Jump to content

O/ Soldier


Starbuck

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 67
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Reroll.

Point stands. Your alliance no longer exists, probably due to stupidity by leadership, and now your here trying to be all nostalgic and trying to add self worth to your useless and ultimately irrelevant former home.

I love the hypocrisy in this post.

I think it's you looking for the "self-worth" you speak of, my good man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reroll.

Point stands. Your alliance no longer exists, probably due to stupidity by leadership, and now your here trying to be all nostalgic and trying to add self worth to your useless and ultimately irrelevant former home.

Thus I lol.

I wear your scorn as a badge of honor

Sorry you couldn't make it with your first nation, glade your working at being worthless this time too. Keep it up, you have my vote as a professional noob

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry you couldn't make it with your first nation, glade your working at being worthless this time too. Keep it up, you have my vote as a professional noob

RAWR PIXELS ARE MY ENTIRE SELF WORTH

anyway

Johnsondiversey-Glade-Plugins-Air-Freshener---Plug-in---Tropical-Mist---30-Day--_296676.jpg

Even though I am a professional noob now, I can still spell better than you. and make better points.

Edited by jizzyb
Link to comment
Share on other sites

RAWR PIXELS ARE MY ENTIRE SELF WORTH

anyway

Johnsondiversey-Glade-Plugins-Air-Freshener---Plug-in---Tropical-Mist---30-Day--_296676.jpg

Even though I am a professional noob now, I can still spell better than you. and make better points.

Wow, I really liked that last one, it didn't stink

Edited by Dodger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The soldier war pretty much destroyed all credibility TPF had in their criticism of PC when they broke that NAP. I suppose we have that to than you for.

I'd love for you to explain this one, please cite the treaties involved and terms listed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd love for you to explain this one, please cite the treaties involved and terms listed.

I can't find the link to the original announcement of the soldier protectorate, but I would say that this should work fine:

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=44951

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=44952

Last I checked, attacking a protectorate is a pretty blatant violation of your obligations in the treaty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reroll.

Point stands. Your alliance no longer exists, probably due to stupidity by leadership, and now your here trying to be all nostalgic and trying to add self worth to your useless and ultimately irrelevant former home.

Thus I lol.

I wear your scorn as a badge of honor

Wow,

probably due to stupidity by leadership,

Probably? If you are going to attack an alliance and her leadership perhaps you should do some research as to why they disbanded in the first place.

I would say you disgust me but you would probably enjoy that bit of hate directed towards you.

====

My apologies on what happened to your alliance Dodger, it was truly a tragedy. I hope one day you are able to feel the same about NATO as you did Dodger

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Soldier seemed like an alliance that had its time and place, not to say its disbandment was a good thing or warranted, but I get the feeling its members learned from their experiences there and went on to do good things in other places.

Even though I am a professional noob now, I can still spell better than you. and make better points.

-A typo (adding an 'e' to the end of a word) has nothing to do with spelling ability

-Your claim of making "better points" seems to be directly countered by the inaccuracy of your "points"

-If you're a re-roll, either embrace your past or separate from it completely; few things discredit a post more in my opinion than an author who claims to have extensive background knowledge but refuses to admit where/how it was gained.

That is all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't find the link to the original announcement of the soldier protectorate, but I would say that this should work fine:

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=44951

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=44952

Last I checked, attacking a protectorate is a pretty blatant violation of your obligations in the treaty.

Thats why I ask you to cite that original treaty. It doesn't exist.

Thats the difference between GP, OPP, FP. Consider your assumption wrong.

Edited by mhawk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats why I ask you to cite that original treaty. It doesn't exist.

Thats the difference between GP, OPP, FP. Consider your assumption wrong.

Here's the announcement of it:

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=40363

So you're telling me this has less validity than this:

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=70177

You're taking e-lawyering to an all time low here. You attacked your own protectorate. Anyone that trusted you with an NAP after that is crazy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's the announcement of it:

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=40363

So you're telling me this has less validity than this:

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=70177

You're taking e-lawyering to an all time low here. You attacked your own protectorate. Anyone that trusted you with an NAP after that is crazy.

First off, your statement doesn't even make sense.

"so you're telling me this has less validity than this" - Then you link some ronin mk treaty or picture. How can anything be less valid than itself?

Second, let's assume you are comparing our GP announcement to your MK/ronin announcement, how does that comparison relate at all to a NAP which lists exact terms for cancellation. A written treaty with terms both alliances sign to is indeed different than a non treaty declaration of general protection of the AA. One has terms, one doesn't. One has wording, one doesn't. One requires notification, the other doesn't have any terms at all.

That said, Soldier was a good alliance and we spent much time afterward in rebuilding and helping where we could both politically and internally with guides ect. I think how our two alliances stood at the end is a better statement to our polices than your cobbled together attacks filled with hollow arguments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...