Alterego Posted April 26, 2009 Report Share Posted April 26, 2009 (edited) Who are you to call an INT member a bandwagoner?These terms weren't negotiated with the INT afaik, thusly Tiki has every right to demand more than those extremely soft terms. And so it begins Demanding that they decom a Wonder is pretty harsh though Harsh terms will be the order of the day as stated earlier. Edited April 26, 2009 by Alterego Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lebubu Posted April 26, 2009 Report Share Posted April 26, 2009 (edited) Too early. Especially after looking at some of the replies here :v Edited April 26, 2009 by lebubu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enderland Posted April 26, 2009 Report Share Posted April 26, 2009 These terms are unofficial to our coalition, yes? I choose to recognize them, with one additional clause.Secondly, I am fighting only those which have declared war upon The International. I can not settle for allowing these members of NATO to remain a military threat to me, having played too many games of Command & Conquer: Red Alert. (I was tempted to request that any surrendering nation maintain their government type as "Communism" for thirty days, but I decided to exclude that for brevity ). All I have to say on this issue - Karma is a @#%#$. Hopefully you do not have to learn that lesson the hard way later on in your CN career where this policy backfires. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comrade Tiki Posted April 26, 2009 Report Share Posted April 26, 2009 Demanding that they decom a Wonder is pretty harsh though Actually, none of the nations I am at war with even have a Foreign Air Force base. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Savage Man Posted April 26, 2009 Report Share Posted April 26, 2009 KARMA have bitten of more than they can chew and don't want to be bogged down on what is going to be long and destructive war. Actually it is because we know that most of Hegemony are reasonable individuals who know when the battle is lost. The rest are the zealots, trolls, and the leaders who are so caught up in NPO's supposed invincibility that they refuse to acknowledge defeat. We don't need to waste our time fighting the innocent masses of misguided decent guys, we would rather fight, annihilate and destroy the people who give NPO, GGA, etc. a bad name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Srqt Posted April 26, 2009 Report Share Posted April 26, 2009 These terms are unofficial to our coalition, yes? I choose to recognize them, with one additional clause.Secondly, I am fighting only those which have declared war upon The International. I can not settle for allowing these members of NATO to remain a military threat to me, having played too many games of Command & Conquer: Red Alert. (I was tempted to request that any surrendering nation maintain their government type as "Communism" for thirty days, but I decided to exclude that for brevity ). Are you government in the International? If you are not than it really is not up to you. Decommissioning wonders on an individual term is overly harsh and completely unnecessary. Intelligence agencies have an economic benefit. I will be in contact with your government regarding this shortly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augustus Autumn Posted April 26, 2009 Report Share Posted April 26, 2009 So the unofficial group is offering unofficial surrender terms that aren't officially accepted by any actually alliance and may not be officially acknowledged. Sounds Legit to me. I think you are trying too hard now. Supreme Chancellor, with respect, I think the point is valid. There are in fact no signatories to these terms much less any apparent structure set up to handle those persons who accept this offer. Emperor Ghostlin made an excellent point to be earlier today that, in practice, it would likely be the alliance or alliances they were fighting who would mind the POW. It would certainly help the "Karma" movement to make clear who precisely will be responsible for protecting the POWs and which alliances acknowledge these terms as being official. I have two questions for those concerned:1. Why are these terms so lenient? 2. Why wasn't INT consulted before this was announced? I only quote this statement to underline my above point. Again, thank you for your time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ejayrazz Posted April 26, 2009 Report Share Posted April 26, 2009 People will complain about everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comrade Tiki Posted April 26, 2009 Report Share Posted April 26, 2009 I will be in contact with your government regarding this shortly. I am looking forward to this warm exchange of words in the near future, and I thank you for your help in attempting to resolve any disagreements of misunderstandings I may have. The current channel has proven itself inappropriate for such an exchange. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted April 26, 2009 Report Share Posted April 26, 2009 People will complain about everything. They do. They also complain when the side of "high morals" cant wait to get decommissioning our wonders and getting the harsh terms they are after. We cant even get a straight answer when we ask who is in Karma and who agreed to offer these terms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thisperson Posted April 26, 2009 Report Share Posted April 26, 2009 Yeah you fooled us good. All that talk of no more harsh terms was a trick, you have solidified my already solid position. I will see you at my enforced EZI Funny that. You see you would need power first in order to do that, and honestly, I can't see you with much of it. Good luck tearing through our ranks to enforce this now though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludacrism2 Posted April 26, 2009 Report Share Posted April 26, 2009 KARMA have bitten of more than they can chew and don't want to be bogged down on what is going to be long and destructive war. Say what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulafaras Posted April 26, 2009 Report Share Posted April 26, 2009 (edited) to my knowledge the terms are official. Which means that Big_Z confirmed them for our alliance and our dancing partners. Ps: Alterego your paranoia is showing (edit: Alterego since there seems to be some confusion wether you were threatening me with EZI or trying to imply that we want to EZI you (funny i didn't know we were at war with you) let me just state that i have never asked for anyone to be put on such a list. If on the other hand you think you can EZI me, the words "bring it" come to my mind) Edited April 26, 2009 by Tulafaras Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted April 26, 2009 Report Share Posted April 26, 2009 They do. They also complain when the side of "high morals" cant wait to get decommissioning our wonders and getting the harsh terms they are after. We cant even get a straight answer when we ask who is in Karma and who agreed to offer these terms. Clearly our plan. You are really a piece of work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comedian Posted April 26, 2009 Report Share Posted April 26, 2009 Actually it is because we know that most of Hegemony are reasonable individuals who know when the battle is lost. The rest are the zealots, trolls, and the leaders who are so caught up in NPO's supposed invincibility that they refuse to acknowledge defeat. We don't need to waste our time fighting the innocent masses of misguided decent guys, we would rather fight, annihilate and destroy the people who give NPO, GGA, etc. a bad name. Well the op believes this war to swell for the near future and with no end in sight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzelger Posted April 26, 2009 Report Share Posted April 26, 2009 They do. They also complain when the side of "high morals" cant wait to get decommissioning our wonders and getting the harsh terms they are after. We cant even get a straight answer when we ask who is in Karma and who agreed to offer these terms. If your alliance ends up with white peace I know you're going to be really disappointed. These terms have been in discussion for days and no party has raised an objection. The International government explicitly said they were ok with it, so I don't think you can extrapolate the postings here into a problem. I'm sure it will be ironed out after a bit of communication. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denial Posted April 26, 2009 Report Share Posted April 26, 2009 They do. They also complain when the side of "high morals" cant wait to get decommissioning our wonders and getting the harsh terms they are after. We cant even get a straight answer when we ask who is in Karma and who agreed to offer these terms. Yes, not requiring the decommission of any Wonders whatsoever in the surrender terms is a devious plot to... decommission Wonders. You caught us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raider Posted April 26, 2009 Report Share Posted April 26, 2009 They do. They also complain when the side of "high morals" cant wait to get decommissioning our wonders and getting the harsh terms they are after. We cant even get a straight answer when we ask who is in Karma and who agreed to offer these terms. The terms of surrender are those posted in the OP. ComradeTiki is not a government offical of The International, INT gov has approved of these terms with no additional requirements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted April 26, 2009 Report Share Posted April 26, 2009 Funny that. You see you would need power first in order to do that, and honestly, I can't see you with much of it.Good luck tearing through our ranks to enforce this now though. I meant I will be at perma ZI under the Karma jackboot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulafaras Posted April 26, 2009 Report Share Posted April 26, 2009 I meant I will be at perma ZI under the Karma jackboot. as i said your paranoia is showing... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted April 26, 2009 Report Share Posted April 26, 2009 Yes, not requiring the decommission of any Wonders whatsoever in the surrender terms is a devious plot to... decommission Wonders.You caught us. The vagueness of who is in karma means you surrender to the wrong alliance and you can say hello to slavery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comrade Tiki Posted April 26, 2009 Report Share Posted April 26, 2009 (edited) They also complain when the side of "high morals" cant wait to get decommissioning our wonders and getting the harsh terms they are after. If you are talking about me, you should care to read that I have not asked for the decommission of any wonders. Edited April 26, 2009 by Comrade Tiki Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted April 26, 2009 Report Share Posted April 26, 2009 I meant I will be at perma ZI under the Karma jackboot. Of course, because LoSS and Nemesis, the people who you are engaged with, practice permaZI..ohwait. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merrie Melodies Posted April 26, 2009 Report Share Posted April 26, 2009 NSO and others have said they are not part of Karma. NSO is not part of the Karma movement, nor will it be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted April 26, 2009 Report Share Posted April 26, 2009 as i said your paranoia is showing... All that was supposed to be taboo is now up for debate openly by the Karma side. If you got the upper hand would you roll an alliance on your side who would only take excessive terms? because some seem to want to reap the spoils of war and arent afraid to say it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts