Nklauss Posted May 9, 2009 Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 Wow, looking at many different AA support NEW like that, i guess I can skip my coffee this morning. I would invite u all to our homemade roast turkey but since we (even my third wife) are busy preparing special nuke parcels, I guess I'll take a rain check. Again, what a great day to start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aming Posted May 9, 2009 Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 i enjoy the fight. i hope i can join the fight with DF. soon we will know who's NS will drop fast DF or NEW? i hope DF enjoy the war too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sigelopisan Posted May 9, 2009 Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 /me invite everybody to our room at #indo. We have prepare snacks and cold beer. And, local girls in bikini. Everyone can have 2 girls while Zoomzoomzoom can have 3 local girls..... o/ NEW o/ DF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magicninja Posted May 9, 2009 Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 Just out of curiosity how would DF have gotten into this legally? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suryanto tan Posted May 9, 2009 Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 Just out of curiosity how would DF have gotten into this legally? I think we better cut him some slack and stop with these legality questions. OOC: Read the quote below. OOC: I am trying to finish a university assignment which was due yesterday, so you will excuse me if I don't want to spend hours going through this massive thread to fulfil your desires. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magicninja Posted May 9, 2009 Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 I think we better cut him some slack and stop with these legality questions. OOC: Read the quote below. I was just wondering since they said they had a way in. Just curious. I haven't seen them mention that way in. <---What the hell? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlmightyGrub Posted May 9, 2009 Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 Whether you like it or not, there are two sides to this war (I'm looking at you, NpO). Alliances who have been facing tough adversaries search far and wide for others that they can grab, legally, to assist. It seems DF could have been pulled in that way, and whoever asked them to join probably suggested that manner. SCM, as abrasive and argumentative as he is, probably thought it'd be more fun to DoW out of honor, friendship, and being on the same side, rather than find the legal way in (I think he even enjoys these little "debates").I feel bad for NEW, as they must be fighting well to warrant a late addition to the party, but if they are doing so well, I am sure they can handle the extra pressure. As for DF having any other reason or desire to enter this front, I am not quite sure what benefit a war such as this will bring. All nations will be damaged immensely; there are no rich spoils. This is nuclear warfare. Good luck to each side. May you find peace and prosperity when this is all over. Whether you like it or not the New Polar Order does not support this war, therefore we choose no side. We refuse to wear your silly hat, we will not wave your silly flag and in general, your agendas remain your own. Any perception that we have joined your side is seriously misplaced. Doesn't mean we don't like you, doesn't mean we don't agree with some of what is happening but conversely it doesn't mean I support alliances getting the life bled out of them clinically (and by clinically I mean surgery as performed by a psychopath who has his victim strapped to the operating table, slowly removing the victims skin in order to make a pretty hat) Please try not the mention us again thanks... unless I do something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foxodi Posted May 9, 2009 Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 I was just wondering since they said they had a way in. Just curious. I haven't seen them mention that way in. <---What the hell? IPA's optional aggression with GR > Our Mutual Aggression with IPA. I'm pretty sure it was stated at least once b4 in this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magicninja Posted May 9, 2009 Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 IPA's optional aggression with GR > Our Mutual Aggression with IPA.I'm pretty sure it was stated at least once b4 in this thread. So IPA is on NEW too then? It's tough to keep up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnAkeBiTe Posted May 9, 2009 Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 So IPA is on NEW too then?It's tough to keep up. Who said that? Foxodi said that IPA could declare on NEW and then we would have a "legimate" reason to enter... just imagine that, 2 alliances instead of 1 declare on NEW and nobody would have call us bandwagoners Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magicninja Posted May 9, 2009 Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 Who said that? Foxodi said that IPA could declare on NEW and then we would have a "legimate" reason to enter... just imagine that, 2 alliances instead of 1 declare on NEW and nobody would have call us bandwagoners Yes that's true. Sooooooo IPA didn't declare on NEW? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aming Posted May 9, 2009 Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 (edited) Who said that? Foxodi said that IPA could declare on NEW and then we would have a "legimate" reason to enter... just imagine that, 2 alliances instead of 1 declare on NEW and nobody would have call us bandwagoners IPA not declare war on NEW. DF attack us without treaty connected. if DF attacked us because of treaty we will no problem at all. since DF attacked us now we have no problem too. we enjoy it. but bandwagon is still bandwagon. Edited May 9, 2009 by aming Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daikos Posted May 9, 2009 Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 IPA not declare war on NEW. DF attack us without treaty connected. if DF attacked us because of treaty we will no problem at all. since DF attacked us now we have no problem at all. but bandwagon is still bandwagon. In the future we will keep in mind your preference to have two alliances attack you instead of one... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aming Posted May 9, 2009 Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 In the future we will keep in mind your preference to have two alliances attack you instead of one... Now you admited you DOW us without treaty connection. since its happened already let's played it. i hope both of us will enjoy the war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haflinger Posted May 9, 2009 Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 In the future we will keep in mind your preference to have two alliances attack you instead of one... Given what NEW are like, I think their real preference is to have fifteen alliances attack them instead of one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neneko Posted May 9, 2009 Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 Is this still going on? Really? They are on the other side of the war, they wanted to help their friends, end of story. Seriously stop being vogons. OOC: these boards needs a vogon emote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starcraftmazter Posted May 9, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 IPA not declare war on NEW. DF attack us without treaty connected. if DF attacked us because of treaty we will no problem at all. since DF attacked us now we have no problem too. we enjoy it. but bandwagon is still bandwagon. Now you admited you DOW us without treaty connection. You are failing to understand. Whether IPA DoWed you is irrelevant - the fact that they could have had due to the treaties is the relevant part. The outcome is the same, how that outcome is achieved is irrelevant. Would you really care if IPA declared war on you or not? How does this relate to us declaring war? In the end, regardless of whether they did or not, we'd still be fighting you - and that's all that matters - the outcome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K1L1O Posted May 9, 2009 Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 The outcome is the same, how that outcome is achieved is irrelevant I shall remember this words, thank you for enlightened me SCM Outcome is everything Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daikos Posted May 9, 2009 Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 Now you admited you DOW us without treaty connection. since its happened already let's played it. i hope both of us will enjoy the war. I don't remember ever saying that our DOW was through a treaty connection. In fact I think our argument the entire time is that our DOW was based on you being on the ENEMY side and us wanted to help alliances on our side of the war effort. I really don't understand why this is such an incredibly difficult concept. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magicninja Posted May 9, 2009 Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 You are failing to understand. Whether IPA DoWed you is irrelevant - the fact that they could have had due to the treaties is the relevant part. The outcome is the same, how that outcome is achieved is irrelevant. Would you really care if IPA declared war on you or not? How does this relate to us declaring war? In the end, regardless of whether they did or not, we'd still be fighting you - and that's all that matters - the outcome. No, we understand. We just know it's !@#$%^&*. Thanks to enlightening us to your "legal" way of entering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neneko Posted May 9, 2009 Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 IPA not declare war on NEW. DF attack us without treaty connected. if DF attacked us because of treaty we will no problem at all. since DF attacked us now we have no problem too. we enjoy it. but bandwagon is still bandwagon. You're absolutely right what they did was completely illegal. You should declare war on them for breaking the cn law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daikos Posted May 9, 2009 Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 You're absolutely right what they did was completely illegal. You should declare war on them for breaking the cn law. And then neneko won the thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fahlenfor Posted May 9, 2009 Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 Who said that? Foxodi said that IPA could declare on NEW and then we would have a "legimate" reason to enter... just imagine that, 2 alliances instead of 1 declare on NEW and nobody would have call us bandwagoners Ahh.. you said it. Yes. We prefer to have two alliances DoWing us rather than those without any valid treaty to jump in. If the story happens to be IPA DoW NEW first for its optional aggression pact with GR and then DF DoW NEW in support of IPA's Aggression, we won't have to troll each other to begin with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magicninja Posted May 9, 2009 Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 You're absolutely right what they did was completely illegal. You should declare war on them for breaking the cn law. You know it's about the principle. They claimed they were doing it for friends and honor and for being on the other side etc. C'mon.......what a load. Even the "dishonorable" side did everything by the book. This is the first I heard of someone using the optional aggression part of someone else's treaty to get into a war. I think everyone knows damn well if anyone on the other side had done this the tune would be a whole lot different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daikos Posted May 9, 2009 Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 (edited) Ahh.. you said it. Yes. We prefer to have two alliances DoWing us rather than those without any valid treaty to jump in. If the story happens to be IPA DoW NEW first for its optional aggression pact with GR and then DF DoW NEW in support of IPA's Aggression, we won't have to troll each other to begin with. Could you please point out the section of the ToS that states that one must have a treaty obligation in order to enter a war? What? That doesn't exist? Let me break it down to you one last time: -The world is at war -This war has two (2) sides -If a member of Karma is losing it affects all alliances fighting alongside Karma -If a member of the Hegemony is losing it affects all alliances fighting alongside the Hegemony -Not aiding an alliance fighting on the same side as you because you do not have a treaty with them is foolish and can result in a potential loss of momentum for ones own side. -Loss of momentum could result in the enemy side gaining ground -The enemy gaining ground is bad -Thus it is best to help those fighting on your side in any way possible. I don't think we can make it any damn simpler then that. EDIT: Magicninja doing things by the book is a great way to lose. All is fair in war. Edited May 9, 2009 by Daikos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts