Van Hoo III Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 That's an odd way of.. agreeing? I think. No, just someone tired of the same posts and accusations appearing over and over and over ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TehChron Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 that's a pretty nice comment from the sidelines right there. Let's assume that TPF are not completly without honor shall we? Otherwise future negotiations might be a tad difficult since they obviously couldn't be trusted if your version was correct. Why should they play niceties with the folks who attacked them out of the blue? Especially when it's a curbstomp? I'd say any concept of this being an honorable fight flew out the window when you blitzed without even trying to handle a five-month old issue that never went anywhere to begin with. Why should they trust you? Really? It's simple equivalency, giving back what they've been given. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PrideAssassin Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 (edited) Well that is one way to completly change what actually happened.Don't we usually save the re-writing history part of the war until people actually start to forget what happened? White peace with conditions is not white peace. Also; setting a precedent for this CB is dangerous and wholly destabilizing. Edited January 2, 2010 by PrideAssassin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rsoxbronco1 Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 See, now you're just (playing) dumb. If you knew they were stalling for time, and you went along with their game to begin with, knowing full well you fired the first shot in a way ensured to make them hostile towards you, how can you honestly expect to get away with arguing that they pulled a fast one on you?Either you're an idiot, or you're lying. Your argument would make sense if I had the ability to be 100% sure about anything. We all suspected they were stalling, but that's not a good enough reason to just walk away. (although apparently getting exactly what you wanted is) Either you don't know how to negotiate or you don't have any desire to expand your horizons beyond what works for you at this moment in time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rsoxbronco1 Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 (edited) White peace with conditions is not white peace. Posting without reading or thinking is very IRON though. <@Shahenshah[iRON]> repeat repeat repeat <@Shahenshah[iRON]> pick on something, then just repeat repeat repeat Edited January 2, 2010 by rsoxbronco1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TehChron Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 Except then you lose some of that moral high ground that your coalition clung to in order to sway others. You can't bash someone's head in with a crowbar just because you feel they have done something equally as bad to you and then still point at yourself and proclaim that you're the good guys. I'd say your lots opening dick move still gives TPF plenty of moral high ground left to maneuver, especially considering they had no reason to assume the negotiations were in good faith to begin with. And your analogy makes no sense, the ones with the crowbar being taken to them are TPF, not the multiple alliances curbstomping them. And what do you mean, "your coalition"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Impero Romano Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 White peace with conditions is not white peace.Also; setting a precedent for this CB is dangerous and wholly destabilizing. lol you took shashensah (sp.)'s comments a little bit to literally... See, now its having the reverse effect Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Van Hoo III Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 White peace with conditions is not white peace.Also; setting a precedent for this CB is dangerous and wholly destabilizing. And there are already ten or so threads that you may go and argue that in. Now if you'll excuse me, I will now return to ignoring IRON's quantity over quality posting tactic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulafaras Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 White peace with conditions is not white peace.Also; setting a precedent for this CB is dangerous and wholly destabilizing. Leaving aside that those points aren't really connected i fail to see your point. Yes the first offer was not white peace, it was a cessation of hostilities and an apology. Later offers were closer but still included something. The last offer (you know the part concerning the logs posted) which was in the process of being accepted was white peace. Setting a precedent for any kind of CB is dangerous, but also largely irrelevant. As this war has shown no matter how airtight you consider a CB the other side always disagrees (and frankly an alliance leader conspiring to infiltrate and sabotage a different alliance is probably among the most balant of CBs i can imagine). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Van Hoo III Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 And your analogy makes no sense, the ones with the crowbar being taken to them are TPF, not the multiple alliances curbstomping them. And what do you mean, "your coalition"? I didn't mean you as in you in specific, Chron ... I mean you as in them ... er, whatever. You get what I mean. All right, too late at night for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TehChron Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 Your argument would make sense if I had the ability to be 100% sure about anything. We all suspected they were stalling, but that's not a good enough reason to just walk away. (although apparently getting exactly what you wanted is)Either you don't know how to negotiate or you don't have any desire to expand your horizons beyond what works for you at this moment in time. So your being dense is reason enough to...be dense? That's, dare I say it, reasonable? I mean, seriously. You guys pick a fight, rub salt in the wounds with your proposed terms, and are now trying to claim the moral high ground? That either takes some brass ones, or a severe disconnect from reality, and all things being considered, I'm guessing the latter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baden-Württemberg Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 Except then you lose some of that moral high ground that your coalition clung to in order to sway others. You can't bash someone's head in with a crowbar just because you feel they have done something equally as bad to you and then still point at yourself and proclaim that you're the good guys. How about you stop that black or white arguing here? Fact remains that TPF didn't spy, because they 1. Never infiltrated an alliance 2. Never gathered information. All they did was talking about infiltrating alliances in case of an eternal war. When Vox did it, it was justified. Of course, I don't agree with that strategy either. But considering it happened 6 months later, diplomacy should have been used first. rish actually spied, and tried to start a war between NSO and TOP. Explain me why he'd do it, if not for Ragnarok? To gain a few information that are completely useless for him personally because he'd "self-destroy his nation" (OOC quit) anyway? Yah right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silentkiller Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 (edited) TPF wasn't declared on for running into peacemode. Their going into peace only influenced when they were attacked. No you misunderstood what I said. I meant that TPF walked out before the whitepeace term was officially offfered(i.e all the