Feanor Noldorin Posted February 9, 2014 Report Share Posted February 9, 2014 Because we don't do realpolitik treaties. Valhalla should have been cancelled months previously You only sign treaties with friends right? How's that IRON treaty working out for you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stewie Posted February 9, 2014 Report Share Posted February 9, 2014 You only sign treaties with friends right? How's that IRON treaty working out for you? It still has it's uses... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auctor Posted February 9, 2014 Report Share Posted February 9, 2014 real politick uses? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feanor Noldorin Posted February 9, 2014 Report Share Posted February 9, 2014 It still has it's uses... Fair enough, you got rid of the worst of those two plotters. I and others look forward to what you have planned for the other. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goldie Posted February 9, 2014 Report Share Posted February 9, 2014 I can't believe your side is being so ridiculous that you'd rather hold your entire sphere at war over words. It goes both ways. Accept you have more to lose than we do. I know you find this hard to believe and your threats of even larger reparations on us if we didn't agree to your demands are and will always be laughable. UPN wants 6 mil, you seem to be fine with giving it to them, and you've agreed to surrender terms, pending NoR working its exit out. I don't think people are worried about NG leaving, and I'm unaware of anything other than the 6 mil being discussed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stewie Posted February 9, 2014 Report Share Posted February 9, 2014 (edited) real politick uses? Nah, Please note this is not the official stance of Non Grata. Edited February 9, 2014 by Stewie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hob Dobson Posted February 9, 2014 Report Share Posted February 9, 2014 Say that often enough you will believe it. As head of her sovereign alliance, that is a decision for her to make. As it's more likely to be a fully informed judgement based on an inside view of her alliance's readiness for a protracted war, I'm more likely to accept that view over your expressed disdain for her alliance and its wartime performance.I suppose at this point it would be traditional to respond with some asinine challenge of warfare over the point of disagreement, but it lies to me whether I consider my own wartime record adequate or not. In either case, there's little to be done that can validate it and surely room enough to improve it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hormones74 Posted February 9, 2014 Report Share Posted February 9, 2014 Can I just interject here. Again, sorry TLR for the thread derail. I don't recall who dragged us into this thread but meh, it's done. I don't have the time or inclination to pore over war stats, but I personally know that MWs Howlin Mad pretty much did the most damage to my nation, so well done to him. I and other members of NoR will always defend ourselves in battle or on the OWF, and sure, sometimes it can get a little heated. But take that more as a love of our own community than disdain for yours. We entered to support our ally NG, but obviously treaty webs make a nonsense of everything as regards wars and peace agreements. We accept that, and genuinely do not wish to cause grief to "our side". Neither do we care to get embroiled in a protracted and damaging guerrilla war with the polardoxic side. We don't really understand your plan, and frankly don't care. We are and never were the target, a primary target or anything like a crucial factor in the outcome of this war. The sad fact is that the way this panned out has allowed some old AAs with long ago grudges which we have moved on from to ride the coat-tails of others to victory and attempt to humiliate us for personal reasons. All we ask is a little leniency, we did our job and did it well. But we were also undeniably defeated politically, numerically and therefore militarily. As MoFA, I have to take the greater part of the blame for that. For the sake of my people and the NPO coalition, I humbly request that NoR is permitted to leave the war and admit its defeat to your coalition. Finish this war. You are willing to admit defeat but refuse a surrender? When you admit defeat you basically state you lost the fight. Surrendering is essentially the same thing, you aren't being forced to do anything out of the ordinary. I'm not trying to undermine NoR's thought process, I just find it confusing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted February 9, 2014 Report Share Posted February 9, 2014 It's really just because they dont want to be called "cheese eating surrender monkeys" lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stewie Posted February 9, 2014 Report Share Posted February 9, 2014 It's really just because they dont want to be called "cheese eating surrender monkeys" lol. Take that back... they're german, not french. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurnipCruncher Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 You are willing to admit defeat but refuse a surrender? When you admit defeat you basically state you lost the fight. Surrendering is essentially the same thing, you aren't being forced to do anything out of the ordinary. I'm not trying to undermine NoR's thought process, I just find it confusing. It is primarily the difference in the two words. To admit defeat is to acknowledge that we are beaten, and to accept the end of hostilities as the losing party. To surrender, is to submit to the will of the other side, a loss of sovereignty, to accept their authority over your alliance and nations. Unless they intend to force a viceroy on us, this option is not even possible and indeed has not been requested. It is nonsensical to be forced to state the one when they seek the other. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CnaedmacAilpn Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 It's really just because they dont want to be called "cheese eating surrender monkeys" lol. As always an asinine and foolish post. From you who have bravely run away on so many occasions. Still at least there is then something you are good at. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CnaedmacAilpn Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 As head of her sovereign alliance, that is a decision for her to make. As it's more likely to be a fully informed judgement based on an inside view of her alliance's readiness for a protracted war, I'm more likely to accept that view over your expressed disdain for her alliance and its wartime performance. I suppose at this point it would be traditional to respond with some asinine challenge of warfare over the point of disagreement, but it lies to me whether I consider my own wartime record adequate or not. In either case, there's little to be done that can validate it and surely room enough to improve it. You are of course entitled to your opinion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krashnaia Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 (edited) So, another front was peaced out. It's just NPO and NG being pinned by the peace-mode krauts, now. NG, with 80% of their nations also in PM, look cool. NPO, with only 30% and terms whose lenght increases the more this war continues, may be less so. :popcorn: Edited February 10, 2014 by Krashnaia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daenerys Targaryen Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 There can only be eternal war for NPO and NG now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurnipCruncher Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 So, another front was peaced out. It's just NPO and NG being pinned by the peace-mode krauts, now. NG, with 80% of their nations also in PM, look cool. NPO, with only 30% and terms whose lenght increases the more this war continues, may be less so. :popcorn: You can keep pedalling that line, but it still doesn't work. NPO and NoR are not treaty partners, although your side seemed determined that we should be. And they are your crappy terms on NPO that are becoming more punitive, so don't blame us for that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stefano Palmieri Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 There can only be eternal war for NPO and NG now. And lemme guess, your mighty alliance is going to be charging to the front lines to make it happen, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daenerys Targaryen Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 And lemme guess, your mighty alliance is going to be charging to the front lines to make it happen, right? It's already happening and maybe you haven't notice but they already have to much on their plates. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CnaedmacAilpn Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 (edited) So, another front was peaced out. It's just NPO and NG being pinned by the peace-mode krauts, now. NG, with 80% of their nations also in PM, look cool. NPO, with only 30% and terms whose lenght increases the more this war continues, may be less so. :popcorn: What a stupidly insulting and idiotic post, oh wait, sorry, I should have realised, you are in MI6 :facepalm: . Considering the title of your alliance, you should be able to come up with better Intel than that :smug: Edited February 10, 2014 by CnaedmacAilpn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stefano Palmieri Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 (edited) It's already happening and maybe you haven't notice but they already have to much on their plates. A couple of extra weeks of war while they argue over peace terms hardly constitutes perma war. Now unless you're going to join them on the front lines quit @#$% posting. Edited February 10, 2014 by Stefano Palmieri Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IYIyTh Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 words I really don't think you are. You're arguing for the sake of arguing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayvon Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 I really don't think you are. You're arguing for the sake of arguing. If you insist. At least try and keep this story straight after 3 posts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IYIyTh Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 (edited) If you insist. At least try and keep this story straight after 3 posts. How could I possibly attempt to? You keep believing it's a static narrative that you can interchange perspectives and point of views on but somehow have to arrive at the same conclusion. Getting intensely upset because another user previously suggested NoR is the holdup in the war, only for me to agree that there were two fronts holding peace up. Guess how many there are now? How can you possibly get any more ridiculous about someone telling you reality? Apologize today the world isn't what you hoped it would be, life's tough, get a helmet. Edited February 10, 2014 by IYIyTh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayvon Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 lol - who's arguing now for the sake of arguing?Keep pressing those buttons, IYIyTh. Bravo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Williambonney Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 lol - who's arguing now for the sake of arguing? Keep pressing those buttons, IYIyTh. Bravo. Can't blame him, if you fire a million shots your bound to hit something sooner or later. :smug: 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.