In response to the "cold war" of CN

[SiCkO]

on the flip, side, are they all with you because you are allies or just because your right now the top dog?

P.S. Bob we have a name! its called the Remnants!

[Sal Paradise]

If MK finds a concrete CB on any alliance they're pretty much screwed, we're allied to half the game.

Just as Bad!

SalParadise:

It's funny, because utopia in real life is radically different from utopia in the Cyberverse. The end of history may sound like a pleasant dream in real life, but in Cyber Nations, if Fukuyama's vision came true I'd stop playing.

Fortunately, Fukuyama's theories are equally wrong applied to both Cyber Nations and real life.

Edit: or perhaps this was your point and I'm being slow.....

It would be pretty stupid to apply real world political theories to Cybernations. I was really just borrowing the phrase.

[NoFish]

Actually, the situation is analogous to the situation between the Athenian and Spartan alliances in the Peloponnesian War. Donald Kagan covers this brilliantly in his book The Peloponnesian War.

Are you saying Sparta's gonna go to war with Athens?

[Il Impero Romano]

Impero showcases his lack of knowledge once again.

Really? If that's true, why not quote my post and respond appropriately?

Also please elaborate.

Edited January 10, 2010 by Il Impero Romano

[Stonewall Jaxon]

I feel like the closest thing we had to the Cold War was Polaris vs. Pacifica. They maintained "friendly" relations, but in the background indiscreetly built separate, rivaling spheres of influence to top one another.

[Arminius]

Are you saying Sparta's gonna go to war with Athens?

I never thought of that, but it makes perfect sense!

Perceptive on your part, NoFish!

[bigwoody]

I feel like the closest thing we had to the Cold War was Polaris vs. Pacifica. They maintained "friendly" relations, but in the background indiscreetly built separate, rivaling spheres of influence to top one another.

Ding! That, and post-GWII were two cold wars.

[Stonewall Jaxon]

Ding! That, and post-GWII were two cold wars.

The key is indiscreetly[/i] to be a "cold war," hostility should openly be taboo. It seems to make no sense, but with a little thought, it makes perfect sense. Either that or I'm going bat!@#$ insane.

[bigwoody]

The key is indiscreetly[/i] to be a "cold war," hostility should openly be taboo. It seems to make no sense, but with a little thought, it makes perfect sense. Either that or I'm going bat!@#$ insane.

Its the latter. Its not a cold war unless all parties involved are well aware of what it is.

[The AUT]

If MK finds a concrete CB on any alliance they're pretty much screwed, we're allied to half the game.

All MK needs is a shoddy CB and another well crafted Archon post appealing to people's ethos to have any alliance screwed no matter how many holes the CB has in it.

[Heft]

What exactly is this "cold war" supposed to be? Who are the sides? What is the criteria for a "cold war?" Because right now the idea that we're in a "cold war" doesn't make any sense, so clearly I'm misunderstanding the application of the term.

[Zizka]

This situation currently isn't anything like a cold war. Neither of the sides are unified in the slightest and the main diplomatic/military powers on one of the sides aren't even that gung-ho about being a part of it. Now the period before GWII after the formation of The Initiative and The League (and to a lesser extent the period between GWII and III) that was a cold war, and a spectacular one to boot.

[August]

I feel like the closest thing we had to the Cold War was Polaris vs. Pacifica. They maintained "friendly" relations, but in the background indiscreetly built separate, rivaling spheres of influence to top one another.

Thankyou for understanding history.

[rapmanej]

This situation currently isn't anything like a cold war. Neither of the sides are unified in the slightest and the main diplomatic/military powers on one of the sides aren't even that gung-ho about being a part of it. Now the period before GWII after the formation of The Initiative and The League (and to a lesser extent the period between GWII and III) that was a cold war, and a spectacular one to boot.

That was my main point. The sides aren't unified enough. In my opinion, to be considered a "cold war" there must first be two big sides pitted against each other. I can't comment on the past wars because I've only been here for about 11 months. To put it into perspective, my first war was the NPO-Jarheads war.

[Zizka]

That was my main point. The sides aren't unified enough. In my opinion, to be considered a "cold war" there must first be two big sides pitted against each other. I can't comment on the past wars because I've only been here for about 11 months. To put it into perspective, my first war was the NPO-Jarheads war.

Karma wasn't a cold war either. For a cold war, you really need two obvious sides you actively dislike one another and make that fact eminently known on the forums but, for one reason or another refrain from attacking one another directly for the time being.

[Sin]

The cold war to me was that power was organized into two categories and that conflict was easily predicted and followed. For some time now wars have been quite complex and the prediction of a side an alliance is to take is much more challenging than say the days of Aegis and The Initiative. And I do not think that globalization is the correct term to use either. I think we are more in a power vacuum with a lot of reluctant alliances unwilling to take up the reins.

Edited January 10, 2010 by King sin

[Megabyte]

This is more World Affairs than OWF.

[Penkala]

All MK needs is a shoddy CB and another well crafted Archon post appealing to people's ethos to have any alliance screwed no matter how many holes the CB has in it.

Can Carthage be first? Pretty please?

[rapmanej]

Karma wasn't a cold war either. For a cold war, you really need two obvious sides you actively dislike one another and make that fact eminently known on the forums but, for one reason or another refrain from attacking one another directly for the time being.

I'm not sure it is possible to "win" in cybernations without conflict. IRL, you have economic and military ways of waging war, in cybernations, it seems military is the only major choice. However, one could make the argument that "my warchest is x bigger than yours" as a possible economic way of waging war. But, granted I haven't been around for long, so I haven't seen a lot of the diplomatic wars that people have been talking about.

And on another note, I posted this in OWF because I thought most of my OP was OOC.

[Vilien]

All MK needs is a shoddy CB and another well crafted Archon post appealing to people's ethos to have any alliance screwed no matter how many holes the CB has in it.

So which historical event is this post based off of?

[ratonbox]

i don't really think there is a Cold War around.. maybe just a lot of little "Cold Wars".. buy if any of them escalate.. it can get really ugly (and fun) after that.

[ChairmanHal]

Recently, I was reading a very well written thread that dealt with the political situation now occurring in cybernations.

However, I disagree with the notion that planet bob is now experiencing a cold war.

I my opinion, bob has just arrived from a cold war, and now we are entering into a phase of "globalization"

In bob's cold war, we had Hegemony vs Karma. That war is over. Now, just like irl, we have a new phase where every alliance has a greater share of power because of the leveling out of total NS. I would argue that this war was a direct correlation to the military tactic of balancing.

Now to steal from Thomas Friedman's the Lexus and the olive tree: The karma vs Hegemony war was like sumo wrestling, with one side winning, the other losing, and it being very much a bipolar battle.

Now we live in a world where the next war could be like a 100 meter dash: Where the added competition means more competitors, so no matter how much you win by, you will have to get up, and do it again the next day.

Funny how CN can translate to RL quite well at times.

I couldn't disagree more. Planet Bob experienced what amounted to a political revolution prior to the Karma War. The war, really the conclusion of that revolution, brought significant change in some interalliance relations, with the old regime shattered and Karma left basically unchallenged. As time went on after the war, Karma itself split, and you had a true multipolar world through nearly the end of 2009. The TPF War marked a major shift back toward a bipolar world and its likely that as the months progress there will be deepening of tensions between these poles and a significant Cold War will develop before flaring once again into a Great War.

It's probably a bit premature to talk about who will be on what sides, but there are some pretty obvious trends.

[The AUT]

Can Carthage be first? Pretty please?

Anything to shut that pretty mouth of your's.

[Learz]

To the OP: I'm assuming you're responding to me

I'd like to offer my opinion on a few things:

Now, just like irl, we have a new phase where every alliance has a greater share of power because of the leveling out of total NS. I would argue that this war was a direct correlation to the military tactic of balancing.

While this is true, Planet Bob has something "RL" doesn't: massive amounts of treaties. Even though military power may be relative equal across alliances, treaties mean that power is concentrated in a few areas.

The karma vs Hegemony war was like sumo wrestling, with one side winning, the other losing,

IMO, not really. There weren't any real "losers", barring NPO and TPF and such. The vast majority of alliance on both sides made it out relatively undamaged and unharmed. There really wasn't a "winner" either, except for MK who won in name/ideology/goal.

I couldn't disagree more. Planet Bob experienced what amounted to a political revolution prior to the Karma War. The war, really the conclusion of that revolution, brought significant change in some interalliance relations, with the old regime shattered and Karma left basically unchallenged. As time went on after the war, Karma itself split, and you had a true multipolar world through nearly the end of 2009. The TPF War marked a major shift back toward a bipolar world and its likely that as the months progress there will be deepening of tensions between these poles and a significant Cold War will develop before flaring once again into a Great War.

It's probably a bit premature to talk about who will be on what sides, but there are some pretty obvious trends.

I couldn't have said it better myself

Edited January 11, 2010 by Learz

[Raclaf]

This whole karma war has really change lots of things in planet bob. The existence of karma it self is now questionable. What will they do after the so called "tyrant" alliance got punished ?