Are We Harsh?

[Yggdrazil]

Ahh you might want to double check who you are addressing before you start tossing terms like noob around.

Also, you are almost completely lacking any coherency what so ever at this point. So I have a few questions you need to clarify.

First off, the emperor's new clothes fable refers to people not speaking the painfully obvious out of fear of offending somebody, I fail to see how that applies at all.

Progressive era? fossilized concept? what are you on about?

You misunderstood my post. i.e. means what follows is an example of the concept and did not refer to you specifically.

The Emperor's New Clothes concerns a con were only those without morality would see the Emperor naked and it took the innocence of a child to rectify because the adults lacked the moral courage.Not wanting their own morallty to to be questioned.

You misunderstanding of my post is my fault.Your right, it is a little off on coherence.

LMAO. You obviously dont read do you? Ill quote myself in a previous post in this thread, which was copy and pasted form the post made by Moo himself when he made the terms public, for which I provided a link as well, and bolded the relevant parts to make it easier for you.

I repeat, no where in the reps does it say they will be adjusted, only if Karma feels an adjustment is needed.

Edited June 27, 2009 by Yggdrazil

[TypoNinja]

I repeat, no where in the reps does it say they will be adjusted, only if Karma feels an adjustment is needed.

Ahh comprehension where art thou?

B2) Reparations of up to 300,000 tech and $7,000,000,000 will be assessed upon the New Pacific Order. This shall be determined dependent on their ability to pay after the aforementioned period of war, in the judgment of the Karma signatories of this document. All reparations of technology must be paid by nations with greater than or equal to 1000.00 technology at the end of the above-mentioned 14 day period.

Read that carefully, it does not, contrary to popular opinion say the terms start at 7 billion and 300k tech, it says that is the maximum possible the NPO might be subjected to with the implication that less is likely.

What this term does say if you can glean meaning from context is that since we can't predict how much damage two weeks (plus however long compliance takes) of war will do is that we can't guess what kind of reps would be appropriate. So they will be determined after we know what the NPO is capable of paying.

It involves some amount of trust that Karma will actually be reasonable about what is payable when evaluating, but since there are several alliances with experience on moving large reparation on a short time table getting expert opinions on the matter should be no trouble. But trust isn't an issue there are bigger leaps of faith an alliance must take when surrendering, demilitarizing is generally a surrender condition, nations will have to exit peace mode to pay reps, alliances also trust that the victors won't take advantage of their weakened position to jump them again. I can only think of one alliance (in)famous for pulling that stunt, care to guess who it was?

[shotgun91]

No look at the terms other alliances have gotten from NPO and allies of NPO, it makes perfect sense for them to get the same treatment back. The NPO for too long have held there noses high saying that they were the over rulers of CN and would try to squash any person that came after them, there are those who would never be erased no matter how many times they were Zied no matter how much crap was thrown at them. These are the true people of CN the ones who don't give a damn about others opinions.

[Z3000]

No look at the terms other alliances have gotten from NPO and allies of NPO, it makes perfect sense for them to get the same treatment back. The NPO for too long have held there noses high saying that they were the over rulers of CN and would try to squash any person that came after them, there are those who would never be erased no matter how many times they were Zied no matter how much crap was thrown at them. These are the true people of CN the ones who don't give a damn about others opinions.

you know we're not actually giving them the same treatment. Notice the lack of a Viecory.

[shotgun91]

you know we're not actually giving them the same treatment. Notice the lack of a Viecory.

you missed my point completely

[Cortath]

TypoNinja: if Karma wanted to give some hard numbers on how that would be calculated, they would have. At no point during our negotiations, prior to our formal rejection, or subsequently, did anyone in Karma give the slightest inclination that they had given a modicum of thought to the faintest glimmer of an idea that we would not be paying the full terms listed. If that's not the case, I invite those representatives of Karma to approach our government and inform us otherwise, including calculations of how such terms would be lowered and under what conditions.

[TypoNinja]

TypoNinja: if Karma wanted to give some hard numbers on how that would be calculated, they would have. At no point during our negotiations, prior to our formal rejection, or subsequently, did anyone in Karma give the slightest inclination that they had given a modicum of thought to the faintest glimmer of an idea that we would not be paying the full terms listed. If that's not the case, I invite those representatives of Karma to approach our government and inform us otherwise, including calculations of how such terms would be lowered and under what conditions.

Aren't you kind of asking the wrong people at the moment?

[Cortath]

Aren't you kind of asking the wrong people at the moment?

I don't think so.

I'm not convinced that everyone on the other side wanted peace. If they were so willing to bring down the terms based on our ability to pay, I would have thought that after hours of debating the economics, one of them would have piped up and said, "Oh, by the way, if you can't pay, we'll lower it, and here's how."

That they did not do that makes me suspect that some number of them did not and do not want peace, any peace. We were and are willing to sit down and offer anything reasonable that was within our power to give. Many of them our opposites were not willing to hear any counter-offer or budge an inch on the substantive issues. That they were unwilling to do this is telling.

[TypoNinja]

Well you won't know if you don't try, I hope you're putting at least as much effort into private channels as you are into the OWF.

Edit: your=/=you're

Edited June 28, 2009 by TypoNinja

[Sebet]

I'm not a government official I'm not even going to pretend i care about the reparations being paid seeing as it has little to no effect upon my nation. I fought on the side of Karma and am glad the war is being resolved. As for whether or not the terms are "harsh" in MY opinion I'd like to see terms that go easier on NPO. I see a lot of people dredging up the past saying NPO's past action have earned them these terms i just hope that you realize in saying that you acknowledge that the terms are beyond what would be imposed upon a different alliance with a less infamous history. In your argument to support the terms you are undermining you government making them seem vengeful and angry about the past that has nothing to do with our current war. I for one don't see why we can't fight bravely and once the winner appears say "good fight see you around" instead of dragging the war out trying to profit and handicap someone you've already beaten.

[Cortath]

Well you won't know if you don't try, I hope you're putting at least as much effort into private channels as you are into the OWF.

Edit: your=/=you're

I don't think I've put in a lot of effort here.

But I have put in effort into speaking with our opposites.

[NoFish]

I don't think so.

I'm not convinced that everyone on the other side wanted peace. If they were so willing to bring down the terms based on our ability to pay, I would have thought that after hours of debating the economics, one of them would have piped up and said, "Oh, by the way, if you can't pay, we'll lower it, and here's how."

That they did not do that makes me suspect that some number of them did not and do not want peace, any peace. We were and are willing to sit down and offer anything reasonable that was within our power to give. Many of them our opposites were not willing to hear any counter-offer or budge an inch on the substantive issues. That they were unwilling to do this is telling.

When your arguments involve things like being nuked three times a day people are, unfortunately, inclined not to change their positions based on them.

[Prime minister Johns]

It involves some amount of trust that Karma will actually be reasonable about what is payable when evaluating, but since there are several alliances with experience on moving large reparation on a short time table getting expert opinions on the matter should be no trouble. But trust isn't an issue there are bigger leaps of faith an alliance must take when surrendering, demilitarizing is generally a surrender condition, nations will have to exit peace mode to pay reps, alliances also trust that the victors won't take advantage of their weakened position to jump them again. I can only think of one alliance (in)famous for pulling that stunt, care to guess who it was?

Yep, and this is probably the precise reason the NPO is being cautious.

This war has had a general theme of "What goes around comes around" and since they did this on at least one occasion that comes to my mind, they are probably expecting it to happen to them.

What is needed is for everyone to take a step back from the situation for a second or two and evaluate the situation and ask themselves the following questions;

How much damage has the NPO suffered in this war?

The damage inflicted on them should also be considered when imposing terms.

Would you consider the current terms if you were offered them?

If you would reject them then it is likely that the NPO will also reject them.

What exactly does karma want out of this war?

Do they wish to punish then NPO or destroy the NPO?

If the goal is to punish the NPO then they should offer terms that will bring about a positive change in the NPO and not fuel resentment and a second war at a later date. In my opinion a reasonable (but still tough) set of terms and a diplomatic blitz will ensure that the NPO will still exist but it will no longer be the sole hegemon of planet Bob and will work within the new political framework. After all the NPO leadership are not blind to the politics of the world and they will most likely adapt to being a medium sized alliance that works with other alliances cooperatively rather than competitively in future, because they will no longer have the resources to do so. And with clever management on the part of the karma alliances then they will not get back into the position to do that.

So to summarise this Karma would be best served by imposing tough (but reasonable) reps to ensure that the NPO will not grow for a couple of months and taking those reps and investing them in their own growth so that they will have a lead that will be difficult to reach for at least a year or two and ensure that the NPO is not a military threat for that time.

But this is just my opinion.

[TypoNinja]

Well the reps are not the hang up point, clearly the reps are easily done since NPO's counter offer included an extra billion.

The spot we are hung up at is the two weeks at war for the top 60 in peace mode, NPO's extra billion was offered in exchange for that being removed, relative economics aside, clearly thats the point we are hung up on. Karma has little motivation to go out of their way to be nicer to the NPO, NPO doesn't want to expose the last of their real power to a gang bang. On both sides we have people unwilling to change their position, and the situation is complicated by there being so many alliances on the karma side to coordinate with when making even minor changes to terms (like wording changes to counter some misgivings.

There is a solution, there is always a solution, but nobody seems willing to put in the extra work to find it at this point.

[Darth Elecian]

CoaLUEtion: LUE, GATO, CGS(CDS), SRI, ICSN, DDA, AoAN, GGA, TAGA, OIN, NAAC, ONOS, FIS, LOSS, ODN

How many of these alliances are still around

Then how many alliances are shadows of what they once were

NPO get to continue to play the game. Anything less than forced disbandment are light terms

Yes the terms are too harsh. Whatever the amount of money they owe to Karma, in whatever billions is WAY too much considering what this war was started over. No matter how much money and tech you guys will try to force out of Pacifica, it will not bring back any of those alliances. To me it is saying "We are jealous because you guys have played the game better than we have and now we want our turn in the sun". Another reason why I am not to overly fond of Karma is the lists of alliance you often leave out "The Legion" as one of the alliances victimized by NPO which they were.

[Matthew Conrad]

Yes the terms are too harsh. Whatever the amount of money they owe to Karma, in whatever billions is WAY too much considering what this war was started over. No matter how much money and tech you guys will try to force out of Pacifica, it will not bring back any of those alliances. To me it is saying "We are jealous because you guys have played the game better than we have and now we want our turn in the sun". Another reason why I am not to overly fond of Karma is the lists of alliance you often leave out "The Legion" as one of the alliances victimized by NPO which they were.

Actually many people have mentioned Legion, not as much as GATO, but I've seen the Legion mentioned many a time. Of course, being that Legion fought on NPO's side and doesn't exactly complain about what happened to it, what did you expect?

[Cortath]

Well the reps are not the hang up point, clearly the reps are easily done since NPO's counter offer included an extra billion.

The spot we are hung up at is the two weeks at war for the top 60 in peace mode, NPO's extra billion was offered in exchange for that being removed, relative economics aside, clearly thats the point we are hung up on. Karma has little motivation to go out of their way to be nicer to the NPO, NPO doesn't want to expose the last of their real power to a gang bang. On both sides we have people unwilling to change their position, and the situation is complicated by there being so many alliances on the karma side to coordinate with when making even minor changes to terms (like wording changes to counter some misgivings.

There is a solution, there is always a solution, but nobody seems willing to put in the extra work to find it at this point.

We have made genuine and sincere efforts to come to the table again and discuss proposals.

[TypoNinja]

We have made genuine and sincere efforts to come to the table again and discuss proposals.

Yea I just saw a new quote from Sparta about how it was tweaked to go by nation to avoid extended war due to non compliance, good stuff.

[Cortath]

Yea I just saw a new quote from Sparta about how it was tweaked to go by nation to avoid extended war due to non compliance, good stuff.

Even assuming that it works out the way it purports to (and reading some of the posts there does not encourage me, but then again, I do keep in mind that only government of alliances speaks for government), it does eliminate the second (and other) major problem with the terms, which is that you cannot destroy the income generation section of an alliance, while simultaneously ask for large reparations.

[Matthew Conrad]

Even assuming that it works out the way it purports to (and reading some of the posts there does not encourage me, but then again, I do keep in mind that only government of alliances speaks for government), it does eliminate the second (and other) major problem with the terms, which is that you cannot destroy the income generation section of an alliance, while simultaneously ask for large reparations.

Well, I believe it was GeorgetheGreat who said it so it would be government.

[Cortath]

Well, I believe it was GeorgetheGreat who said it so it would be government.

Excellent dodging of my second point. My hat goes off to you, sir.

[Matthew Conrad]

Excellent dodging of my second point. My hat goes off to you, sir.

I wasn't dodging it, I was clarifying something for you regarding the first thing you said because it seemed you weren't sure if it was official. My apologies, I'll try not to help you out next time.

[Cortath]

I wasn't dodging it, I was clarifying something for you regarding the first thing you said because it seemed you weren't sure if it was official. My apologies, I'll try not to help you out next time.

Your clarification is appreciated.

[TypoNinja]

Even assuming that it works out the way it purports to (and reading some of the posts there does not encourage me, but then again, I do keep in mind that only government of alliances speaks for government), it does eliminate the second (and other) major problem with the terms, which is that you cannot destroy the income generation section of an alliance, while simultaneously ask for large reparations.

Yea its kind of a switch, your enemies have more faith in your ability to rebuild than you do.

[auto98]

These reps are neither punitive, nor do they cover damages.

The top one nation from each alliance fighting NPO could probably account for all 7 billion in damages before you even have to look at the rest of their members.

I know its hard to believe but 7 billion dollars amounts to TOKEN reparations.

It isn't the amount per se, it is the slots it uses