight every war. I find it incredibly hard to believe that an alliance as successful as NPO can run itself internally so unsuccessfully as to mandate that people actually sit out of a war in order to have them send cash out after it. I mean, I could fight for months more on my average warchest and still be able to aid bomb for the entire time, and however long my alliance needs me to afterward. I find it hard to believe NPO can't do the same thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boston Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 are people still unironically giving Tywin the time of day? I dont know if your familiar with the Man Bear Pig episode of South Park but basically Al Gore = Tywin. 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.