Jump to content

Bring the Boys Back Home


Paradigm

Recommended Posts

Its pathetic to force people off a certain AA by attacking them. You're playing some kind of policing game; which is up to admin and his evil minions, and not up to other players.

The New Pacific Order is still at war with those alliances. So it would make sense any nation who changes to that alliance would become targets.

Edited by Bilrow
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 317
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Why should we show weakness by allowing FAN peace to grow and attack us 6 months down the road?

IC that would be senseless, of course. Except that by the same logic all wars IRL ought to be wars of extermination, and they arent. So something doesnt really connect there, somehow.

But OOC it would be my choice in your shoes. I'm sure I'd find a rematch in 6 months more fun than fighting guerilla warfare for years, no?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FAN has admitted to doing basically all of the atrocities most of you would go to war about.

Like meta-game spying, using senators as a weapon, using peace mode (That became naughty during the GATO war when NPO decreed that any peace-moders get perma-ZI), and general disrespect for their enemies.

This has already been mentioned, but I wonder how you can call Peace Mode an "atrocity" ("most of us would go to war about", nothing less!). During the GATO war the NPO issued some threats you alluded to but that doesn't make PM an "atrocity".

Regardless of the arguments on whether they are justified in using this tools, I think if they were to be released, they'd be back in the same situation soon when they are found "plotting against the NPO."
Why should we show weakness by allowing FAN peace to grow and attack us 6 months down the road?

[...]

We do not trust them as they have stated their goal is the destruction of our alliance. We therefore remain at war with FAN, not out of fear, rather out of prudence. We do what we must for the security of the NPO.

I think that FAN would quietly rebuild, and they will work to weaken the NPO, staying ready to hit them as hard as possible when the opportunity to drive the NPO down would present.

The NPO helped "create" an irreducible enemy in FAN, and that may prove a fatal mistake, one day. We'll see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be interesting if someone has a link for the protectorate/surrender terms NPO gave to FAN, as I'm pretty sure it specifically said the individual nations in violation would be attacked rather than the alliance, also I don't think it said anything about them needing exactly 20% troops, think it was something more along the lines of enough to keep their population happy, which ranges from 20% to 80%.

I keep hearing FAN is NPO's enemy and would seek the downfall of NPO as the excuse to keep the war going, etc. However why give them peace terms in the first place if you think they don't ever deserve peace? Is it alright to sign an agreement with an alliance with no attention of following through with it?

Considering they were attacked while the agreement was still in place, which obligated NPO to protect them and involved non-aggression between the two, I'm curious as to how that can be justified without admitting to breaking the agreement. I'm an open minded person so I look forward to it if someone can point out where in the text of the agreement it gave NPO the grounds to attack FAN without first canceling the treaty.

This FAN incident with them getting attacked right before the peace terms ended has me disappointed, because other than this FAN incident I've felt NPO has at least tried being honorable or at least appear to be, but here it was just so blatant you didn't want peace with FAN despite signing the agreement. I would of seen nothing wrong if you guys had just kept fighting them forever, but the fact that you signed that peace treaty and they complied the best they could, yet you still attack them and say they can never has peace has me wondering why?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This has already been mentioned, but I wonder how you can call Peace Mode an "atrocity" ("most of us would go to war about", nothing less!). During the GATO war the NPO issued some threats you alluded to but that doesn't make PM an "atrocity".

If you have the NS and the allies to back you, you can make anything you want an "atrocity."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be interesting if someone has a link for the protectorate/surrender terms NPO gave to FAN, as I'm pretty sure it specifically said the individual nations in violation would be attacked rather than the alliance, also I don't think it said anything about them needing exactly 20% troops, think it was something more along the lines of enough to keep their population happy, which ranges from 20% to 80%.

I keep hearing FAN is NPO's enemy and would seek the downfall of NPO as the excuse to keep the war going, etc. However why give them peace terms in the first place if you think they don't ever deserve peace? Is it alright to sign an agreement with an alliance with no attention of following through with it?

Considering they were attacked while the agreement was still in place, which obligated NPO to protect them and involved non-aggression between the two, I'm curious as to how that can be justified without admitting to breaking the agreement. I'm an open minded person so I look forward to it if someone can point out where in the text of the agreement it gave NPO the grounds to attack FAN without first canceling the treaty.

This FAN incident with them getting attacked right before the peace terms ended has me disappointed, because other than this FAN incident I've felt NPO has at least tried being honorable or at least appear to be, but here it was just so blatant you didn't want peace with FAN despite signing the agreement. I would of seen nothing wrong if you guys had just kept fighting them forever, but the fact that you signed that peace treaty and they complied the best they could, yet you still attack them and say they can never has peace has me wondering why?

Here you go:

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=2818

Very good topic by the way, I enjoyed reading it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And as always. This link can be found in my sig. I won't let them forget that they blatantly broke their terms.

Not that I am not sympathetic to FAN's cause (they were a vibrant element of the CN community back in the day, one that has been missed), but there is a logical fallacy in FAN's argument concerning the violation of those terms.

FAN's argument is that a very low percentage of FAN nations were violating the terms, and were doing so inadvertently. This argument might fly for some of the bloated sanctioned alliances with teeming masses of inactives, but it doesn't make a lot of sense for FAN.

1. FAN had just been involved in a couple of wars. Wars in CN have an unerring tendency to reduce the inactive population of an alliance to just about nill. This is particularly the case if the alliance is losing the conflict.

2. At various times throughout FAN's existence they had heralded themselves as military masterminds that were fully in-control of their nations' militaries and development. The proof of this is in their rapid redevelopment during the first peace terms even without factories.

3. At various times FAN has claimed to keep nearly perfect discipline among its members. Their restrictions are few, but they are kept uniformly. One leader (Mpol, I believe) even touted the fact that FAN had only ever had two nations go rogue, and had acted immediately to punish their roguery.

Add it all up, and you quickly come to the conclusion that FAN was either lying then (when they were making these claims) or that they are lying now (when they are selling this grand story). I tend to believe the latter.

In spite of all of that, I am resolute in my belief that this conflict needs to come to an end. Though NPO hasn't been able to attack their nations, they have permanently crippled them by keeping them from developing for two years. Whatever damage was inflicted on FAN for the violation of the peace terms has surely been made up by now by all of the aid thieving, spying, and guerilla fighting.

Even if we were barbaric enough to hold to the idea of an eye for an eye, all debts have been paid. The only thing that keeps this going is FAN's pride and NPO's desire for "true" battle.

Edited by WalkerNinja
Link to comment
Share on other sites

FAN's argument is that a very low percentage of FAN nations were violating the terms, and were doing so inadvertently. This argument might fly for some of the bloated sanctioned alliances with teeming masses of inactives, but it doesn't make a lot of sense for FAN.

1. FAN had just been involved in a couple of wars. Wars in CN have an unerring tendency to reduce the inactive population of an alliance to just about nill. This is particularly the case if the alliance is losing the conflict.

2. At various times throughout FAN's existence they had heralded themselves as military masterminds that were fully in-control of their nations' militaries and development. The proof of this is in their rapid redevelopment during the first peace terms even without factories.

3. At various times FAN has claimed to keep nearly perfect discipline among its members. Their restrictions are few, but they are kept uniformly. One leader (Mpol, I believe) even touted the fact that FAN had only ever had two nations go rogue, and had acted immediately to punish their roguery.

Add it all up, and you quickly come to the conclusion that FAN was either lying then (when they were making these claims) or that they are lying now (when they are selling this grand story). I tend to believe the latter.

Huh?

FAN was a relatively active mass-membership alliance, and that's supposed to mean it was impossible for them to miscalculate troops buys or impossible for a handful of ghosts to join long enough for screenshots then disappear?

Your argument seems a bit far-fetched.

Edited by Sigrun Vapneir
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Huh?

FAN was a relatively active mass-membership alliance, and that's supposed to mean it was impossible for them to miscalculate troops buys or impossible for a handful of ghosts to join long enough for screenshots then disappear?

Your argument seems a bit far-fetched.

Indeed.

I doubt ALL nations could be held to those terms. Hell, Pacifica, if ever under the same terms (lol won't ever happen Vox XD) wouldn't even come anywhere near as close to FAN in actually holding them.

Also this, straight from the terms:

Any member of FAN who violates these terms will be ZId as long as the NPO deems appropriate.

Why should all of FAN had to suffer, when not all of FAN was in violation?

Edited by MegaAros
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indeed.

I doubt ALL nations could be held to those terms. Hell, Pacifica, if ever under the same terms (lol won't ever happen Vox XD) wouldn't even come anywhere near as close to FAN in actually holding them.

Also this, straight from the terms:

Why should all of FAN had to suffer, when not all of FAN was in violation?

I'm glad someone understands the correct context of the terms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm glad someone understands the correct context of the terms.

plenty understood them, there's no point of arguing against the current VietFAN war though, because it simply will never come to an end, NPO doesn't want your AA to exist anymore, just like NAAC and LUE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to say thank you to everyone that has supported peace for FAN.

I have read most of the posts, I thought this war was over us supposedly breaking terms not for the transgressions that lead to the 1st Vietfan. During the terms we were not plotting against NPO and decided to live past it. If I remember correctly there were even discussions during the peace terms of FAN allying with NPO to kill the Nazis in NoV(while NoV was still NPO’s protectorate and yes this was NPO doing the plotting.) All of this was after NPO feigned diplomacy and had us send peace terms to them and nuked us then peaced out and redeclared (this was before it was fixed and deleted all peace offers when you attack.) This doesn’t sound like an alliance that wanted to destroy NPO.

As for the 2nd Vietfan, we were a weakened alliance due to the terms that were imposed on us. The only way for us to fight this war is the means we have used and continue to use.

It has been stated the only way that we will get peace is for us to come out peace and to fight. Then peace terms would be discussed. Well we tried that in the 1st Vietfan and you see how that ended for us. You state that you keep us at war because we are a threat to Pacifica, well accepting anything but white peace is a threat to our very existence. Your offer to come out and fight, well we don't believe you. We believe you have every intention to drive us from Bob. You fooled us twice with your feigned diplomacy and we should have known better the second time but we have finally learned.

As for our status, we don’t come to the bb much but we are still around lurking. Our nations have probably suffered in growth more than ZI could ever hurt them. All in all that doesn’t matter we still exist and will continue to until we decide not to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

plenty understood them, there's no point of arguing against the current VietFAN war though, because it simply will never come to an end, NPO doesn't want your AA to exist anymore, just like NAAC and LUE.

And that's where NPO is crossing the line. They don't have the right to say or enforce such a thing. They are not admin nor are they moderators.

Edited by erikz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
... little different from the recent Jarheads war.

So you claimed that FAN was planning to attack then launched an attack against them without presenting any evidence of this?

Huh, I had thought FAN really did attack you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...