Why I am a Pacifican

[Klonopin]

Yes, but I seriously doubt you want your opponents asking to repay the damages of the current conflict. That would be something you'd never pay off.

You feel the current offer in Reps doesn't cover the current damages suffered to Karma?

[Locke]

Do you automatically label anyone that doesn't agree with your points of view "Karma?"

Didn't Karma call themselves merely a loose alliances of alliances who wanted vengance on the NPO, and nothing more? And that anyone who wanted that end was a part of them? Or am I just going senile?

And no, that's not an invitation to call me senile.

[Locke]

My understanding is that Karma will mark the nations and attack them for 14 days; no more and no less. And it's said that this is what Karma told the NPO, too, so there's no excuse for misunderstanding.

If you actually look at the rest of my post, you'd see that I don't buy that any group as large and varied as Karma can keep that kind of order. If it is, I will be both impressed and satisfied. Karma, prove it.

[Teriethien]

You feel the current offer in Reps doesn't cover the current damages suffered to Karma?

They don't even come close; it's not a matter of feeling but rather statistics.

[Tromp]

14 days after terms are met, yes, I understand that perfectly. Nothing in the terms, however, seem to imply that you won't be attacking those who are moving to war mode in the time before the 90%, which is why I say minimum, not maximum. Once 90% is met, it is a maximum of 14 days, but as said before, it will take more than a single day to pull this off, and I can't see that...was it 17 alliances declared on NPO will all hold off. If you can pull together such a varied assortment of alliances towards this, I will applaud you, since coordinating just NPO from inside of NPO seems to quite the difficulty, complicated by people simply ignoring orders. You think every single member under Karma will be able to pull off something greater than a far smaller number under one alliance? It's like coordinating war efforts between different countries: it's not easy.

Sorry, have you read my post? I think I explained it pretty well?

Here's what it comes down to: 14 days of warfare for each of the nations in PM. I already gave you the point that the term may be interpreted differently, however that does not change our intentions nor the fact that NPO knows what our intentions are.

[Klonopin]

They don't even come close; it's not a matter of feeling but rather statistics.

Damages done by NPO alone?

[King DrunkWino]

Didn't Karma call themselves merely a loose alliances of alliances who wanted vengance on the NPO, and nothing more? And that anyone who wanted that end was a part of them? Or am I just going senile?

And no, that's not an invitation to call me senile.

I'm not talking about Karma, I'm talking about:

So why doesn't Karma not follow the vicious circle?

If through repeating our actions is Karma for our actions, then Karma will come around for your actions, then Karma will come around for New Karma's actions ... and the whole process will go on ad nauseam.

All the terms show is that you haven't learnt from the lessons that this war was about teaching us - that draconian actions will come back to bite you.

But like I said, surely you can break this circle through not giving draconian terms?

See, I'm not Karma, I have yet (actually in my entire nations existence,) to engage a NPO target and I'm sure I'm not the only one. Now if I'm going to be considered such, I'd like to know now so I can get some good swings in at the NPO before they come back around and roll me at a later date.

[sirrontail]

Oh, here is the "You're as bad as we were" argument again. Meh.

That was proven false a long time ago.

I assume that was directed at me?

But that wasn't what I was saying though.

You can say you're not as bad as us, but that doesn't stop what you do being bad, nor does it stop Karma. Karma comes about whether you punch someone in the face or whether you stab them in the gut.

[Locke]

Sorry, have you read my post? I think I explained it pretty well?

Here's what it comes down to: 14 days of warfare for each of the nations in PM. I already gave you the point that the term may be interpreted differently, however that does not change our intentions nor the fact that NPO knows what our intentions are.

<snip snip>I don't buy that any group as large and varied as Karma can keep that kind of order. If it is, I will be both impressed and satisfied. Karma, prove it.

Again, intentions are all well and good, but let's be real too. I'm just pointing out that it's going to be hard to pull off, and I don't really think anyone can do it. Again, if you can, bravo, good for you, if NPO can accept that and it happens, well, I can agree with that.

