Beauty Posted May 12, 2009 Report Share Posted May 12, 2009 Grub, I like you. I like this too. o/ The New Polar Order! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penguin Posted May 12, 2009 Report Share Posted May 12, 2009 (edited) It's kind of dumb to be critical and then decide not to back it up, but okay. I suppose we reap what we sew when we announce we wont discuss our cancellation in our OP Oh GE, you make me smile sow much sometimes. But you're right, there is no sense getting upset about a little criticism when we have chosen to maintain our privacy. well i honestly diddent expect you to come up with this as your reply but ok ill biteregardless of what happened between you and NPO on the last great war u still signed a treaty (mdoap)? with them i know my history and i know what i am talking about We did what we could to honor our part of the Defense clause behind the scenes since the war began. We did not enact the Optional Aggression clause and we did not sign a treaty that chained. Obviously, we're not giving out specific reasons in the OP, which is essentially an invitation for you to come to your own conclusions, informed or otherwise. I will say that, while the emotions behind the cancellation expressed by many throughout this thread are undoubtedly linked to the past, the reasons are grounded in the present. No doubt the war played a large role in unearthing unresolved issues and old habits but the subsequent realizations reflect more on the nature of our relationship than any current event. Also, there's no need to gang up on a critic, guys. In this instance, we have accepted skepticism in exchange for our privacy and we can deal with it without getting defensive. Edited May 12, 2009 by Penguin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Archer Posted May 12, 2009 Report Share Posted May 12, 2009 I'm sure that was a hard to move to make, but still a good one. o/ Polaris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owned-You Posted May 12, 2009 Report Share Posted May 12, 2009 Today is a great day...I needed to reaffirm that and express my joy here once more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MagicalTrevor Posted May 12, 2009 Report Share Posted May 12, 2009 And now, for our next trick! Bibbity, bobbity, BAM. Trevvy, check your AA- you're back in Polar again. Thank god for that, for a minute i thought i'd got drunk and done something incredibly retarded. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fupresti Posted May 12, 2009 Report Share Posted May 12, 2009 two weeks iirc. I thought it was only a few days. Damn you Polaris for abandoning your allies after they abandoned you the first time. HAVE YOU NO HONOR! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hizzy Posted May 12, 2009 Report Share Posted May 12, 2009 (edited) I thought it was only a few days.Damn you Polaris for abandoning your allies after they abandoned you the first time. HAVE YOU NO HONOR! he did it so fast, if you look at the time stamps you'll find that the treaty was canceled before he announced it was unbreakable And agnews I'd love to say your argument is a rock trying to swim, but that wouldn't really be a proper representation of how much it fails. Your rock, good sir, is attempting to fly. Polar's MD(oA? doesn't matter)P is explicitly non-chaining. Polar had no obligation, or even any inclination to opt into NPO's aggressive war, nor defend them from the backlash of said war. Their involvement (or lack thereof) does not breach any treaties or agreements, and further to that, everyone (that is, everyone who mattered; those allied to NpO) knew that Polaris had no inclination to join the fight, but would defend any allies which were attacked unjustly. We knew this, NPO and co. knew this, and yet they chose to go ahead with it. Thus, your flying rock has now crash landed into the pavement. Good day to you, sir. (edited for a typo) Edited May 12, 2009 by hizzy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Bowie Posted May 12, 2009 Report Share Posted May 12, 2009 Well, these two alliances have been tight fopr a long time. This was a tough decision I'm sure. Good luck. JB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cookavich Posted May 12, 2009 Report Share Posted May 12, 2009 (edited) Thank god for that, for a minute i thought i'd got drunk and done something incredibly retarded.If that is what happens when you get drunk then please... I beg of you to stay sober. Edited May 12, 2009 by cookavich Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlmightyGrub Posted May 12, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 12, 2009 I woke up this morning to see this thread had diverted somewhat from its intended course, a simple announcement that a treaty was cancelled and that the reasons are private, but not for the benefit or amusement of anyone who might like to think they have some claim to the announcement. It seems the concept of Polaris doing what it wanted to do, for its own benefit, not the benefit of the Peanut Gallery, confuses some of you. More than anything else besides the lack of comprehension, the e-lawyering of my announcement shows where the world is heading.. may Admin spare us all. Polaris is not a performing monkey and therefore we will not dance because you play your organ. For those of you who will respond with announcements of spectacular foresight saw this coming, that is a good trick because frankly I did not. I will consult you oracles when I determine what we are to do in future. incredible graphic sensibilities lines are drawn/erased, maybe in your mind this is a meaningful comment but reality is simple, Polaris has cancelled a treaty not in play during this war, for reasons that are her own, no lines were harmed in the creation of this thread. or overly astute political commentarybrilliant political move, I have simply had enough of that one, so therefore => save it Some of you are so keen to pick a fight, you embarrass yourself tripping over your own tongues to get into the fight, arriving ten minutes late to the party, only to find it isn't what you thought it was. For some reason you still feel the need to keep wrapping your mouth around your foot long after the joke has been on you. Proceed to discuss at your leisure, I long for your input into my foreign policy planning for the future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calixo Posted May 12, 2009 Report Share Posted May 12, 2009 (edited) ya know, never actually thought i'd see it, first a suspention that kinda hooked me, and then this cancellations. well whatever the reasons, it sure has made the CN world a bit more interesting in these strange times. seems like the orders have somewhat finished their slow drift away from one another. EDIT; re. to post above. i havn't read this topic, as in all the posts after the OP, but i don't see why you care, or even reply to the "peanut gallery" unless you felt you had to justify something, or argue a point. btw. ignore this if you feel you need to. Edited May 12, 2009 by Calixo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rajistani Posted May 12, 2009 Report Share Posted May 12, 2009 So you aren't even going to help them rebuild? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomInterrupt Posted May 12, 2009 Report Share Posted May 12, 2009 So you aren't even going to help them rebuild? Polar members have already sent more foreign aid to the NPO in this war than the NPO sent to Polar following their beatdown. Before you go looking it up, the second amount is 0. If Polar offers the NPO a single soldier it will be more than provided to them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cowen70 Posted May 12, 2009 Report Share Posted May 12, 2009 Polar members have already sent more foreign aid to the NPO in this war than the NPO sent to Polar following their beatdown. Before you go looking it up, the second amount is 0. If Polar offers the NPO a single soldier it will be more than provided to them. Yet polar has pretended up until now as though some relationship existed. Why is that? Is honesty that undervalued? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Innerspeaker Posted May 12, 2009 Report Share Posted May 12, 2009 So you aren't even going to help them rebuild? Pacifica has received 9,000,000 in aid from Polaris since this war began. Polaris received nothing from the NPO for rebuilding. I'd say that's generous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomInterrupt Posted May 12, 2009 Report Share Posted May 12, 2009 Yet polar has pretended up until now as though some relationship existed. Why is that?Is honesty that undervalued? Where did I say anything about their relationship? I am talking about aid slots as I responded to a post about rebuilding aid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigwoody Posted May 12, 2009 Report Share Posted May 12, 2009 incredible graphic sensibilities lines are drawn/erased Thank you for your surrender. My terms are: 1) Allow me to admire the awesome bird graphic in peace. Proceed to discuss at your leisure, I long for your input into my foreign policy planning for the future. I expect your foreign policy to include many more awesome graphics sent my way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yinner Posted May 12, 2009 Report Share Posted May 12, 2009 i applaud this move NpO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoping Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 I woke up this morning to see this thread had diverted somewhat from its intended course, a simple announcement that a treaty was cancelled and that the reasons are private, but not for the benefit or amusement of anyone who might like to think they have some claim to the announcement.It seems the concept of Polaris doing what it wanted to do, for its own benefit, not the benefit of the Peanut Gallery, confuses some of you. Proceed to discuss at your leisure, I long for your input into my foreign policy planning for the future. Had you said the bolded part in the OP, any confusion on my end would have been gone. Yet you did not. Maybe try to expand and clearly state what you are trying to say the first time if you want to avoid us "fight pickers". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ninja Colt Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 Are you ever pleased? By anything? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ninja Colt Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 For those of you who will respond with announcements of spectacular foresight saw this coming, that is a good trick because frankly I did not. I will consult you oracles when I determine what we are to do in future. incredible graphic sensibilities lines are drawn/erased, maybe in your mind this is a meaningful comment but reality is simple, Polaris has cancelled a treaty not in play during this war, for reasons that are her own, no lines were harmed in the creation of this thread. or overly astute political commentarybrilliant political move, I have simply had enough of that one, so therefore => save it wrapping your mouth around your foot long Also, that's what she said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlmightyGrub Posted May 13, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 Had you said the bolded part in the OP, any confusion on my end would have been gone. Yet you did not. Maybe try to expand and clearly state what you are trying to say the first time if you want to avoid us "fight pickers". Maybe try giving advice to someone who gives a rat's arse about your opinion. No one else struggled with the concepts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 Are you ever pleased? By anything? No. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaGneT Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 Also, that's what she said. That smiley is AWESOME pun intended. cowen, stop grasping for straws. Perhaps Polaris did attempt to reestablish the love? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penguin Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 (edited) Had you said the bolded part in the OP, any confusion on my end would have been gone. Yet you did not. Maybe try to expand and clearly state what you are trying to say the first time if you want to avoid us "fight pickers". Except that was exactly what I told you three times not long after you asked. If you're not going to take the rest of Grub's government at their word, then what does he need us for? It honestly looked to me like you just came here to pick at semantics, which is probably why no one else took you seriously. Yet polar has pretended up until now as though some relationship existed. Why is that?Is honesty that undervalued? Because some relationship did exist. Significant effort was being put into re-establishing an historic friendship that was once known as the strongest on the planet and it upset the diplomatic shark you quoted immensely. Obviously he's pleased with us that we're giving up now, but that doesn't mean we were pretending to try before or that any other former-Polars had a say in the cancellation. Edited May 13, 2009 by Penguin 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.