Lincongrad Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 What was that argument? The CB is irrelevant as war has happened.The peace talks are irrelevant as war has already happened. We cannot go back and stop now! To tomorrows update. I'd like to express my annoyance with this viewpoint. Sorry for jumping on you in particular, but I've been seeing this several places around the forums. Peace talks are never irrelevant. Ideally, constant communication should be kept up between opponents in order to facilitate better understanding, if nothing else. The entire point of war is either to eliminate an opponent or secure an advantageous peace. Since I trust that none of the fighters in this conflict desire to destroy their opponents, the only possible goal is to secure the advantage after the war, be it through reparations, treaties, or even simply white peace (to escape the conflict thus securing a less bad position). What's that quote? "War is a continuation of politics by other means." [OOC]While not necessarily true in RL, it certainly applies to CN.[/OOC] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kzoppistan Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 How much earlier could you possibly ask for peace? It hasn't been a long war. What, they're gonna blitz then start peace negotiations? How about any day after the DoW? Any of them. They had ample opportunity before and they refused all approaches, sounds like white peace was only brought at the last minute to save their own hide and score PR points, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazyisraelie Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 (edited) Well this took long enough. At least this time people aren't sitting in peace mode the entire time... oh wait. Edited January 2, 2010 by crazyisraelie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nizzle Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 i do not have full logs i can post for you but that is what happened.Our first offer included an admission of guilt which was unacceptable to TPF. They said complete white peace or nothing. Tonight negotiations were ongoing and our side offered white peace. TPF replied that these negotiations were going nowhere and walked out. Well, I guess until both parties come to some agreement on what happened or at such a time that full logs are posted we shall never be able to fully convince anyone who isn't already decided. That's because there's a variable in the equation that you're not accounting for. Guess what it is! The Coalition's overwhelming desire to stop you from posting? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AirMe Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 Well, I guess until both parties come to some agreement on what happened or at such a time that full logs are posted we shall never be able to fully convince anyone who isn't already decided.The Coalition's overwhelming desire to stop you from posting? I need to know, what makes you happy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Infidel Israeli Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 (edited) How about any day after the DoW? Any of them.They had ample opportunity before and they refused all approaches, sounds like white peace was only brought at the last minute to save their own hide and score PR points, Well if they're going to DoW in the first place, they probably wanted to cause some damage. I mean they're warring not tech raiding. Anywho, I'm personally excited for this war. Though not impressed with CC, name or actions. Edited January 2, 2010 by Infidel Israeli Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nizzle Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 I need to know, what makes you happy? When you talk to me If you mean "Why won't you take anyone's word on this?", then I should think that's obvious. No one can be trusted. Ever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shimmer Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 I'd like to express my annoyance with this viewpoint. Sorry for jumping on you in particular, but I've been seeing this several places around the forums.Peace talks are never irrelevant. Ideally, constant communication should be kept up between opponents in order to facilitate better understanding, if nothing else. The entire point of war is either to eliminate an opponent or secure an advantageous peace. Since I trust that none of the fighters in this conflict desire to destroy their opponents, the only possible goal is to secure the advantage after the war, be it through reparations, treaties, or even simply white peace (to escape the conflict thus securing a less bad position). What's that quote? "War is a continuation of politics by other means." [OOC]While not necessarily true in RL, it certainly applies to CN.[/OOC] It boils down to this. People want to go to war when they can secure a victory only. The moment the idea they might lose they attempt to end the war for self-preservation. CC waited until they were confident they could win or at least come close to enter. While whatever you want to call the other side "Team Athens" was going to go through with this war and much taunting occured by "Team Athens" until events unfolded and they were no longer guaranteed a win. Once no longer guaranteed a win Self-Preservation occurs which leads to peace negotiations. tl;dr No side is going to take peace if they believe they could win the war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AirMe Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 When you talk to me If you mean "Why won't you take anyone's word on this?", then I should think that's obvious. No one can be trusted. Ever. Then question everything, not just somethings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ejayrazz Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 Listen. I understand what you all are preaching here, but it still is not adding up. You can blame TPF for that. White peace was asked by a gov member, which was then offered, which was then met with a "We are out of here for now." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Ultimate 747 Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 No side is going to take peace if they believe they could win the war. And therein lies the problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Mathers Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 o/ Coward Coalition \o and btw, afraid of loosing your hard earned Warchest while your allies get demolished isn't OOC issues Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haflinger Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 People want to go to war when they can secure a victory only. The moment the idea they might lose they attempt to end the war for self-preservation. You know, it's a lot easier to save your allies when you win the war. Losing wars is usually not good for alliances like TPF, look what happened the last time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerichoholic Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 I prefer the Coalition of Excuses, personally. Only one man can lead a war? Really? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Infidel Israeli Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 If you mean "Why won't you take anyone's word on this?", then I should think that's obvious. No one can be trusted. Ever. Why ask questions if you don't accept the validity of answers? ehh whatever, go on with your fun Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doitzel Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 Draw me a picture? I'm not understanding the connection you are trying to draw here. Of course, that may be dependant on how you are viewing things. I presume you aren't viewing what TPF did as a war time matter that was halted before peace was issued? You shouldn't conspire to destroy alliances that you aren't at war with because they probably will not like it, and if you do you might want to tell them when you have a change of heart or they'll likely grind you into dust. The Desperado quote doesn't indicate that Get it through your head. White peace is peace without terms. That's what it means. [23:22:19] <Roquentin> please don't leave desperado [23:22:48] <Desperado`> Im here. [23:22:53] <Desperado`> Didnt get an answer yet [23:23:30] <rsoxbronco1|Athens> hold [23:24:05] <VanHooIII[RoK]> You know what? ... I am fine with white peace as long as it's worded in a mutually favorable way [23:24:09] <VanHooIII[RoK]> I'm just tired of arguing about it [23:24:25] <VanHooIII[RoK]> The CB was valid to us and we attacked you, it was never intended to be a long affair [23:24:41] <Big_Z[GOD]> Fine, then white peace? [23:24:44] <VanHooIII[RoK]> We fought for awhile, like I told JBone we would ... and I am cool with that [23:25:01] <ComradeGoby> \m/ agrees with white peace [23:25:08] <EmperorMarx> Aye. [23:25:10] <VanHooIII[RoK]> And I want it understood that we were not part of some nefarious plan to attack anyone else [23:25:58] <Desperado`> This time sensitive [23:26:01] <VanHooIII[RoK]> I'm not interested in another flame war, and that goes for both sides [23:26:17] <Roquentin> how much time? [23:26:27] <VanHooIII[RoK]> Desperado`: If you can agree that it's a friendly and respectful white peace ... [23:26:38] <VanHooIII[RoK]> And I want it understood that we were not part of some nefarious plan to attack anyone else <--- and that [23:26:41] <VanHooIII[RoK]> That is all i care about [23:27:27] <Big_Z[GOD]> Desperado`? [23:27:35] <Desperado`> Ok, this doesnt seem to have gotten anywhere [23:27:39] <Desperado`> We will be around tommorow. [23:27:45] <Desperado`> Good Niught. [23:27:46] <--| Desperado` has left #edit (Bye!) [23:30:15] <Londo[Athens]> ok [23:30:19] <Londo[Athens]> I'm down for peace. [23:30:30] <ComradeGoby> ok [23:30:36] <ComradeGoby> Sounds good then [23:30:40] <VanHooIII[RoK]> TOOL declared The Coalition's overwhelming desire to stop you from posting? I'm sure such a desire exists (especially now) but no. The correct answer is arrogance (aka stupidity). You can still get partial credit if you can guess who was displaying it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flak attack Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 (edited) Correction. Athens and co. rejected white peace before our declaration of war was announced. Perhaps by the fate of a few minutes, but wasn't the last war with Moo being timed out of Skype a similar situation? NPO and TORN then declared war on OV and the rest as we know is history.War is here. Cherist it, and never let it go. This is wrong. During the negotiations TPF repeatedly said they would only go for white peace, eventually GOD, \m/, Rok and Athens agreed. Next thing you know, all of TPF leaves saying things aren't going anywhere. Yeah white peace with an admission of guilt. But the TPF side feels that TPF has done nothing wrong since they surrendered and rejected the terms. Your point? Nope. Plain old white peace. Barely one war cycle into the war? I highly doubt it. It was a silly question to ask, though, because of course it would do them good to claim now that they would have wanted white peace after 6 or 7 days. Darn. CnG actually has a precedent in the UBD war. White peace after a week of war is how we handle spying. Karma doesn't exist anymore, Starfox. Oops. A coalition is not a cause. It has a cause (or at least should), but it is not the cause. Probably because TOP is out for blood. Never my dear Doitzel. Surely TOP stands for all that is good and just in this world. They would never have an ulterior motive. And...there was no "TPF you have to say you are sorry"? Not at all. Well, I guess until both parties come to some agreement on what happened or at such a time that full logs are posted we shall never be able to fully convince anyone who isn't already decided. I've seen the logs, but at the moment they are on a private section of our forum, so I'm afraid I can't share them with you. Ask an involved alliance head for them if you want to verify something. MK gov has them. EDIT: And as usual, Doitzel beats me. That is the end part of the logs, after the other two TPF reps suddenly left without a word. Edited January 2, 2010 by flak attack Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fantastico Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 What the hell does that have to do with TPF walking out of negotiations after getting what they were asking for? Seems a bit disingenuous don't you think? As I learn the history of this fair planet's politics, this reminds me of the tale of another alliance that went to war as it negotiated peace. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vladimir Stukov II Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 (edited) So TPF gets offered white peace exactly 5 minutes before 17 alliances were set to DoW. How exactly did you expect them to stop all 17 alliances with only a couple minutes notice? Did you really think they would be foolish enough to halt the whole war plan before even finalizing a peace deal? Edited January 2, 2010 by Vladimir Stukov II Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silentkiller Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 You shouldn't conspire to destroy alliances that you aren't at war with because they probably will not like it, and if you do you might want to tell them when you have a change of heart or they'll likely grind you into dust.Get it through your head. White peace is peace without terms. That's what it means. [23:22:19] <Roquentin> please don't leave desperado [23:22:48] <Desperado`> Im here. [23:22:53] <Desperado`> Didnt get an answer yet [23:23:30] <rsoxbronco1|Athens> hold [23:24:05] <VanHooIII[RoK]> You know what? ... I am fine with white peace as long as it's worded in a mutually favorable way [23:24:09] <VanHooIII[RoK]> I'm just tired of arguing about it [23:24:25] <VanHooIII[RoK]> The CB was valid to us and we attacked you, it was never intended to be a long affair [23:24:41] <Big_Z[GOD]> Fine, then white peace? [23:24:44] <VanHooIII[RoK]> We fought for awhile, like I told JBone we would ... and I am cool with that [23:25:01] <ComradeGoby> \m/ agrees with white peace [23:25:08] <EmperorMarx> Aye. [23:25:10] <VanHooIII[RoK]> And I want it understood that we were not part of some nefarious plan to attack anyone else [23:25:58] <Desperado`> This time sensitive [23:26:01] <VanHooIII[RoK]> I'm not interested in another flame war, and that goes for both sides [23:26:17] <Roquentin> how much time? [23:26:27] <VanHooIII[RoK]> Desperado`: If you can agree that it's a friendly and respectful white peace ... [23:26:38] <VanHooIII[RoK]> And I want it understood that we were not part of some nefarious plan to attack anyone else <--- and that [23:26:41] <VanHooIII[RoK]> That is all i care about [23:27:27] <Big_Z[GOD]> Desperado`? [23:27:35] <Desperado`> Ok, this doesnt seem to have gotten anywhere [23:27:39] <Desperado`> We will be around tommorow. [23:27:45] <Desperado`> Good Niught. [23:27:46] <--| Desperado` has left #edit (Bye!) [23:30:15] <Londo[Athens]> ok [23:30:19] <Londo[Athens]> I'm down for peace. [23:30:30] <ComradeGoby> ok [23:30:36] <ComradeGoby> Sounds good then [23:30:40] <VanHooIII[RoK]> TOOL declared I'm sure such a desire exists (especially now) but no. The correct answer is arrogance (aka stupidity). You can still get partial credit if you can guess who was displaying it. [23:46] <Impero[VE]> rayvon is willing to give the choice to seth on his own[23:47] <Impero[VE]> to resign and appologise [23:47] <Impero[VE]> and face ZI [23:48] <Impero[VE]> <@sethb[OV-DepMoFO]> I will not see OV come to any harm on my behalf [23:48] <Impero[VE]> ^and seth will do that [23:54] <Impero[VE]> nevermind, change of plans [23:54] <Impero[VE]> im sorry. At least they didnt accept the term and then back out Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nizzle Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 Then question everything, not just somethings. Unless something makes perfect sense to me, I normally question it. It makes some people really mad at me. You shouldn't conspire to destroy alliances that you aren't at war with because they probably will not like it, and if you do you might want to tell them when you have a change of heart or they'll likely grind you into dust. OK. So we both disagree on the premise. Get it through your head. White peace is peace without terms. That's what it means. I perfectly understand what it means to me, good sir. I'm sure such a desire exists (especially now) but no. The correct answer is arrogance (aka stupidity). You can still get partial credit if you can guess who was displaying it. I think I got your answer wrong. [23:24:25] <VanHooIII[RoK]> The CB was valid to us and we attacked you, it was never intended to be a long affair I'm going to assume it was this that caused TPF to exit. Though, thank you for the logs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nizzle Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 So TPF gets offered white peace exactly 5 minutes before 17 alliances were set to DoW. How exactly did you expect them to stop all 17 alliances with only a couple minutes notice?Did you really think they would be foolish enough to halt the whole war plan before even finalizing a peace deal? That's what I'm thinking. It could be backed by the lack of wars. What I find interesting is VanHoo's quote in the logs, which may well have relayed that in the announcement it would be stated the CB was a valid one. To my thinking, any white peace agreement would have to state that the entire thing was a misunderstanding and both parties regret not pursuing diplomacy in the first place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doitzel Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 So TPF gets offered white peace exactly 5 minutes before 17 alliances were set to DoW. How exactly did you expect them to stop all 17 alliances with only a couple minutes notice?Did you really think they would be foolish enough to halt the whole war plan before even finalizing a peace deal? I guess TOP doesn't like diplomacy as much as we were led to believe. At least they didnt accept the term and then back out Two wrongs still make a right even after Pacifica's fall, I guess. [23:24:25] <VanHooIII[RoK]> The CB was valid to us and we attacked you, it was never intended to be a long affairI'm going to assume it was this that caused TPF to exit. Though, thank you for the logs. You're joking, right? Hoo wanted to clear up a misunderstanding so we get a global war? Tell me you're joking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dochartaigh Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 So TPF gets offered white peace exactly 5 minutes before 17 alliances were set to DoW. How exactly did you expect them to stop all 17 alliances with only a couple minutes notice?Did you really think they would be foolish enough to halt the whole war plan before even finalizing a peace deal? IRC is a wonderful thing. i am certain that since the leaders were online to dispatch orders, they could have easily been taken aside in a query and told that peace was accepted. instead TPF walked out. sure, there would have been some attacks made but no DoWs as orders could have gone out quickly to cease all attacks and no DoWs would have been posted. it would not have taken that long in all actuality had peace actually been wanted by CC. as it stands, it is pretty clear that peace was most likely not going to be accepted, otherwise TPF would not have walked out of the talks. even if TPF had accepted and DoWs gone out due to lack of time. it could have been retracted by update. so again, it is obvious that TPF/CC did not want peace and only wanted blood. basically, they are committing the same crime as they are accusing Athens. the only difference is the essentially fake set of talks that was underwent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dochartaigh Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 That's what I'm thinking. It could be backed by the lack of wars. What I find interesting is VanHoo's quote in the logs, which may well have relayed that in the announcement it would be stated the CB was a valid one.To my thinking, any white peace agreement would have to state that the entire thing was a misunderstanding and both parties regret not pursuing diplomacy in the first place. seriously, so because Hoo stated that Athens, RoK, \m/, and GOD thought the CB was valid, that somehow means that TPF has to state it? seriously... ya'll keep stretching everything beyond imagination. tis quite amusing to watch though. 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.