A Message from the Emperor of the New Pacific Order

[Opportunity]

I think proportionately there are probably more oAs activated than in a good amount of wars.

 

Polar starts a war and most of their coalition chains in on oAs and THEY want to impose terms on an alliance that came in on an MDP? NPO should give them war until Feb 2015 and break them for it.

[Goldie]

 

Polar starts a war and most of their coalition chains in on oAs and THEY want to impose terms on an alliance that came in on an MDP? NPO should give them war until Feb 2015 and break them for it.

I don't think the 26 fighters on your AA can go on for that long, but hell, if you want to do it I'm fine.

[Opportunity]

I don't think the 26 fighters on your AA can go on for that long, but hell, if you want to do it I'm fine.

 

We're just restocking nukes so we can make you guys glow some more. 

[Centurius]

This war will end with white peace or it will not end at all, if NPO is smart. The TOP/NpO coalition will eventually fall apart.

Guess you're going to be in it for a long while still then.

[Opportunity]

Guess you're going to be in it for a long while still then.

 

I don't think anyone on this side particularly cares, really. As long as NG is in the war, NoR will honor our treaty. And since it's pretty shitty for an aggressive coalition to try to impose reps on an alliance that simply entered on MD, I think the resolve on this side will be pretty hard to break in general. You guys are the bad guys in this war, and everyone knows it.

[hartfw]

 

 

 

3) NPO is the reason umbrella and top got light terms and white peace.  How do I know that?  Well... I was the one to negotiate the change from heavy terms for umbrella and top to white peace.  Me. Not umbrella.  Not TOP.  I spent an insane amount of time negotiation with equilibrium then running back to umbrella mk et all to get their OK on things.  Hell, admin knows you all have made enough propaganda about how I did that and had some secret deal with Brehon and NPO's allies should leave NPO as a result. There was no secret backroom promises by the bye, but I *was* the one to negotiate the peace terms.  Who did I negotiate it with? NPO.  Why?  Because NPO made it clear they disproved of the radical wing of their coalition demanding terms of umbrella.  They were my in to negotiate a better peace.

 

 

 

What?  This is the second head scratcher of a post you have made about last peace deal (the first beingthat Umb would never accept an extended war when they did).  

 

NPO didn't save TOP from any harsh terms whatsoever.  If Brehon told you he did, he was making that up as he went along.  Or you are now.  Because TOP wasn't offered harsh terms by the people fighting them.

 

Brehon made a peace deal for an extended war with Umb, and then brought it back to the Eq coalition, refused to share logs for a while and then took a break from CN thinking peace was done.  During that time a bunch of people were shocked to find they were suddenly supposed to fight an extended war that they hadn't agreed to, and a bunch more had pushed for it but couldn't find the nations to commit.  As such the coalition told Brehon the peace deal he struck all of a sudden and out of the blue was not acceptable, and only then did Brehon go back to change it.

[Caliph]

 

 

As pointed out above, you've been lied to if your gov has told you NPO tried to get you to agree to harsh terms in equilibrium.  In fact, if anything you owe NPO for that war.

 

Another part of the problem Caliph... is that your leaders... yes YOURS... refuse to tell anyone in our coalition what the terms are actually for.  Or why.  You say/imply one thing in here.. but its not what your leaders are saying.  In fact your leaders are saying the reason for the terms are secret and cant be shared.

 

 

You are not telling the full truth.  We [b]accepted[/b] the terms of extended warfare.  We had many internal discussions about the EQ war and those terms.  The only reason EQ didn't carry out the extended war was because of a lack of interest on EQ's side.  NPO could not muster up enough upper tier nations to fight Umbrella for the extended warfare, so Brehon switched gears like a good politician and changed his story to make it sound like it was his idea all along to not go with such terms.  The EQ coalition broke apart in the upper tiers and refused to fight us.  Some of EQ was fine with it, but EQ would have lacked the upper tier strength because upper tier EQ alliances refused to engage us.  That would have resulted in us owning the upper tier again and our lower tiers getting swarmed, esentially an exact continuation of the war.

 

It is not because Brehon was such a nice guy, it was only because EQ lacked enough upper tier nations who were willing to fight us in the extended war to keep us fully engaged.  Without their support an extended warfare on our part would have either forced the whole of EQ upper tier into peace mode or we would have continued to shred them like we had been doing all war.  

[Caliph]

 

 

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.

 

If the winners want to impose terms on a defeated enemy that is up to them to put in place.  There has been too much white peace around here if this is the reaction people give to some of the most lenient terms I have ever seen here.

 

Lets just be honest about the fact that this has nothing to do with NPO's nations in PM.  It's all about the best way to cripple NPO for the longest period of time.  It's penalizing them for being good at rebuilding.  And honestly, you all created that monster by your 3+ year old grudges that you keep festering up every war.

 

If this war has nothing to do with NPO's nations in PM than why are the terms discussed solely about said NPO peace mode nations?

[Opportunity]

...why are the terms discussed solely about said NPO peace mode nations?

 

That's a great question. Why is a non-aggressive alliance being given terms for ending a war declared on another alliance?

Edited January 30, 2014 by Opportunity

[JoshuaR]

 

 

This post and many similar ones accusing NPO of trying to give Umbrella crazy terms. YOu, Joshua R.  A bunch of others.  So.... Ummm.. you are wrong.  How do I know you are wrong?  Well, I was actually at the negotiations for equilibrium peace.  In fact, I represented cng and (in some of them) MK.   There wasnt a peace conversation that occurred in that war I wasnt present for.  In fact, I was the lead person negotiating.  I say that not as an ego rush, but simply to lay out the fact that there's few people in bob currently who have a better idea of what happened in the equilibrium negotiations than I do.

 

So lets clear up a couple of things.

 

1) NPO relaying a demand from a coalition doesnt mean that NPO supported terms.  Unless we are now claiming that say XX (who have been disavowing that the drive for the terms this war comes from them) are actually demanding this of NPO?  Unless your coalition is now claiming that everyone fighting NPO is pushing for terms and approves of them, I'm not sure where you get off claiming NPO was pushing for them.

 

2) Even if NPO had pushed for them (hint, they didnt) what does it matter what someone says at day one of posturing in negotiations compared to what they actually do?  Words are cheap, actions show the truth.

 

3) NPO is the reason umbrella and top got light terms and white peace.  How do I know that?  Well... I was the one to negotiate the change from heavy terms for umbrella and top to white peace.  Me. Not umbrella.  Not TOP.  I spent an insane amount of time negotiation with equilibrium then running back to umbrella mk et all to get their OK on things.  Hell, admin knows you all have made enough propaganda about how I did that and had some secret deal with Brehon and NPO's allies should leave NPO as a result. There was no secret backroom promises by the bye, but I *was* the one to negotiate the peace terms.  Who did I negotiate it with? NPO.  Why?  Because NPO made it clear they disproved of the radical wing of their coalition demanding terms of umbrella.  They were my in to negotiate a better peace.

 

4) Who actually wanted to impose harsh terms on umbrella and top? Most of those alliances are fighting with you to roll NPO right now ironically. And you know it.

 

Nothing wrong with that.  Politics make for odd bed fellows.  But the level of hypocrisy needed to claim that you are doing this for NPO's conduct in equilibrium... when in fact NPO let you off *lightly* while you are fighting with those who didnt want that... its insane.  Seriously. 

 

If anything, I would question the honor of umbrella and top in supporting terms at all on NPO after they stuck their neck out for you.  But again, politics I suppose trumps honor.  At least have the decency to not try and rewrite history in front of the people who... hey... were actually there.

 

If it helps, give me permission and im sure I can dig up some logs of the leader of GOONS and Umbrella talking about using NPO to get themselves white peace because they knew NPO was the part of the coalition pushing for that.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Part of the problem here, is your coalition has refused to tell anyone WHY you are demanding terms.  People say this and that on the OWF.  But when asked blankly, we are told its officially a "secret" why terms are being demanded, and we cant find out until after we agree.

 

For example. You in this post claim your demands are about keeping banks from importing tech.  Yet how do you explain that when NPO offered to let their nations send out aid but not receive it.. i.e not import tech... you declined? 

 

Its difficult to forge a compromise on terms when you wont even tell anyone officially why you are demanding them.  i,e what the motivation is so a compromise can be reached.

 

That's your right.  You dont have to compromise.  But don't act bewildered or lay the blame on anyone else when no progress happens.  YOu wont tell who is demanding terms, and you wont share why you want them.  That makes it difficult for talks to progress.

 

 

 

As pointed out above, you've been lied to if your gov has told you NPO tried to get you to agree to harsh terms in equilibrium.  In fact, if anything you owe NPO for that war.

 

Another part of the problem Caliph... is that your leaders... yes YOURS... refuse to tell anyone in our coalition what the terms are actually for.  Or why.  You say/imply one thing in here.. but its not what your leaders are saying.  In fact your leaders are saying the reason for the terms are secret and cant be shared.

 

 

 

 

You know what would be kind of interesting?  And im actually for this.  Why dont we do negotiations publicly?

 

I know Polar et all will never agree to that. But think for a second.  Why not ask admin to have a thread where only a few reps can post.  And then publicly let people state their position and why, and lay out their logic on the line in front of everyone.

 

1) It would probably breath some life in this community.

 

2) It removes the veil of secrecy.  As ive seen in this very thread... people like to conduct talks in private because they can then hide motivations and fact... from their own alliances, their allies, the general world, etc.  It lets them rewrite history.

 

Well I say... if you are embarrassed to state your demands and your logic in public, that's a sign you shouldnt HAVE Those demands to begin with.

 

Is there any actual logical reason (other than to feed egos) that we couldn't have the negotiations in public, before the eyes of all?  What's there to hide? 

 

I say that as someone who has been in more of these high level negotiations than all but a few people.  There's no REAL need for secrecy, other than that people are worried that their demands or conduct are so outrageous they would take flak if it got out.  Or that they dont match with what they are presenting to others.  Whats so opsec about it otherwise?

0. First of all, I apologize to myself for responding to another NPO/Umbrella post, even though current terms are being offered by alliances that aren't Umbrella and for completely different reasons than the anti-BIBO war where after all Umbrellans fought and WERE crushed and were NOT in peace mode versus this war where people are trying to discourage the use of PM-ing and unnecessarily extending wars that could end in a few weeks instead of several months... but anyhow, I just hate to see someone so misguided he may be misleading others.

 

1. Brehon both represented his coalition and represented his alliance in taking on the role of chief negotiator. Why didn't he let someone else do it? Because he wasn't a peripheral alliance. He was the chief organizer and planner of the entire war. His motivation was both revenge for DH/NPO, but in his own words more because of general insults toward his person from people within Umbrella. You can't pretend that taking on the role of negotiator is merely a grand gesture. Sometimes it is also done because you want to make sure your terms and ideas are the ones presented and agreed to! Many in Equilibrium hated that they didn't get to be a part of negotiations. If Brehon truly wanted to represent his coalition, he wouldn't have tried to keep so many of them out of the loop and without a voice. Don't give me that crap.

 

2. Their actions were to pursue and get whatever they could of those initial talks. Brehon's initial offer was 5 months of zero external aid for Umbrella (maybe also DH as a whole, I forget?). You could say today's terms to NPO are similar, except in one case it was specifically punitive on top of an entire alliance fighting a war (Brehon's offer to Umbrella), versus in this case affecting ONLY the thirty-one nations who did not fight in the war and are not senators.

 

In any case, in those first talks, Brehon also exhibited his willingness to exchange aid restriction for extended war. He kept asking which of those options we wanted. In the end, Umbrella accepted 1 month of war.

 

Why don't you know about it? Well apparently you are so pompous and have such feelings of self-importance that you believe you WERE the key force at every negotiation table and that you WERE present at every negotiation table. (Meanwhile you personally kept proposing that we should offer tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands as tech reparations instead.) Yes you were the key force of light and reason that saved Umbrella from all harm, an alliance you had disliked for months because your ear was tickling Brehon's lips and you believed an enemy over an ally. No, this was a meeting between raken and Brehon. We aren't lying in that we accepted extended war. You are just too ignorant to believe the best (or truly anything better than the worst) when it comes to Umbrella.

 

3. NPO is not the reason Umbrella got white peace. You were not Umbrella's savior. Let me quote a post from a member of the enemy coalition who seems to know what he's talking about: hartfw

 

Brehon made a peace deal for an extended war with Umb, and then brought it back to the Eq coalition, refused to share logs for a while and then took a break from CN thinking peace was done.  During that time a bunch of people were shocked to find they were suddenly supposed to fight an extended war that they hadn't agreed to, and a bunch more had pushed for it but couldn't find the nations to commit.  As such the coalition told Brehon the peace deal he struck all of a sudden and out of the blue was not acceptable, and only then did Brehon go back to change it.

 

 

4. Sure, lots of alliances wanted to impose tough terms. Lots also did not. I'm not arguing that. I'm just explaining to you that NPO was one of those that did!

 

Again, not that that has anything to do with this thread and the negotiations based off of the use of PM and not just an individual's desire to see an alliance crushed.

 

Responding to the second half of your post, OsRaven:

 

Why are these terms being issued? It's no secret. The terms affect the thirty one nations (since we are not counting senators here, and clearly senators get a free pass on using PM) who have been in peace mode for the entire war. In an effort to discourage the use of PM, it was cleverly proposed by a member of an alliance fighting the New Pacific Order that those utilizing such a practice must enjoy it enough they wouldn't mind staying in PM after the war. The number first presented started off as thirty-five, but it has been reduced as people left PM to fight the war. Isn't it then obvious why the terms are being presented? 

--

 

 

Now, for something we agree upon! I would love to see negotiations in public on the OWF in a closed roleplay. For one, it would remove the problem of time zones and reliance on IRC. One would clearly see if Farrin was just refusing to reply or not. Secondly, it would remove the he-said, she-said of people turning what may or may not have happened during negotiations into propaganda. And three, it'd be a lot more fun for those not in upper gov and involved in the talks. I agree with you there! 

 

I find it funny that people think this is going to be the end of NPO, that by doing this you will crush them to nothing.. You can quiet the beast, but you can not kill it...

Only NPO is saying that. Pacifica's rebuilding tier is going to lose $10B in aid from thirty-one nations (really only $5B in numbers we are used to since the aid change came only recently). If their allies loved them so much, they could have taken white peace and each ally promised a few people sending aid to cover the difference. Or, you know, they could still do that, presuming the largest alliance on the other side who is dishing out more damage than receiving STILL can't handle it.

[Letum]

If this war has nothing to do with NPO's nations in PM than why are the terms discussed solely about said NPO peace mode nations?

Except the terms discussed are not solely about NPO peace mode nations, since their main impact is outside those nations.

[Caliph]

 

That's a great question. Why is a non-aggressive alliance being given terms for ending a war declared on another alliance?

 

You must be new here.  Many people have had this happen to them, this is not a one time thing only applicable to NPO.  Get over yourself.

 

Perhaps my point just flew right over your head.  These terms are only about these peace mode NPO nations.

Edited January 30, 2014 by Caliph

[brucemania]

K i can understand that the EQ was what is was. Here is this question i think people are asking. In the EQ peace talks one can see there being terms regardless whom wanted them as the original DoW was about Umbrella and the original AA's that declared on Umbrella hence Umbrella being a offending nation. In this case NPO is not the offending nation but a AA that has entered a conflict on a treaty of Defense. NPO had dont no wrong or offense. So why the terms as others are asking and NPO being singled out for terms.

Edited January 30, 2014 by brucemania

[OsRavan]

Josh your revisionism doesnt carry much weight.  Call it ego if you want ::grins:: my ego is strong enough to withstand your attacks.  YOu can't at the same time be complaining how I uniliateraly took over negotiations when you had 'already agreed' to something and forged a seperate deal that the rest of NPO's allies didnt agree with... and that I have no idea what really went down at negotiations.  Like it or not, I was one of the chief negotiators for our side in that war.  Piss you off as it might. Bad choice by your leaders as you may view it.  You in fact werent even THERE for the key negotiations.  So its a little rich for you ot be lecturing me on who offered what for what motivation.

 

The idea that NPO was the one pushing terms there is kind of laughable.  Everyone.. including the leaders of DH at the time... recognized it wasnt NPO pushing them.  Theres whole discussions on that fact on the war boards and litteraly reams of logs.

 

I'll make you a deal Josh.  Get me permission to release logs of my convos with DH high gov (so umbrella and goons currently) and I will show you logs of your own leaders indicating that NPO was the weak link who wanted easy terms and where we should apply pressure.  And if I do that, will umbrella do what they can to give NPO white peace?  We can make a deal. YOu get me permission.  I post logs. If I post them, umbrella exerts all influence to get NPO white peace.  What do you sa?

 

No one at the time thought NPO were the ones pushing the harsh terms. NPO was very up front that they felt they had a duty to represent the stance of the coalition even if they didnt agree. Very much what a lot on your side are currently saying heh.

 

By your logic, apparantly sparta are the evil villains in this current drama who want to hurt and punish NPO. They are the ones presenting the terms and pushing them in official talks.  Yet I bet a candid convo on the side with the leaders of sparta would show us they dont actually give a damn.

[Centurius]

Josh your revisionism doesnt carry much weight.  Call it ego if you want ::grins:: my ego is strong enough to withstand your attacks.  YOu can't at the same time be complaining how I uniliateraly took over negotiations when you had 'already agreed' to something and forged a seperate deal that the rest of NPO's allies didnt agree with... and that I have no idea what really went down at negotiations.  Like it or not, I was one of the chief negotiators for our side in that war.  Piss you off as it might. Bad choice by your leaders as you may view it.  You in fact werent even THERE for the key negotiations.  So its a little rich for you ot be lecturing me on who offered what for what motivation.

 

The idea that NPO was the one pushing terms there is kind of laughable.  Everyone.. including the leaders of DH at the time... recognized it wasnt NPO pushing them.  Theres whole discussions on that fact on the war boards and litteraly reams of logs.

 

I'll make you a deal Josh.  Get me permission to release logs of my convos with DH high gov (so umbrella and goons currently) and I will show you logs of your own leaders indicating that NPO was the weak link who wanted easy terms and where we should apply pressure.  And if I do that, will umbrella do what they can to give NPO white peace?  We can make a deal. YOu get me permission.  I post logs. If I post them, umbrella exerts all influence to get NPO white peace.  What do you sa?

 

No one at the time thought NPO were the ones pushing the harsh terms. NPO was very up front that they felt they had a duty to represent the stance of the coalition even if they didnt agree. Very much what a lot on your side are currently saying heh.

 

By your logic, apparantly sparta are the evil villains in this current drama who want to hurt and punish NPO. They are the ones presenting the terms and pushing them in official talks.  Yet I bet a candid convo on the side with the leaders of sparta would show us they dont actually give a damn.

I know that due to your ties to NPO you're used to getting pressured into terms by allies, but on this coalition internal pressure doesn't actually get an alliance anything.

[Caliph]

K i can understand that the EQ was what is was. Here is this question i think people are asking. In the EQ peace talks one can see there being terms regardless whom wanted them as the original DoW was about Umbrella and the original AA's that declared on Umbrella hence Umbrella being a offending nation. In this case NPO is not the offending nation but a AA that has entered a conflict on a treaty of Defense. NPO had dont no wrong or offense. So why the terms as others are asking and NPO being singled out for terms.

 

 

Umbrella was declared upon by Duckroll and other alliances for attacking and doing more damage to a nuclear rogue than the AI nations whom he attacked did.  Eventually our wars on our nuke rogue were removed despite us doing considerable damage to him, in part because our nations who were fighting him got attacked in force by Duckroll.  We were attacked, our allies came in on MD clauses, and the war was on.  We also got offered terms and eventually accepted 1 month of extended warfare, despite OsRevans false claims here.  OsRevan decided to believe Brehon's words over ours for quiet some time, despite them being an MDoAP ally at the time and NPO wasnt.  But ODN made their choice and decided to follow that path.  It is what it is.

 

In this case NPO entered in on an MD, however there is abslutely nothing in the whole history here on planet bob that states that alliances enterring wars on MD level treaties must give given white peace at the exact time they ask for it.  That is simply not the case. 

[IYIyTh]

My claim that the New Pacific Order was pushing for those terms can be easily backed up by the logs of the negotiations as well as logs of your private pleading with Brehon to change his mind, where you said he was breaking promises to you and the rest of CnG that Umbrella would get white peace. Logs I can just as easily produce as you. Negotiations I was also very much involved in on the GOONS side of the fence and offered input on various levels throughout the course of the negotiations.

The entire controversy that made the terms a big deal was the fact that the New Pacific Order started the war saying there wouldn't be any terms like the ones they later proposed. If I recall, that was a major point of contention for CnG at the time when Brehon did one of his 180 degree turns on promises he made you because you were foolish enough to believe a word that came out of his mouth. Look where that got you. Brehon pushed for those terms until other voices in eQ finally broke through that they wouldn't support such terms and reinforced the fact that Umbrella, MK, GOONS and almost everyone else on our side wouldn't accept them. Let's not pretend that the New Pacific Order is the victim here. They made many missteps and this war is the price of their failures.

I'm sure you'll remember that once it became clear that the New Pacific Order wasn't just pushing those terms on behalf of their coalition, but actually because they wanted Umbrella to suffer the most crippling terms they could get away with, we immediately knew how far we could trust them and against all warnings and signs to the contrary, you insisted they had honorable intentions and that in spite of the evidence that Brehon had no designs to actually carry out the terms he himself proposed. The extended warfare clause of the terms came at the behest of Brehon and it took his coalition to tell him that nobody had the capability or the willpower to see it through before they dropped it. Let's not pretend Umbrella got off "easy" because of anything you did. They knew they wouldn't get the terms they fought so vigorously for when we collectively told them where they could stick their heads. The point is that they pushed these terms and there simply is no way to deny that they did without completely altering reality.

 

You mean the rhetoric isn't true. Say it ain't so.

 

Anyway, you all can have fun arguing about how it was right for the Pacifican Emperor to walk out of negotiations when peace was so close -- I guess that's better than having to explain what exactly you think you're holding out for.

 

Have fun.

[JoshuaR]

Josh your revisionism doesnt carry much weight.  Call it ego if you want ::grins:: my ego is strong enough to withstand your attacks.  YOu can't at the same time be complaining how I uniliateraly took over negotiations when you had 'already agreed' to something and forged a seperate deal that the rest of NPO's allies didnt agree with... and that I have no idea what really went down at negotiations.  Like it or not, I was one of the chief negotiators for our side in that war.  Piss you off as it might. Bad choice by your leaders as you may view it.  You in fact werent even THERE for the key negotiations.  So its a little rich for you ot be lecturing me on who offered what for what motivation.

 

The idea that NPO was the one pushing terms there is kind of laughable.  Everyone.. including the leaders of DH at the time... recognized it wasnt NPO pushing them.  Theres whole discussions on that fact on the war boards and litteraly reams of logs.

 

I'll make you a deal Josh.  Get me permission to release logs of my convos with DH high gov (so umbrella and goons currently) and I will show you logs of your own leaders indicating that NPO was the weak link who wanted easy terms and where we should apply pressure.  And if I do that, will umbrella do what they can to give NPO white peace?  We can make a deal. YOu get me permission.  I post logs. If I post them, umbrella exerts all influence to get NPO white peace.  What do you sa?

 

No one at the time thought NPO were the ones pushing the harsh terms. NPO was very up front that they felt they had a duty to represent the stance of the coalition even if they didnt agree. Very much what a lot on your side are currently saying heh.

 

By your logic, apparantly sparta are the evil villains in this current drama who want to hurt and punish NPO. They are the ones presenting the terms and pushing them in official talks.  Yet I bet a candid convo on the side with the leaders of sparta would show us they dont actually give a damn.

No I wasn't there because I recognize I am a less important individual than our vice president and person acting as Umbrella's leader while our president was less active. No you weren't there because you were similarly an unimportant individual. 

