Alterego Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 (edited) The vindictive war of hypocrisy or Operation double standards. Edited June 17, 2009 by Alterego Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fireandthepassion Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 (edited) I like War of the CoaLUEtion that someone used towards in a thread some where. Edited June 17, 2009 by Fireandthepassion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Conrad Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 The vindictive war of hypocrisy or Operation double standards. What I find to be the most hilarious aspect of this post is that it speaks of double standards and yet the poster's alliance got white peace. So, I guess if we didn't have double standards you would have gotten reps proportional to NPO's. Oh wait, that's right. We actually put into consideration the alliance's position in the war and how they entered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 What I find to be the most hilarious aspect of this post is that it speaks of double standards and yet the poster's alliance got white peace. So, I guess if we didn't have double standards you would have gotten reps proportional to NPO's. Oh wait, that's right. We actually put into consideration the alliance's position in the war and how they entered. You raise some interesting points that I will clarify. First, it wasnt white peace. It was close, but not white peace. Second, we didnt fight you (Sparta) and you had zero input in our surrender terms. Third, the disbandment of Terra prime and this: TSI will remain neutral for the rest of the war, and will not aid any nations involved in the war. All violations of this will be taken on an individual basis, and treated as an act of war.All damages done after the update of May 5th/May 6th will be added or subtracted to the reparations, depending on the offending party. TSI will pay the following at the total of 6,500 technology and 60 million - 2,300 technology at 3 million per 150 to TFO - 1,400 technology at 3 million per 150 to IS - 1,700 technology at 3 million per 100 to TFO - 1,100 technology at 3 million per 100 to IS - 250 technology, bought by Shurukian, at the rate of 3 million per 50 from TFO - 250 technology, bought by Shurukian, at the rate of 3 million per 50 from IS - 250 technology, bought by Tokugawa Mitsukuni, at the rate of 3 million per 50 from TFO - 250 technology, bought by Tokugawa Mitsukuni, at the rate of 3 million per 50 from IS Extraduty and Shurukian will continue their war until midday, May the 5th, on the basis that neither nation has been nuked, and both would like pop each other's nuke cherries. How you act against NPO/TPF/Echelon etc will confirm what the rest of us have known for some time, Im actually looking forward to seeing you prove me right. I also notice you didnt dispute the first name, just the second. I am prepared to call it that and drop the operation name. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sumeragi Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 (edited) Karma doesn't necessarily that the punisher alliances are "good". There was a legend of a knight who killed a devil. However, being covered with the blood of the devil, the knight himself became a devil. Whether this will also happen, we shall see. Just noting the bias of the poll. Ignroe the philosophical talks. Edited June 17, 2009 by Sumeragi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Conrad Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 First, I never said my alliance had any input in your alliance's terms. You were referring to the whole of Karma so I responded in like. If you want an example directly relating to my alliance, take TOOL's white peace. Sorry TOOL, I guess Alterego would rather us treat you unlike someone who just honored a treaty and just made you pay reps anyways. Second, your alliance received white peace so please don't complain about a few petty restrictions (you just make yourself sound ungrateful). Lastly, do you know why you're the only person who brings up Terra Prime? It's because you're the only one honestly dumbstruck enough to not know they received white peace from CCC and then disbanded afterward because of the damage the war did, not because of any terms. Show me any mistreatment of Terra Prime. Seriously, please do some research next time. Also, if you think your name of the hypocrisy war is unique, you've got another thing coming. I don't need to respond to it because there's probably 100 pages of posts proving that wrong. But hey, enjoy your ignorance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maelstrom Vortex Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 I am disappointed that, "The war of to many names." is not an option. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursarkar E Creed Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 The Hypocrisy War - 72 - 32.88% Quite an ironic title for both sides if I might say so myself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayOvfEnnay Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 The Hypocrisy War - 72 - 32.88% Quite an ironic title for both sides if I might say so myself. Lol, though I'm not so sure Dahl meant for this to be turned against the Pacifican's so quickly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mathias Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 I liked the NPO better before they were reduced to whining failures. This is just pathetic. Failed PR attempt has failed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teriethien Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 You raise some interesting points that I will clarify. First, it wasnt white peace. It was close, but not white peace. Second, we didnt fight you (Sparta) and you had zero input in our surrender terms. Third, the disbandment of Terra prime and this:How you act against NPO/TPF/Echelon etc will confirm what the rest of us have known for some time, Im actually looking forward to seeing you prove me right. I also notice you didnt dispute the first name, just the second. I am prepared to call it that and drop the operation name. I only just noticed that you are in BAPS. This is your surrender terms: 1) BAPS hereby admits defeat and surrenders to LOSS, Nemesis, TOP, TSO, Umbrella, BTO, IngSoc and Ravyns;2) BAPS will declare neutrality for the duration of the Karma War; 3) BAPS will decommission all but 25 nuclear weapons for a period of two months or for the duration of the war, whichever is shorter 4) BAPS will decommission all but 10 navy vessals (per nation) for a period of two months or for the duration of the war, whichever is shorter How could you run around complaining about Karma's supposed 'hypocrisy', 'harshness' and 'double standard' or being 'vindicative', 'not wanting peace' and even persecuting 'eternal war', when you were given white peace? I doubt that you honestly think the terms given to you were not fair. Why would you take the coalition that gave you white peace and then publicly proclaim that they intend to use peace terms to force the NPO into eternal war? You are a shining example of where white peace fails. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enderland Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 The Vindictive War This happened to GATO and FAN already. The Guilt Trip War wat? The Manufactured War This would apply but in the opposite as to how you want it to. The War for your Self Esteem wtf The War on Peace Mode See the link in my sig. The Hypocrisy War Saying "Do something about it" and then bawwing is hypocritical, yes. The 'I Just Changed my Mind/Side' War That was your allies. Not sure why the "refighting GWI/II" were there at all since those completely do not fit since most of those alliances are disbanded and/or fighting on opposite sides. The Karma War is what this war will be called. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Moldavi Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 The Hypocrisy War sounds good to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seerow Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 The Hypocrisy War sounds good to me. I would have thought you of all people would shoot for gramatical correctness. It would at least need to be changed to The Hypocritical War if we went that route. That said, on topic, I don't support any rebranding at this point in time and won't until Karma retroactively declares all alliances who got white peace were under secret terms that were broken, and are redeclared on then put under viceroyship and turned into neverending tech banks to avoid any future breaking of terms. For now Karma still seems suitable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 (edited) How could you run around complaining about Karma's supposed 'hypocrisy', 'harshness' and 'double standard' or being 'vindicative', 'not wanting peace' and even persecuting 'eternal war', when you were given white peace? I doubt that you honestly think the terms given to you were not fair. Why would you take the coalition that gave you white peace and then publicly proclaim that they intend to use peace terms to force the NPO into eternal war? You are a shining example of where white peace fails. Your statement saying I am a shining example of why white peace fails is false for three reasons. 1. Its not white peace, there were conditions albeit light ones. 2. I do not speak for my alliance, these are my own thoughts and not official policy or sanctioned comments. To my knowledge Karma hasnt banned that yet. BAPS is and will continue to be neutral for this war. 3. There is no tension, ill will or plans for revenge against any of the alliances we fought. We are at peace and will continue to be at peace. Edited June 17, 2009 by Alterego Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoFish Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 (edited) I enjoy "The Hypocrisy War," I mean, it just suits this war so well. You've got the "our spies told us that your alliance accepted classified information" hypocrisy that started off the whole thing, then there's the "you can't give us these terms, it's unfair even though we've given out much worse in the past" hypocrisy and then there's the whole "these terms are horribly unfair but we're still glad we got out of the war early and don't want to help them fight to get better ones" hypocrisy. And then there's the whole "Karma is full of hypocrites" meta-hypocrisy that just makes my head spin. That said, I'm not opposed to people calling me vindictive, it kinda fits my personality. There's a lot of people in this war that aren't nearly as vindictive as we are, though so it would sorta be like stealing the spotlight for ourselves. Edited June 17, 2009 by NoFish Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enderland Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 Heh I just null voted and realized that almost 1/2 those who voted did the same, wow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teriethien Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 (edited) You really dont know what white peace means, this is why some people must think peace means at least 2 more weeks of full alliance war. Your statement saying I am a shining example of why white peace fails is false for three reasons. You're nit picking. It's not technically white peace, no. But there are no reps or special terms so it's practically white peace in spirit and effect, thus I stand by my point. I don't want to say "peace with the very light terms of some nuke and navy restrictions" so I said white peace. 1. Its not white peace, there were conditions albeit light ones.2. I do not speak for my alliance, these are my own thoughts and not official policy or sanctioned comments. To my knowledge Karma hasnt banned that yet. BAPS is and will continue to be neutral for this war. 3. There is no tension, ill will or plans for revenge against any of the alliances we fought. We are at peace and will continue to be at peace. My sig, a bold pronouncement from Karma, should clear up the bulk of the rest of what I have said. I didn't say BAPS shouldn't get white peace, I said you are an example of where white peace obviously wouldn't have worked despite the hegemony's call for Karma to give white peace to everyone because doing so will magically make the world a better place. Your insistence on making a distinction between complete white peace and peace with a couple of temporary military restrictions suggests to me that you'll be able to find fault with even the lightest of terms as long as it's even got terms. Once again I'm using white peace in lieu of "peace with very light terms that are practically white" here. EDIT: clarification Edited June 17, 2009 by Teriethien Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daikos Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 Null vote. I'm personally partial to "World War Bawwwwwwww" but that doesn't appear to be an option. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 I didn't say BAPS shouldn't get white peace, I said you are an example of where white peace obviously wouldn't have worked despite the hegemony's call for Karma to give white peace to everyone because doing so will magically make the world a better place. The insinuation was my comments were "a shining example of where white peace (just for the purpose of this conversation) fails" Why would you take the coalition that gave you white peace and then publicly proclaim that they intend to use peace terms to force the NPO into eternal war? You are a shining example of where white peace fails. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teriethien Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 The insinuation was my comments were "a shining example of where white peace (just for the purpose of this conversation) fails" I probably should have qualified my 'you's to indicate that I meant you the poster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirDog Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 The whining war. I thought that deserved a sig. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Blair Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 The IF YOU CRAVE WAR WHY DO YOU SQUEAL WHEN WE BRING IT? war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 Null voted Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daikos Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 The IF YOU CRAVE WAR WHY DO YOU SQUEAL WHEN WE BRING IT? war. I'm a fan of this. 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.