Jump to content

The next DBDC raid target


Beauty

Ya?  

222 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

Actually, after Karma and the rise of Global Feudalism (the reign of MK), CN had a huge reduction in nations as nation leaders fled this world tired of the patronism and random violence represented in the new hegemonic philosophy "friends > infra." This philosophy was damaging to stability because it recognized friendships between sovereigns of different alliances to be more important than responsibilities to the member-nations that sovereigns are supposed to protect.

When I look at post karma I see this - http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Timeline_of_Major_Wars (sorry no special hyperlink) I see a stable times and the lack of multiple wars. This realm thrives on disorder and the moralists are a plague to our society ;)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 213
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

 

National sovereignty is not a moral shield against attack, only peace mode or local superiority of force can provide that.

I'm amused to note that you're now in a position of agreeing (at least in part) with what Riley originally said. That aside, of what use is your personal definition of national sovereignty to the current conversation? Why did you bring it up?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I look at post karma I see this - http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Timeline_of_Major_Wars (sorry no special hyperlink) I see a stable times and the lack of multiple wars. This realm thrives on disorder and the moralists are a plague to our society ;)

 

Stability has nothing to do with the absence of war. In fact, the world is most stable when there is a consistent war against barbarian elements.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm amused to note that you're now in a position of agreeing (at least in part) with what Riley originally said. That aside, of what use is your personal definition of national sovereignty to the current conversation? Why did you bring it up?

 

If you carefully read and absorb what I am saying there were never any inconsistencies in what I am saying. In any case, this definition of sovereignty preceded me by several years, that's why this is not called Junkalunkaism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The lack of declaration just further illustrates the difference between NPO's approach to the Woodstock Massacre and DBDC's approach to Pax. One isn't necessarily more justifiable than the other, but one might make it easier for allies to bandwagon in with you.

 

This of course, presumes that those allies care if it easy or easier. Hint: I do not think they do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My two cents on neutrality: is see neutraly as a non agression statement( AA says that they will not attack nobody, they will not get involved in any war exept to defend themselves) so defensive agreement between  neutral AA' s would be ok in my book, besides the neutral AA would not trigger that agreement that would be on the agressors job to trigger it so all the consequenses of attackers choises would be on attacker.

I also think that any AA neutral or not  has  a perfectly justified CB to declare on DBDC on the bases of the right to defend themselves because the raid on neutrals illustrates how unpredictable DBDC is and how they like to break rules. I would not be shocked to see DBDC jump on some of their allies if they grow big enough.  

But until there is a power strong enough out there to take on DBDC, this talk here is pointless anyways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

This isn't about GPA it's much more personal.

 

Polar's boys got a stern talking to now were just waiting for Jerdge to get that same conversation from his handlers.

A stern talking to?

 

For what, exactly? For speaking out against DBDC? Is that a problem now? This isn't the first time I've seen DBDC threaten those who speak out against them with attacks on their alliances top tier. Guess what - you're acting in a manner that deserves to be called out. You crave attention and you seek it. So, why, when we provide you with said attention do you being frothing at the mouth about being so offended by it? You attack alliances for no reason and then pretend to be the good guy - but yet, apparently speaking out against that is such an utter crime. I really don't understand this logic behind discouraging political discourse. If you wish to have a quiet world where everyone praises you, go be GPA. Clearly you've chosen another path, so I'm completely confused by your anger with those who disagree with you. I would honestly expect you to enjoy coming out and debating your actions with us.

 

And guess what: nobody told us anything. Keep dreaming that you can influence Polar's IA matters. This isn't IRON, or any of those other alliances that you raided that now grovel at your feet.

 

They did? Not by me!

Some polar members expressed their opinions which they have every right to do. If they have said less since, it's because they chose to say less.

And this is why we love Dajobo.

 

 

To be fair, I remember NPO doing quite a lot to inflame popular opinion against GPA and create a narrative that they had done something seriously wrong and deserved the attack. Contrast that with DBDC attacking Pax over "a stalemate in the top 250," without even the respect shown by acknowledging this war for what it is (a war), let alone a formal announcement of it (even if they can't bring themselves to call it a war).

There's no comparison between the two. NPO was - and is - a political alliance. They made actions based on a long term plan, carried it out with force, and with a squad of mouthpieces here on these forums. I have to admit, those were great times. DBDC is just another alliance contributing to the devolution of the political world.

 

Given that Polaris had no trouble fighting Colossus when I led it without a declaration of war, I don't see the point of this particular criticism. I know I didn't hold it against Polar.

I was not around for that, and I imagine not many in our government were - but in major alliance wars, there have rarely been declarations when assisting an ally who needs help. The last time I led a real alliance into war, Guns of Glory, we destroyed CIS, and then got caught by about 10 more alliances without even so much as a message. The same thing happened to us when we founded Vox. More recent wars have been much better about this, as far as I know. I guess the chaos is a little more organized now.

 

Not justifying Polar's previous actions, just stating that there never has been large scale attacks on large alliances, not part of a larger war, without even so much as an acknowledgement. I'm sure you understand that distinction as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

There's no comparison between the two. NPO was - and is - a political alliance. They made actions based on a long term plan, carried it out with force, and with a squad of mouthpieces here on these forums. I have to admit, those were great times. DBDC is just another alliance contributing to the devolution of the political world.

 

I'll make a Francoist out of you yet Starfox.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



There's no comparison between the two. NPO was - and is - a political alliance. They made actions based on a long term plan, carried it out with force, and with a squad of mouthpieces here on these forums. I have to admit, those were great times. DBDC is just another alliance contributing to the devolution of the political world.

Just because you don't know or understand our plan or goals doesn't mean we don't have them.  You are very narrow-minded.

 

starfox_zpsa9636744.png

 

 

 

We find ourselves disagreeing on most of your post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lol that was pretty funny.

 

But I grasp DBDC's goal, and it has been long in planning. They seek to destroy Order and civilization, annihilate the concept of alliance sovereignty, and reduce our worlds nations to the status of a confused, fighting mob... once this happens, they can establish a permanent hierarchical society with themselves in power exploiting tech slaves by "persuading" the minions below them.

 

The fact that it would lead to another exodus of nations from our realm, and would be completely against the interest of every civilized alliance, is irrelevant to their goals.

Edited by Tywin Lannister
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A stern talking to?

 

For what, exactly? For speaking out against DBDC? Is that a problem now? This isn't the first time I've seen DBDC threaten those who speak out against them with attacks on their alliances top tier. Guess what - you're acting in a manner that deserves to be called out. You crave attention and you seek it. So, why, when we provide you with said attention do you being frothing at the mouth about being so offended by it? You attack alliances for no reason and then pretend to be the good guy - but yet, apparently speaking out against that is such an utter crime. I really don't understand this logic behind discouraging political discourse. If you wish to have a quiet world where everyone praises you, go be GPA. Clearly you've chosen another path, so I'm completely confused by your anger with those who disagree with you. I would honestly expect you to enjoy coming out and debating your actions with us.

 

And guess what: nobody told us anything. Keep dreaming that you can influence Polar's IA matters. This isn't IRON, or any of those other alliances that you raided that now grovel at your feet.

 

And this is why we love Dajobo.

 

There's no comparison between the two. NPO was - and is - a political alliance. They made actions based on a long term plan, carried it out with force, and with a squad of mouthpieces here on these forums. I have to admit, those were great times. DBDC is just another alliance contributing to the devolution of the political world.

 

I was not around for that, and I imagine not many in our government were - but in major alliance wars, there have rarely been declarations when assisting an ally who needs help. The last time I led a real alliance into war, Guns of Glory, we destroyed CIS, and then got caught by about 10 more alliances without even so much as a message. The same thing happened to us when we founded Vox. More recent wars have been much better about this, as far as I know. I guess the chaos is a little more organized now.

 

Not justifying Polar's previous actions, just stating that there never has been large scale attacks on large alliances, not part of a larger war, without even so much as an acknowledgement. I'm sure you understand that distinction as well.

Don't worry brah.  I'll be coming for Polar's top two nations when I get my 25 nukes back.  You've got about 10 days to figure something out.  Here's my acknowledgement for you.  :smug:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't worry brah.  I'll be coming for Polar's top two nations when I get my 25 nukes back.  You've got about 10 days to figure something out.  Here's my acknowledgement for you.   :smug:

So do you want to bring the potato salad to the picnic or should we? Just trying to get things figured out you know in these 10 days. Also we still ain't gonna kiss you on the second date. We just ain't that kinda girl. :smug:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was not around for that, and I imagine not many in our government were - but in major alliance wars, there have rarely been declarations when assisting an ally who needs help. The last time I led a real alliance into war, Guns of Glory, we destroyed CIS, and then got caught by about 10 more alliances without even so much as a message. The same thing happened to us when we founded Vox. More recent wars have been much better about this, as far as I know. I guess the chaos is a little more organized now.

Grudge War's not ancient history yet, is it?
 

Not justifying Polar's previous actions, just stating that there never has been large scale attacks on large alliances, not part of a larger war, without even so much as an acknowledgement. I'm sure you understand that distinction as well.


Maybe I'm just missing it. I didn't think it was wrong at the time, and subsequent wars saw similar events. In a world where 80% of the action is kept secret, it seems silly to point to no DoW as the defining action of a ~political culture~ being ruined. It's very nearly the least unconventional thing DBDC does - we're not talking about an alliance that doesn't provide plenty of other bases for criticism.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe I'm just missing it. I didn't think it was wrong at the time, and subsequent wars saw similar events. In a world where 80% of the action is kept secret, it seems silly to point to no DoW as the defining action of a ~political culture~ being ruined. It's very nearly the least unconventional thing DBDC does - we're not talking about an alliance that doesn't provide plenty of other bases for criticism.

 

It is totally ignoring alliance sovereignty and the concept of government to government relations. It basically means DBDC is just an uncivilized band of rogues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is totally ignoring alliance sovereignty and the concept of government to government relations. It basically means DBDC is just an uncivilized band of rogues.

Is a societal norm that gets violated routinely by every corner of the web /actually/ a societal norm? Edited by Auctor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So do you want to bring the potato salad to the picnic or should we? Just trying to get things figured out you know in these 10 days. Also we still ain't gonna kiss you on the second date. We just ain't that kinda girl. :smug:


Lmao, I think this Polar member, DaFuzzy, is definitely on a good start on becoming my number one favorite NpO member already. :D
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is a societal norm that gets violated routinely by every corner of the web /actually/ a societal norm?

 

One can't expect much civilization among smaller peripheral alliances or micros fighting one another close to the state of nature, but we are talking about attacks against the heart of civilization itself, deep within the civilization represented by the treaty web, rich culture and long history central to our world. DBDC does not comprehend or respect the stabilizing importance of these traditions and are simply rogues with a new found sense of power lust. Literally barbarians.

 

4e5201be347f95a9741d5855b6592ad9161724dd

Edited by Tywin Lannister
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't worry brah.  I'll be coming for Polar's top two nations when I get my 25 nukes back.  You've got about 10 days to figure something out.  Here's my acknowledgement for you.   :smug:

Mate we've been there and done it so many times it's old news!
Work out if it's really helping your alliance and their goals or not first. You have about 10 days. Edited by Dajobo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't remember the reasons why, but I do remember having fun in the Massacre. Neutrals don't do anything of significance to warrant a CB and thus one would have to be manufactured. Manufacturing a CB to claim the moral high ground of it not being a raid doesn't work with the defending entity being a neutral alliance.
 

Let's face it, people like raiding neutrals for whatever reason they paint it as. Comparing neutrals to unaligned nations is such an obtuse statement, even for you hal. It's like saying "hey neutrals, your $%*!, and no better than a 1k NS nation." Neutrals have something we don't have, years of unchecked growth. Just imagine what they could accomplish if they installed programs like their warring counterparts.

These "certain" parties of which you speak don't just go after neutrals. You weren't preaching about neutrals coming together when they raided Polar or when they raided you and your alliance. You're no Rembrandt so quit trying to paint pictures.
So your telling them to compromise on giving up what they value most? Even if they bend it just a little, they break everything in which they stand for.

 

I'm saying that people must evolve or perish.  That doesn't make it fair, and indeed fairness has nothing to do with it.

 

And yes, certain parties have raided both aligned and non-aligned alike.  I think it says a lot about the state of Planet Bob at the moment that the community hasn't come together to do something about it, and none of what it says is very good.  I don't have to "paint pictures" for that to be true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's always been incumbent on the folks that have a problem with it to do the doing something about it.

Indeed.  However, when individuals attempt to do so through military action, they are declared "nuke rogues" and every attempt is made to run them off Planet Bob. Therefore, telling someone individually to "do something about it", is an invitation to suicide.

 

But you knew that already.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...