JDavis Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 Yall don't know me. I read the OWF, but do not typically post. The following is all personla opinion and should be read in that context. All this 'Karma War Peace Terms Update: Why NPO refuses to agree to the terms' is starting to get real old. It is almost as bad as turning on ESPN and watching 3 hours of nothing but "Will Brett Favre come back: the latest story". Point is, I cannot see where any of this speculation is getting us any closer to the peace almost all of us want, so I have a couple of tips for both Karma and NPO, as well as for some of the NPO's main defenders/supporters. To Pacifica: You lost, period. You have dictated harsh* terms to almost all of the alliances you have beaten in the past. Can you not see that this war is about retribution, not a seizure of power away from the hegemony that dictated the path of CN for so long. You really have maybe four options: Man** up, take the terms given to you with a smile, and try to recover both statistically and politically; the masses rise up, overthrow you government, and install someone who may be able to talk reasonably with the Karma leaders; start winning the war and then YOU can dictate the terms; and finally, you can really PO Karma and disband, not allowing them the chance to grind you to dust. To Karma: Yes, you have won, I give you that. But I want you to reflect a little before you completely destroy the standard bearer for Planet Bob almost since its inception. Many of the alliances now aligned against NPO were once direct allies or solidly connected through the MDP web. Also remember who will pay the reps and those that will take the most damage in the 14 day war on hippies that will happen if/when the current peace terms are accepted will be the masses, not the government that you are truly fighting against. Their true power is not in infra or tech, but in their say in the NPO private forum. As long as the current government rules NPO, there will never be a true time of peace in CN. To mhawk & other NPO defenders: I have read many thready where you have debated Karma members about the math involved in the reps proposed. While I do not have the ability (or patience) with numbers that many of these others do, I cannot see why an alliance famed for its ability to rebuild quickly to pre-war totals, can suddenly not be able to pay back a simple amount over an indefinite length of time. That being said, I applaud you for your staunch support of your alliance (or ally) despite the situation it now faces. All I can ask is that my friends and alliance-mates try to aid me like yall whenever I stick my foot in my mouth**. *while the harsness of the terms is subjective to personal opinion, I am using popular opinion **Figures of speach, don't go all PC on me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azhrei Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 Don't hold your breath for a change in the OWF any time soon. And don't get worked up about it, it's not worth the blood pressure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comedian Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 I'm disappointed. I was expecting a poll. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Kremlin Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 (edited) I cannot see why an alliance famed for its ability to rebuild quickly to pre-war totals, can suddenly not be able to pay back a simple amount over an indefinite length of time. I think their problem with the terms is that it isn't just a simple amount. Will Brett Favre come back: the latest story also AROD MANNY CLEMENS REDSOX/YANKEES BRADY KOBE LEBRON Edited June 17, 2009 by Joe Kremlin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDavis Posted June 17, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 (edited) I do not expect much of a change, just want a break from all the same old "we can't pay, here's the math to prove it" vs. "yes you can pay, and here's the math to prove it" which devolves down to "my math can beat up your math" and hopefully get some actual thought in a few threads. I think their problem with the terms is that it isn't just a simple amount. The point being, "it's too harsh, we cannot possibly pay this" load the NPO is trolling is BS Edited June 17, 2009 by JDavis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teriethien Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 I do not expect much of a change, just want a break from all the same old "we can't pay, here's the math to prove it" vs. "yes you can pay, and here's the math to prove it" which devolves down to "my math can beat up your math" and hopefully get some actual thought in a few threads.The point being, "it's too harsh, we cannot possibly pay this" load the NPO is trolling is BS By itself the they admitted they can pay the reps. The real issue is the 2 weeks of war terms; I don't think the NPO is fooling anyone that 2 weeks of war would destroy a reasonably prepared nation. The larger issue seems to be the possibility of eternal war due to the wording of these terms. Which is silly because Karma explained what they intended to do and there's no leeway for eternal wars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deadshot Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 By itself the they admitted they can pay the reps. The real issue is the 2 weeks of war terms; I don't think the NPO is fooling anyone that 2 weeks of war would destroy a reasonably prepared nation. The larger issue seems to be the possibility of eternal war due to the wording of these terms. Which is silly because Karma explained what they intended to do and there's no leeway for eternal wars. Well good then, there's the answer. Officially clarify the terms of the 14 day war and re-present the same terms. There is no reason Karma can't do that. Then, there will be no debate over the terms, NPO will pay the amounts and holy hell, problem solved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teriethien Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 Well good then, there's the answer. Officially clarify the terms of the 14 day war and re-present the same terms. There is no reason Karma can't do that. Then, there will be no debate over the terms, NPO will pay the amounts and holy hell, problem solved. Yeah except that having received the clarification in private the NPO decided to go and pull a 200+ page pity act. Instead of, you know, requesting something like you said. I do hope that the two sides have resuemd communicating though, this is getting tedious and rather annoying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mixoux Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 Well good then, there's the answer. Officially clarify the terms of the 14 day war and re-present the same terms. There is no reason Karma can't do that. Then, there will be no debate over the terms, NPO will pay the amounts and holy hell, problem solved. It's definitely not that simple, otherwise reps would be getting paid right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Otto Verteidiger Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 There is no reason Karma can't do that. They won. Why should they do that when they don't have to? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sulmar Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 They won. Why should they do that when they don't have to? Might makes right, huh? I like it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Otto Verteidiger Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 Might makes right, huh? I like it. No, I'm a believer in punishing a criminal justly. If Pacifica wasn't deserving of it, I would be crying about the harsh terms. But they are deserving, I guess some people just like to forget things though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doitzel Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 Might makes right, huh? I like it. You fought for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Letum Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 It always amuses me that with all the "winners dictate the terms" speeches lately, people have forgotten that a peace treaty is an agreement. The winner agrees in order to satisfy what goals they have, and the loser agrees if it is better than the alternative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sulmar Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 (edited) No, I'm a believer in punishing a criminal justly. If Pacifica wasn't deserving of it, I would be crying about the harsh terms. But they are deserving, I guess some people just like to forget things though. I'm not saying that they don't deserve, they do indeed. It's just nice to know that some things never really change. You fought for it. What can I say? I'm a sucker for hegemony. Edit: Yeah grammar! Edited June 18, 2009 by Sulmar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New Frontier Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 The only thing worse than whining is whining about whining. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qaianna Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 Yeah except that having received the clarification in private the NPO decided to go and pull a 200+ page pity act. Instead of, you know, requesting something like you said. I do hope that the two sides have resuemd communicating though, this is getting tedious and rather annoying. Just as a side note, I highly doubt they were expecting it to go 200+ pages. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cortath Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 We lost this war. We do not have so much pride, or so little wisdom, as not to have realized that a long, long time ago. If we were given terms we believed were possible to pay, we would take them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Otto Verteidiger Posted June 18, 2009 Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 It always amuses me that with all the "winners dictate the terms" speeches lately, people have forgotten that a peace treaty is an agreement. The winner agrees in order to satisfy what goals they have, and the loser agrees if it is better than the alternative. Winners do dictate terms. The terms are dictated by the winners, they are accepted or rejected by the loser. That's entirely up to you guys to come to an agreement or not with the forces against you. I'm not saying that they don't deserve, they do indeed. It's just nice to know that some things never really change. Oh. Oh, I see what you're thinking. You see, the "Might makes right" being used here is, well, justified. The "Might makes right" Pacifica and her allies used was not. So things have changed actually. The vehicle maybe has remained the same, the direction it is going has not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sulmar Posted June 18, 2009 Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 Oh. Oh, I see what you're thinking. You see, the "Might makes right" being used here is, well, justified. The "Might makes right" Pacifica and her allies used was not. So things have changed actually. The vehicle maybe has remained the same, the direction it is going has not. I don't think the direction matters if you end up at the same place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChairmanHal Posted June 18, 2009 Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 (edited) The OP won the thread with the first post. Ya'll are of course welcome to continue the discussion afterward if you like. Edited June 18, 2009 by ChairmanHal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melchior Posted June 18, 2009 Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 To Pacifica: You lost, period. You have dictated harsh* terms to almost all of the alliances you have beaten in the past. Can you not see that this war is about retribution, not a seizure of power away from the hegemony that dictated the path of CN for so long. You really have maybe four options: Man** up, take the terms given to you with a smile, and try to recover both statistically and politically; the masses rise up, overthrow you government, and install someone who may be able to talk reasonably with the Karma leaders; start winning the war and then YOU can dictate the terms; and finally, you can really PO Karma and disband, not allowing them the chance to grind you to dust. The New Pacific Order wouldn't gain anything from disbanding nor would Karma lose anything. Actually the NPO-CIS war didn't start until the Confederate of Imperial States had disbanded. They were pretty much ground to dust. To Karma: Yes, you have won, I give you that. But I want you to reflect a little before you completely destroy the standard bearer for Planet Bob almost since its inception. Many of the alliances now aligned against NPO were once direct allies or solidly connected through the MDP web. Also remember who will pay the reps and those that will take the most damage in the 14 day war on hippies that will happen if/when the current peace terms are accepted will be the masses, not the government that you are truly fighting against. Their true power is not in infra or tech, but in their say in the NPO private forum. As long as the current government rules NPO, there will never be a true time of peace in CN. I think "standard bearer" is the wrong term to describe the New Pacific Order. Many would definitely disagree with that statement considering the fact that most of the CyberNation population dislike them one way or another. You must take into account that the way the New Pacific Order has enforced their position is through military superiority through not only bonds between them and other strong alliances and demeaning diplomacy (that's how I imagine it anyway), but mostly through a lot of infrastructure, technology and massive armies of well-trained and well-experienced teams created for warfare. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melchior Posted June 18, 2009 Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 (edited) It always amuses me that with all the "winners dictate the terms" speeches lately, people have forgotten that a peace treaty is an agreement. The winner agrees in order to satisfy what goals they have, and the loser agrees if it is better than the alternative. How they do things on Planet Earth is not how we do things on Planet Bob, if I may remind you, dearest Letum. Edit: Sorry, double post. Edited June 18, 2009 by Melchior Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New Frontier Posted June 18, 2009 Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 The OP won the thread with the first post. Ya'll are of course well to continue the discussion afterward if you like. I'm sure he appreciates your vote of confidence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deadshot Posted June 18, 2009 Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 They won. Why should they do that when they don't have to? Well why should any alliance have to submit terms that are agreeable to anyone then? Whether right or wrong, NPO, when on the winning side of a war, had every right to place terms on the losers that they deemed appropriate. That is of course uising your logic. However if you agree that Pacifica has levied terms before that are unacceptable and should have been negotiated, then you must not even believe what you just wrote, because I'll bet anything that you would not say that when Pacifica did it to you. I still don't agree with how this war started, nor do I agree with some of the previous terms levied. However, if it isn't right for one alliance to say this, it isn't right for the other either. 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.