Jump to content

Imperial Decree from the New Pacific Order


Recommended Posts

So, lemme get this straight cause I dont feel like reading a total of 150 pages worth of BS....

NPO doesnt want to accept the easy terms given to them because of a few more days of war? Pathetic.

In a completely off topic manner, I love your signature. I believe it sums up Pacifica's mental capacity quite nicely.

Edited by Chimaera
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 4.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Did Haflinger really just say that Invicta has no other meaningful FA than the NPO? :wacko: Well, I guess that's good for their other treaty partners to hear now as opposed to when they might actually request Invicta holds up the treaty.

From some of the posts here, Karma should clearly impose a viceroy on NPO; in a year, the NPO will be correctly brainwashed (um, I mean, politically recalibrated) and won't think that Karma did anything rough to them at all.

So uhm, where did you learn your reading comprehension Bob?

From Seerow and WC?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OOC: Dude, you have a boxxy signature... /OOC

OOC: Dude, we all know Chimmy isn't intelligent so there's no point in pointing it out :lol1:

Just joking mate.

IC: Says the powerpuff girl...

Edited by James Wilson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless you're too stupid to look at the treaty web that is.

Don't mistake honor for stupidity, We are no GGA.

What he's saying is that, we value ALL our treaties, otherwise we wouldn't sign them, or we'd have switched sides to further our own political agenda like so many other alliances did when they were clearly obligated to defend NPO or her allies.

I'm pretty sure that's not what he said. If that's what he meant, I have to admit I'm not a psychic so I can't contradict that.

The claim asserted was that the time NPO is rebuilding the politics of the world will stand still because the NPO can not participate.

The argument against that was that plenty of other drama will be taking place with or without the NPO, and Invicta or anyone else will have plenty to keep them entertained if they remain open minded.

We hold treaties as important, and we think that we should give NPO time to rebuild and re-evaluate its future before we rush to make judgements about them or make any rash decisions about that treaty.

And how per se does giving NPO time to rebuild and re-evaluate themselves prevent invicta from taking part in any politics that does not involve the NPO?

It doesn't. And that's the argument being made. If you can't see that Invicta has a political future and will be able to continue to enjoy the game without the NPO then really you are every bit as bad as the GGA has been over the last several years.

If you want to judge people based on WC's word, then go ahead, but I won't be handing you any "smartest poster" awards.

Cute, your member messes up and you try to cover it up by insulting my intelligence

Or is that too much to ask?

Next time you want to judge us, how about you come to our IRC first and get to know us and what we're about instead of following the braying of a former alliance leader trying to regain his relevance.

My IRC time is not what it used to be, and I've never been the diplomatic type. I rarely deal with strangers, and avoid contact outside of my alliance in any personal fashion 9 times out of 10. I judge by what I see on the forums, and in this case I was judging by the posts that led up to the comment you quoted. I see no reason for me to want to get to know Invicta any better than I already do based on this.

If you don't like the perception your member gives your alliance, perhaps you should have said member stay off the forums.

edit:

So uhm, where did you learn your reading comprehension Bob?

From Seerow and WC?

Perhaps you should brush up on your reading yourself. Go back and reread what was actually said, the responses were not that off base, your member may not have spoken for the alliance, but he sure enough spoke as though he did. You can't blame us for the impression your member leaves.

Edited by Seerow
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since their reform:

A 2 day war they (along with OV) ended up with 1500 tech from alliance with 4000 total tech (in a bad diplomatic move by the person on the other side) provided VE paid for this

12k tech from MK

and UJW: No reps.

So I guess VE is getting progressively worse?

They forced /b/ to disband (first alliance to do this?) in GW3, although the alliance imploded on its own for obvious reasons.

edit: didn't see "since their reform"

Edited by Joe Kremlin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, lemme get this straight cause I dont feel like reading a total of 150 pages worth of BS....

NPO doesnt want to accept the easy terms given to them because of a few more days of war? Pathetic.

it isn't so much pathetic as it is a move that invokes images of self preservation, even i would have to balk at those terms if they were offered to me.

