HurricaneLOL Posted January 16, 2010 Report Share Posted January 16, 2010 (edited) not sure you should ................ but it appears to be worthless unless you intend to follow it.............unless the OP has his summary incorrect ........ if so please enlighten me. Also, charters are just a piece of paper meant to be molded to your will. Being an ex-unjust member, I know this first-hand. Honestly, I can no longer support tech raiding, however. Hopefully you'll get what's coming. Edited January 16, 2010 by HurricaneLOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doitzel Posted January 16, 2010 Report Share Posted January 16, 2010 Actually, I'll most likely be seeing them first. I'll have nukes again soon. FAIL will have a glorious return. I have nukes already. Poser. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LiquidMercury Posted January 16, 2010 Report Share Posted January 16, 2010 o/ \m/ for tech-raiding some unaligned people and causing people to cry themselves to sleep in fear of the big bad tech raiders. Except, you know, they're not unaligned.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penkala Posted January 16, 2010 Report Share Posted January 16, 2010 (edited) That looks more like a war on FOA, not a tech raid.What did FOA do wrong, except not having the strength to defend themselves? If nothing, then it seems we're back to the good old days of might makes right. At least Karma gave us a 6-month reprieve from the antics your allies invented, eh? \m/ will conduct our business as we see fit, and I kindly invite you to choke upon a cucumber if you feel what you say has any impact upon our decision making. I, nor anyone else in \m/, are obligated to provide you with an explanation regarding anything we do. Ever. You know, Marx, you really don't have the firepower to back that up. It'd be a shame if you instead relied on RoK to allow you to say things like that and RoK realized that and decided they'd had enough, wouldn't it? FREE \M/ FROM THIS TYRANNY Please stop making it hard for those of us who seriously don't like these acts to defend FoA. Take your political cheap shots elsewhere. Edited January 16, 2010 by Penkala Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurricaneLOL Posted January 16, 2010 Report Share Posted January 16, 2010 Except, you know, they're not unaligned.... Semantics, unaligned/untreatied at the time. (OOC: It's 5:30am, give me a break) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Janova Posted January 16, 2010 Report Share Posted January 16, 2010 Looks like you guys learnt nothing from the KoN incident, huh? I hope someone 'tech raids' you right out of existence again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LiquidMercury Posted January 16, 2010 Report Share Posted January 16, 2010 Semantics, unaligned/untreatied at the time.(OOC: It's 5:30am, give me a break) And as I said prior, it was a poor semantics argument in the first place. [ooc: No break for you, I just worked 13 hours over night and still haven't gone to bed, 8:40 AM here and I woke up yesterday at 11:20 AM.] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Groucho Marx Posted January 16, 2010 Report Share Posted January 16, 2010 You know, I thought \m/ might actually have a shot at building themselves a future different from their past with Aros, CSM, et al over there. Silly me. Looks like you're going to follow GOONS over the cliff again.Be seeing you. Oh thank god, I thought we were doing this wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o-dog Posted January 16, 2010 Report Share Posted January 16, 2010 (edited) At least Karma gave us a 6-month reprieve from the antics your allies invented, eh? CDT invented mass tech raiding of alliances? News to me, or are you talking about another UCN treaty partner, other than our CDT partners? If so, please enlighten me. You do seem to have a skewed opinion of UCN. If you want to carry on this conversation, let us do it away from this thread, as it is quite clearly off-topic. Edited January 16, 2010 by O-Dog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doitzel Posted January 16, 2010 Report Share Posted January 16, 2010 Oh thank god, I thought we were doing this wrong. Yeah, yeah, we get it. Tough guy sticking it to the moralist MAN. Tough guy that folds in a week when held to his own standards. You're in over your head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ch33kY Posted January 16, 2010 Report Share Posted January 16, 2010 (edited) \m/ has never cared for anything other than sheer wanton aggression in CN. They have no shame. They will ravage a 33 member alliance just for fun. That's how they roll. Edited January 16, 2010 by Ch33kY Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penkala Posted January 16, 2010 Report Share Posted January 16, 2010 (edited) CDT invented mass tech raiding of alliances? News to me, or are you talking about another UCN treaty partner, other than our CDT partners? If so, please enlighten me. You do seem to have a skewed opinion of UCN.If you want to carry on this conversation, let us do it away from this thread, as it is quite clearly off-topic. No, I was talking about those CDT stood behind and continue to stand behind. Those who would curbstomp any alliance they had to in order to avoid losing any political clout. You really have no basis to be outraged at 'might makes right'. Edited January 16, 2010 by Penkala Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
