AirMe Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 (edited) To be fair, the precedent on that issue was set by the coalition that attacked the New Polar Order, i.e. the Joint MCXA/TOP/Grämlins/Umbrella/FOK/RnR/FARK Announcement. I would note that all of the alliances in that announcement except MCXA are currently fighting on the Karma side of this war, and the two MCXA Co-Chancellors who signed that announcement are now in TSO, on the Karma side, although TOP and TSO are not a part of Karma.mhawk and Elysium defended Valhalla against Greenland Republic, who were defending Hyperion against Valhalla. You can argue all you want about the appropriateness of that action but at least get your history right. Your post has nothing to do with my response either. I was pointing out to people who were actually paying attention, that NpO was attacked for the actions of a leader who had been removed. There for holding Valhalla responsible for her actions when noWedge led her is perfectly acceptable and valid given the precedent that was set there. I urge you to go back and read mhawk's original comment instead of making yourself look like a fool. And I know my history and don't need you to attempt to school me on it. I am well aware of who was involved where and for what reasons. EDIT: My apologies to the OP for getting this off topic. I will take it elsewhere. Edited May 5, 2009 by AirMe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shahenshah Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 So the only form of surrender terms ever to be accepted on Planet Bob ever again is white peace. Got it. Karma has offered the sweetest deal and people are hooked to the idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhawk Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 This is one of the worst comebacks possible. You mentioned in your original post that holding Valhalla responsible for something in the past is moot because they removed that leader long ago. I was pointing out your hypocrisy by pointing out that in the noCB war NpO had removed sponge but NpO was still punished for the crimes of a leader that they removed.Way to attempt to complete ignore the point of the post to try to make yourself look better. You just don't get it. How am I being hypocritical? 1) I state that the leader that did the crime against baps was removed and destroyed. Deductively it would seem neither valhalla nor her allies were in support of his actions. 2) I entered the "noCB" war honoring a defense treaty. I don't think I even commented in the citadel+all dow on polar thread. You cite my hypocrisy, but no where do you link how my statement on nW translates into me holding the opposite view or actions against polaris when they removed sponge. I entered the war on a defense obligation with Valhalla, I wasn't out there enacting punishment on NpO despite their leader being removed, hell I don't think we even fought. I'm not trying to make myself look better, I'm trying to clear up whatever misconception you have on my character and actions because you're a good guy, but have come to some incredibly fallacious conclusions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AirMe Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 You just don't get it. How am I being hypocritical? 1) I state that the leader that did the crime against baps was removed and destroyed. Deductively it would seem neither valhalla nor her allies were in support of his actions. 2) I entered the "noCB" war honoring a defense treaty. I don't think I even commented in the citadel+all dow on polar thread. You cite my hypocrisy, but no where do you link how my statement on nW translates into me holding the opposite view or actions against polaris when they removed sponge. I entered the war on a defense obligation with Valhalla, I wasn't out there enacting punishment on NpO despite their leader being removed, hell I don't think we even fought. I'm not trying to make myself look better, I'm trying to clear up whatever misconception you have on my character and actions because you're a good guy, but have come to some incredibly fallacious conclusions. It was MONTHS....I say MONTHS after that war started that nowedge was removed. If it happened a couple of weeks down the line....I could concede that point to you. If her allies were truly were against her they would have stood up fairly quickly and said something about. Instead they allowed him to continue on his way and participate in other atrocities until he was finally removed. I apologize if I made it seem like you were an instigator in the noCB war with my comments, that was not the point I was trying to make. I was just pointing out that you did support that line of argument then whether you entered on treaty obligations or not. And for the most part I think you are one of the most stand up guys in the game, you just have a history of making not so stand up decisions Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nish81 Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 All you’ve basically done is force tech deals, which just about everyone on the planet agrees, are a good thing. 3m/150 sells and 3m/50 buys - I don't think everyone on planet bob sees those as good. unless things have -really- changed while I was gone. You do realize how transparent your argument is? Yours and every other Hegemony goon who wants tro cry out and call out karma on what peace terms will be given. So the only form of surrender terms ever to be accepted on Planet Bob ever again is white peace. Got it. It has to be put into context, the context being why the alliance entered the war, (and possibly how they conducted themselves). this is an alliance that entered purely in defense of an ally, with no link to the original CB or any of the grievances that karma has against hegemony, and IMO we conducted ourselves well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhawk Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 It was MONTHS....I say MONTHS after that war started that nowedge was removed. If it happened a couple of weeks down the line....I could concede that point to you. If her allies were truly were against her they would have stood up fairly quickly and said something about. Instead they allowed him to continue on his way and participate in other atrocities until he was finally removed.I apologize if I made it seem like you were an instigator in the noCB war with my comments, that was not the point I was trying to make. I was just pointing out that you did support that line of argument then whether you entered on treaty obligations or not. And for the most part I think you are one of the most stand up guys in the game, you just have a history of making not so stand up decisions Not to keep beating this, but the BAPs war started Jan 7th, nW issued the pzi statement on Jan 13, 2008, 11:41 PM Proceedings on his removal started on valentines day. The "months months" part is a bit misleading. To be part of a then 15 man alliance working with our protectorate toward such an outcome is no small undertaking. Indeed had we failed there would have been ezi all around. What was accomplished took only a matter of weeks before the cards were all on the table and the delay with the norns fighting it out. Indeed you can ask val mil guys, on V day I ordered elysium into a military deployment for a fight against our protectors should things have gone poorly. Friendly val gov set us up with backup treaties with TPF incase it went really wrong, that stuff takes time. We all roll with hand we're dealt, I just happened to have been raised by a pack of drunk vikings and gun totting shtf survivalists. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elderago Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 (edited) wow rather harsh terms to be honest nevertheless it is good you guys got peace Edited May 5, 2009 by sircrimson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kryievla Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 As the precedent you guys set in the noCB, removing the leader of an alliance does not absolve that alliance from it's sins. Double standards run thick in you. noWedge has been gone well over a year now. Our alliance has had a fair bit of turnover; many folks who left because of him have returned, and many folks who supported him have left. Those of us who have taken power since see things in a different light. Sure, we're still Valhalla, the alliance that you love to hate But, we are not what we were a year ago. Most folks aren't; times change & so do people. Nonetheless, I figured the day would come when folks would come a knockin', wanting payback for past deeds. Turnabout is fair play, no? And revenge is a fire that burns in the belly til it's had some outage. I am not complaining about it, figure it would take copious amounts of blood to expiate some past sins anyhow. Just remember that those things are in the past. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AirMe Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 noWedge has been gone well over a year now. Our alliance has had a fair bit of turnover; many folks who left because of him have returned, and many folks who supported him have left. Those of us who have taken power since see things in a different light. Sure, we're still Valhalla, the alliance that you love to hate But, we are not what we were a year ago. Most folks aren't; times change & so do people.Nonetheless, I figured the day would come when folks would come a knockin', wanting payback for past deeds. Turnabout is fair play, no? And revenge is a fire that burns in the belly til it's had some outage. I am not complaining about it, figure it would take copious amounts of blood to expiate some past sins anyhow. Just remember that those things are in the past. TBH, there are only like 2 of you I don't like Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhawk Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 TBH, there are only like 2 of you I don't like I bet you punitive tpf terms I can name them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragashingo Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 You must not have read the thousands of posts in the last two weeks calling for total destruction, super reps, viceroys, PZI, EZI, removal of leaders, disbandment etc. There is no doubt in my mind that he didn't as those thousands of posts simply do not exist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Havamil Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 I have skimmed through this thread and have one question. TSI will remain neutral for the rest of the war, and will not aid any nations involved in the war. If i recall IS declared on Valhalla, did they not? Therefore sending tech to IS would not be staying neutral would it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AirMe Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 I bet you punitive tpf terms I can name them Unfortunately, Archon will be setting the terms and in the end I will have very little say Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yubyubsan Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 Those are seriously bull**** terms. Best of luck to you in the future, TSI. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solaris Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 Good to see Sasori getting peace. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New Reverie Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 (edited) edit: misread the terms :lol: Hang them from the rafters!!! Edited May 5, 2009 by New Reverie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extraduty Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 I have skimmed through this thread and have one question.If i recall IS declared on Valhalla, did they not? Therefore sending tech to IS would not be staying neutral would it? The terms will not be paid until the war is over. Therefore they will be no violation of the terms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 There is no doubt in my mind that he didn't as those thousands of posts simply do not exist. You can start HERE, then here for starters and tell me they dont exist. You can continue by reading surrender terms from the newest back and you will find hundreds more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janax Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 We are now at hundreds.... How long before that becomes dozens? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morey 2k7 Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 We are now at hundreds....How long before that becomes dozens? and then he will find that those posts are just from members and not in positions to be calling the shots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Manbearpig Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 (edited) You fought amazingly well TSI, I can only imagine IS and TFO had to have been amazing fighters as well to hold out for so long. j/k Good fight and good luck rebuilding everyone! P.S. Not too harsh of terms, I doubt these will even come close to repairing the damage TSI did to TFO, but I've only heard IS had exactly one war with TSI, so why are they getting reps??? Edited May 5, 2009 by The Manbearpig Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Facade Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 aww, terms aren't my favorite thing to see. good luck anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shurukian Posted May 5, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 You fought amazingly well TSI, I can only imagine IS and TFO had to have been amazing fighters as well to hold out for so long. j/k Good fight and good luck rebuilding everyone! P.S. Not too harsh of terms, I doubt these will even come close to repairing the damage TSI did to TFO, but I've only heard IS had exactly one war with TSI, so why are they getting reps??? IS had much more than one war with us MBP, no worries. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Cash Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 Yes, for all your bleating about not showing your enemies any mercy keep on crying about not getting any. We don't have nearly enough of that, you cowards. You wanted to fight, you got the fight. Take your medicine.EDIT for clarity: This isn't about TSI, but about NPO and their dogs. I like TSI. take their 'medicine'? to cure what, honor? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augustus Autumn Posted May 5, 2009 Report Share Posted May 5, 2009 take their 'medicine'? to cure what, honor? I cleared this issue up - the comment was not directed at TSI as seen by the edit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.