Not only would it allow for bank nations to be destroyed but it would also take out alot of nations who could help pay off the reps would be damaged as well

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It has elsewhere in this thread but I don't mind explaining it so no one has to go back through the last 145 pgs (:/). Karma means the action to fulfill your duty based on your class. Each class has a different action which will fulfill their duty. In the B Gita, the main character is forced to fight to fulfill the correct action. To fulfill the correct action is to fulfill your dharma. Each class's dharma is different. From fulfilling your dharma, your soul can achieve mocha in the sansarian cycle.

Karma comes from you need to do the correct action to fulfill your dharma. By not doing the correct action, you do not fulfill your dharma, but that doesn't not always led to a negative personal situation if you fail to, more to a negative for all. The Gita goes through all the variable behind the warrior's decision to fight showing that by not fighting, they will lose and he will not fulfill his dharma and not be able to more up in the sansarian cycle.

Thanks for the explanation. Now no one will have to bring it up as a substitute for a real argument ever again, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They forced /b/ to disband (first alliance to do this?) in GW3, although the alliance imploded on its own for obvious reasons.

edit: didn't see "since their reform"

How many people are going to argue against this, irregardless?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IC: Says the powerpuff girl...

You went to far...

No one $%&@s with the powerpuff girls

I was puzzled by this post, until I remembered Planet Bob's definition of dignity: a state of being in which everyone else is wrong and you are right. Also see delusional.

So I am right and you're wrong? Gotcha

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How many people are going to argue against this, irregardless?

Not me, I was in VE at the time (although we did make that declaration before any attacks on the site iirc so it was more of a political move). Just saying that as far as surrender terms there wasn't any pattern.

Edited by Joe Kremlin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure that's not what he said. If that's what he meant, I have to admit I'm not a psychic so I can't contradict that.

The claim asserted was that the time NPO is rebuilding the politics of the world will stand still because the NPO can not participate.

The argument against that was that plenty of other drama will be taking place with or without the NPO, and Invicta or anyone else will have plenty to keep them entertained if they remain open minded.

And how per se does giving NPO time to rebuild and re-evaluate themselves prevent invicta from taking part in any politics that does not involve the NPO?

It doesn't. And that's the argument being made. If you can't see that Invicta has a political future and will be able to continue to enjoy the game without the NPO then really you are every bit as bad as the GGA has been over the last several years.

Cute, your member messes up and you try to cover it up by insulting my intelligence

My IRC time is not what it used to be, and I've never been the diplomatic type. I rarely deal with strangers, and avoid contact outside of my alliance in any personal fashion 9 times out of 10. I judge by what I see on the forums, and in this case I was judging by the posts that led up to the comment you quoted. I see no reason for me to want to get to know Invicta any better than I already do based on this.

If you don't like the perception your member gives your alliance, perhaps you should have said member stay off the forums.

I see no where that Haf said that NPO was the only thing that was important to us, unly that they are important to us, just as UPN, Legion, NATO, etc... are important to us.

Twisting words is something anyone can do though, so I don't blame you for trying.

Had you known anything about Invicta, you'd know that you accusations, are just accusations with nothing behind themm but hot air.

And I can't tell haf to stay off the Forums, I like reading his posts =D

...and he outranks me, haha.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something I haven't really seen talked about yet is the damage those fighting the NPO will take if they have to face 90% of the NPO military at once for two weeks. Yes, the NPO isn't the most powerful alliance anymore, but bringing 200+ rested nations into the fight is also nothing to sneeze at.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something I haven't really seen talked about yet is the damage those fighting the NPO will take if they have to face 90% of the NPO military at once for two weeks. Yes, the NPO isn't the most powerful alliance anymore, but bringing 200+ rested nations into the fight is also nothing to sneeze at.

200+ "rested" define rested, there are only like 50 that havent fought at all (above 2000 infra).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see no where that Haf said that NPO was the only thing that was important to us, unly that they are important to us, just as UPN, Legion, NATO, etc... are important to us.

Twisting words is something anyone can do though, so I don't blame you for trying.

Had you known anything about Invicta, you'd know that you accusations, are just accusations with nothing behind themm but hot air.

And I can't tell haf to stay off the Forums, I like reading his posts =D

...and he outranks me, haha.

If he outranks you let him defend himself.

He claimed explicitly that while NPO is under terms that the political game would be dead. There is no twisting of words to be done there, he said it himself!

You're really just fighting a losing battle. You can't alter what he has already said, so just quit while you're ahead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...