Announcement from the Global Order of Darkness

[Bob Janova]

Otherwise it's obvious that TORN is itself the victim of a manufactured war.

This is clear that TORN believes (or at least, wants us to believe that it believes) that GOD and others will actually attack them. This is (i) laughable if you are in the loop at the minute, and (ii) nothing like what you claimed to be our precedent (the Polar war), where we never said that Polaris was going to attack us right then and that we were acting in self defence.

We came straight out and attacked Polaris and said 'yes, we are fighting an offensive war. None of this 'but they were going to start it anyway'. Actually this reminds me most of the Viridicide (remember the use of VE's defensive militarisation as an attempted justification?), but this time the target is not so easy to isolate.

[Alterego]

So have any of the alliances in peace mode attempted to explain what they're doing there or are we just supposed to pretend the aggressive intentions broadcast by this action are really just a joke and everything they say is to be taken at face value?

I dont see how you can come to the conclusion that people sitting in peace mode is an aggressive action. Calling for people to be crushed etc as has been happening in most of these cancellation threads by the alliances doing the canceling and their friends is actually aggressive. Your assumption is pure speculation and nothing more.

[Machiabelly]

Going into peace mode en masse is not, in and of itself, an agressive action. However he said agressive intentions and history has shown that when alliances go into peace mode then agression almost always follows.

Edited April 18, 2009 by Machiabelly

[Denial]

Your assumption is pure speculation and nothing more.

You may want to enquire as to what your allies had been planning over the past 48 hours. I would sincerely hope you haven't been left out of the loop, Alterego!

[Haflinger]

You may want to enquire as to what your allies had been planning over the past 48 hours. I would sincerely hope you haven't been left out of the loop, Alterego!

For once, alterego knows what he's talking about.

[Alterego]

Going into peace mode en masse is not, in and of itself, an agressive action. However he said agressive intentions and history has shown that when alliances go into peace mode then agression almost always follows.

Almost always so it is an educated assumption, but still an assumption.

Edited April 18, 2009 by Alterego

[Denial]

For once, alterego knows what he's talking about.

You are directing me to the BAPS war screen why, exactly? Are you just throwing out random links now, or what?

[Haflinger]

You are directing me to the BAPS war screen why, exactly? Are you just throwing out random links now, or what?

That's not the war screen.

C'mon Revanche, you're not stupid. Figure it out.

[Alterego]

For once, alterego knows what he's talking about.

I believe there were two such events not one.

[Bob Janova]

The only reason to go to peace mode en masse is because you think you're about to get rolled. Since no-one would pre-emptively roll alliances like Valhalla and TORN who are well connected to the web, the inference must be that they are planning to start a war and then not have to face the counter attack.

C'mon Haf, you're not that stupid either.

[Alterego]

The only reason to go to peace mode en masse is because you think you're about to get rolled. Since no-one would pre-emptively roll alliances like Valhalla and TORN who are well connected to the web, the inference must be that they are planning to start a war and then not have to face the counter attack.

C'mon Haf, you're not that stupid either.

There has been speculation Sparta & Co was planning just such a thing. These cancellations actually reinforce that theory and make it a more plausible theory than an aggressive action was coming because of nations in peace mode.

Edited April 18, 2009 by Alterego

[pezstar]

There has been speculation Sparta & Co was planning just such a thing. These cancellations actually reinforce that theory and make it a more plausible theory than an aggressive action was coming because of nations in peace mode.

The glaring difference in this "comparison" is that Sparta's actions were purely speculative. There's been hard evidence passed around that TORN was/is planning to attack OV. You fail.

[Haflinger]

The only reason to go to peace mode en masse is because you think you're about to get rolled. Since no-one would pre-emptively roll alliances like Valhalla and TORN who are well connected to the web, the inference must be that they are planning to start a war and then not have to face the counter attack.

Actually, there's another reason. Heh.

But I'm not sure this is the proper place to go into the details of strategy that my ally is using.

The glaring difference in this "comparison" is that Sparta's actions were purely speculative. There's been hard evidence passed around that TORN was/is planning to attack OV. You fail.

Once again, I'd like to point out that alterego is not BAPS gov, and the fact that he very occasionally gets something right (once so far that I've seen) doesn't mean that his posts should be counted on for reliable strategic insights.

[Wu Tang Clan]

And on that note, has anyone mad a treaty web following all these cancellations? I'd really like to see one...

