New Pacific Order Reps Race

[Schattenmann]

These reps are ridiculous those proposing them should be ashamed.

Once more, with feeling. It's like someone stole your mojo.

[youwish959]

The point of this whole thing argument is we have not been given surrender terms yet. So we pull our nations out of pm and we still get pummeled for another two months. What is the point in that if the whole alliance will be pretty muched zied either way.

Because, you can rebuild. Just as Polar has. Take the beating, and move on. Rebuild. Get them when you can actually hurt them, that would make more sense.

Your other option you know is not pull your nations out of peace mode, and continue in this war forever. Without the chance for retribution.

[bzelger]

I've been repeatedly informed there was a long discussion thread on certain secret forums where discussion of said terms took place.

Make up your mind, though. Many of your esteemed colleagues stated that alliances not involved in the war had little to no say in peace terms. Which is it?

Let's be clear: I could not care less if any outside thoughts are taken into consideration or not. Honestly, judging by some egos involved, I doubt any outside suggestions would take place now. These are your decisions as sovereign alliances involved in a war, and others should have no impact on that process. However, we all reserve the right to speak out against what we believe are poor terms and poor methods of "securing peace".

Not getting say in surrender terms doesn't mean you can't offer ideas. If you think this one is bad, by all means suggest a better one. It's up to the front whether or not they'll make it policy.

[HeinousOne]

I've been repeatedly informed there was a long discussion thread on certain secret forums where discussion of said terms took place.

Make up your mind, though. Many of your esteemed colleagues stated that alliances not involved in the war had little to no say in peace terms. Which is it?

Let's be clear: I could not care less if any outside thoughts are taken into consideration or not. Honestly, judging by some egos involved, I doubt any outside suggestions would take place now. These are your decisions as sovereign alliances involved in a war, and others should have no impact on that process. However, we all reserve the right to speak out against what we believe are poor terms and poor methods of "securing peace".

Well, I have no access there as far as I know nor do I wish such.

From what I have gathered though they may have had a "say" in such but that it was not really listened to at all.

Not sure why you would think I would be against folks speaking up and speaking out against things they do not agree with. Just pointing out that this situation seems like a mirrored version of the situation with Valhalla.

[jimbacher]

You realize that basing your entire argument on assumptions is NOT a wise argumentative tactic? Right?

Yeh and yours is not? You are assuming we get terms when nations pull our of pm.

[Vhalen]

If anything, the actions of "Karma" have done nothing but encourage the NPO to seek revenge in whatever way possible.

Also, if they come out of peace mode....they will just get attacked. That's some pretty fail strategy.

As if they need encouragement.

Also, if they attack people over a long period of time, using increasingly vicious strategies, brutal peace terms, and questionable reasons....they will just get attacked. Didn't stop them that time, did it?

Look, I'm not saying these terms are a great idea, but I am saying it's ridiculous for NPO to think they'll get white peace. If nothing else, this should serve as a slap in the face to break that illusion. Frankly, I doubt there's any intention of honoring this PM penalty to the letter.

[Virillus]

Yeh and yours is not? You are assuming we get terms when nations pull our of pm.

I'm the Minister of Defense for the Greenland Republic.

I might know what I'm talking about.

Edited May 28, 2009 by Virillus

[jimbacher]

I'm the Minister of Defense for the Greenland Republic.

I might know what I'm talking about.

So you speak for Karma as a whole then right? Also, how long after members leave PM would we get terms? I'd rather be zied for a year and have no reps to pay, then have to pay rediculous reps with no nations still capable of making said payments.

[Nizzle]

Not getting say in surrender terms doesn't mean you can't offer ideas. If you think this one is bad, by all means suggest a better one. It's up to the front whether or not they'll make it policy.

Well, I have no access there as far as I know nor do I wish such.

To be fair, and so you don't think I'm holding a "trump" card, I don't have access either.

From what I have gathered though they may have had a "say" in such but that it was not really listened to at all.

Which is what they were entitled to, which is what bzelger is saying I am entitled to, which Archon said everyone was entitled to. A say. Nothing more, nothing less. Just because you said something, and we disagreed, does not mean we should have done it anyway. I certainly wouldn't have advised taking part in what has become a blood crusade.

Not sure why you would think I would be against folks speaking up and speaking out against things they do not agree with. Just pointing out that this situation seems like a mirrored version of the situation with Valhalla.

I think you confused the post I made to you with the one I made to bzelger

It may well be a mirrored version of Valhalla, except yet again I am not one out for blood and revenge. Let me make it clear now: NPO deserves to hand out some reparations as they initiated the war against OV in a dishonorable fashion. However, the way it's been conducted so far is horrible. Just because someone else jumps off a bridge does not mean you should flirt with the idea.

Edited May 28, 2009 by Nizzle

[Timoteo]

After the crap they tried to pull on IRON (thank you Citadel for having the class to stop them), did you expect better from RoK? This time they don't even have the "we were attacked" excuse. It's all in the name of justice! ...Except the restitution money for NPO's crimes will end up in RoK's pockets, not in those of NPO's victims.

I understand that NPO is gonna get harsh terms. Fine. No, that doesn't make you OMG AS BAD AS NPO, which I know you'll accuse me of saying. But you're setting whole new precedents here, things even NPO never did. Not to mention that, as always, the restitution will wind up in the pockets of opportunists, not in the pockets of those who have a valid claim to restitution. RoK, hopefully your comrades in this fight are as classy as those in your fight against IRON.

-Bama

If someone wanted to send some reps my way, that would be fine with me.

[Virillus]

So you speak for Karma as a whole then right? Also, how long after members leave PM would we get terms? I'd rather be zied for a year and have no reps to pay, then have to pay rediculous reps with no nations still capable of making said payments.

No, I don't speak for Karma. But I do know the intent behind the aforementioned terms, and it is NOT to ZI the lot of you.

And if that is your opinion, than it is definitely in your best interest to surrender as early as possible. Something that will only happen if you get your big guys to leave peace mode.

The resulting reparations will NOT be high, unlike your allies, we are merciful.

[King Srqt]

So you speak for Karma as a whole then right? Also, how long after members leave PM would we get terms? I'd rather be zied for a year and have no reps to pay, then have to pay rediculous reps with no nations still capable of making said payments.

No one really speaks for Karma as a whole and Karma as a whole is not at war with you. I would think however that a government member of an alliance at war with you would know a thing about when you will get peace and under what circumstances especially considering another gov member from another alliance at war with you has already stated that all of the alliances at war with you have agreed to under what terms and conditions you would get peace.

[Nizzle]

No, I don't speak for Karma. But I do know the intent behind the aforementioned terms, and it is NOT to ZI the lot of you.

And if that is your opinion, than it is definitely in your best interest to surrender as early as possible. Something that will only happen if you get your big guys to leave peace mode.

The resulting reparations will NOT be high, unlike your allies, we are merciful.

If your opponent beats someone to death, and you just beat someone nearly to death...does that make you merciful?

It totally just popped into my head when I read that last line

[Virillus]

If your opponent beats someone to death, and you just beat someone nearly to death...does that make you merciful?

It totally just popped into my head when I read that last line

No.

But if our opponent tortures somebody for 3 weeks for doing nothing at all. And then we bloody somebody's nose for a very justified reason, then it DOES make us merciful.

[BamaBuc]

You know what I've figured out? We're all hypocrites. All of us. Myself included. I'm speaking out against these terms, but I didn't speak out when this was done to GATO. I didn't like it, I thought it was wrong, but I said nothing. I wish I had had the balls to say something, but I didn't. For that, I am a hypocrite. I freely admit it. But I'm speaking up now. Call me a hypocrite, but I see an injustice, and I'm speaking up. I have as much right to do that as anyone. I'm not a fan of everything NPO does or has done. Heck, if you ask me, the CB for this war was crap. NPO is gonna get some harsh terms. Okay. I get that. Fine. But you're as hypocritical as I am, because if NPO did this to anyone, even someone who "deserved it", you would hate it. I mean, come on, pre-terms? We are all hypocrites. But he who does not hold himself to the standards to which he holds others is the worst kind of hypocrite. Take that as you will.

-Bama

[Nizzle]

No.

But if our opponent tortures somebody for 3 weeks for doing nothing at all. And then we bloody somebody's nose for a very justified reason, then it DOES make us merciful.

I think that's a silly comparison At least mine was comparable. Anyway, it was a horrible tangent and I don't intend to continue it. It was more for a quick laugh.

[King Srqt]

You know what I've figured out? We're all hypocrites. All of us. Myself included. I'm speaking out against these terms, but I didn't speak out when this was done to GATO. I didn't like it, I thought it was wrong, but I said nothing. I wish I had had the balls to say something, but I didn't. For that, I am a hypocrite. I freely admit it. But I'm speaking up now. Call me a hypocrite, but I see an injustice, and I'm speaking up. I have as much right to do that as anyone. I'm not a fan of everything NPO does or has done. Heck, if you ask me, the CB for this war was crap. NPO is gonna get some harsh terms. Okay. I get that. Fine. But you're as hypocritical as I am, because if NPO did this to anyone, even someone who "deserved it", you would hate it. I mean, come on, pre-terms? We are all hypocrites. But he who does not hold himself to the standards to which he holds others is the worst kind of hypocrite. Take that as you will.

-Bama

These terms are crap, and pretty much anyone who calls you a hypocrite for saying it is ignoring theri own hypocrisy while they do it.

(also I object to you calling me a hypocrite )

[Virillus]

You know what I've figured out? We're all hypocrites. All of us. Myself included. I'm speaking out against these terms, but I didn't speak out when this was done to GATO. I didn't like it, I thought it was wrong, but I said nothing. I wish I had had the balls to say something, but I didn't. For that, I am a hypocrite. I freely admit it. But I'm speaking up now. Call me a hypocrite, but I see an injustice, and I'm speaking up. I have as much right to do that as anyone. I'm not a fan of everything NPO does or has done. Heck, if you ask me, the CB for this war was crap. NPO is gonna get some harsh terms. Okay. I get that. Fine. But you're as hypocritical as I am, because if NPO did this to anyone, even someone who "deserved it", you would hate it. I mean, come on, pre-terms? We are all hypocrites. But he who does not hold himself to the standards to which he holds others is the worst kind of hypocrite. Take that as you will.

-Bama

The difference is in the reasoning for war, Bama.

Let me put this in perspective.

Say there's two alliances, A and B.

Alliance A spies on you, recruits from you, tries to convince your allies to attack you, and has been spying away your nukes for a month now.

Alliance B has done nothing at all.

Now, you go to war with both alliances, and both alliances hit peace mode en masse.

At this point, what do you do? Alliance A has wronged you, do you just pack up and go home without hurting them whatsoever simply because the opportunity is not there? How does that make any sense whatsoever? You're there to teach them a lesson, rightfully so. You shouldn't simply give up because the popular opinion says it's a "bad" thing to do.

Now with alliance B. The reason you want to hurt them is because you *want* to hurt them. And at this point, forcing them out of peace mode IS unjust.

The fact is, Bama. They deserve punishment, GATO did not.

[Virillus]

I think that's a silly comparison At least mine was comparable. Anyway, it was a horrible tangent and I don't intend to continue it. It was more for a quick laugh.

Your face is silly!

[enderland]

So you speak for Karma as a whole then right? Also, how long after members leave PM would we get terms? I'd rather be zied for a year and have no reps to pay, then have to pay rediculous reps with no nations still capable of making said payments.

It might take a while to remove your attitude(s) about how you dictate terms. Your alliance is so used to it, that it damn well might even take a year to do so.

[Desert Ratz]

Wait so there's no catch and it's pretty straight forward.

The reps aren't that difficult to manage now.

If they just surrendered now they could be done with the reps after a short time and be on their way. The terms for an alliance NPO's size with the number of nations in peace mode who can comfortably produce twice or thrice as much to fill their aid slots with outgoing aid, are relatively light.

The longer they try to hold out for terms which suit them, to some how spin this into a victory, the more their compatriots will suffer. Both in fighting the war, and later in paying reparations for their unjustified attacks of the past and of that on OV.

I have no sympathy for NPO if they let this get out of hand. They have been offered a way out of this war and should take it. If they choose not to all they can expect is what they're trying to avoid, harsh terms.

I like this man and his answers.

[HeinousOne]

To be fair, and so you don't think I'm holding a "trump" card, I don't have access either.

Which is what they were entitled to, which is what bzelger is saying I am entitled to, which Archon said everyone was entitled to. A say. Nothing more, nothing less. Just because you said something, and we disagreed, does not mean we should have done it anyway. I certainly wouldn't have advised taking part in what has become a blood crusade.

I think you confused the post I made to you with the one I made to bzelger

It may well be a mirrored version of Valhalla, except yet again I am not one out for blood and revenge. Let me make it clear now: NPO deserves to hand out some reparations as they initiated the war against OV in a dishonorable fashion. However, the way it's been conducted so far is horrible. Just because someone else jumps off a bridge does not mean you should flirt with the idea.

I think if anyone deserves very heavy terms handed to them, it is NPO. With that being said these terms seem more likely to me to make sure peace doesn't happen anytime soon.

[OverCaffeinated]

Demanding that their nations come out of peace mode prior to terms being negotiated and NPOs security being assured is just plain ridiculous and stinks of ulterior motives. I don’t think the NPO is as naive to think that such terms would be forthcoming, especially from a rag-tag group that has neither the ability nor desire to enforce such constraints among its coalition.

I have no idea how long this war will last and what the end terms will be, but I am sure that whatever reps are decided upon will have nothing to do with this empty threat from Karma's self appointed leadership.

[Vladimir]

Allow me to clarify for those still claiming not to understand our position. We have been offered 'pre-terms'. That is to say, we have been told 'do this', and offered nothing in return. Absolutely nothing.

They say they will put up the reps the longer we are in peace, but so what? There is no base number for these reps to increase from, so it means nothing to us -- any number could just be pulled out of thin air later on. They say the war will end sooner if we accept, but so what? There has been no set end to the war that it can retract from. In fact we have been told numbers here and there, and every time that number is reached it magically reduces on the basis that 'Karma is a loose coalition and nobody speaks for it', This is the same excuse used by so many failed alliances over the years to act ridiculously with impunity, and not one that inspires a great deal of trust in you to keep your word, since any word is only the opinion of one member, and thus doesn't really exist.

So we are receiving non-existent demands from a a non-existent entity. We could accept and then be in war for the next five years for all we know, only to receive reps of infinite dollars at the end of it. From our perspective the pre-term amounts to 'let us hit you really, really hard, and then, one day, somewhere down the line, at an undefined time, we might, if we feel nice, and you are sufficiently destroyed for our liking, consider maybe giving you undefined terms that could amount to anything and that will probably be designed to force you into rejecting anyway'. Or, in other words, it amounts to 'destroy your own alliance for us plz, thx'.

Like I said, designed to be refused so that the 'I don't want to hurt you, you're forcing me to do it' reasoning can come out to justify eternal war, which in turn is just a tad contradictory to the prominent assertion that war will continue until the Order has been destroyed anyway. The incentive to accept such pre-terms, or indeed, any pre-terms at all, is nil. When you want peace, come to the table with something substantive, anything else is nothing more than fodder for your propagandists.

[Virillus]

Allow me to clarify for those still claiming not to understand our position. We have been offered 'pre-terms'. That is to say, we have been told 'do this', and offered nothing in return. Absolutely nothing.

They say they will put up the reps the longer we are in peace, but so what? There is no base number for these reps to increase from, so it means nothing to us -- any number could just be pulled out of thin air later on. They say the war will end sooner if we accept, but so what? There has been no set end to the war that it can retract from. In fact we have been told numbers here and there, and every time that number is reached it magically reduces on the basis that 'Karma is a loose coalition and nobody speaks for it', This is the same excuse used by so many failed alliances over the years to act ridiculously with impunity, and not one that inspires a great deal of trust in you to keep your word, since any word is only the opinion of one member, and thus doesn't really exist.

So we are receiving non-existent demands from a a non-existent entity. We could accept and then be in war for the next five years for all we know, only to receive reps of infinite dollars at the end of it. From our perspective the pre-term amounts to 'let us hit you really, really hard, and then, one day, somewhere down the line, at an undefined time, we might, if we feel nice, and you are sufficiently destroyed for our liking, consider maybe giving you undefined terms that could amount to anything and that will probably be designed to force you into rejecting anyway'. Or, in other words, it amounts to 'destroy your own alliance for us plz, thx'.

Like I said, designed to be refused so that the 'I don't want to hurt you, you're forcing me to do it' reasoning can come out to justify eternal war, which in turn is just a tad contradictory to the prominent assertion that war will continue until the Order has been destroyed anyway. The incentive to accept such pre-terms, or indeed, any pre-terms at all, is nil. When you want peace, come to the table with something substantive, anything else is nothing more than fodder for your propagandists.

Your assumptions are wrong.