Release of GPA from Terms

[magicninja]

Magicninja, can you please get a little better at 'butting heads' if you are going to do it? Revanche seems to easily get the upper hand every time you post.

All he does is find a little nugget of truth and surround it with insults. I guess if that's the kind of thing you like though.......

[Chickenzilla]

All he does is find a little nugget of truth and surround it with insults. I guess if that's the kind of thing you like though.......

Sounds like the normal NPO, Slayer, or TBB route. Ask any of them for tips in making Revanche look the fool.

Congrats for getting your nukes back GPA.

[Denial]

Meh, there are far too few I really enjoy butting heads with.

Ah, so it's weak in your case is it? At least you didn't dodge your shortcomings. Carry on with your bawfest then.

Also, since we generally like minding our own business I think we'll be fine. Though I do make an exception here and there.

I have no delusions as to our member count, nuclear arsenal or total strength. Our influence comes not through numbers and putting those towards aggressive goals, but other means. And for an alliance that apparently values minding its own business, you sure do have a great deal to say on a range of alliances and issues from behind the shield of The Phoenix Federation.

All he does is find a little nugget of truth and surround it with insults. I guess if that's the kind of thing you like though.......

I would like you to point out these insults. But it is nice to see you admit that I am speaking the truth.

[enderland]

I don't understand -

• Why GPA gets nukes since they never will use them
  
• Why the surrender terms had clauses about nukes since GPA never will use them and all this did was force them to grow faster
  
• Why people here act like GPA was a "threat" ever
  
• How surrender terms were forgotten - I'm sure if they were broken they would no longer have been forgotten
  
• Why GPA never used their nukes in the first place ( )
  

[magicninja]

I have no delusions as to our member count, nuclear arsenal or total strength. Our influence comes not through numbers and putting those towards aggressive goals, but other means. And for an alliance that apparently values minding its own business, you sure do have a great deal to say on a range of alliances and issues from behind the shield of The Phoenix Federation.

I would like you to point out these insults. But it is nice to see you admit that I am speaking the truth.

Point them out?

Can you not see yourself type? Here I'll bold one in this post for you. I used to talk no matter my AA or friends. I can respect you for doing the same but honestly I don't see how you and everyone else like you doesn't get tired of it. At this rate it'll be the same a month a year and even five years from now and you'll still be talking instead of acting. It's almost painful to watch but I do my best.

Also, the only truth you've said is that you aren't strong enough to stand up for what you believe. I agree.

[Chickenzilla]

Point them out?

Can you not see yourself type? Here I'll bold one in this post for you. I used to talk no matter my AA or friends. I can respect you for doing the same but honestly I don't see how you and everyone else like you doesn't get tired of it. At this rate it'll be the same a month a year and even five years from now and you'll still be talking instead of acting. It's almost painful to watch but I do my best.

Also, the only truth you've said is that you aren't strong enough to stand up for what you believe. I agree.

What? Go back and read your last few posts. Were you the one just stating "All he does is find a little nugget of truth and surround it with insults. I guess if that's the kind of thing you like though......." You just did the same thing that you tried to call him out for. Would that not make you a hypocrite?

[magicninja]

What? Go back and read your last few posts. Were you the one just stating "All he does is find a little nugget of truth and surround it with insults. I guess if that's the kind of thing you like though......." You just did the same thing that you tried to call him out for. Would that not make you a hypocrite?

Yep.

I don't pretend to have the moral high ground though.

[Chairman Cao]

Gogo

[Chickenzilla]

Yep.

I don't pretend to have the moral high ground though.

You tried to by saying that that's all that all he does is surround the truth with insults, like you yourself did not.

[Denial]

Point them out?

Can you not see yourself type? Here I'll bold one in this post for you.

Even if we ignore the fact that your only evidence of my 'insults' came after your claim, what you have bolded is not an insult. It is an observation that I worded in a most respectful manner.

OOC: If you believe I am making insults, perhaps you should try reporting me to moderation for flaming and let them do their job. See how that works out.

I used to talk no matter my AA or friends. I can respect you for doing the same but honestly I don't see how you and everyone else like you doesn't get tired of it. At this rate it'll be the same a month a year and even five years from now and you'll still be talking instead of acting. It's almost painful to watch but I do my best.

If I was 'acting' to bolster my 'talking', it would be counter-productive to share the details of those actions and plans to you or anyone else in the general public. Though, you are providing me with a great deal of insight into your leadership methods; plan all strategy in the public eye, and throw your alliance against a coalition fifty times its size. I wish the members of Enigma the best of luck. They are going to need it.

Also, the only truth you've said is that you aren't strong enough to stand up for what you believe. I agree.

I realise this may be difficult to comprehend for someone who is so accustomed to belligerence, but there are more ways to make a stand for what you believe in than imprudent military action.

[Petrovich4]

At this rate it'll be the same a month a year and even five years from now and you'll still be talking instead of acting. It's almost painful to watch but I do my best.

Well, well, look who it is

Why, magic I thought you enjoyed butting heads with several people in the form of a verbal dialogue where you spin and display your own incompetence? Keep it up with those posts!

Congrats GPA on being sovereign again and for the other alliances that finally let you fully off the hook.

[WorldConqueror]

hay gais remember when this thread was about GPA and nukes, and not each others' perceived shortcomings?

And on that note, I should congratulate GPA for being released from this term, and hope they learned from the events that led to the imposition of terms in the first place.

[magicninja]

Even if we ignore the fact that your only evidence of my 'insults' came after your claim, what you have bolded is not an insult. It is an observation that I worded in a most respectful manner.

OOC: If you believe I am making insults, perhaps you should try reporting me to moderation for flaming and let them do their job. See how that works out.

If I was 'acting' to bolster my 'talking', it would be counter-productive to share the details of those actions and plans to you or anyone else in the general public. Though, you are providing me with a great deal of insight into your leadership methods; plan all strategy in the public eye, and throw your alliance against a coalition fifty times its size. I wish the members of Enigma the best of luck. They are going to need it.

I realise this may be difficult to comprehend for someone who is so accustomed to belligerence, but there are more ways to make a stand for what you believe in than imprudent military action.

ooc: Even a snide remark can be worded respectfully. They're IC insults one leader to another so it's fine. I like it or else I wouldn't be here.

Yes, that is exactly what I would do.

Maybe, but none quicker or more effective.

Hey Petro learned from his master. How sweet.

hay gais remember when this thread was about GPA and nukes, and not each others' perceived shortcomings?

Very true.

Best of luck GPA.

Edited February 3, 2009 by magicninja

[Generalissimo]

How surrender terms were forgotten - I'm sure if they were broken they would no longer have been forgotten

Nothing on this thread has yet to shine light on this mysterious mystery, how could the coalition forget their responsibility?

[WorldConqueror]

Nothing on this thread has yet to shine light on this mysterious mystery, how could the coalition forget their responsibility?

Not just a mystery but a MYSTERIOUS MYSTERY! I would guess that a combination of release from the other surrender terms, and the passage of time contributed to an assumption that GPA was no longer under terms, and thus the nuclear restriction was overlooked.

[Generalissimo]

Not just a mystery but a MYSTERIOUS MYSTERY! I would guess that a combination of release from the other surrender terms, and the passage of time contributed to an assumption that GPA was no longer under terms, and thus the nuclear restriction was overlooked.

Reasonable enough. I apologize for my intense and occasionally belligerent hard-hitting questions and commentary, but I will not apologize for my ever vigilant search for truth!!! It might have been easy to overlook a single article, perhaps the community needs a compendium of continuing treaty terms to prevent another such oversight?

[Venizelos]

hehe, about time!

GPA have fun with the big sticks!

as for aldern peterson's Qs earlier, nations need nukes as a detterence agaisnt raiding and roguing against them. if a nuclear rogue attacks you you should have nukes to retaliate promptly.

also, nukes bump up your NS and make the alliance more secure in general, since they become a strong defensive (if not offensive) force that others don't tamper with.

[Epiphanus]

Valhalla is so cool they signed twice.

[James Wilson]

I don't understand -

• Why GPA gets nukes since they never will use them
  
• Why the surrender terms had clauses about nukes since GPA never will use them and all this did was force them to grow faster
  
• Why people here act like GPA was a "threat" ever
  
• How surrender terms were forgotten - I'm sure if they were broken they would no longer have been forgotten
  
• Why GPA never used their nukes in the first place ( )
  

1) I already explained why every serious alliance has nukes.

2) This I do not know because the only thing I get from it is that NPO feared that the Neutral Menace would grow to new heights again and seek revenge (Yea right.)

3) Because they need to keep up that act that they had a good CB.

4) I would like to know the answer to this as well because thats a terrible thing to do to those who have surrendered honorably. And yes, I'm sure that would have been the case.

5) Why? Because any alliance who uses nukes against NPO either disbands or gets such harsh terms that they become a shell of the alliance they once were (Or disband later).

And Sam. No were not GPA 2.0, how silly of you to think that. No, I'm one of those people who has whats called a voice . And I will use it.

[enderland]

1) I already explained why every serious alliance has nukes.

Alliances which prove they will not use nukes should not bother having them as all they are is wasted bills and lost income.

2) This I do not know because the only thing I get from it is that NPO feared that the Neutral Menace would grow to new heights again and seek revenge (Yea right.)

You forget that not having nukes means they make more money, thus growing FASTER.

5) Why? Because any alliance who uses nukes against NPO either disbands or gets such harsh terms that they become a shell of the alliance they once were (Or disband later).

http://www.cybernations.net/stats_alliance...hroom%20Kingdom

Edited February 3, 2009 by alden peterson

[WilliamDean]

Alliances which prove they will not use nukes should not bother having them as all they are is wasted bills and lost income.

You forget that not having nukes means they make more money, thus growing FASTER.

These points both assume that not having nukes wouldn't also make them a very easy target for alliances looking for a war.

http://www.cybernations.net/stats_alliance...hroom%20Kingdom

Example is taken after the Woodstock Massacre. How were GPA supposed to know what NPO were going to do in the future? Besides, GPA had to make huge rep payments (70,000 tech in total) even without using nukes.

Edited February 3, 2009 by WilliamDean

[Zoomzoomzoom]

As I said before - nukes are part of the game. It shouldn't be up to anyone to deny them the right to buy em. People run their nations they way they want to-and if having a nuke or 20 makes them feel awesome then they should be allowed to buy them.

[James Wilson]

Alliances which prove they will not use nukes should not bother having them as all they are is wasted bills and lost income.

Yes because using the nukes would have totally gotten them peace earlier then they did.

You forget that not having nukes means they make more money, thus growing FASTER.

Oh gee...your totally right...most people are proud of having nukes. If they don't want the increase in bill payment, then they wait to get them. Then again...when the odds against you are 8-1, why launch nukes and %*$^ up any chance at peace?

http://www.cybernations.net/stats_alliance...hroom%20Kingdom

Oh, hey look, a lone survivor.

Responses are bolded . And I agree with Zoom

Edit: forgot my key and another thing

Edited February 3, 2009 by James Wilson

[Mongrel]

The only two heartening developments are that the Green Protection Agency is once again sovereign, and that at least one of the signatories of this announcement has since distanced itself from such aggressive practices.

... Well I'd like to think they have their sovreignty, however as I said, by surrendering they have validated the CB, which I believe opens the door for future tech harvests.

What I never understood about the GPA hub bub was why Kurushio was literally let off scott free when it appeared he was the one hid details from membership and other things. Of course my knowledge of the whole conundrum is only what I read via here, but it appeared that way to me.

GPA would have had no means to act against Kurushio, as he was long gone and entrenched in tC by the time his scemes were revealed. As for his ultimate demise ... I guess you can't really say he was let off scott free.

Anyway, my point is that someone with a different starting belief about the character of the victors would reach a different conclusion about the nuclear restrictions.

I hate to actually have to respond to you, because it fascinates me that you actually believe yourself.

Let's just drop the whole preconceived notion bit, and look at the facts of the war. I suspect you have no capacity for an objective view, but it may just help a bit to try.

If all the alliances that liked to come and cry about how awful the NPO and their friends are actually decided to stop whining and fight for what they believe we might actually see a war worth fighting. They are too scared or weak or have some other excuse though. Isn't that right Revanche?

Actually most of the whining I'm seeing is from the "victors" side. It's very entertaining seeing so many sore winners here.

I don't understand -

...Why people here act like GPA was a "threat" ever

...Why GPA never used their nukes in the first place ( )

Well I would like an answer to the first myself. As for not flying our nukes, I can tell you I was one of the people who could have ordered the strike. There's no short answer, and it's something I often find myself discussing with others. Feel free to PM or find me in #Rok if you'd like to chat.

After seeing some of the other responses to your questions, I have to just share my thoughts about how funny I found the attitude of the aggressors for giving strong warnings and threats to keep us from nuking. It was cute seeing how worried they were for their precious pixels to be preserved while the destroyed an entire alliance and community.

hay gais remember when this thread was about GPA and nukes, and not each others' perceived shortcomings?

And on that note, I should congratulate GPA for being released from this term, and hope they learned from the events that led to the imposition of terms in the first place.

I have to agree chickenzilla and magicninja need to get a room and leave this thread.

However, I'd love to hear your opinion about some of the "lessons" GPA should have learned and why.

[enderland]

These points both assume that not having nukes wouldn't also make them a very easy target for alliances looking for a war.

What's it matter? In the last war, they proved they won't use nukes in a defensive war. They have a precedent for not using nukes already. What difference does it make to hvae 2000 of them

Example is taken after the Woodstock Massacre. How were GPA supposed to know what NPO were going to do in the future? Besides, GPA had to make huge rep payments (70,000 tech in total) even without using nukes.

Yes because using the nukes would have totally gotten them peace earlier then they did.

Nukes are no deterrence when they are not used.

Oh gee...your totally right...most people are proud of having nukes. If they don't want the increase in bill payment, then they wait to get them. Then again...when the odds against you are 8-1, why launch nukes and %*$^ up any chance at peace?

Irony - claiming that by not firing nukes retained for the sake of pride increases the odds of one surrendering (not exactly a "proud" moment).