deSouza Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 I really don't. That would make sense, since King Death went and put a stop to it at that point. That is one way to look at it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dochartaigh Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 I find it interesting that after the thread about UEDs aggression was posted on the WF the "mistakened" attack by seasoned members of UED stopped. seriously? or it could be that they realized they were duped and ceased attacking WF in support of a ghost nation.... deSouza, you are seriously stretching your defense of WF immeasurably thin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tick1 Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 Yes, World Federation, don't defend your nations or take actions without clarifying your point to the world. You had no reason to attack UED, their mindless recruits aren't their fault. They all just happened to ghost UED and decide too attack World Federation at the same time. Please discuss reparations with UED instead of declaring war on them, reparations are apparently the solution to everything. (A lot of sarcasm in this post) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deSouza Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 Said ban evader was also high up in the govt of World Federation at one time, he knew what treaties they held. And he was trying to harm WF just as much as UED. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augustus Autumn Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 That is one way to look at it. You're being intentionally obtuse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poyplemonkeys Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 No, i'm saying that to UED WF looked like a big, fat raid target. Bwahahaha. Even though it's been proven that none of the attacks were authorised by UED's leader? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deSouza Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 You're being intentionally obtuse. seriously? or it could be that they realized they were duped and ceased attacking WF in support of a ghost nation.... deSouza, you are seriously stretching your defense of WF immeasurably thin. Eliminate the impossible, and then there is the possible. I am not stretching my defense of WF, I am merely exposing the possible scenarios. And in terms of international relations, one has to be extremely distrusting of other people's intentions. Trick of the trade. Maybe UED should be more clear about their hierarchy if that was not intentionally planned. Either way, a war would help them learn that. Note: I do support a diplomatic solution, but only due to rajistani's manipulation of the peace negotiations with fake screenshots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dochartaigh Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 Yes, World Federation, don't defend your nations or take actions without clarifying your point to the world. You had no reason to attack UED, their mindless recruits aren't their fault. They all just happened to ghost UED and decide too attack World Federation at the same time. Please discuss reparations with UED instead of declaring war on them, reparations are apparently the solution to everything. (A lot of sarcasm in this post) you need to read all that happened. WF/UED discussed matters and reached a peaceful solution where WF would continue to attack the nations that hit WF, including ZI if WF wanted that. not sure if KDII discussed giving WF reps as nothing has been said of that, but WF accepted the solution, then decided to take the word of a rogue nation when said rogue sends a fake SS to them, and declares on UED and hits most of their members. 4 members hitting a handful out of 195 vs 195 nations hitting 66 members...... which is worse? especially since WF seemed to have accepted a peaceful solution already. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deSouza Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 Bwahahaha. Even though it's been proven that none of the attacks were authorised by UED's leader? Proved? Can you prove KD did not ask rajistani to do it all? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayvon Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 you need to read all that happened. WF/UED discussed matters and reached a peaceful solution where WF would continue to attack the nations that hit WF, including ZI if WF wanted that. not sure if KDII discussed giving WF reps as nothing has been said of that, but WF accepted the solution, then decided to take the word of a rogue nation when said rogue sends a fake SS to them, and declares on UED and hits most of their members. 4 members hitting a handful out of 195 vs 195 nations hitting 66 members...... which is worse? especially since WF seemed to have accepted a peaceful solution already. This part is false. We're still trying to figure out where it came up. It was offered to WF by KDII, but never accepted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poyplemonkeys Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 Proved?Can you prove KD did not ask rajistani to do it all? This post can't be serious can it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tick1 Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 Bwahahaha. Even though it's been proven that none of the attacks were authorised by UED's leader? Just because it's not authorized by the leader doesn't mean the alliance isn't held responsible. If any NSO member disagrees with this I'll have to go pull up some references, but anyone else can argue this point of view if they like. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dochartaigh Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 Eliminate the impossible, and then there is the possible.I am not stretching my defense of WF, I am merely exposing the possible scenarios. And in terms of international relations, one has to be extremely distrusting of other people's intentions. Trick of the trade. Maybe UED should be more clear about their hierarchy if that was not intentionally planned. Either way, a war would help them learn that. Note: I do support a diplomatic solution, but only due to rajistani's manipulation of the peace negotiations with fake screenshots. oh i agree that UED has much work to do to fix their alliance, especially in terms of ensuring members know who the gov is and who can give orders. but fact is, WF screwed the pooch way bigger than KD did. KD has shown that he is not a very good leader but WF has just shown complete and utter incompetence and stupidity or shown naked aggression similar to that which was fought against by Karma. either way, WF comes off looking worse than UED, despite the failures of KD, which are mainly internal politics versus WF's failures in external politics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LRA KING Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 "Probably waited for it to happen and prepared for it and not acted based off of screenshots from a guy who has just attacked you, and a target list that doesn't exist? When those two occur, you don't really tend to believe the person. " He was the best person to ask, an attacking nation simply ask them the reason they are attacking and he showed us an order given out to attack WF. Who else would we ask think about it? and as we got this 4 more attacks came through, use your logic and see what it looked like Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dochartaigh Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 This part is false. We're still trying to figure out where it came up.It was offered to WF by KDII, but never accepted. my apologies then. from the way some VE and WF members wrote, the SS from Raj came about after the offer was accepted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayvon Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 (edited) my apologies then. from the way some VE and WF members wrote, the SS from Raj came about after the offer was accepted. The SS came about after it was offered. The response after Enrage thought it over in light of the additional evidence, was a DoW. Edited December 1, 2009 by Rayvon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poyplemonkeys Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 Just because it's not authorized by the leader doesn't mean the alliance isn't held responsible. If any NSO member disagrees with this I'll have to go pull up some references, but anyone else can argue this point of view if they like. So if I change my AA to that of your alliance andmessage every single member of your alliance telling them to attack Nemesis. Then a couple of inactive members do so, you'd consider retaliation against your entire alliance the normal action to take? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 "Probably waited for it to happen and prepared for it and not acted based off of screenshots from a guy who has just attacked you, and a target list that doesn't exist?When those two occur, you don't really tend to believe the person. " He was the best person to ask, an attacking nation simply ask them the reason they are attacking and he showed us an order given out to attack WF. Who else would we ask think about it? and as we got this 4 more attacks came through, use your logic and see what it looked like I am using my "logic". And you are asking a guy who was a member for one day and sending out the attacks, like, seriously? It didn't really puzzle you if you believed he was a member that he gave you the order and didn't have any hesitations about it? Most people would you know, support their alliance if they are a member and not try to stir up trouble.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augustus Autumn Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 Proved?Can you prove KD did not ask rajistani to do it all? You're stretching so hard your back is about to break. Admin help you if you ever end up in the position that KDII is in now - people might remember this nonsense. I personally just find it amusing since either 1) I'm correct and you're being intentionally obtuse to prove some sort of point or 2) you're as bored as I am and looking to start/continue an argument in the face of something utterly obvious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dochartaigh Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 "Probably waited for it to happen and prepared for it and not acted based off of screenshots from a guy who has just attacked you, and a target list that doesn't exist?When those two occur, you don't really tend to believe the person. " He was the best person to ask, an attacking nation simply ask them the reason they are attacking and he showed us an order given out to attack WF. Who else would we ask think about it? and as we got this 4 more attacks came through, use your logic and see what it looked like you mean the nation with 1 day seniority that you were told by KDII had PMed his membership to attack you? you ask this nation and get an SS stating that he had discussed war plans with KDII before he joined UED and got sent the PM from KDII within 15 seconds of his joining UED.... said PM had a link to a !@#$%* that did not exist, was not deleted, nor expired (simple research would have uncovered this fact) but you take the word of a nation you are told is a rogue over that of the leader of an alliance. i honestly hope that WF never deals with any other alliance since it is obvious that you guys trust rogues more than you do gov of an alliance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tick1 Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 So if I change my AA to that of your alliance andmessage every single member of your alliance telling them to attack Nemesis. Then a couple of inactive members do so, you'd consider retaliation against your entire alliance the normal action to take? If you ghost our alliance it's a different story, but if you are a registered member and we accepted you into our alliance. Yes, I do believe it is our fault, but we will attempt a political method towards peace. Whether or not they feel obliged to do the same isn't my concern. Although considering you position in Nemesis it'd be taken into a deeper consideration on how far it's discussed and who is actually too blame for the war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheEraser Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 wow. Just wow... so much drama out of such a tiny little incident, if people stopped caring about silly stuff and got back in their back channels, maybe we could have a big war again Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayvon Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 (edited) you mean the nation with 1 day seniority that you were told by KDII had PMed his membership to attack you? you ask this nation and get an SS stating that he had discussed war plans with KDII before he joined UED and got sent the PM from KDII within 15 seconds of his joining UED.... said PM had a link to a !@#$%* that did not exist, was not deleted, nor expired (simple research would have uncovered this fact) but you take the word of a nation you are told is a rogue over that of the leader of an alliance. i honestly hope that WF never deals with any other alliance since it is obvious that you guys trust rogues more than you do gov of an alliance. I have 22 days seniority in VE according to my nation page -- yet see sig Big accomplishments for 22 days. Edited December 1, 2009 by Rayvon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dochartaigh Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 The SS came about after it was offered.The response after Enrage thought it over in light of the additional evidence, was a DoW. that is what i said. i apologized for making the misreading some posts where i thought it was stated that the SS came after the offer was accepted. obviously the offer happened since that was discussed prior to the SS being shown. but my mistaken belief was that the offer was accepted prior to the SS being sent and then WF decided to reneg on the solution and DoW instead. hence the apology. i am unsure what you are attempting to say with this post... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deSouza Posted December 1, 2009 Report Share Posted December 1, 2009 You're stretching so hard your back is about to break. Admin help you if you ever end up in the position that KDII is in now - people might remember this nonsense. I personally just find it amusing since either 1) I'm correct and you're being intentionally obtuse to prove some sort of point or 2) you're as bored as I am and looking to start/continue an argument in the face of something utterly obvious. I'm maintaining my stance that it was a legitimate call (I didn't really have to do it, I could simply say WF screwed up and throw them to the wolves). I dont care what you think or say, if four nations with 5 months of alliance seniority attack you, its war. 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.