[zzzptm]

I came for the GOD and I stayed for the Vanguard.

Vanguard, I'd eat 100 nukes for you guys, really I would.

Quick question: do the nukes I ate during the "No CB" / "Friends > Infra" war count towards that total?

[Khyber]

I'm sure miscommunication and mistrust will push both respective sides to their corners. Then the bigger side, will start to bully on the OWF, and the weaker side will get overly defensive, showing they are the weaker side publically, this will get the more neutral alliances to generally go to the bigger side, since they really have no stake in the war and have no intrest in getting rolled for another alliance's purposes.

Aggressive alliances on the bigger side will push furthur and furthur until the weaker side draws a line in the sand. This line in the sand will be crossed by an aggressive alliance on the bigger side, and some of the weaker side will stand and fight and others will back out in back room deals.

There is one difference here, while I consider GOD to be one of those aggressive alliances (TORN, Valhalla, TPF are also in my opinion aggressive alliances), certainly one that will cross the line when it is drawn in the sand, the larger alliances on their side have not been aggressors often. You may point to the NpO war, but that is generally it, and it was fear of what the NpO would do to them if they were in a similiar position that drove them to aggressively seek war with the NpO. And lets be honest GOD will not go to war against TORN, Valhalla and others without the consent from these larger alliances. To avoid war for TORN or Valhalla is actually easy, which is don't give a solid CB to anyone to get attacked. The coalition needs a very strong CB to unite them at this stage.

These are just thoughts on the matter.

So I disagree with you Haflinger, TORN and Valhalla have no reason to fear a war being brought to their doors without acting aggressive in the first place. And worse being very defensive here only weakens your position as it puts you as the weaker side.

NPO is playing it smart, sadly I don't see the same from Valhalla and others. Remember public opinion was against the Initiative in GWII, and they sure as hell won that battle, but they didn't post from a weaker position, and always thought they were going to win the war. What I'm seeing now is far more reminisent of the NpO and BLEU just before they were attacked.

So to avoid war here is what TORN and Valhalla need to do. 1) Stop being overly defensive on the OWF, and acting like the victims when the truth of the matter is they believed they had a valid CB to attack OV and found out they didn't have the political capability to do so (yes I don't believe in conspiricy theories about how it was used to divide and conquer). 2) Don't give the opposition a valid CB. 3) Be curtious and polite on the OWF with meaningless quotes like, sad but nessessary and so forth, and in the mean time try to work with those alliance that are less aggressive on the other side to broker a more lasting peace. At least this is how I see it.

But I don't think TORN or Valhalla want peace, and feel too threatened to get their act straight in time. Never the less, here's hoping.

[Denial]

I came for the GOD and I stayed for the Vanguard.

Vanguard, I'd eat 100 nukes for you guys, really I would.

Right back at you

Quick question: do the nukes I ate during the "No CB" / "Friends > Infra" war count towards that total?

No, I've reset the counter

[GOONS]

Bow chika wow wow. I'm loving these past few days.

[shahenshah]

I'm sure miscommunication and mistrust will push both respective sides to their corners. Then the bigger side, will start to bully on the OWF, and the weaker side will get overly defensive, showing they are the weaker side publically, this will get the more neutral alliances to generally go to the bigger side, since they really have no stake in the war and have no intrest in getting rolled for another alliance's purposes.

Aggressive alliances on the bigger side will push furthur and furthur until the weaker side draws a line in the sand. This line in the sand will be crossed by an aggressive alliance on the bigger side, and some of the weaker side will stand and fight and others will back out in back room deals.

There is one difference here, while I consider GOD to be one of those aggressive alliances (TORN, Valhalla, TPF are also in my opinion aggressive alliances), certainly one that will cross the line when it is drawn in the sand, the larger alliances on their side have not been aggressors often. You may point to the NpO war, but that is generally it, and it was fear of what the NpO would do to them if they were in a similiar position that drove them to aggressively seek war with the NpO. And lets be honest GOD will not go to war against TORN, Valhalla and others without the consent from these larger alliances. To avoid war for TORN or Valhalla is actually easy, which is don't give a solid CB to anyone to get attacked. The coalition needs a very strong CB to unite them at this stage.

These are just thoughts on the matter.

So I disagree with you Haflinger, TORN and Valhalla have no reason to fear a war being brought to their doors without acting aggressive in the first place. And worse being very defensive here only weakens your position as it puts you as the weaker side.

NPO is playing it smart, sadly I don't see the same from Valhalla and others. Remember public opinion was against the Initiative in GWII, and they sure as hell won that battle, but they didn't post from a weaker position, and always thought they were going to win the war. What I'm seeing now is far more reminisent of the NpO and BLEU just before they were attacked.

So to avoid war here is what TORN and Valhalla need to do. 1) Stop being overly defensive on the OWF, and acting like the victims when the truth of the matter is they believed they had a valid CB to attack OV and found out they didn't have the political capability to do so (yes I don't believe in conspiricy theories about how it was used to divide and conquer). 2) Don't give the opposition a valid CB. 3) Be curtious and polite on the OWF with meaningless quotes like, sad but nessessary and so forth, and in the mean time try to work with those alliance that are less aggressive on the other side to broker a more lasting peace. At least this is how I see it.

But I don't think TORN or Valhalla want peace, and feel too threatened to get their act straight in time. Never the less, here's hoping.

While you make excellent points, but its been obvious for past 2-3 months that no matter what is done, right or wrong, a certain side is going to be blamed regardless and trolled afterwards, you and I have both seen this, while I wont hold any party 100% innocent, as there is none, but I hope you get my point. The rhetoric of war has been coming from the other side for a long time now. The Present Hegemony is not the one trying to change the status quo with war, its in the best interest of the Hegemony to not have a war and this has been stated publicly and privately several times before. The other side has to initiate or act if they wish to change the current status, they'd been saying it for a past few months and some steps are now starting to become visible in that regards, it is only natural to react to the hostile intentions and actions.

The script is being followed to the letter as far as some alliances outside Q and Citadel are concerned, I applaud them for their diligence.

[Scorbolt]

So to avoid war here is what TORN and Valhalla need to do. 1) Stop being overly defensive on the OWF, and acting like the victims when the truth of the matter is they believed they had a valid CB to attack OV and found out they didn't have the political capability to do so (yes I don't believe in conspiricy theories about how it was used to divide and conquer). 2) Don't give the opposition a valid CB. 3) Be curtious and polite on the OWF with meaningless quotes like, sad but nessessary and so forth, and in the mean time try to work with those alliance that are less aggressive on the other side to broker a more lasting peace. At least this is how I see it.

But I don't think TORN or Valhalla want peace, and feel too threatened to get their act straight in time. Never the less, here's hoping.

I don't think you could really be more correct Khyber. However, I think TORN/Valhalla could deal with peace, the problem they face is that so many on their 'side' (excuse me for calling it that) are so used to the aggressive posturing it's a hard habit to break. TORN particularly has been playing it cool by staying away from these announcements to avoid getting sucked into bad arguments.... then there is Bob Sanders.

[Nintenderek]

This is excellent news. It looks like their whole isolation plan, didn't just fail, but is now being used against them. Isn't irony great?

[ChairmanHal]

This is excellent news. It looks like their whole isolation plan, didn't just fail, but is now being used against them. Isn't irony great?

I think you'll find that TORN has no shortage of friends and allies willing to come to its aid...even if I spend the next two weeks in a cabana chair sipping Dos Equis with a buxom Viking girl planted on my...lap.

[Haflinger]

So I disagree with you Haflinger, TORN and Valhalla have no reason to fear a war being brought to their doors without acting aggressive in the first place.

If this is true, an awful lot of people may wind up being sadly disappointed.

Well, I'm no prophet. We'll see what happens in the next few days.

(But a terrific post nonetheless, Khyber.)

[ChairmanHal]

I don't think you could really be more correct Khyber. However, I think TORN/Valhalla could deal with peace, the problem they face is that so many on their 'side' (excuse me for calling it that) are so used to the aggressive posturing it's a hard habit to break. TORN particularly has been playing it cool by staying away from these announcements to avoid getting sucked into bad arguments.... then there is Bob Sanders.

You were making a perfectly valid point there for a while then you bulloxed the landing with a "but you know...Bob Sanders" meme and face planted. Pity.

[Scorbolt]

You were making a perfectly valid point there for a while then you bulloxed the landing with a "but you know...Bob Sanders" meme and face planted. Pity.

Please excuse me, I could not resist.

good riddance, uyo were planning to roll us anyway $%&@ersw