the rebel Posted June 30, 2009 Report Share Posted June 30, 2009 Fine.Between NPO and the 18 alliances fighting it, only one side has ever attacked a surrendered alliance. Happy? A little but with all the hate aimed at NPO because of its past, who says it wouldnt happen... The point still stands. What so your denying the 100s of people who say in OWF, in private or even think it, dont exist......wow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OverlordOeboema Posted June 30, 2009 Report Share Posted June 30, 2009 What so your denying the 100s of people who say in OWF, in private or even think it, dont exist......wow how do you know that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnCapistan Posted June 30, 2009 Report Share Posted June 30, 2009 Between NPO and Karma, only one has ever attacked a surrendered alliance. I beg to differ my good man: http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Second_Illuminati_War Second FAN War: http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/InFANtile_War As you can see both were caused by a breach of surrender terms and I don't think anyone can argue that Ragnorok is on the side of Karma. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teriethien Posted June 30, 2009 Report Share Posted June 30, 2009 What so your denying the 100s of people who say in OWF, in private or even think it, dont exist......wow I'm not and I have no idea where you got it from, but then you are obviously not making any sense anyway Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kitex Posted June 30, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 30, 2009 Where the heck have YOU been? I fought in the Karma War. I just haven't been able to get an idea on what is happening with everyone else as MHA fought only IRON. I started this topic to allow myself to get a better insight on what is still going on in the Karma War. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the rebel Posted June 30, 2009 Report Share Posted June 30, 2009 (edited) how do you know that? Ive been in several alliances, go on irc and talk to loads of people and the overall feel I get is that people hold grudges however old they may be. I'm not and I have no idea where you got it from, but then you are obviously not making any sense anyway Ok I give up with you Edited June 30, 2009 by the rebel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin32891 Posted June 30, 2009 Report Share Posted June 30, 2009 I beg to differ my good man:http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Second_Illuminati_War Second FAN War: http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/InFANtile_War As you can see both were caused by a breach of surrender terms and I don't think anyone can argue that Ragnorok is on the side of Karma. Its ok when they do it. But they are on the Karma side now so all their past sins have been cleansed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WcaesarD Posted June 30, 2009 Report Share Posted June 30, 2009 I have to agree with those who said the main war is over, the conflict is ongoing. It's pretty simple. And I don't think NPO is waiting for better terms, I think they're waiting for Karma to get bored or lose resolve and let the matter drop... or something that would have the same effect, like another global war with most of the alliances still fighting involved. NPO still has considerable weight in peace mode, if there was another global conflict, they would still be able to play a role, if they so desired. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingzog Posted June 30, 2009 Report Share Posted June 30, 2009 And with that belief we can look forward to an attack through any one of the many gaping loop-holes in the terms, justified on the same basis that Karma has justified everything else 'NPO did it first, it's Karma lol'. You have no business saying that. But please, subject yourself to even more derision. It gives me pleasure. As to the war, it continues but Karma seems to have lost interest. NPO members, including those who were 'properly' staggered, have been allowed to slip back into peace mode. If this is a 'tactic' by Karma, it's the worst I've seen in a long time. If it's not a tactic, then their hearts are no longer in it. Simple as that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juanveldez Posted June 30, 2009 Report Share Posted June 30, 2009 well in all honesty imo the war has pretty much stalled with neither side really attempting to make a move to the table. and NPO isnt the only one with a considerable bulk of their membership in peace mode. TPF, Echelon, Avalon and the others have a considerable amount of their membership in peace mode. now imo if your terms are accepted step back re work them and offer a new set of terms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnCapistan Posted June 30, 2009 Report Share Posted June 30, 2009 If this is a 'tactic' by Karma, it's the worst I've seen in a long time.If it's not a tactic, then their hearts are no longer in it. Simple as that. A wise man once said that: "Where there's a will there's a way" IMO the NPO will simply pull a FAN in order for them to garner massive public support later on (like FAN did). The only question is will the NPO be able to garner that support? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Velken Posted June 30, 2009 Report Share Posted June 30, 2009 IMO it seems the war has hit a stalemate or just stalled do to lack of interest (as others in thsi thread have stated). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChairmanHal Posted June 30, 2009 Report Share Posted June 30, 2009 (edited) I beg to differ my good man:http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Second_Illuminati_War Second FAN War: http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/InFANtile_War As you can see both were caused by a breach of surrender terms and I don't think anyone can argue that Ragnarok is on the side of Karma. I also don't think that anyone would argue that Illuminati had it coming...as for FAN...not so much...ok, at all. EDIT: Back on point... Your gauge as to whether major combat operation are over is the GRL and the number of combatant alliances on one side or the other that have a significant number of members in Peace Mode. By both measures, major combat operations have ended for the most part. However, it would also be incorrect to say that the war is over. That might not happen until the end of summer. Edited June 30, 2009 by ChairmanHal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doitzel Posted June 30, 2009 Report Share Posted June 30, 2009 And with that belief we can look forward to an attack through any one of the many gaping loop-holes in the terms, justified on the same basis that Karma has justified everything else 'NPO did it first, it's Karma lol'. Young fool. Only now, at the end, do you understand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Conrad Posted June 30, 2009 Report Share Posted June 30, 2009 A little but with all the hate aimed at NPO because of its past, who says it wouldnt happen...What so your denying the 100s of people who say in OWF, in private or even think it, dont exist......wow You'd be hard pressed to find 15% of the Karma people who post on here calling for disbandment. The reason you think this is because such posts stick out from the others. If a "majority" really wanted NPO disbanded, there really would be not terms to offer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Locke Posted June 30, 2009 Report Share Posted June 30, 2009 (edited) You'd be hard pressed to find 15% of the Karma people who post on here calling for disbandment. The reason you think this is because such posts stick out from the others. If a "majority" really wanted NPO disbanded, there really would be not terms to offer. The disbandment talk was more at the beginning of the war. There was a poll a while back in which ~300 members voted for disbanding the NPO at the end of the war, out of...I don't recall exactly how many, but I'm pretty sure it was the second highest voted option. I can dig up the topic, if you'd like to see for yourself. EDIT: Disbanging? O.o Edited June 30, 2009 by Locke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Conrad Posted June 30, 2009 Report Share Posted June 30, 2009 The disbandment talk was more at the beginning of the war. There was a poll a while back in which ~300 members voted for disbanding the NPO at the end of the war, out of...I don't recall exactly how many, but I'm pretty sure it was the second highest voted option. I can dig up the topic, if you'd like to see for yourself.EDIT: Disbanging? O.o You're assuming everyone who wants NPO to disband is in Karma or on the NPO front. There are numerous people who vocally support Karma or oppose NPO (whichever you prefer) who aren't actually part of our coalition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Locke Posted June 30, 2009 Report Share Posted June 30, 2009 You're assuming everyone who wants NPO to disband is in Karma or on the NPO front. There are numerous people who vocally support Karma or oppose NPO (whichever you prefer) who aren't actually part of our coalition. I thought that Karma had declared itself as merely a group of people who wanted to see "karma" given back to NPO. What, you guys are limiting yourself to declared Karma alliances now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnum T. Gundraw Posted June 30, 2009 Report Share Posted June 30, 2009 The war is over, but not done. The end result is clear, NPO is just gonna stay at war until they get better terms and/or can trust Karma. Which may be a while yet. You don't have to trust the victors. You just have to bend for them. NPO should know that best of all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Conrad Posted June 30, 2009 Report Share Posted June 30, 2009 I thought that Karma had declared itself as merely a group of people who wanted to see "karma" given back to NPO. What, you guys are limiting yourself to declared Karma alliances now? When was that said? Karma has always referred to the group of alliances in the military coalition. You can also be a supporter of Karma's goals, but that doesn't make you a member of the coalition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Locke Posted June 30, 2009 Report Share Posted June 30, 2009 When was that said? Karma has always referred to the group of alliances in the military coalition. You can also be a supporter of Karma's goals, but that doesn't make you a member of the coalition. It's been said numerous times by numerous people in numerous places. And numerous other views of what Karma are have also been voiced. Karma can't even agree on what Karma is. *facepalm* But the general voice I seem to get out of all the Karma stuff is that all Karma is is a way to give to NPO what NPO has given to others, and anyone who supports that is an agent of Karma. Again, there hasn't been a true consensus, this is just what seemed to be the prevalent voice when Karma was still steaming along the PR machine; it seemed like a lot of people were quite eager not to be considered a military coalition, but rather a movement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WcaesarD Posted June 30, 2009 Report Share Posted June 30, 2009 One of the worst things about this war was just the incedental naming of Karma. If Karma hadn't been named that I think a lot of us would have had fewer handprints on our faces over the course of the war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Conrad Posted June 30, 2009 Report Share Posted June 30, 2009 It's been said numerous times by numerous people in numerous places. And numerous other views of what Karma are have also been voiced. Karma can't even agree on what Karma is. *facepalm* But the general voice I seem to get out of all the Karma stuff is that all Karma is is a way to give to NPO what NPO has given to others, and anyone who supports that is an agent of Karma. Again, there hasn't been a true consensus, this is just what seemed to be the prevalent voice when Karma was still steaming along the PR machine; it seemed like a lot of people were quite eager not to be considered a military coalition, but rather a movement. Please link wherein a government member or Karma high command member said anyone who wanted to was part of Karma could without actually being an alliance member of the military coalition. Karma is a military coalition with an overarching goal. You'll be hard pressed to dig up 5 posts of normal Karma members who have explicitly stated anyone who supports our cause is automatically a member of Karma. You know why we have a high command? It's because we're a military organization and we're structured accordingly. Unless those people who aren't involved in the conflict wish to hand over their sovereignty to the combined alliance leaders of Karma, they're really not a member. Many of those people I appreciate for their support, but they are not members of the coalition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the rebel Posted June 30, 2009 Report Share Posted June 30, 2009 The disbandment talk was more at the beginning of the war. There was a poll a while back in which ~300 members voted for disbanding the NPO at the end of the war, out of...I don't recall exactly how many, but I'm pretty sure it was the second highest voted option. I can dig up the topic, if you'd like to see for yourself.EDIT: Disbanging? O.o 617 voted for being better without. http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?s...=55295&st=0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hassman Posted June 30, 2009 Report Share Posted June 30, 2009 I sure as hell hope they aren't staying away because Moo has 'swine flu'. What does that mean anyway? Ok seriously i have heard too many sources that cow has swine flu. Seriously? Is this true? Or was the NPO decree wrong and it was leis! >.< always getting fooled by NPO propaganda. 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.