I have a dream.

[TehChron]

I think you must have missed the countless discussions that have already developed where Sparta has admitted that things are not black and white and I have personally said that I did not like the Karma moniker from the start. But it is hardly fair after the couple weeks that we've been 'on top' and are still engaged in the very war that severed Pacifica's grasp on the world to say that we aren't much different. There hasn't been a whole lot of time to distinguish ourselves has there? I agree that it remains to be seen. Pacifica sat atop this world for a long time to earn its reputation as a tyrant, let's not be so ready to brand everyone else because of one finalized surrender and another that is yet to be worked out.

I think you're deliberately glossing over the fact that you and your alliance (and others) were more than happy to enable the NPO's tyranny up until this war.

Denying the fact of Sparta's complicity in the Pax Pacifica is kinda disgusting, in my opinion.

[Enzos]

-Sparta has no moldavi doctrine

-Sparta has no history of destroying alliances

-Sparta hasn't started this war

NPO is guilty of all above and is now being punished for it. Why is NPO singuling out Sparta for not DoWíng NPO before, there are 18 alliances at war with you atm! Are all alliances wrong?? half of the planet stood by and watched untill you went over the line. Now half of the planet united against you, now you start whining like little girls. You have been defeated!

If you want your members to get peace, if you want your alliance to be able to grow and prosper again then accept the terms offered. They aren't destructous. They will prevent you a free-ticket right back in the top 3 yes. but they won't cripple you that much. you will still be 600/700 organised nations, because of that you will recover quite easily with these terms. 2 weeks of war will not ZI, it will hurt you, but not destroy you.

Staying in the war will damage you further and further. not only physically but also mentally. Pacifica's gov has it's terms and is denying them which results in Pacifa's members not being able to rebuilt their nations. Many will stay for a month but not longer. Nations will get deleted and others will desert. There is only little needed to prevent this from happening to Pacifica, something that can easily done by it's government. By not doing it IMO Pacifica's gov is betraying all of it's 700 members.

[KingSuck]

-Sparta has no moldavi doctrine

-Sparta has no history of destroying alliances

-Sparta hasn't started this war

NPO is guilty of all above and is now being punished for it. Why is NPO singuling out Sparta for not DoWíng NPO before, there are 18 alliances at war with you atm! Are all alliances wrong??

how many of those alliances were a major part of the 'hegemony'? how many of those 18 alliances held a MDoAP with the NPO until days before attacking?

Staying in the war will damage you further and further. not only physically but also mentally. Pacifica's gov has it's terms and is denying them which results in Pacifa's members not being able to rebuilt their nations. Many will stay for a month but not longer. Nations will get deleted and others will desert. There is only little needed to prevent this from happening to Pacifica, something that can easily done by it's government. By not doing it IMO Pacifica's gov is betraying all of it's 700 members.

I'm pretty sure Pacifica's members are well aware of the peace terms, and given their posts on these forums recently I'm pretty sure they share a similar view as their gov regarding said peace terms.

[Electric Mango]

..... and you people have the temerity to try make us feel ashamed

You people? Just what do you mean, you people?!

[kevin32891]

Insulting me sure enhances your point. Good job. Please let Vladimir or Branimir do the talking, kid.

Just responding to the last sentence shows you're an idiot.

[King DrunkWino]

You people? Just what do you mean, you people?!

What do YOU mean you people?!

[Qazzian]

-Sparta has no history of destroying alliances

http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Big_Biz-Spartan_War

Result was destruction of the alliance, and another attack on an alliance of rerolls. Care to try again?

[Gandroff]

If you want your members to get peace, if you want your alliance to be able to grow and prosper again then accept the terms offered. They aren't destructous. They will prevent you a free-ticket right back in the top 3 yes. but they won't cripple you that much. you will still be 600/700 organised nations, because of that you will recover quite easily with these terms. 2 weeks of war will not ZI, it will hurt you, but not destroy you.

Those terms will hurt us more than continuing the war.

Staying in the war will damage you further and further. not only physically but also mentally. Pacifica's gov has it's terms and is denying them which results in Pacifa's members not being able to rebuilt their nations. Many will stay for a month but not longer. Nations will get deleted and others will desert. There is only little needed to prevent this from happening to Pacifica, something that can easily done by it's government. By not doing it IMO Pacifica's gov is betraying all of it's 700 members.

WE have told them we don't want to accept those terms. Stop trying to make us turn against the government because you think they are taking these actions without asking us.

[HeinousOne]

Those terms will hurt us more than continuing the war.

WE have told them we don't want to accept those terms. Stop trying to make us turn against the government because you think they are taking these actions without asking us.

Dont worry too much about Enzos. He hasnt yet caught up with what the rest of the Sparta guys are now saying. He is still repeating the same tired lines that everyone else moved past when they realized such had no chance of being effective.

[Electric Mango]

What do YOU mean you people?!

That was

[King DrunkWino]

That was

Hey, you give me a setup that good 9 times out of 10 I can nail the three pointer.

[Trinite]

http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Big_Biz-Spartan_War

Result was destruction of the alliance, and another attack on an alliance of rerolls. Care to try again?

Oh please. We never even got around to offering them alliance surrender terms because they disbanded before we could. That war lasted like two weeks. And Zeus weren't re-rolls in earnest. Vengeance was the only reason for their existence. To my knowledge, CK has re-rolled in truth and is doing quite well with our blessing. Sparta has done some things we're not proud of and stood by while things have been done, but big-biz was not one of those things.

Edited July 10, 2009 by Trinite

[Vol Navy]

Didn't Sparta raid Darkfall, screw that up, then all out war with them because of "a disagreement over their tech raid strategy, your belief that their ambassador and their alliance as a whole did not show you respect and you wanted someone to fight and test your military skills."

So you've "forced" an alliance to disband. Warred another for the very poor reasons listed above. Signed off on terms that required the decommission of up to 5 wonders, later amended to 4 when it was pointed out that the MP couldn't be decommed, held a high level treaty with NPO since August 2007 and were a founding member of Q, giving your diplomatic and miltary backing to Q actions for well over a year. A treaty you held onto for months after you'd already begun preparing to go to war against NPO/Q.

That's just after a brief glimpse at Sparta's history. When every action you've ever taken starts getting looked at and held against you, they can mount up pretty quickly. Just like they have for NPO.

[Matthew Conrad]

Didn't Sparta raid Darkfall, screw that up, then all out war with them because of "a disagreement over their tech raid strategy, your belief that their ambassador and their alliance as a whole did not show you respect and you wanted someone to fight and test your military skills."

So you've "forced" an alliance to disband. Warred another for the very poor reasons listed above. Signed off on terms that required the decommission of up to 5 wonders, later amended to 4 when it was pointed out that the MP couldn't be decommed, held a high level treaty with NPO since August 2007 and were a founding member of Q, giving your diplomatic and miltary backing to Q actions for well over a year. A treaty you held onto for months after you'd already begun preparing to go to war against NPO/Q.

That's just after a brief glimpse at Sparta's history. When every action you've ever taken starts getting looked at and held against you, they can mount up pretty quickly. Just like they have for NPO.

First off, we never forced any alliance to disband. Big Biz disbanded by themselves in an internal decision before we even offered terms. Second off, TPF has actually signed off on terms that involved the forced disbandment of an alliance. I find it hilarious you are trying to mud sling on the issue of alliance disbandment.

Second, we accepted the lightest reps from GR and we weren't the ones who pushed for the wonder decom. Admittedly, they that was harsh however. If GR feels that they have a grievances about it, I'll be glad to talk to them in private about it.

[Vol Navy]

First off, we never forced any alliance to disband. Big Biz disbanded by themselves in an internal decision before we even offered terms. Second off, TPF has actually signed off on terms that involved the forced disbandment of an alliance. I find it hilarious you are trying to mud sling on the issue of alliance disbandment.

Second, we accepted the lightest reps from GR and we weren't the ones who pushed for the wonder decom. Admittedly, they that was harsh however. If GR feels that they have a grievances about it, I'll be glad to talk to them in private about it.

I'm not claiming TPF didn't do some bad things in our history. Spartan's seem to be the ones trying to wear the white hat on here.

We did things we shouldn't have in the past and we've paid an extremely heavy toll for it these past 3 months. Last I checked we'd lost an even bigger % of our pre-war strength than NPO, maybe more than any alliance in the entire war.

And yes, you forced that alliance to disband just as much as NPO forced alliances to disband.

You can't say NPO forced disbandments and claim you didn't when they occured under similar circumtances. Well you can, but you can't say it and not be a complete hypocrite.

Also....ummm I believe that Sparta fought right alongside of TPF in the war you are refering to where those terms were set.

Just another example of Sparta lending her military and diplomatic might to Q actions and now trying to run from them.

As for the GR terms. I've heard that several times from Spartans...."well we didn't really want the terms to be that bad." But you signed off on them anyway.

That sounds familiar, pretty much what some Spartans are saying about these terms to NPO.

You try to distance yourself from them all the while backing them with your miltary power and signing off on them. Then you say "well we didn't take reps" or "we took light reps" and think that excuses everything.

IRON took light reps or waived reps too, they were still beaten down by millions and millions of NS and forced to pay the largest reps in Bob history that have actually been accepted.

People act like there were "key cogs" in Q. Actually every part of Q was important and all parts gave military and diplomatic backing to every action that Q undertook.

Just over half of us had to face the fire over it. The rest of you didn't......yet. But the eternal rule on Bob is that we all have it coming. Someday the other half of Q will get their Karma.

[Matthew Conrad]

I'm not claiming TPF didn't do some bad things in our history. Spartan's seem to be the ones trying to wear the white hat on here.

We did things we shouldn't have in the past and we've paid an extremely heavy toll for it these past 3 months. Last I checked we'd lost an even bigger % of our pre-war strength than NPO, maybe more than any alliance in the entire war.

And yes, you forced that alliance to disband just as much as NPO forced alliances to disband.

You can't say NPO forced disbandments and claim you didn't when they occured under similar circumtances. Well you can, but you can't say it and not be a complete hypocrite.

Also....ummm I believe that Sparta fought right alongside of TPF in the war you are refering to where those terms were set.

Just another example of Sparta lending her military and diplomatic might to Q actions and now trying to run from them.

As for the GR terms. I've heard that several times from Spartans...."well we didn't really want the terms to be that bad." But you signed off on them anyway.

That sounds familiar, pretty much what some Spartans are saying about these terms to NPO.

You try to distance yourself from them all the while backing them with your miltary power and signing off on them. Then you say "well we didn't take reps" or "we took light reps" and think that excuses everything.

IRON took light reps or waived reps too, they were still beaten down by millions and millions of NS and forced to pay the largest reps in Bob history that have actually been accepted.

People act like there were "key cogs" in Q. Actually every part of Q was important and all parts gave military and diplomatic backing to every action that Q undertook.

Just over half of us had to face the fire over it. The rest of you didn't......yet. But the eternal rule on Bob is that we all have it coming. Someday the other half of Q will get their Karma.

First off, we have never claimed to have a clean past. Many of us have admitted we have done things in the past we don't currently agree with. This is one of the reasons we're not taking reps, because we were once apart of what the Hegemony did.

Second off, we never signed off on those terms. However, I haven't said that completely excuses our participation in Q.

Third off, we aren't trying to distance ourselves from the terms. We support our allies in their decisions and our decision to not take reps stems from a different matter which I explained earlier.

[mhawk]

We support our allies in their decisions and our decision to not take reps stems from a different matter which I explained earlier.

I suppose it would be harder to explain being allied to someone until the day you attack them and then pushing for reparations. At least you got the attacks in

You guys always favored GOD above most your other allies, so I have to wonder if you are proud of how far xiphosis would carry out PZI practices at the same time how ashamed you must have been to be allied to TPF when we tried to break some of those cycles.

Edited July 10, 2009 by mhawk

[shahenshah]

What do YOU mean you people?!

No u!

and Sparta, dont you know, No.1 spot is very damning on OWF , once you've touched it, OWF becomes ebil suddenly

Edited July 10, 2009 by shahenshah

[Rebel Virginia]

You guys always favored GOD above most your other allies, so I have to wonder if you are proud of how far xiphosis would carry out PZI practices at the same time how ashamed you must have been to be allied to TPF when we tried to break some of those cycles.

That was an obvious public relations move on your part, and it is futile to try and deny it (or else the timing of the decision was just a remarkable coincidence, which I don't entirely buy), however, that does not excuse the actions of GOD. That alliance, I must say, is just as jealous about PZI, if not more so, as you guys were at your peak. I must say it is interesting that Sparta can favor them while at the same time condemn others for the action, as I have seen their members do in the past. With that in mind, the same can also be said of VE as well.

[Matthew Conrad]

I suppose it would be harder to explain being allied to someone until the day you attack them and then pushing for reparations. At least you got the attacks in

When were we pushing reps to us onto NPO?

Edited July 10, 2009 by Matthew Conrad

[Cataduanes]

I am so glad you ask and before I say such let me commend you for your particular loyalty to your alliance. I will respect that, although if you were a bank nation and were vital to the rebuilding effort of your alliance you might think otherwise. Then again, if you were your alliance might not be so willing to sacrifice you either.

Anyways, on to my suggestion. The real point of that two week term is to make it so the NPO does not rise up in the near future, correct? That can definately be done in other ways that does not cause the unneeded destruction of individual nations. What you do is you target the power of their leaders. What power am I talking about? This is NPO, come on, of course I am talking about Diplomatic Power.

You offer in replacement of the two weeks worth of attacks, them agreeing to sign Zero military treaties for a year. During that year they will be assigned protectors that possibly they agree upon. For an entire year then as our blocs begin to square off due to us all being rather equal in power no one will be able to approach NPO in order to try and gain a numerical advantage in the future. You in essence take them out of the game for an entire year while they rebuild. If it is going to take atleast 9 months to do so then this is no big deal when it comes to the survival of the alliance but it is a Huge deal when it comes to disallowing them to project their power in the near future like they did in the past.

That would be my suggestion, stop focusing on their individual nations and find a way to hamstring their leaders from doing what they have done in the past that brought this War on.

Thnak you for your commendation, i have always tried to conduct myself according to the principle of doing ones duty and have done so on more than one occasion (with my nation paying a heavy price each time for it), not smart sometimes but i feel i have nothing to feel personally ashamed of. I was a banking nation only once....and hated it

Your suggestion is certainly interesting and for me anyhow i can see the merits in this, perhaps one of my 'superiors' in Karma will take notice of this...perhaps your right i do need to get the venom out of my system, i must admit i am still a bitter man about the GATO-1V war (jeez i cannot believe i am getting a sort of therapy from you Heinous ).

Edited July 10, 2009 by Cataduanes

[NoFish]

That was an obvious public relations move on your part, and it is futile to try and deny it (or else the timing of the decision was just a remarkable coincidence, which I don't entirely buy), however, that does not excuse the actions of GOD. That alliance, I must say, is just as jealous about PZI, if not more so, as you guys were at your peak. I must say it is interesting that Sparta can favor them while at the same time condemn others for the action, as I have seen their members do in the past. With that in mind, the same can also be said of VE as well.

Yes, what bad people we are for having all of one person on our PZI list who is actively ruling a nation (who, incidentally, was placed there for gross surrender terms violations). Regardless, I think it is perfectly reasonable for an allies to remain supportive of an ally despite having differing opinions with them on some matters. Sparta and VE know our stance on PZI and disagree with it, just as we know and disagree with theirs.

Now I believe I should probably address mhawk's question form a few pages back. (Incidentally, kevin32891, maybe you should give me more than 12 hours to respond before you start calling me out on it? I understand that NPOers are a breed above the rest, but some of us have thing we have to do; like sleep).

At the time the Illuminati viceroy was put in place, I was too inexperienced of a nation ruler to have much of an opinion on it. In retrospect, even for an alliance like Illuminati, I think it was too harsh. You will note, though, that I've never once claimed that NPO is a morally wrong alliance because of the terms they have imposed - only that they have no business whining over the terms they receive when they've done worse in the past. That is not to say that I don't find them in the wrong for starting most of those wars to begin with, but that's another issue entirely.

Before you bring it up, yes, if GOD loses a war in the future and the victors impose harsh terms on us we may decide to reject them but we sure as hell won't come here to whine about how unfair they are, especially if they're given by anyone with a legitimate grievance against us. (If they're given by people chewing us out for the terms we're giving now, though, I reserve the right to call you out on it).

[Trinite]

No u!

and Sparta, dont you know, No.1 spot is very damning on OWF , once you've touched it, OWF becomes ebil suddenly

OWF has always been an ebil place. When we were small it was good to be big, and now that we're big it's cool to be small.

"The Open World Forums. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious."

[Kilkenny]

Yes, what bad people we are for having all of one person on our PZI list who is actively ruling a nation (who, incidentally, was placed there for gross surrender terms violations). Regardless, I think it is perfectly reasonable for an allies to remain supportive of an ally despite having differing opinions with them on some matters. Sparta and VE know our stance on PZI and disagree with it, just as we know and disagree with theirs.

Now I believe I should probably address mhawk's question form a few pages back. (Incidentally, kevin32891, maybe you should give me more than 12 hours to respond before you start calling me out on it? I understand that NPOers are a breed above the rest, but some of us have thing we have to do; like sleep).

At the time the Illuminati viceroy was put in place, I was too inexperienced of a nation ruler to have much of an opinion on it. In retrospect, even for an alliance like Illuminati, I think it was too harsh. You will note, though, that I've never once claimed that NPO is a morally wrong alliance because of the terms they have imposed - only that they have no business whining over the terms they receive when they've done worse in the past. That is not to say that I don't find them in the wrong for starting most of those wars to begin with, but that's another issue entirely.

Before you bring it up, yes, if GOD loses a war in the future and the victors impose harsh terms on us we may decide to reject them but we sure as hell won't come here to whine about how unfair they are, especially if they're given by anyone with a legitimate grievance against us. (If they're given by people chewing us out for the terms we're giving now, though, I reserve the right to call you out on it).

Isn't that what is happening now?? You are imposing harsh terms on NPO due to their past actions of imposing harsh terms. And you tell them they don't have the right to complain because they have done worse. But you say if you get beat down in the future, then get harsh terms imposed because of the harsh terms you have imposed here, you reserve the right to whine. That is just crazy funny

Yes you said legit grievence, but who determines if it is legit?? You?? or them?? and is there a certain level of greivence that allows harsh terms?? just saying.

[Tsar Vserossijskij]

It's ridiculous how morally and intellectually bankrupt Karma is. Crass and disingenuous hypocrisy abounds, whether it's found in statements about EZI, about harshness of terms, or the raison d'etre of Karma itself.