Hymenbreach Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 If Athens and RoK were so concerned for welfare of TPF members, then they should have settled this issue without a war. Don't bring logic to a crazy fight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
medtech Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 The open calls and desire for a bigger but still winnable war suddenly changing to lets hope this ends soon in an hour... Some could only hope that was our reasoning behind it. But wrong sir please try again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 I apologize on behalf of Athens and RoK for being reasonable. They feel terrible they are not the monsters you wish to make them out to be. Reasonable alliances dont beat on an alliance a fraction of their size on a whim. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
President Obama Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 Seems rather quick for peace. I'd rather see this play out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deathcat Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 uh.. oh.. oh.. uh.. No.. oo/ TPF Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heft Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 Aren't the treaty cancellations normally done pre-war?And I thought the only treaty canceled so far was Athens on MASH, an alliance that flipped sides and took all private planning material from an ally as well as most likely alerted their ally's partner to the war that was coming. Seems justified enough, but probably a debating point for the topic concerning it. Can't cancel pre-war if you don't know about the war, in which case it would generally come after. Especially with such an obvious out as this. "ESPIONAGE - WE'RE OFF THE HOOK" But none of that. Individual terms are given in order to lighten the load (as someone said, if you cared about TPF's wellbeing you wouldn't have gone off all half-cocked and launched a war like this, at least not in this manner). Again, just some observations to make me curious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archon Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 (edited) Normally by now there would have been a wave a treaty cancelations and maybe one or two counter declarations. Interesting how we the only treaty cancelations I've noticed are not on the TPF side of things. Are you really trying to spin a "OMG RoK/Athens/GOD/\m/ are losing clearly because they're offering terms and one of them cut an ally loose!" angle? I mean...really Heft? Really? I know you love a number of alliances on the other side, but come on now. At least the allies of those four alliances were ready to roll and didn't need 3 days to get their !@#$ together. Edit: Though I do love that people who have been trolling about the war are suddenly trolling for the war to get bigger. I love how people do 180s once they are ready to finally put their money where their mouths are. God forbid you people have you **** together when your ally needs it. Edited December 30, 2009 by TheNeverender Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 Reasonable alliances dont beat on an alliance a fraction of their size on a whim. Are you calling NPO unreasonable Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 (edited) <snip> That's this world for you. I don't really care to debate an /established/ principle of this world, because it is a debate that I have won without firing a shot. You know why? Because this is Planet Bob, where alliance's members have always been responsible for their leadership's actions. They may choose to go for peace via individual terms as this, but in every single example I can think of, the members were responsible for the actions of the government. If you don't agree with it, then you can work to change it. You cannot debate that it is a part of the Cyberverse. Edit: Well you can, but you will not be doing it with me. Edited December 30, 2009 by Penlugue Solaris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flak attack Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 I didn't know TPF was looking to surrender yet. I don't even think mhawk has even had time to get on his cross. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earogema Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 Wait, so people are actually complaining that individual terms are coming too early? Personally, I'd just give them at the start of the war, then just call everybody who fled cowards. It's a win/win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trout Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 (edited) I'd rather continue to launch nukes at your wee ones. o/ TPF Edited December 30, 2009 by Boogeyman657 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heft Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 Are you really trying to spin a "OMG RoK/Athens/GOD/\m/ are losing clearly because they're offering terms and one of them cut an ally loose!" angle? I mean...really Heft? Really? I know you love a number of alliances on the other side, but come on now. At least the allies of those four alliances were ready to roll and didn't need 3 days to get their !@#$ together. I do think they misjudged how much support they would get and how much TPF would get. It's a cool move to release but it's not like it makes much a material difference either way in this situation. I don't know what they were planning on but I'm pretty sure it hasn't worked out like they hoped. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 Are you calling NPO unreasonable Are you comparing what you and your cohorts was did to TPF to some of the "bad things" NPO did in the past? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earogema Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 Can't cancel pre-war if you don't know about the war, in which case it would generally come after. Especially with such an obvious out as this. "ESPIONAGE - WE'RE OFF THE HOOK" But none of that. Individual terms are given in order to lighten the load (as someone said, if you cared about TPF's wellbeing you wouldn't have gone off all half-cocked and launched a war like this, at least not in this manner). Again, just some observations to make me curious. Terms can be for both reasons. Remember TPF's whole "If you aren't really a nazi, take this pledge and leave NoV" deal? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irish Wolf Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 I would like to make it clear that Athens's and Ragnarok's problem is not with TPF's membership, but with those government officials who were complicit in the plotting against us and our associates. Are you serious? Those complicit in this action got a great big pat on the back from ya'll.. /hint their in an alliance called Zero Hour Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael McBride Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 Van Hoo II? My god, Hoo has been replaced by his father! He was the mean one! Run for the hills! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 Are you comparing what you and your cohorts was did to TPF to some of the "bad things" NPO did in the past? What did MK do? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 Individual terms are given in order to lighten the load Funniest line ever. TPF must be too much for them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archon Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 I do think they misjudged how much support they would get and how much TPF would get. It's a cool move to release but it's not like it makes much a material difference either way in this situation. I don't know what they were planning on but I'm pretty sure it hasn't worked out like they hoped. Actually I think they expected TPF's allies to have a modicum of readiness and go in prior to three days elapsing with zero support. Just a thought. I also think that they figured, given the amount of emo spilling out over the war, that they might offer the common nations a way out. However, now that TPF's allies and sympathizers have finally gotten their !@#$ together, suddenly said sympathizers do a 180 in tone and go from doves to hawks. I mean, it's not like we've seen this played out a hundred times before or anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magicninja Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 Can't cancel pre-war if you don't know about the war, in which case it would generally come after. Especially with such an obvious out as this. "ESPIONAGE - WE'RE OFF THE HOOK" But none of that. Individual terms are given in order to lighten the load (as someone said, if you cared about TPF's wellbeing you wouldn't have gone off all half-cocked and launched a war like this, at least not in this manner). Again, just some observations to make me curious. It's not about being scared if that's what you're thinking. It's about having nothing better to do. This would actually imo rush people to defend TPF before their members give up hope and start deserting but maybe that's my skewed view. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hymenbreach Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 (edited) Regardless of what it is meant to actually signify, the peanut gallery is taking it as a 'Oh, whoops, we've seen the coming storm and our houses are built of straw, so we better evacuate the situation." Which is a propaganda loss for the anti-tpfers, alas. Edited December 30, 2009 by Hymenbreach Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadie Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 (edited) If Athens and RoK were so concerned for welfare of TPF members, then they should have settled this issue without a war. Which they most certainly are not. Heard rumor of possible logs to that effect. Or not. Maybe it's just a rumor that I'm starting right here, right now. Or not. But it could have been Londo or the guy on first. Definitely not someone from the little m in the tiny room. Outhouse or closet maybe. With walls falling. Edited December 30, 2009 by Roadie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kulomascovia Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 At least the allies of those four alliances were ready to roll and didn't need 3 days to get their !@#$ together. Indeed, they only considered the situation for one day before deciding to declare war. Didn't even attempt diplomatic contact with TPF. Such honorable allies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 I'd rather continue to launch nukes at your wee ones. Go for it, that is your choice and you have the right to make it. If others disagree, they may act among this. I don't expect to see many if any however personally, but the option is now available. 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.