[sirrontail]

See, I'm not Karma, I have yet (actually in my entire nations existence,) to engage a NPO target and I'm sure I'm not the only one. Now if I'm going to be considered such, I'd like to know now so I can get some good swings in at the NPO before they come back around and roll me at a later date.

Sorry for assuming.

I'm also sorry for casting aspersions upon your character.

[Teriethien]

If you actually look at the rest of my post, you'd see that I don't buy that any group as large and varied as Karma can keep that kind of order. If it is, I will be both impressed and satisfied. Karma, prove it.

Well, from what I was reading it sounds like you were contradicting yourself, so I just addressed the part where you said nothing says Karma won't attack. But I don't doubt that Karma and NPO could have worked out a way to ensure this is carried out smoothly had the latter actually tried. Or just reps to cover unwarranted damages. And anyway if you wanna follow this line of logic, how is a group as large as Karma gonna prevent individual nations from attacking the NPO even after Pacifica surrenders?

[JCFalkenberg]

It's not "a couple." By these numbers, almost 300: http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=56317 Yeah, and this was hardly it. Earlier in the war I know I saw lots of posts from the general membership crying for NPO to disband. To my knowledge, no one with actual decision making power has supported such measures, but you can hardly call it "a couple of fanatical haters" either, don't kid yourself.

..more words..

so, your evidence consists of a (mostly) anonymous, completely unscientific poll of the sort that regularly gets ballot stuffed just for fun? cool story bro.

[Delta1212]

You feel the current offer in Reps doesn't cover the current damages suffered to Karma?

I personally sustained over 1 billion dollars in damages, and I got off pretty light compared to a lot of people.

Edit: 1 =/= 2

Edited June 16, 2009 by Delta1212

[Teriethien]

Damages done by NPO alone?

High strength nations would have suffered billions' worth of damages. And I'm fairly certain NPO have engaged a few of those.

[Tromp]

Again, intentions are all well and good, but let's be real too. I'm just pointing out that it's going to be hard to pull off, and I don't really think anyone can do it. Again, if you can, bravo, good for you, if NPO can accept that and it happens, well, I can agree with that.

So you're saying some of us are so desperate for a fight that they will immediately declare war on a NPO nations that will come out of PM?

That's not really how it works.

And even then, if it would happen, there would be only 14 days of war like we said there would be. It isn't that hard.

[Locke]

Well, from what I was reading it sounds like you were contradicting yourself, so I just addressed the part where you said nothing says Karma won't attack. But I don't doubt that Karma and NPO could have worked out a way to ensure this is carried out smoothly had the latter actually tried. Or just reps to cover unwarranted damages. And anyway if you wanna follow this line of logic, how is a group as large as Karma gonna prevent individual nations from attacking the NPO even after Pacifica surrenders?

Following this line of logic, I should hope that it's the same as peace terms I've seen before: the defeated party(s) are protected by the winning party(s). Threatening attackers with military action goes a long way. for that matter, to make this more smooth in the first place, I hope you're doing that to those who attack marked nations jumping into war mode, attacking those who jump the gun.

[Letum]

So you're saying some of us are so desperate for a fight that they will immediately declare war on a NPO nations that will come out of PM?

That's not really how it works.

Generally, that is how war works. Nations that are in war-mode get attacked.

Unless you are saying that Karma will offer a general cease-fire upon the signing of these terms, wait until the 90% compliance rate has been reached, and then resume warfare for 2 weeks.

[Tromp]

I assume that was directed at me?

But that wasn't what I was saying though.

You can say you're not as bad as us, but that doesn't stop what you do being bad, nor does it stop Karma. Karma comes about whether you punch someone in the face or whether you stab them in the gut.

War is bad. You aggressively attacked a small alliance with basically no CB, knowing it would become a global war. The agressor will be punished and I see no injustice in that.

If there will be grudges over this war, who am I to deny them.

Seriously, this happens every war?

The point was how heavy the terms were. As you said yourself, these terms are not in the slightest close to those NPO has offered in the past.

In fact, most people think they are justified. There is even a large group of people that think these terms are too lenient. I guess that says something.

[Locke]

Generally, that is how war works. Nations that are in war-mode get attacked.

Unless you are saying that Karma will offer a general cease-fire upon the signing of these terms, wait until the 90% compliance rate has been reached, and then resume warfare for 2 weeks.

Thank you for putting it in clearer terms than I, Letum.

[Tromp]

Generally, that is how war works. Nations that are in war-mode get attacked.

Unless you are saying that Karma will offer a general cease-fire upon the signing of these terms, wait until the 90% compliance rate has been reached, and then resume warfare for 2 weeks.

Whatever we should do is not important by now, more so because NPO decided to reject our terms and make them public. I, for one, don't think that is the way one should negotiate. I won't go into the negotiations themselves, but I can say that we were more than willing to listen and work with NPO.

[Letum]

Whatever we should do is not important by now, more so because NPO decided to reject our terms and make them public. I, for one, don't think that is the way one should negotiate. I won't go into the negotiations themselves, but I can say that we were more than willing to listen and work with NPO.

I thought we were debating the merit of the terms, and specifically what the 14 day provision entails, not what course of action Karma should follow.

Edited June 16, 2009 by Letum

[Qazzian]

So you're saying some of us are so desperate for a fight that they will immediately declare war on a NPO nations that will come out of PM?

That's not really how it works.

And even then, if it would happen, there would be only 14 days of war like we said there would be. It isn't that hard.

Has that officially been said anywhere? That nations would be monitored and only subject to war for the 14 days each, not 14 days as of the point that 90% of high NS nations and 90% of the alliance in general is in war mode?

B1) The New Pacific Order shall move the bulk of its forces into warmode for 2 weeks prior to the end of combat. When 90% or more of all nations at or above 4,000 infrastructure and additionally 90% or more of the alliance is in warmode, a countdown clock shall begin, starting on the day immediately after the above conditions have been met. A state of open warfare shall exist between the signatories of this document for a period of exactly 14 days. After the period of 14 days has elapsed no further attacks are to occur, peace is to be offered in all quarters, and the period of protection specified in part C of this agreement will begin.

That says the clock will start for 14 days once that condition has been met, not kept individually. I could easily be wrong and have missed an official statement from Karma that what you're saying is true, there's been way too many posts on the topic of reps.

[Tromp]

I thought we were debating the merit of the terms, and specifically what the 14 day provision entails, not what course of action Karma should follow.

There is no debating the 14 day period, as I have now explained multiple times.

14 days = 14 days.

Has that officially been said anywhere? That nations would be monitored and only subject to war for the 14 days each, not 14 days as of the point that 90% of high NS nations and 90% of the alliance in general is in war mode?

That says the clock will start for 14 days once that condition has been met, not kept individually. I could easily be wrong and have missed an official statement from Karma that what you're saying is true, there's been way too many posts on the topic of reps.

Please read one or two pages back, as this has already been adressed.

Edited June 16, 2009 by Tromp

[Letum]

There is no debating the 14 day period, as I have now explained multiple times.

14 days = 14 days.

It appears you have some difficulty understanding the argument here.

Point 1: There is near certainty of a number of days between the signing of any such terms and the time at which the 90% compliance rate is reached.

Point 2: During that number of days, the New Pacific Order and the assorted alliances fighting it will be in a state of war.

Point 3: Nations currently in peace mode will be entering war mode during this period

Point 4: Nations in war mode will get attacked, because that is what happens when you are in a state of war. See point 2.

Point 5: Once the 90% point is reached, a "state of open warfare shall exist between the signatories of this document for a period of exactly 14 days"

Point 6: It will be 14 days after point 5, and more than 14 days after point 1, that this state of open warfare shall end.

Point 7: See point 4.

Edited June 16, 2009 by Letum

[enderland]

There is no debating the 14 day period, as I have now explained multiple times.

14 days = 14 days.

Are you sure? This appears to be a major point of contention amongst the NPOers.

You might mean any of the following

14 days = 1 fortnight

14 days = 2 weeks

14 days = 336 hours

14 days = 20160 minutes

The possibilities are endless of course.

Just sayin' since this appears to be quite unclear to some people and I'm just not sure what "14 days" means!