JBone Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 (edited) are you intentionally ignoring my posts? it was stated by Jbone that ZH ended the operation in August not July. thus showing that the argument that the operation ended in July being false. second, if TPF knew that ZH ended the op in August, that shows that the argument they ceased relations in July to also be false. this also proves that the argument that mhawk/TPF ended the op is also a lie. now with three lies building up, you really think that TPF is telling the truth or just covering their @#$%? We surrendered August 4th. ZH pulled the plug on the opperation before we surrendered. 01[22:53] <DrunkMonkey[ZH]> Yohan & I have to talk to hawk as soon as TPF accepts peace [22:53] <Beernuts|Away> aboot? 01[22:54] <DrunkMonkey[ZH]> the op 01[22:54] <DrunkMonkey[ZH]> we're pulling out As of this notification, which was obviously before we accepted peace, the plan to have ZH get close with Athens ,to cause harm to a coalition at war with TPF ended. Regardless of who ended it....it was non exsistant at this point in time, which was before we signed terms with Karma. Edited December 28, 2009 by JBone Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
potato Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 C&G negotiated peace with TPF, so yes that would be silly. C&G did no such thing. I would know, I was there. If you're going to go through that silly route, you're saying that anyones CB against TPF for Karma war reasons like having attacked an ally are still 100% legit because they haven't used the CB yet and didn't sign any surrender terms. I'm not saying that at all. You seem to have implied it though. I'm not the one that brought up the fact that TPF and Athens hadn't specifically declared war on each other. I agree and don't find it relevant to the CB, but someone did bring it up so I just commented. Yes, I waste my time and go off point like that /shrug That's the SpoiL I know and like. And I agree, it's not relevant, except for the fact that TPF initiated hostilities, albeit undercover hostilities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin McDonald Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 We surrendered August 4th.ZH pulled the plug on the opperation before we surrendered. 01[22:53] <DrunkMonkey[ZH]> Yohan & I have to talk to hawk as soon as TPF accepts peace [22:53] <Beernuts|Away> aboot? 01[22:54] <DrunkMonkey[ZH]> the op 01[22:54] <DrunkMonkey[ZH]> we're pulling out As of this notification, which was obviously before we accepted peace, the plan to have ZH get close with Athens ,to cause harm to a coalition at war with TPF ended. Regardless of who ended it....it was non exsistant at this point in time, which was before we signed terms with Karma. ZH ending it does not absolve you of responsibility. I don't understand why that is a hard concept to accept. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sooner Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 That would be excellent propaganda, but TPF's courage, bravery, spine, etc aren't in question here. Gotta do that with someone who breaks a treaty or something. Not calling on TPF's. I'm calling on mhawk's. He's as spineless as President Jalen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeinousOne Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 Was or was not this operation found to be still operational after the end of the Karma War? Was a split off of TPF a protectorate of RoK or had applied for such? Is the war based on actual pursuit of the plan or just the presentation of the plan during the Karma War? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Srqt Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 (edited) ZH ending it does not absolve you of responsibility. I don't understand why that is a hard concept to accept. So they are on the hook now for acts of war they committed during a war they already surrendered for?I have been a bit out of the loop lately so correct me if I am wrong here. Edited December 28, 2009 by KingSrqt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deadshot Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 It's funny to see some of the people in here cheering on Athens for attacking an alliance conspiring against them. How quickly some forget the past, the incessant whining and crying foul when it happened to them. Athens and Co. want war. I don't give a !@#$ what the reasons are, if the cb is valid or not, or if this situation can be compared to a murder trial. The war is here, no need to argue about it. Athens, \m/, RoK and anyone else who joins in, have fun out there. Rule book has flown out of the window as far as I am concerned. I have pity for what the future of some of your alliances hold. /brb working up a cb to declare on Athens. I think they were mean to me a little over a year ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chalaskan Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 Not calling on TPF's. I'm calling on mhawk's. He's as spineless as President Jalen. I believe it was his spine that brought TPF into the last war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 So they are on the hook now for acts of war they committed during a war they already surrendered for?I have been a bit out of the loop lately so correct me if I am wrong here. They made acts of war against an alliance they weren't at war with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 So they are on the hook now for acts of war they committed during a war they already surrendered for?I have been a bit out of the loop lately so correct me if I am wrong here. No, they are on the hook for spying on Athens and RoK, which is independent of the war they surrendered in in the minds of Athens, RoK, and everyone allied to them. It's funny to see some of the people in here cheering on Athens for attacking an alliance conspiring against them. How quickly some forget the past, the incessant whining and crying foul when it happened to them. Athens and Co. want war. I don't give a !@#$ what the reasons are, if the cb is valid or not, or if this situation can be compared to a murder trial. The war is here, no need to argue about it. Athens, \m/, RoK and anyone else who joins in, have fun out there. Rule book has flown out of the window as far as I am concerned. I have pity for what the future of some of your alliances hold. /brb working up a cb to declare on Athens. I think they were mean to me a little over a year ago. Yes, that is what this is like. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sal Paradise Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 They had to stop conspiring instead of... continuing to conspire. There were a few people who ended this and none were TPF. They continued to conspire after it ended? That was essentially the first half done, therefore rendering your "hardly out of the gate" argument moot. What's the second half? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpiderJerusalem Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 Were CB's manufactured from acts taken during prior wars?Not that i can remember. A name comes to mind... Something that happened when GATO ended up with a Viceroy... Hmm... We surrendered August 4th.ZH pulled the plug on the opperation before we surrendered. 01[22:53] <DrunkMonkey[ZH]> Yohan & I have to talk to hawk as soon as TPF accepts peace [22:53] <Beernuts|Away> aboot? 01[22:54] <DrunkMonkey[ZH]> the op 01[22:54] <DrunkMonkey[ZH]> we're pulling out As of this notification, which was obviously before we accepted peace, the plan to have ZH get close with Athens ,to cause harm to a coalition at war with TPF ended. Regardless of who ended it....it was non exsistant at this point in time, which was before we signed terms with Karma. JBone. A simple question for you, the person I like and all... When did you inform anyone that this happened? Should you not inform Athens that this was a plan all along and that "you" pulled the plug when the war ended? It's an airtight CB, so suck it up and realize that you're heading for destruction Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silentkiller Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 Was or was not this operation found to be still operational after the end of the Karma War? Was a split off of TPF a protectorate of RoK or had applied for such? Is the war based on actual pursuit of the plan or just the presentation of the plan during the Karma War? Heinous http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?s...t&p=2058302 basically TPF are getting declared war on because they werent the ones who cancelled it and are getting killed because of their "intentions" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 What's the second half? Reading helps Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadie Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 6 months after a plan to spy during a war never comes to fruition, we get DoW'd over it. I'm actually liking this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 Heinous http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?s...t&p=2058302 basically TPF are getting declared war on because they werent the ones who cancelled it and are getting killed because of their "intentions" Their intentions were made clear when they organize and kicked off a long term plan to damage an alliance they were not at war with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Srqt Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 They made acts of war against an alliance they weren't at war with. Athens and RoK both declared on treaty partners that TPF was obligated to defend, whether or not an actual declaration was made is irrelevant as to whether a legitimate state of war could exist between them. I can play semantics too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bower3aj Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 ZH ending it does not absolve you of responsibility. I don't understand why that is a hard concept to accept. Going to throw this in here, and not because I like defending TPF or anything but... Since ZH was founded by TPF albeit secretly, than they were kinda like a sleeper cell of TPF agents. Now follow me here, if ZH is a sleeper cell for TPF, and ZH ended the mission, than TPF ended the mission. So... what would have been acceptable. ZH ending it and then TPF going "no you don't quit you're fired!" or something like that? Just wondering. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 Athens and RoK both declared on treaty partners that TPF was obligated to defend, whether or not an actual declaration was made is irrelevant as to whether a legitimate state of war could exist between them. I can play semantics too. So..there was a war but there wasn't one. I am lost by this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeinousOne Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 Heinous http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?s...t&p=2058302 basically TPF are getting declared war on because they werent the ones who cancelled it and are getting killed because of their "intentions" My question was not a leading question, it was an honest question and it still stands because I honestly don't know. Could you answer my questions with yes or no answers? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpiderJerusalem Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 Heinous http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?s...t&p=2058302 basically TPF are getting declared war on because they werent the ones who cancelled it and are getting killed because of their "intentions" This is so funny... I remember countless wars where the "intentions" have counted. Or even where the perceived intentions counted. TPF are getting declared war on because they did something bad. They were caught with both hands, the head and a foot in the cookie jar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin McDonald Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 Going to throw this in here, and not because I like defending TPF or anything but... Since ZH was founded by TPF albeit secretly, than they were kinda like a sleeper cell of TPF agents. Now follow me here, if ZH is a sleeper cell for TPF, and ZH ended the mission, than TPF ended the mission. So... what would have been acceptable. ZH ending it and then TPF going "no you don't quit you're fired!" or something like that? Just wondering. Both to you and Srqt, ZH ending this doesn't absolve Mhawk or TPF of responsibility. The intent was to harm Athens, and as far as I can tell, the only reasons the intent did not occur is because a party other than Mhawk ensured it didn't occur. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBone Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 ZH ending it does not absolve you of responsibility. I don't understand why that is a hard concept to accept. I never said it absolved us of anything. I said it had come to an end before we surrendered. When we surrendered, we agreed not to do anything to cause harm to members of the Karma coalition. We did not. Why is that such a hard concept to accept? Was or was not this operation found to be still operational after the end of the Karma War? Was a split off of TPF a protectorate of RoK or had applied for such? Is the war based on actual pursuit of the plan or just the presentation of the plan during the Karma War? See above......also good to have you back posting here, missed ya HO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Srqt Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 So..there was a war but there wasn't one.I am lost by this. TPF had valid reasons to commit war acts against both alliances in regards to the Karma war. Seeing as though TPF was already defeated and surrendered and completed terms for that war declaring on them months later for it seems idiotic at best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 Athens and RoK both declared on treaty partners that TPF was obligated to defend, whether or not an actual declaration was made is irrelevant as to whether a legitimate state of war could exist between them. I can play semantics too. So they had a state of war without having a state of 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.