attackers agreeing on it), yes it would have been offered officially but TPF walked out before that. [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 I was comparing this with the fact that even though Moo was very likely going to accept the terms offered by karma he never did in the timeframe provided (1min(?)) due to him pinging out. Although its a pretty moot point and I am sure TPF knew that you were going to offer white peace, just trying to explain what I think pride assasin is getting at. Edited January 2, 2010 by silentkiller Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Van Hoo III Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 How about you stop that black or white arguing here? Fact remains that TPF didn't spy, because they 1. Never infiltrated an alliance 2. Never gathered information. All they did was talking about infiltrating alliances in case of an eternal war. When Vox did it, it was justified. Of course, I don't agree with that strategy either. But considering it happened 6 months later, diplomacy should have been used first. rish actually spied, and tried to start a war between NSO and TOP. Explain me why he'd do it, if not for Ragnarok? To gain a few information that are completely useless for him personally because he'd "self-destroy his nation" (OOC quit) anyway? Yah right. Because he was bored? Because he wanted to start trouble? I have no idea, you'd have to ask him. While you're doing so, ask him why on earth he thought any of it was a good idea for me, ok? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TehChron Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 I didn't mean you as in you in specific, Chron ... I mean you as in them ... er, whatever. You get what I mean.All right, too late at night for me. Just call it CC, or CoC, or whatever works. Monikers are there for everyone's convenience, y'know? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rsoxbronco1 Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 So your being dense is reason enough to...be dense? That's, dare I say it, reasonable? I mean, seriously. You guys pick a fight, rub salt in the wounds with your proposed terms, and are now trying to claim the moral high ground? That either takes some brass ones, or a severe disconnect from reality, and all things being considered, I'm guessing the latter. Says the guy who has effectively said TPF cannot be trusted in negotiations. Good night. No you misunderstood what I said. I meant that TPF walked out before the whitepeace term was officially offfered, yes it would have been offered officially but TPF walked out before that. I was comparing this with the fact that even though Moo was very likely going to accept the terms offered by karma he never did in the timeframe provided (1min(?)) due to him pinging out. Ah. Well the issue is that TPF was the alliance that offered straight white peace (no conditions). But, instead of pinging out, they just left and said negotiations were going nowhere after 3/4 alliances said yes and the 4th asked for a moment to talk privately amongst themselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silentkiller Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 Says the guy who has effectively said TPF cannot be trusted in negotiations.Good night. Ah. Well the issue is that TPF was the alliance that offered straight white peace (no conditions). But, instead of pinging out, they just left and said negotiations were going nowhere after 3/4 alliances said yes and the 4th asked for a moment to talk privately amongst themselves. check my edit: "Although its a pretty moot point and I am sure TPF knew that you were going to offer white peace, just trying to explain what I think pride assasin is getting at." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rsoxbronco1 Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 check my edit:"Although its a pretty moot point and I am sure TPF knew that you were going to offer white peace, just trying to explain what I think pride assasin is getting at." My only problem is that pride assassin keeps posting the same thing despite any and all evidence we show to the contrary. He isn't fooling anyone with an IQ higher that that of a potted plant, but he keeps on trucking like any good IRON member. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TehChron Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 Says the guy who has effectively said TPF cannot be trusted in negotiations.Good night. Trust is a two-way street, if you've done nothing to engender trust, then you aren't going to be given any. Nice of you to try and spin it as you being the victim, here, when all things being considered, you lot tossed any basis for trust in negotiations out to the window in the first place. This is that disconnect from reality I was referring to earlier. Good night. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sigrun Vapneir Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 The sad thing is, it's exactly this sort of behaviour in the past that made it possible to defend the decision to hit TPF first and negotiate later. And now this entire coalition has painted itself with the same brush. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TehChron Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 The sad thing is, it's exactly this sort of behaviour in the past that made it possible to defend the decision to hit TPF first and negotiate later. And now this entire coalition has painted itself with the same brush. No it didn't. This is the attitude of an aggrieved party expecting insincerity from the folks who attacked it without negotiating a settlement to a dead issue beforehand. What's so wrong about flipping the bird to the folks ganging up on you? Really? As far as I'm concerned, getting back at your attackers in whatever small way possible is something to be encouraged in this day and age. [ooc]SO long as it remains IC[/ooc] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juslen Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 (edited) I get it.. the CB is BS.. that is what I keep hearing. Ok... now can we move onto the issue of whether or not TPF truly wants peace or not or if they simply want to take this war to the very end now that their allies have finally stepped in to defend. Because if this issue is all about whether the CB was justified or not then TPF's allies should be willing to fight until they are forced to surrender or they achieve victory. Through this entire mess, I would think both sides would be interested in resolving this issue. Unless of course the vast CN conspiracy of GnG and SF trying to destroy TOP and IRON is true. I will just try to be reasonable here and say its in the best interests of both parties to resolve this issue so we can save our pixels for a truly worthy war. (as in all those who have barely joined in or have yet to join in) Edited January 2, 2010 by juslen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
genius15 Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 so wait why is the !@#$ hitting the fan now over something that happen months ago? sounds like a conspiracy to me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scorponok Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 War! March good men and women, defeat the evil of this world. Plague it of its stranglehold. And forge a new brighter world. Basically have fun enjoy the GRL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
genius15 Posted January 2, 2010 Report Share Posted January 2, 2010 so wait why is the !@#$ hitting the fan now over something that happen months ago? sounds like a conspiracy to me its like taking a dog to the vet long after its been dead. its retarded!!! 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.