Emperor Stranger Posted November 18, 2009 Report Share Posted November 18, 2009 However, the CIA can and does act as a military tool, even with its other functions. As I also stated, half of the US Intelligence Community operates within the DoD, meaning, again, that espionage is a military asset.The logic isn't faulted. As I said, there is a covert aspect to espionage, and I realize that. However, a state of war can exist without the consent or knowledge of the other party. By committing acts of espionage, especially those against military assets, you risk the declaration of a state of war and therefore are acknowledging that one exists when you commit the act. Once again, that's wrong. It's impossible to acknowledge a state of war when one side isn't even aware of a war. And spying is not an automatic declaration of war. It can be used as a CB, but it's the alliance that's being spied on's choice to use it as a CB. And even so, it would still be an aggressive action. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Titus Pullo Posted November 18, 2009 Report Share Posted November 18, 2009 (edited) I don't understand why anyone would believe this. Look at the image. ByzantineEmpire said "I want to exterminate LE". Jim said "I concur, they've been sanctioning/attacking me for a couple rounds." There's no other way to read it. Ok, obviously we need to use a more special approach. Did Jim agree with someone other than himself? Once again, that's wrong. It's impossible to acknowledge a state of war when one side isn't even aware of a war. And spying is not an automatic declaration of war. It can be used as a CB, but it's the alliance that's being spied on's choice to use it as a CB. And even so, it would still be an aggressive action. So... Let's say I posted up a DoW tonight against PWN (Which I don't plan on nor does anyone in OP to my knowledge) and no one in PWN read it. Is OP in a state of war with PWN? Edited November 18, 2009 by Titus Pullo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hiro Nakara Posted November 18, 2009 Report Share Posted November 18, 2009 (edited) Does a full stop not mean a new sentence? I'm hazy on English? Tried to semi spell and grammar, so tiberuis does not have an anurism. Edited November 18, 2009 by Hiro Nakara Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emperor Stranger Posted November 18, 2009 Report Share Posted November 18, 2009 So... Let's say I posted up a DoW tonight against PWN (Which I don't plan on nor does anyone in OP to my knowledge) and no one in PWN read it. Is OP in a state of war with PWN? That depends. Did OP actually literally declare war in-game, or did they just post a topic declaring war? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varianz Posted November 18, 2009 Report Share Posted November 18, 2009 Ok, obviously we need to use a more special approach.Did Jim agree with someone other than himself? Yes, he did. He agreed with someone saying "Let's exterminate LE." Personally, I see agreement as a statement of opinion, but hey, maybe I'm just weird. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emperor Stranger Posted November 18, 2009 Report Share Posted November 18, 2009 Yes, he did. He agreed with someone saying "Let's exterminate LE." Personally, I see agreement as a statement of opinion, but hey, maybe I'm just weird. Oh please, stop avoiding it. We all know that you ARE weird. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maicke Posted November 18, 2009 Report Share Posted November 18, 2009 (edited) okay, i really dont see OP's view on jims post. jim agreed with byzantines post, in which he says that he wanted to exterminate LE. since that is a part of the post, and jim agreed with said post, he agrees that he wants to exterminate LE. it doesnt matter what was said before that, it doesnt change the fact that jim agreed that he would love to exterminate LE. im trying to see it OPs way, but the absence of logic in their view makes this difficult EDIT: that makes it seem like im dissing on OP, sorry D= Edited November 18, 2009 by maicke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Titus Pullo Posted November 18, 2009 Report Share Posted November 18, 2009 That depends. Did OP actually literally declare war in-game, or did they just post a topic declaring war? Let's say no, for the sake of argument. Yes, he did. He agreed with someone saying "Let's exterminate LE." Personally, I see agreement as a statement of opinion, but hey, maybe I'm just weird. Ok, so we've established that part of Jim's statement is true. He agreed with something someone else said. Now, was Byzantine Empire responding to someone other than himself? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emperor Stranger Posted November 18, 2009 Report Share Posted November 18, 2009 Let's say no, for the sake of argument. Then no, it's not a valid declaration of war. It would be the same if it were spying. SWAT hit PWN hours before posting a declaration of war. The in-game DoW is what told us to defend ourselves, not the OWF post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varianz Posted November 18, 2009 Report Share Posted November 18, 2009 Ok, so we've established that part of Jim's statement is true. He agreed with something someone else said. Now, was Byzantine Empire responding to someone other than himself? It doesn't matter who he was responding to, it matters what he responded (and agreed) to. Byzantine Empire said he would like to exterminate LE. That's what Jim agreed with. If he'd wanted to say "let's not treaty LE" he would have said it, instead of replying to a post saying "Let's exterminate LE" by saying "I agree." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Titus Pullo Posted November 18, 2009 Report Share Posted November 18, 2009 It doesn't matter who he was responding to, it matters what he responded (and agreed) to. Byzantine Empire said he would like to exterminate LE. That's what Jim agreed with. If he'd wanted to say "let's not treaty LE" he would have said it, instead of replying to a post saying "Let's exterminate LE" by saying "I agree." I'm just trying to figure out why you think Jim was lying in his previous post. I ask again, was Byzantine Empire responding to someone other than himself? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varianz Posted November 18, 2009 Report Share Posted November 18, 2009 I'm just trying to figure out why you think Jim was lying in his previous post. I ask again, was Byzantine Empire responding to someone other than himself? You're right, I was wrong to say he lied. Why? Because he was telling the truth. He said: I merely agreed with someone's response to the suggestion we try to ally with LE. His "agreement" was agreeing to the suggestion that OP exterminate LE. So thank you for clearing that up, I appreciate your devotion to truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Titus Pullo Posted November 18, 2009 Report Share Posted November 18, 2009 You're right, I was wrong to say he lied. Why? Because he was telling the truth. He said:His "agreement" was agreeing to the suggestion that OP exterminate LE. So thank you for clearing that up, I appreciate your devotion to truth. I'm glad you finally realized your mistake and admitting that Jim was telling the truth when he said he was just agreeing with someone else's response to another persons suggestion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varianz Posted November 18, 2009 Report Share Posted November 18, 2009 I'm glad you finally realized your mistake and admitting that Jim was telling the truth when he said he was just agreeing with someone else's response to another persons suggestion. You're correct, and again, I thank you for admitting that Jim admitted that he said he wanted to exterminate LE. Looks like we both got what we wanted- you got me to admit I used the wrong word, I got you to admit that Jim wants to exterminate alliances for things done in past rounds. I'm happy, how about you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Titus Pullo Posted November 18, 2009 Report Share Posted November 18, 2009 You're correct, and again, I thank you for admitting that Jim admitted that he said he wanted to exterminate LE. Looks like we both got what we wanted- you got me to admit I used the wrong word, I got you to admit that Jim wants to exterminate alliances for things done in past rounds. I'm happy, how about you? I've always been content, it's amazing what knowing the truth does for you emotionally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varianz Posted November 18, 2009 Report Share Posted November 18, 2009 I've always been content, it's amazing what knowing the truth does for you emotionally. I know, now I'm just curious to see how Jim reacts to your agreeing with me that he stated his desire to exterminate LE. I forsee !@#$%*ing in all our futures, full of "No u!" and "But what I really meant was...". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Titus Pullo Posted November 18, 2009 Report Share Posted November 18, 2009 (edited) I know, now I'm just curious to see how Jim reacts to your agreeing with me that he stated his desire to exterminate LE. I forsee !@#$%*ing in all our futures, full of "No u!" and "But what I really meant was...". He'll probably continue to press you to tell the whole truth instead of just the part that is most convenient to your cause like you have been. Though, since you agreed that you aren't showing the whole picture... He'll probably just be content in knowing you admitted it. Of course, there is the fact that Jim's personal desires are not representative of OP's official position... but that's just a minor detail everyone seems to be missing. Right? Edited November 18, 2009 by Titus Pullo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varianz Posted November 18, 2009 Report Share Posted November 18, 2009 He'll probably continue to press you to tell the whole truth instead of just the part that is most convenient to your cause like you have been.Though, since you agreed that you aren't showing the whole picture... He'll probably just be content in knowing you admitted it. You're right, I did admit I haven't showed the whole picture, not that it matters to anyone with half a brain. Jim agreed with Byzantine Empire saying that he wanted to exterminate LE. The fact that Byzantine Empire was replying to someone doesn't matter- as I stated, if Jim had wanted to say "lets not ally with LE" he would have either replied to that person, or said so independently. There really isn't anything more to it, though, if you like, you can screenshot the post Byzantine Empire responded to and post it, if it makes you happy (not that it'll change anything at all). Face it, no one is buying your moronic argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maicke Posted November 18, 2009 Report Share Posted November 18, 2009 Of course, there is the fact that Jim's personal desires are not representative of OP's official position... but that's just a minor detail everyone seems to be missing. Right? Usually the opinion of the leader of an alliance is the official policy, because they decide what to do, they will do stuff according to their opinion most of the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Titus Pullo Posted November 18, 2009 Report Share Posted November 18, 2009 Usually the opinion of the leader of an alliance is the official policy, because they decide what to do, they will do stuff according to their opinion most of the time. Usually, the leader of an alliance isn't held accountable by the members of that alliance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chalaskan Posted November 18, 2009 Report Share Posted November 18, 2009 Your man is concurring with the suggestion of exterminating LE. You can try to hide that by saying "oh what he really meant was that he didn't want to treaty LE", but when you include the fact that in that very same post he gets pissy about LE having sanctioned/attacked him in past rounds, and, well...we can all draw the proper conclusion. Hiding that fact behind disinformation won't change the truth. Conjecture, even from our leader on our own private forums is quite common in TE. If we spied on your forums, I am certain we could feed some of your current allies quotes they could use as a CB against you. Regardless, LE lies in waste and many others are heavily damaged. Let's keep rolling while RD gains the top spots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varianz Posted November 18, 2009 Report Share Posted November 18, 2009 Conjecture, even from our leader on our own private forums is quite common in TE. If we spied on your forums, I am certain we could feed some of your current allies quotes they could use as a CB against you. I have no forums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Titus Pullo Posted November 18, 2009 Report Share Posted November 18, 2009 (edited) I have no forums. Then what did I take screenshots of? Edited November 18, 2009 by Titus Pullo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varianz Posted November 18, 2009 Report Share Posted November 18, 2009 Then what did I take screenshots of? I'd say, but I don't wanna get a mod warn.... Also, for those who care: <dogbite[TPF]> by the way you ever post any logs that your talking to me in and ill stop talking to you. I'm unsure whether I should cry out of grief, or laugh out of bliss...only time will tell if I get over the pain of this. But, it had to be done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chalaskan Posted November 18, 2009 Report Share Posted November 18, 2009 I have no forums. Damn you!!! I have no retort! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts