WarMaster Kerr Posted July 5, 2009 Report Share Posted July 5, 2009 It is humorous to watch people mock the Order as being 'blind' or 'brainwashed', only to follow it up with a complete misunderstanding of the events that are taking place. and what is taking place? "were all alone, great patriotic war 2! rah rah re rah!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vladimir Posted July 5, 2009 Report Share Posted July 5, 2009 Such a nuanced analysis. However, I was referring to your comment that the war is continuing because we are 'making a point'. Comrade Sarai in the post above yours makes the point well. In the meantime I will continue to enjoy your humble opinion that anyone who disagrees with you must be suffering from some sort of mental defect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cortath Posted July 5, 2009 Report Share Posted July 5, 2009 and what is taking place?"were all alone, great patriotic war 2! rah rah re rah!" It's as if you read the very drafts of my speeches! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarMaster Kerr Posted July 5, 2009 Report Share Posted July 5, 2009 Such a nuanced analysis. However, I was referring to your comment that the war is continuing because we are 'making a point'. Comrade Sarai in the post above yours makes the point well. Perhaps, perhaps not, from what I remember and still see in the NPO is dfferent, to say the least. In the meantime I will continue to enjoy your humble opinion that anyone who disagrees with you must be suffering from some sort of mental defect. Hardly. But if you're adamant at maintaining that view I might as well have fun with it. "Megalomaniac Moo" satisfy you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarMaster Kerr Posted July 5, 2009 Report Share Posted July 5, 2009 It's as if you read the very drafts of my speeches! You're speeches always were rousing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord of Destruction Posted July 5, 2009 Report Share Posted July 5, 2009 (edited) You're speeches always were rousing. Are you still in the Order, WMK? If no... where are you? Edited July 5, 2009 by Lord of Destruction Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
In Tyler We Trust Posted July 5, 2009 Report Share Posted July 5, 2009 lulz. blind followers to a broken emperor.delish. EDIT: voted no, most of NPO's membership are way too blind/brainwashed/"patriotic" to even grasp the idea that fighting isnt the best path and that keeping their strength instead of throwing it away to make a point, will ultimately, in the long run, just make them weaker. NPO was great before the war, it may become great again, but at this point they seem only to be interested in making their comeback more of an uncertainty. You realize that the only reason we are still at war is because we have 230+ nations "keeping their strength instead of throwing it away to make a point," as you put it. Your post completely encompasses the attitude of Karma in that in the long run they do want to make us weaker by forcing those nations to throw away their strength. We aren't interested in making a comeback an uncertainty, Karma is by removing nearly all of our nations from peace mode and blasting them for 2 weeks once we get 90% of them into war mode. Sounds to me like you would refuse the terms we were given as well if you knew what was going on... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TypoNinja Posted July 5, 2009 Report Share Posted July 5, 2009 You realize that the only reason we are still at war is because we have 230+ nations "keeping their strength instead of throwing it away to make a point," as you put it. Your post completely encompasses the attitude of Karma in that in the long run they do want to make us weaker by forcing those nations to throw away their strength. We aren't interested in making a comeback an uncertainty, Karma is by removing nearly all of our nations from peace mode and blasting them for 2 weeks once we get 90% of them into war mode. Sounds to me like you would refuse the terms we were given as well if you knew what was going on... It sounds to me like you are taking your talking points from your PR department instead of reality. If you'd been paying attention you'd have noticed the terms changing to avoid logistical issues. Tell you what, it'll be a learning experience for you, I'm not going to tell you, you'll have to go look your self. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
In Tyler We Trust Posted July 6, 2009 Report Share Posted July 6, 2009 (edited) It sounds to me like you are taking your talking points from your PR department instead of reality.If you'd been paying attention you'd have noticed the terms changing to avoid logistical issues. Tell you what, it'll be a learning experience for you, I'm not going to tell you, you'll have to go look your self. Sorry if you think the fact that everyone in NPO thinks that that term is !@#$%^&* means that we're brainwashed drones. I'd invite you to read everything I've written since joining to show you how wrong you are at least in my case, but I'm afraid diplomats can't see those things. I'd love to go on a treasure hunt and be proven wrong that you don't want to make 90% of our nations switch to war mode for two weeks, but I'd rather not spend hours digging through 200+ page topics. Unless the term that requires 90% of all nations to be in war mode for two weeks changes my point will remain the same. Edited July 6, 2009 by In Tyler We Trust Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sal Paradise Posted July 6, 2009 Report Share Posted July 6, 2009 Are you still in the Order, WMK? If no... where are you? LoD in MK? Why hello there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord of Destruction Posted July 6, 2009 Report Share Posted July 6, 2009 LoD in MK?Why hello there. What up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glen MoP Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 It sounds to me like you are taking your talking points from your PR department instead of reality.If you'd been paying attention you'd have noticed the terms changing to avoid logistical issues. Tell you what, it'll be a learning experience for you, I'm not going to tell you, you'll have to go look your self. It's impossible to tell if the terms change or if that is just some alliance leader's opinion. Maybe if Karma was to officially post the current surrender terms people would have some idea what was going on. Before you hand me "Karma is not an official entity" junk, let me rephrase. If the alliances that are currently at war with the NPO and who insist on joint negotiations would jointly post the surrender terms they, collectively, are offering it would clear things up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Janova Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 I'm sure that representatives (not sure if it's still Londo or if you have insulted him enough he gave up) are communicating with your government, which is how peace negotiations are always done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glen MoP Posted July 8, 2009 Report Share Posted July 8, 2009 I'm sure that representatives (not sure if it's still Londo or if you have insulted him enough he gave up) are communicating with your government, which is how peace negotiations are always done. Private channels for the win, eh? That's not really my point. My point was that all the people discussing the terms could be arguing about the exact same thing if the people who are offering the terms were to officially tell everyone what they were. It would cut down on a lot of the speculation. As a side note, to address (one interpretation of) your comment about Londo, I've never insulted Londo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raincoat2 Posted July 10, 2009 Report Share Posted July 10, 2009 A hard, but possible set of terms would be a challenge that NPO would relish taking up. There's no point in a set of terms designed for us to fail to start with so we remain in war rather than send 25% of the tech, fail to keep up due to the silly restrictions and get more war.Anyway, we'll pay hard terms when they come. Also we won't revolt, those who are weak will leave to other alliances and crow they know better, (LoD), those who are sick of fighting will <OOC>delete</OOC> or leave to unaligned, this is expected. However the remainder of us will stay strong, discuss things internally, have free discussions on problems and move forward as appropriate including paying terms for many months when they become possible. The current set of terms are both hard and possible. Considering there is no required time frame on the terms, there is no reason you can't complete them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord of Destruction Posted July 10, 2009 Report Share Posted July 10, 2009 A hard, but possible set of terms would be a challenge that NPO would relish taking up. There's no point in a set of terms designed for us to fail to start with so we remain in war rather than send 25% of the tech, fail to keep up due to the silly restrictions and get more war.Anyway, we'll pay hard terms when they come. Also we won't revolt, those who are weak will leave to other alliances and crow they know better, (LoD), those who are sick of fighting will <OOC>delete</OOC> or leave to unaligned, this is expected. However the remainder of us will stay strong, discuss things internally, have free discussions on problems and move forward as appropriate including paying terms for many months when they become possible. I missed this little shot. Hi Sarai. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted July 10, 2009 Report Share Posted July 10, 2009 Also we won't revolt, those who are weak will leave to other alliances and crow they know better, (LoD) Excuse me for poking in on others' business, but how does venturing out into the world and eventually settling down in an alliance known for standing its ground constitute "weak"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
President Kuse Posted July 10, 2009 Report Share Posted July 10, 2009 They have their membership locked around their fingers, The only way for NPO to break down would be internally. Which is unlikely. So instead they will slowly rot away till they Accept the fair and reasonable terms that are laid out before them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord of Destruction Posted July 10, 2009 Report Share Posted July 10, 2009 Excuse me for poking in on others' business, but how does venturing out into the world and eventually settling down in an alliance known for standing its ground constitute "weak"? I know the answer to this one: "Because leaving an alliance you promised to fight for is the wrong thing to do, and those who do not stand for what is right are weak." In response to an answer that has yet to be given - NPO doesn't stand for what's right. No one does. No one ever will. There will never be a night in shining armor to stand for justice. The best you'll get is a corrupt politician who will do what you want as long as he gets the final say. It's called a false sense of comfort. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waterana Posted July 10, 2009 Report Share Posted July 10, 2009 (edited) They have their membership locked around their fingers, The only way for NPO to break down would be internally. Which is unlikely. So instead they will slowly rot away till they Accept the fair and reasonable terms that are laid out before them. The terms aren't fair. aren't reasonable, and you aren't getting our banks. Maybe you should accept that. Edited July 10, 2009 by Waterana Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TypoNinja Posted July 10, 2009 Report Share Posted July 10, 2009 The terms aren't fair. aren't reasonable, and you aren't getting our banks. Maybe you should accept that. I love it when NPO members try to make this assertion, it cracks me up, because its less than terms they've offered to others. This statement from NPO amounts to an admission that none of the terms you've levied on others in the past were fair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeinousOne Posted July 10, 2009 Report Share Posted July 10, 2009 I love it when NPO members try to make this assertion, it cracks me up, because its less than terms they've offered to others. This statement from NPO amounts to an admission that none of the terms you've levied on others in the past were fair. That is all probably true, fact is though they are not letting you get at their banks. Ready for the long war and all the continued talk about it on the OWF? Until this war ends there is going to be nothing else that people will focus on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waterana Posted July 10, 2009 Report Share Posted July 10, 2009 Each side has it's opinions on the terms and why they are fair and unfair. Your side likes to throw up past events as justification, ours wants to survive and not be crippled to the point of destruction. Your side thinks we should just accept these terms out of shame and as some sort of atonement for the past, ours wants to survive and not be crippled to the point of destruction. I could go on, but won't bother. The terms have been rejected, not put aside for revisiting without change at a later date, but totally and irrevocably rejected. The terms as written will never be accepted, no matter how much they are shoved under our nose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ying Yang Mafia Posted July 10, 2009 Report Share Posted July 10, 2009 So you're willing to accept eternal war as an alternative? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waterana Posted July 10, 2009 Report Share Posted July 10, 2009 We're still fighting. What do you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts