To the concerned parties

[The Zigur]

What? These allegations are ridiculous. DBDC has been friendly and cordial with Polar in all of our interactions for the past year and more. We've merely engaged in a few tech and land deals with them, it's not really our fault that Polar suddenly backpedaled about the deals.

That is a crafty way to define attacks against alliance sovereignty which involved national declarations of war and nuclear exchanges. Some would call them rogue actions.

[Neo Uruk]

I bet you wouldn't find any of those people in DBDC!

[Lord Hitchcock]

Polar attacked 2 years too late. They are backing allies in this war who are already outnumbered. And then they strung their coalition even thinner when they declared an all out war on any alliance.

if I were polar's ally, I would be pissed. They can't both back their allies and move forth on their tech blockade.

In fact, their closet allies do not even support their actions because they have been burnt in the past because polar failed to act. It must be a theme on that side of the treaty web

[The Zigur]

If Polar were truly forced to suspend the Imperial Decree, which is highly unlikely seeing how low Enemy morale is, that does not mean anti-terror operations would end. The spark has been kindled and there is far too much fuel to put it out.

Edited December 20, 2014 by Tywin Lannister

[Lord Hitchcock]

Enemy morale low?

People in atlas are happy building casualties, Ds loves war, Sra is happy to be fighting, dbdc loves someone in range, Pacifica can't get enough open slots to declare, kaskus mid teirs loves casualties, non grata is happy for the face time, fellowship of the wolves showed who the better wolf pack is, iron loves hitting Sparta and New has been waiting for a while, and rnr needs to use a little of their big wcs.


your aide, dark was complaining to Sparta about entering the war, spartas king is hiding in peace mode, alpha wolves members are leaving because they are all getting ZId and legion, snx, cannot even declared because they are in a perms state of nuclear anarchy

hell, I was happy to even see Kashmir, Java house league, and dbdc rough up SUN


and don't forget umbrella hitting mi6.

tell me more about how polar is winning..

[Lord Hitchcock]

*fark, not dark

[Lamorak]

They are backing allies in this war who are already outnumbered.

 

I am sorry we help out our allies if they request our help.

 

As to the rest, obvious propaganda is obvious.

[Starfox101]

What? These allegations are ridiculous. DBDC has been friendly and cordial with Polar in all of our interactions for the past year and more. We've merely engaged in a few tech and land deals with them, it's not really our fault that Polar suddenly backpedaled about the deals. 

Damn, DBDC is accepting anyone these days!

 

Polar attacked 2 years too late. They are backing allies in this war who are already outnumbered. And then they strung their coalition even thinner when they declared an all out war on any alliance.

if I were polar's ally, I would be pissed. They can't both back their allies and move forth on their tech blockade.

In fact, their closet allies do not even support their actions because they have been burnt in the past because polar failed to act. It must be a theme on that side of the treaty web

When did we declare an all out war on any alliance? Why would our allies be pissed? We are down 6+ million in support of our allies. And yes, our "closest" allies do support our actions, because nobody is living in 2010 anymore. Except you, I guess, with this insane post.

 

By the way, both you and Tywin are bad at this. Please stop.

[Lord Hitchcock]

you declared an all out war when you threatened war on any nation sending dbdc tech.

 

who does polar think they are? hitting anyone they want? you guys are toast. war stats are showing it

[Dochartaigh]

you declared an all out war when you threatened war on any nation sending dbdc tech.

 

who does polar think they are? hitting anyone they want? you guys are toast. war stats are showing it

 

They are pulling a DBDC just for low tier nations... You seem upset by this. Why? You support DBDC doing the same thing in the upper tier. 

[Lamorak]

you declared an all out war when you threatened war on any nation sending dbdc tech.

 

 

Now, did we declare an all out war against any alliance or did we threaten war on any nation sending tech to DBDC? I'm a bit confused as those 2 things arent exactly the same.

[kingzog]

 

Now, did we declare an all out war against any alliance or did we threaten war on any nation sending tech to DBDC? I'm a bit confused as those 2 things arent exactly the same.

 

Spin all you like, you understand the point being made. Threaten war against a member of an alliance and you threaten the alliance. Period. Or is Polar a special case that shouldn't be judged by either precedent or common sense?

 

(Oh yay, it's this stupid argument again. )

[Mogar]

Spin all you like, you understand the point being made. Threaten war against a member of an alliance and you threaten the alliance. Period. Or is Polar a special case that shouldn't be judged by either precedent or common sense?
 
(Oh yay, it's this stupid argument again. )

So DBDC's raids are not a threat to alliances, but Polar's behavior is? Even you're not this hypocritical.

[Starfox101]

Polar never said we were attacking any alliance who sent tech. Dajobo merely stated we reserved the right to hit a nation who sent tech. It doesn't take a genius to understand this doesn't mean all-out war on every alliance.

[Lamorak]

 

Spin all you like, you understand the point being made. Threaten war against a member of an alliance and you threaten the alliance. Period. Or is Polar a special case that shouldn't be judged by either precedent or common sense?

 

(Oh yay, it's this stupid argument again. )

 

First of all, I am sticking to the actual words in our Declaration, anything else is an interpretation, your side's interpreatation, meaning your side is doing the spinning.

 

Secondly, I wonder how a rather unspecific thread ("we reserve the right to add any nation sending tech to DBDC to our target lists and they may be attacked at anytime.") is worse than actual attacks against our nations and those of our allies in the past half year or so? 

 

Thirdly, wasn't it common practise to consider those nations aiding alliances you are at war with to commit an act of war? 

Edited December 21, 2014 by Lamorak

[Orville Reginbacher]

Starfox is right, Lord Hitchcock is terrible at this:

 

Polar attacked 2 years too late. They are backing allies in this war who are already outnumbered. And then they strung their coalition even thinner when they declared an all out war on any alliance.

if I were polar's ally, I would be pissed. They can't both back their allies and move forth on their tech blockade.

In fact, their closet allies do not even support their actions because they have been burnt in the past because polar failed to act. It must be a theme on that side of the treaty web

By your and Zog's logic, DBDC had already declared an all out war on us when they raided us, right?  Yeah, we honor treaty obligations, big whoop, wanna fight about it?

 

Let's assume for a second that we had to chose between backing our allies (which we are doing 100% right now) and the tech blockade, like they are mutually exclusive.  Do you honestly think we would damn our allies?  That's really ignorant.

 

Enemy morale low?

People in atlas are happy building casualties, Ds loves war, Sra is happy to be fighting, dbdc loves someone in range, Pacifica can't get enough open slots to declare, kaskus mid teirs loves casualties, non grata is happy for the face time, fellowship of the wolves showed who the better wolf pack is, iron loves hitting Sparta and New has been waiting for a while, and rnr needs to use a little of their big wcs.


your aide, dark was complaining to Sparta about entering the war, spartas king is hiding in peace mode, alpha wolves members are leaving because they are all getting ZId and legion, snx, cannot even declared because they are in a perms state of nuclear anarchy

hell, I was happy to even see Kashmir, Java house league, and dbdc rough up SUN


and don't forget umbrella hitting mi6.

tell me more about how polar is winning..

Yeah, Tywin never said Polar is winning.  He said enemy morale is low, which may or may not be true, I'm not a fly on your walls.  Tell me more about how you like to make stuff up that is never said and act like it was.

[kingzog]

So DBDC's raids are not a threat to alliances, but Polar's behavior is? Even you're not this hypocritical.

 

Did I mention DBDC? Hmmm....no, I did not.

 

But I'll address your non-point. I did not mention DBDC. I did not try to equate things. Can such a case be made? Sure it can. Now....how does that in any way invalidate my point?

 

Hmmm....it doesn't.

 

Please put me on ignore. That is where you and your stupidity are going. (I know, I know....you're not really this stupid. It's some kind of mental impairment [ooc] that you are 'roleplaying'[/ooc].)

 

 

 

First of all, I am sticking to the actual words in our Declaration, anything else is an interpretation, your side's interpreatation, meaning your side is doing the spinning.

 

Secondly, I wonder how a rather unspecific thread ("we reserve the right to add any nation sending tech to DBDC to our target lists and they may be attacked at anytime.") is worse than actual attacks against our nations and those of our allies in the past half year or so? 

 

Thirdly, wasn't it common practise to consider those nations aiding alliances you are at war with to commit an act of war? 

 

Let me address your third point first. Yes. I agree completely. (Although I see tech still being traded freely between alliances on both sides of the current conflict. In fact, one of your closest allies is selling tech to Nordreich, and all of our allies are on the other side of this conflict. So apparently that common practice -- which *gasP* I actually support -- went out the window some time ago and both of us missed it.)

 

The whole "reserve the right" part is just weasel words that allows you to avoid attacking those who would be politically inconvenient. Say you will attack everyone or attack no one. Say you are going to "reserve the right" and you are a group of cowards who do not mean what you say.

 

You and Valhalla are perfect for each other.

[Mogar]

Did I mention DBDC? Hmmm....no, I did not.
 
But I'll address your non-point. I did not mention DBDC. I did not try to equate things. Can such a case be made? Sure it can. Now....how does that in any way invalidate my point?
 
Hmmm....it doesn't.
 
Please put me on ignore. That is where you and your stupidity are going. (I know, I know....you're not really this stupid. It's some kind of mental impairment [ooc] that you are 'roleplaying'[/ooc].)

So DBDC is allowed to do so, but Polar reacting to DBDC's constant raids is just awful and Polar should be condemned, gotcha. It does invalidate your point, since you're essentially saying that your side should be allowed to attack nations at will without recourse, but anyone in the Polar coalition doing the same is bad. So standard wartime OWF posturing basically.

Edited December 21, 2014 by Mogar

[Lamorak]

to avoid attacking those who would be politically inconvenient.

 

Tell me more about it, it's not like your side is doing basically the same with all the treaty chess going on.

 

Edit: Also, a nice shift of argument. At first we are the ones declaring an all out war then we weasel out on declaring wars.

Edited December 21, 2014 by Lamorak

[Daenerys Targaryen]

Any further declarations against the alliances of FTW, IRON, Mi6, Polar, Umbrella, or VE will be met by Valhalla. Either you've got enough forces deployed now to get the job done, or you don't. That's the extent of our neutrality in this situation.

 

For the record, I don't believe anyone has declared war on Umbrella (they've waged all their DoW's) and only a 1 nation alliance has declared war on VE. The rest have followed chains but +10 alliances have declared war on Polar. ^_^ If there was ever an ally in need of Valhalla's help, its Polar but I guess Valhalla doesn't want to get rolled. :lol1:

 

Also I'm sure you could help Polar without getting rolled so i guess you're just trying to protect IRON and FTW here because that is all it will do, unless of course, a Lulzist aa can chain in Val now but of course they're mostly cowards who need massive superior odds to fight wars and I'm sure IRON (one of the biggest cowards CN has ever seen) have already told everyone on their side to not chain in Val for Polar's side.

Edited December 21, 2014 by Daenerys Targaryen

[Lord Hitchcock]

Polar never said we were attacking any alliance who sent tech. Dajobo merely stated we reserved the right to hit a nation who sent tech. It doesn't take a genius to understand this doesn't mean all-out war on every alliance.

 

any respectable alliance would protect a member who send tech where they want. so if you hit a nation sending tech to dbdc, you better bet that alliance will hit back.

 

polar is big, apparently they are dumb too

[Starfox101]

 

Did I mention DBDC? Hmmm....no, I did not.

 

But I'll address your non-point. I did not mention DBDC. I did not try to equate things. Can such a case be made? Sure it can. Now....how does that in any way invalidate my point?

 

Hmmm....it doesn't.

 

Please put me on ignore. That is where you and your stupidity are going. (I know, I know....you're not really this stupid. It's some kind of mental impairment [ooc] that you are 'roleplaying'[/ooc].)

 

 

 

Let me address your third point first. Yes. I agree completely. (Although I see tech still being traded freely between alliances on both sides of the current conflict. In fact, one of your closest allies is selling tech to Nordreich, and all of our allies are on the other side of this conflict. So apparently that common practice -- which *gasP* I actually support -- went out the window some time ago and both of us missed it.)

 

The whole "reserve the right" part is just weasel words that allows you to avoid attacking those who would be politically inconvenient. Say you will attack everyone or attack no one. Say you are going to "reserve the right" and you are a group of cowards who do not mean what you say.

 

You and Valhalla are perfect for each other.

Zog, I love you but there is absolutely no comparison between NpO and Valhalla. If you wish to make a comparison, I'll wait. We've backed our allies time and time again.

 

Also, labeling someone a coward for hitting someone who isn't politically convenient is just pointless when this entire war, and every war before it is coalition chess with everyone hitting the easy target. We jumped in to help SNX knowing we would be hit with many counters, and we received 10, and kept 290 nations in war mode. Please, please explain how this makes us cowards.

 

I really am confused why you are so adamantly against Polar. You were away for a good while, came back and now you're becoming a coalition cheerleader for the Doomsphere. I don't get it, especially when you've been on the sideline the entire time.

 

 

any respectable alliance would protect a member who send tech where they want. so if you hit a nation sending tech to dbdc, you better bet that alliance will hit back.

 

polar is big, apparently they are dumb too

You are still not understanding. You are claiming that statement is a blanket declaration on the entirity of CN. It isn't, and no discussion is going to get it through your head.

 

By the way, you really should be more liberal throwing around the term dumb.

[tongkzalot]

 

any respectable alliance would protect a member who send tech where they want. so if you hit a nation sending tech to dbdc, you better bet that alliance will hit back.

 

polar is big, apparently they are dumb too

well...as what i've read since the polar decree been passed, any respectable alliance, given that everyone has been warned, would restrain their members to tech deal w/ dbdc (that's why the decree is posted before they act) if they wish not to be in conflict w/ polaris. there are many other alliance out there to deal w/. but then, it's the alliance call (my thoughts).

[The Zigur]

well...as what i've read since the polar decree been passed, any respectable alliance, given that everyone has been warned, would restrain their members to tech deal w/ dbdc (that's why the decree is posted before they act) if they wish not to be in conflict w/ polaris. there are many other alliance out there to deal w/. but then, it's the alliance call (my thoughts).

 

This is exactly correct. Obviously you will have the lulzists or whatever they want to call themselves rally around DBDC and send up tech regardless of the consequences for their nation, but most nations who are either rational or civilized will not support those who attack alliance sovereignty. One thing is certain, the power of Polaris, and those who stand next to her, waxes in the lower and mid tier the longer this war continues.

 

This is all part of destiny, of course. Most of the Enemy horde, especially those civilized alliances who's arm was bent to support a tyrant, will continue to suffer worse and worse morale in the mid to low tier, fighting for upper tier nations who whine about not having targets and bemoan the difficulty of obtaining tech. Not a favorable position to go about claiming you can stop Polaris from her mission.

Edited December 21, 2014 by Tywin Lannister

[Dcrews]

Yes, I will ask for it to be canceled. In fact, I already have. What is there to hash out? I never understood why people in CN give people so many chances. If an ally fails you in your time of need, to me, there is nothing to save. Move on, and find new friends. Valhalla outright prevented MHA from hitting you guys, so please spare me any incredibly biased banter on your part. Whether or not Valhalla knew this was coming (How could they not? It was pretty widespread that MHA and Fark were entering a week ago), it still is directly hurting us, as our alliances are well covered and the chains are complete, while the alliances on your side were not. Do you see what I'm getting at here? Valhalla watched Polar get hit by 12 alliances, but did nothing. Now Valhalla wants to be a hero and defend their allies. It's just way too little, way too late, and the complete wrong direction to go here. A full declaration of neutrality was their best choice. With Valhalla's history, I'm inclined to believe what is on the surface presented to me.

 

Would you be saying the same were you in our situation, or are you sitting here saying this because this policy protected you directly?

 

So one strike and you're out. Valhalla oAed into NPO for you burning bridges that remain to this day. They chose to help you and your cause but now that they are considering allies other than you it is time to kick them out and slam the door in their face. Spare me any incredibly childish, biased banter on your part.

 

Pretty wide spread, so you're not sure whether they knew and are choosing to assume they did. Convient that suits your narrative right? Sounds like an excuse to flame an ally in public. Who's fault is it that there were alliances that needed to be covered over a month into the war? How about you blame that on Valhalla too while you're at it.

 

If you or your government had done their due diligence there would be nothing to cry about, but you didn't. Poor decisions, following a poor stragetgy, yielded poor results.

 

Perhaps I would be heated if I was in your position, then again, I'd have taken steps to make sure I wouldn't be.