der_ko Posted January 16, 2010 Report Share Posted January 16, 2010 Looks like you guys learnt nothing from the KoN incident, huh? I hope someone 'tech raids' you right out of existence again. If you consider this a valid cb on \m/, GOONS and PC then you are almost as liberal about war as they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Janova Posted January 16, 2010 Report Share Posted January 16, 2010 Not really. Those alliances are clearly showing themselves to be a danger to global security – unlike the alliance that they raided. If you imprison a kidnapper, does that make you as bad as him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corinan Posted January 16, 2010 Report Share Posted January 16, 2010 You're doing it wrong, \m/. You're not as good as playing the villain as we are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o-dog Posted January 16, 2010 Report Share Posted January 16, 2010 You really have no basis to be outraged at 'might makes right'. My alliance has never advocated a 'might makes right' philosophy, nor do our treaty partners. We do however, honour our treaties. Back on topic - Personally, If, for no justifiable reason, an ally of UCN waged war on an alliance that could not hope to defend themselves , I would campaign for the cancellation of our treaty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
der_ko Posted January 16, 2010 Report Share Posted January 16, 2010 Not really. Those alliances are clearly showing themselves to be a danger to global security – unlike the alliance that they raided. If you imprison a kidnapper, does that make you as bad as him? No, they are not a danger to global security. If the victim had any sort of connections then I'd agree they'd pose somewhat of a danger. While I don't much care for raiding alliances I find it hard to get worked up about this. The only difference here from the commonly accepted raiding practices is the number of nations under their A/A. It's rather silly to get outraged when someone raids a 10+ A/A and at the same time be fine with raiding a 10- A/A. Either you support raiding or you don't, there is no middle ground here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corinan Posted January 16, 2010 Report Share Posted January 16, 2010 (edited) Either you support raiding or you don't, there is no middle ground here. Now now, only the Sith deal in absolutes. The Sith or the new Hegemony, that is. Edited January 16, 2010 by Corinan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astronaut jones Posted January 16, 2010 Report Share Posted January 16, 2010 You're doing it wrong, \m/. You're not as good as playing the villain as we are. \m/ is very good at playing the village idiot, however. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Janova Posted January 16, 2010 Report Share Posted January 16, 2010 If the victim had any sort of connections then I'd agree they'd pose somewhat of a danger So what you're saying is that for such alliances, any alliance that has insufficient 'connections' can have no guarantee of peaceful security. That is a threat to global security. Just because we can sit in our comfortable, protected alliances today does not mean that the world is secure. Such attitudes lead the the acceptance of acts like the Viridicide. I do not support raiding of alliances in any form, and those who attempt to push the boundaries of common consensus further towards acceptance of unprovoked war against alliances should be stopped from doing so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haflinger Posted January 16, 2010 Report Share Posted January 16, 2010 No, they are not a danger to global security. If the victim had any sort of connections then I'd agree they'd pose somewhat of a danger. While I don't much care for raiding alliances I find it hard to get worked up about this. The only difference here from the commonly accepted raiding practices is the number of nations under their A/A. It's rather silly to get outraged when someone raids a 10+ A/A and at the same time be fine with raiding a 10- A/A. Either you support raiding or you don't, there is no middle ground here. It's pretty hilarious to see a member of the Mushroom Kingdom now defending the practice of attacking people because they're politically isolated. Seems to me some people have forgotten their own history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
der_ko Posted January 16, 2010 Report Share Posted January 16, 2010 So what you're saying is that for such alliances, any alliance that has insufficient 'connections' can have no guarantee of peaceful security. That is a threat to global security. Just because we can sit in our comfortable, protected alliances today does not mean that the world is secure. Such attitudes lead the the acceptance of acts like the Viridicide.I do not support raiding of alliances in any form, and those who attempt to push the boundaries of common consensus further towards acceptance of unprovoked war against alliances should be stopped from doing so. Since the dawn of time, yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astronaut jones Posted January 16, 2010 Report Share Posted January 16, 2010 It's pretty hilarious to see a member of the Mushroom Kingdom now defending the practice of attacking people because they're politically isolated.Seems to me some people have forgotten their own history. It's also hilarious that they're defending the attacking of this alliance, when it clearly breaks \m/'s charter to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corinan Posted January 16, 2010 Report Share Posted January 16, 2010 It's pretty hilarious to see a member of the Mushroom Kingdom now defending the practice of attacking people because they're politically isolated.Seems to me some people have forgotten their own history. Power will do that to a person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
energizer Posted January 16, 2010 Report Share Posted January 16, 2010 Jesus, what is with people and raiding? I mean seriously.... If people REALLY had a problem with it, they would adopt doctrines like NPO did on their sphere. Of course your alliance would be targeted and such thereby starting a war, but hey! At least you would have actually DONE Something about it, and not chanting "no u!" on the OWF. Raids are just like capitalism. We're just out looking to get our piece in the pie (and we REALLY like pie). That said, good job guys (\m/,GOONS, PC), it certainly gave us SOMETHING to do after this whole "blue ball" war nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts