Opportunity Posted February 1, 2014 Report Share Posted February 1, 2014 You mentioned Global Stability earlier, which is why I asked about NPOs intentions postwar. Because everyone sees hate and irrationality and a desire for revenge. Not stabilizing sentiments. I was really just trying to work in a way to write "Equilibrium" in my post. All I wanted was to join the bandwagon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keeology Posted February 1, 2014 Report Share Posted February 1, 2014 Ah, so the goal is to break Pacifica's will entirely? To make them obsolete on the face of Bob? Is that why TOP and NpO attacked NSO, to force Pacifica into a situation where it risks everything? So not having 10 percent of the AA to rebuild NPO will render them obsolete? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trimm Posted February 1, 2014 Report Share Posted February 1, 2014 How can the opposite be true when NpO and TOP are preemptive aggressors demanding reps of alliances simply honoring an MDP? Firstly, they aren't reps no matter how much you cry about it. Second, no one currently opposing Pacifica has any reason whatsoever to assume that if the shoe were on the other foot that the only term that would be on the table would be white peace. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Buscemi Posted February 1, 2014 Report Share Posted February 1, 2014 No one has taken reps in a major war in a long time, and no one is trying to take them now. At least try to say this with a straight face. You can see the laughing right through your keyboard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trimm Posted February 1, 2014 Report Share Posted February 1, 2014 At least try to say this with a straight face. You can see the laughing right through your keyboard. You are a smart guy Steve. Terms do not equal reps. There are bad terms, there are bad reps. They are not the same thing. You want to argue these are bad terms? Hell, I agree with that. But they are not reps, and I have been here long enough to see the difference. So have you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted February 1, 2014 Report Share Posted February 1, 2014 (edited) You are a smart guy Steve. Terms do not equal reps. There are bad terms, there are bad reps. They are not the same thing. You want to argue these are bad terms? Hell, I agree with that. But they are not reps, and I have been here long enough to see the difference. So have you.Ok, put it this way: C&G has not imposed terms in quite a while. The last time a member of C&G imposed terms, if I recall correctly, was when C&G was pre-empted. And the make-up of the bloc was very different, as well. Different leaders for all of the AAs currently sitting, if you even want to count TLR as the same conglomerate of Athens/GR/=LOST= Edited February 1, 2014 by Neo Uruk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tick1 Posted February 1, 2014 Report Share Posted February 1, 2014 Ok, put it this way: C&G has not imposed terms in quite a while. The last time a member of C&G imposed terms, if I recall correctly, was when C&G was pre-empted. And the make-up of the bloc was very different, as well. Different leaders for all of the AAs currently sitting, if you even want to count TLR as the same conglomerate of Athens/GR/=LOST= When was the last time C&G was in the position to impose terms or reps, been awhile if I remember correctly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trimm Posted February 1, 2014 Report Share Posted February 1, 2014 Ok, put it this way: C&G has not imposed terms in quite a while. The last time a member of C&G imposed terms, if I recall correctly, was when C&G was pre-empted. And the make-up of the bloc was very different, as well. Different leaders for all of the AAs currently sitting, if you even want to count TLR as the same conglomerate of Athens/GR/=LOST= Okay, I will grant you that. So what? CnG also hasn't been the obvious head of a coalition in a long time too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caliph Posted February 1, 2014 Report Share Posted February 1, 2014 The fact is that Polar and TOP launched a preemptive aggressive war and now they want to levy terms on alliances that simply honored treaties to defend the nations that TOP and the NpO aggressively attacked with zero provocation. I suppose pure military victory and stomping on the corpses of their adversaries is all TOP and NpO care about right now, but politically this is a very stupid move that exposes them as a power-hungry bloc with little concern for global stability. Indeed, they seem to care for very little outside of what they can force the world to give them at the point of a gun. The very equilibrium of the world has been upset by their regime. No. Just ... no. You could not possibly be more wrong about this if you tried. If anything, NpO/TOP is the hostile power sphere that needs to be neutralized. NPO, NSO, NG, all were working at one point to roll NpO. Again. NpO didn't take this lying down and built a coalition of their own to ensure they would not get rolled in this attempt. And then NpO brought the pain to NSO who called in NG and NPO and the war boomed from there. Whenever someone says something blatantly not true that is when people must step in and correct it. You are wrong, 100% wrong, and this is your friendly Caliph telling you that you are indeed wrong in every single thing you are saying here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted February 1, 2014 Report Share Posted February 1, 2014 When was the last time C&G was in the position to impose terms or reps, been awhile if I remember correctly. Okay, I will grant you that. So what? CnG also hasn't been the obvious head of a coalition in a long time too.C&G could have imposed their will in Grudge. They didn't decide to take anything personally in DH-NPO despite having the clear upper hand.You could argue that it would be political suicide; you could also make the case here as the "NPO is gonna get us" forecast could easily become a self-fulfilling prophecy should everyone involve feel slighted enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trimm Posted February 1, 2014 Report Share Posted February 1, 2014 C&G could have imposed their will in Grudge. They didn't decide to take anything personally in DH-NPO despite having the clear upper hand. You could argue that it would be political suicide; you could also make the case here as the "NPO is gonna get us" forecast could easily become a self-fulfilling prophecy should everyone involve feel slighted enough. CnG was not by any means the leaders of those coalitions, and only could have made demands of the vanquished with the consent of their coalition. As to the paranoia towards NPO, its perfectly logical given the lack of any other opposite power sphere and NPO's past behavior and stated intents. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iceknave Posted February 1, 2014 Report Share Posted February 1, 2014 No one currently opposing Pacifica has any reason whatsoever to assume that if the shoe were on the other foot that the only term that would be on the table would be white peace. EQ was the shoe being on the other foot for TOP/Umbrella and the only term that ended up passing the table was white peace. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trimm Posted February 1, 2014 Report Share Posted February 1, 2014 EQ was the shoe being on the other foot for TOP/Umbrella and the only term that ended up passing the table was white peace. That it ended up that way is in no way an indicator that it was intended to end up that way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted February 1, 2014 Report Share Posted February 1, 2014 CnG was not by any means the leaders of those coalitions, and only could have made demands of the vanquished with the consent of their coalition.As to the paranoia towards NPO, its perfectly logical given the lack of any other opposite power sphere and NPO's past behavior and stated intents.C&G was incredibly tight with their coalition's "leaders" of those days, so I mean. Yeah. You could say that, but it's like saying I can't post here without Rayvon's consent.As to the NPO statement, it's perfectly logical that if there is no opposite power sphere we'll just be gridlocked into this dumbass game of checkers. When, in the history of Bob, has a new power sphere not emerged shortly after a war? And guess what: Polar's burning theirs. That it ended up that way is in no way an indicator that it was intended to end up that way.Maybe you should look at Valhalla. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted February 1, 2014 Report Share Posted February 1, 2014 These terms are nowhere near crippling enough in a total war sense, and only sets back NPO for a time. It will be time for NPO to soul search while they are out. They need not play a role in short term postwar politics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caliph Posted February 1, 2014 Report Share Posted February 1, 2014 EQ was the shoe being on the other foot for TOP/Umbrella and the only term that ended up passing the table was white peace. We accepted the term of 1 month of us, just Umbrella, fighting the whole of the EQ coalition. The only reason that term did not end up happening is the EQ coalition was unable/unwilling to provide the upper tier nations to keep our upper tier fully engaged. We accepted terms, it was your coalition who was unable/unwilling to carry them out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Opportunity Posted February 1, 2014 Report Share Posted February 1, 2014 No. Just ... no. You could not possibly be more wrong about this if you tried. NPO, NSO, NG, all were working at one point to roll NpO. Again. NpO didn't take this lying down and built a coalition of their own to ensure they would not get rolled in this attempt. And then NpO brought the pain to NSO who called in NG and NPO and the war boomed from there. Whenever someone says something blatantly not true that is when people must step in and correct it. You are wrong, 100% wrong, and this is your friendly Caliph telling you that you are indeed wrong in every single thing you are saying here. 6 month old chat logs of a questionable nature = preemptive aggressive strike/not "taking it lying down" ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iceknave Posted February 1, 2014 Report Share Posted February 1, 2014 (edited) That it ended up that way is in no way an indicator that it was intended to end up that way. The end result either way is that TOP/Umbrella got white peace. What matters is the end result, not the words and bluster behind them. These terms are nowhere near crippling enough in a total war sense, and only sets back NPO for a time. It will be time for NPO to soul search while they are out. They need not play a role in short term postwar politics. It's a matter of principle. We need not play by your rules, !@#$%* and twisted as they are. We accepted the term of 1 month of us, just Umbrella, fighting the whole of the EQ coalition. The only reason that term did not end up happening is the EQ coalition was unable/unwilling to provide the upper tier nations to keep our upper tier fully engaged. We accepted terms, it was your coalition who was unable/unwilling to carry them out. See my response to trimm. Oh, and for the record, NPO was not plotting a war against Polar. Edited February 1, 2014 by Iceknave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daenerys Targaryen Posted February 1, 2014 Report Share Posted February 1, 2014 C&G was incredibly tight with their coalition's "leaders" of those days, so I mean. Yeah. You could say that, but it's like saying I can't post here without Rayvon's consent. As to the NPO statement, it's perfectly logical that if there is no opposite power sphere we'll just be gridlocked into this dumbass game of checkers. When, in the history of Bob, has a new power sphere not emerged shortly after a war? And guess what: Polar's burning theirs. Maybe you should look at Valhalla. How exactly are Polar burning their own sphere? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted February 1, 2014 Report Share Posted February 1, 2014 It's a matter of principle. We need not play by your rules, !@#$%* and twisted as they are It's not my rules. This is a game of thrones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daenerys Targaryen Posted February 1, 2014 Report Share Posted February 1, 2014 The end result either way is that TOP/Umbrella got white peace. What matters is the end result, not the words and bluster behind them. It's a matter of principle. We need not play by your rules, !@#$%* and twisted as they are. See my response to trimm. Oh, and for the record, NPO was not plotting a war against Polar. But NPO knew about the plotting and most likely encouraged it. NPO may not have been those leading the public push but they were helping to build a big part of that coalition to roll Polar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caliph Posted February 1, 2014 Report Share Posted February 1, 2014 The end result either way is that TOP/Umbrella got white peace. What matters is the end result, not the words and bluster behind them. It's a matter of principle. We need not play by your rules, !@#$%* and twisted as they are. See my response to trimm. Oh, and for the record, NPO was not plotting a war against Polar. This is a case of the lady protesting too much. You wanted to put terms on Umbrella, we accepted your terms, and then it came to pass that you actually couldn't adhere to these terms and gave us white peace instead. You are welcome to try the same, and because you are making this thread that is precisely what you are attempting here. You are trying to wait us out by trying to earn PR points by playing the everlasting victim. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monty of the Herm Posted February 1, 2014 Report Share Posted February 1, 2014 But NPO knew about the plotting and most likely encouraged it. NPO may not have been those leading the public push but they were helping to build a big part of that coalition to roll Polar. You seriously think that we would be seriously involved in plotting to roll another alliance after the target we put on our own backs after EQ? Ask Caliph, Tywinn, whoever you want in your coalition we knew right when EQ ended that we were going to be at least the secondary if not the primary target of the next war to get rolled. Now why would we then go out to scheme to such an extent knowing that everyone who didn't get what they wanted out of EQ wanted our head on a platter? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sephiroth Posted February 1, 2014 Report Share Posted February 1, 2014 Lets say NPO left the war without terms and with their upper tier intact. What would Pacifica's will be if not revenge? I think if they got white peace they wouldn't be after revenge, but giving them terms would give them good reason to do so. If NPO got white peace, they would want to avoid perceptions of old. If they are given terms, it would show even when they give white peace like in the Equilibrium War, it doesn't matter to those who oppose them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted February 1, 2014 Report Share Posted February 1, 2014 (edited) But NPO knew about the plotting and most likely encouraged it. NPO may not have been those leading the public push but they were helping to build a big part of that coalition to roll Polar.Proof nobody needs to talk to you. NPO did not in any way support a "roll Polar v245" war. They, of course, would have helped their allies, but it was not their plan to have an aggressive war against Polar. Edited February 1, 2014 by Neo Uruk 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.