[brucemania]

 

 

Umbrella was declared upon by Duckroll and other alliances for attacking and doing more damage to a nuclear rogue than the AI nations whom he attacked did.  Eventually our wars on our nuke rogue were removed despite us doing considerable damage to him, in part because our nations who were fighting him got attacked in force by Duckroll.  We were attacked, our allies came in on MD clauses, and the war was on.  We also got offered terms and eventually accepted 1 month of extended warfare, despite OsRevans false claims here.  OsRevan decided to believe Brehon's words over ours for quiet some time, despite them being an MDoAP ally at the time and NPO wasnt.  But ODN made their choice and decided to follow that path.  It is what it is.

 

In this case NPO entered in on an MD, however there is abslutely nothing in the whole history here on planet bob that states that alliances enterring wars on MD level treaties must give given white peace at the exact time they ask for it.  That is simply not the case. 

 

K as i mentioned i understand that about EQ. The question is why is NPO being singled out for terms now? .. Umbrella is not even at war with NPO at the moment so to me the talk about EQ and what happened is pointless as TOP was not given terms as stated before. And since Umbrella is not at war with NPO now what has that got to do with TOP/Polar asking for terms currently. And if i here here cause ya can well that seems pointless as one would think you set terms for wrong doing on the onset not for someone defending on a MD

[Caliph]

 

K as i mentioned i understand that about EQ. The question is why is NPO being singled out for terms now? .. Umbrella is not even at war with NPO at the moment so to me the talk about EQ and what happened is pointless as TOP was not given terms as stated before. And since Umbrella is not at war with NPO now what has that got to do with TOP/Polar asking for terms currently. And if i here here cause ya can well that seems pointless as one would think you set terms for wrong doing on the onset not for someone defending on a MD

 

You have already been told the reason NPO is being singled out for terms.  The answer will not change just because you do not like it.

 

There terms are only for NPO's peace mode top tier.  Terms have been dropped for nations who came out and fought.  These terms are only levied upon the peace mode nations.  Reasons have been gone over so many times in this thread already that I think you will have no trouble figuring it out for yourself.

 

Just because you don't like the answer doesn't mean its a wrong answer.

[JoshuaR]

 

K as i mentioned i understand that about EQ. The question is why is NPO being singled out for terms now? .. Umbrella is not even at war with NPO at the moment so to me the talk about EQ and what happened is pointless as TOP was not given terms as stated before. And since Umbrella is not at war with NPO now what has that got to do with TOP/Polar asking for terms currently. And if i here here cause ya can well that seems pointless as one would think you set terms for wrong doing on the onset not for someone defending on a MD

Agreed. It's not related, except that some people are pretending the current terms are a reaction to the past, and the most recent past war where the NPO was leading a peace terms talk for one side of a coalition was the anti-BIBO war.

[Raken]

No I wasn't there because I recognize I am a less important individual than our vice president and person acting as Umbrella's leader while our president was less active. No you weren't there because you were similarly an unimportant individual. 

 

You're important to me JoshuaR :wub: . As for you Os, just to reiterate what Josh said earlier, you were not involved at all with the final negotiatons - talk about revisionist history... Those happened solely between Brehon and I. We accepted the extended terms, and the night in which the terms/surrender were to begin, we were presented with an offer of Admission of Defeat and a complete white peace across the board, which we took.

[brucemania]

I just want to point out as well that at 8 days which in turn is a cycle when it comes down to it .. 30 nations at six slots x 6 mil for lower nations does come to just over 1 bil in that cycle. given if it is only have slot use then it is around 500 mil which in turn is alot of money for regrowth at lower tier level. So yes the 8 days in itself may seem or look small but with the actually cash flow this is a big penalty for the lower nations for there efforts of not being able to access that money i would think let alone pushing that back for the total time it can even start.

[Sardonic]

DH/NPO war

Yeah this all pretty much rings true to me.  Thanks for this, I think I needed that history refresher.  Seems a lot more plausible in hindsight than the muddled half-remembered version I previously recalled.

[brucemania]

Yeah this all pretty much rings true to me.  Thanks for this, I think I needed that history refresher.  Seems a lot more plausible in hindsight than the muddled half-remembered version I previously recalled.

 

LOL old age does suck lol