Commonwealth Pizza Delivery Service Delivers

[Denial]

You could say we're doing even better, since we're facing (on paper) 10-1 odds. I believe that point does invalidate your rambling.

In one thread, you Sith claim that you're hot !@#$ and this conflict will be no challenge for your military might, and in the next, you complain about odds in order to excuse yourself from piss-poor military performance. You can't have it both ways.

[Corinan]

You're hilarious. First you go crying in all the other threads that there's too many alliances attacking you, and now you're in here crying that we didn't hit you as well?

Link to this supposed crying?

[TehChron]

In one thread, you Sith claim that you're hot !@#$ and this conflict will be no challenge for your military might, and in the next, you complain about odds in order to excuse yourself from piss-poor military performance. You can't have it both ways.

Wha?

Im sorry, but I believe my mouth is full from the words Im putting in it, you'll have to find another place to store your bullcrap.

[George the Great]

Fault? I dont give a damn about fault. They certainly escalated it and going nuclear is indeed an escalation. My point was directed to the assertion that STA should have made a moral stand against Polar just like our esteemed allies did. So you can keep your moral argument because I am quite frankly tired of them. They are fun to make for propaganda purposes before war but once war starts all that moral propaganda garbage means nothing. When you show people that thought you were their friends that they are nothing more then an obligation then expect them to not be so friendly to you.

You realize that saying it's \m/'s fault for escalating it is a moral argument, don't you? Just because you didn't use the word fault doesn't mean it isn't clearly implied in the bolded sentence. If you don't want to play with mine then I don't want to play with yours.

So you're basically saying that STA likes being friends with my idols, because morality means nothing to them? That's not the STA that I know, nor the STA I've grown to admire of since my time here. You can still make a moral stand contrary to their actions while defending them, they are not mutually exclusive. When you sign any treaty that involves mutual defence, then you promise to defend them regardless of stupidity (unless otherwise stipulated). It's one thing to stick by a friend that did something stupid because you promised you'd stick by them. It's another thing to stick by a friend (after all ready defending them over the stupidity) that refuses to admit what they did was stupid and doesn't regret doing it in the first place/wouldn't have qualms about doing it again.

We're willing to defend PC, but I still think the tech-raid was stupid, and I have a feeling we're going to have some sort of conversation about tech-raiding after this (since we were interrupted from having one before this).

And nothing more than an obligation? From my experience, an obligation is something that you feel toward someone/something that you actually give a crap about.

[Heft]

Okay, and?

So either GO completely imploded upon declaring war, or you're just saying dumb things. FOK has also lost much more strength than we have. Are they just that terrible at war?

In one thread, you Sith claim that you're hot !@#$ and this conflict will be no challenge for your military might, and in the next, you complain about odds in order to excuse yourself from piss-poor military performance. You can't have it both ways.

Where have we been complaining? We welcome it, it's really rather amusing. After months of your ilk loudly crying about irrelevant we are, we now have nearly half of the largest bloc at war with us. Delightful.

[Lord Brendan]

Link to this supposed crying?

Perhaps crying is the wrong word; you've merely been bringing it up constantly.

In any case I'm quite confident that those engaging you will do the job just fine without us. If you were so anxious to fight us you should have declared war when you threatened to.

[NationRuler]

Nice "no u" there. Ran out of material?

I won't debate the latter assertion, but most of us are pretty damn smart.

NO U.

Im sorry, but I believe my mouth is full from the words Im putting in it.

Why are you guys IN this thread?

[Corinan]

Where have we been complaining? We welcome it, it's really rather amusing. After months of your ilk loudly crying about irrelevant we are, we now have nearly half of the largest bloc at war with us. Delightful.

We are kinda a big deal, aren't we?

[TehChron]

NO U.

Why are you guys IN this thread?

Why are you referencing our leaders accomplishments everywhere you go?

Everything is about us, apparently. We just like to make sure everyone can share in the love that is Sith.

[HeinousOne]

What would you have Vanguard, Mushroom Kingdom and Complaints & Grievances as a whole do in this conflict?

Well, I wouldn't have you watch your supposedly close allies fight against four alliances and be wide open to more declarations because you have already publically said you will not be taking up the optional defense that you have with STA right now.

Instead you have publically come out and declared your neutrality which in turn takes out you and MK from helping us. Ever seen how many treaties we keep? Not many. You have picked up even more allies, which you had to know we would likely end up against, which makes it even more likely that we will see more of the same from you guys in the future should we remain allies.

And Heinous, you are mistaken; I am truly sorry that it had to be us, and you. Fact is, we were prepared for it, nobody else was, and somebody had to hit you. I was arguing quite a bit about this last night and made everybody go over all the other options, but really this was the lesser of many evils. Not sure what else to say. I have no words; my voice is in my nukes.

Well, what is simply is. We knew we would be hit. It was a good hit.

You realize that saying it's \m/'s fault for escalating it is a moral argument, don't you? Just because you didn't use the word fault doesn't mean it isn't clearly implied in the bolded sentence. If you don't want to play with mine then I don't want to play with yours.

So you're basically saying that STA likes being friends with my idols, because morality means nothing to them? That's not the STA that I know, nor the STA I've grown to admire of since my time here. You can still make a moral stand contrary to their actions while defending them, they are not mutually exclusive. When you sign any treaty that involves mutual defence, then you promise to defend them regardless of stupidity (unless otherwise stipulated). It's one thing to stick by a friend that did something stupid because you promised you'd stick by them. It's another thing to stick by a friend (after all ready defending them over the stupidity) that refuses to admit what they did was stupid and doesn't regret doing it in the first place/wouldn't have qualms about doing it again.

We're willing to defend PC, but I still think the tech-raid was stupid, and I have a feeling we're going to have some sort of conversation about tech-raiding after this (since we were interrupted from having one before this).

And nothing more than an obligation? From my experience, an obligation is something that you feel toward someone/something that you actually give a crap about.

I can certainly appreciate you trying to define my words for me, wait no I don't. I will define my own words ok? Thank you.

This war should have been a week long and over. I am a hardline defender of Sovereign Rights of Alliances. I also understand that actions have consequences. I have no problem with PC attacking Polar but the moment this war went nuclear the idea of it being a short week long war faded away.

As far as defining what Polar did as being stupid or not, that is your choice to decide for yourself and it is the choice of our leader's to decide for themselves. You may feel it was stupid and some others may not and then some others may not care if it was stupid or not.

An obligation is something you give a crap about? Watching something you give a crap about fight four alliances on their own does not appear to be symbolic of "giving a crap". They can not come to our aid, that is their sovereign choice but to then act as if it is out of line for STA members to no longer feel a closeness to them is in itself ignorant.

[Denial]

So either GO completely imploded upon declaring war, or you're just saying dumb things. FOK has also lost much more strength than we have. Are they just that terrible at war?

Guru Order have lost a number of members in the last couple of days.

Where have we been complaining? We welcome it, it's really rather amusing. After months of your ilk loudly crying about irrelevant we are, we now have nearly half of the largest bloc at war with us. Delightful.

GOD, RnR and a very small portion of Fark is half of what bloc, exactly? Besides, the fact that a few alliances have engaged the New Sith Order does not bequeath any relevancy (we'll ignore the fact that I have not once said the New Sith Order is irrelevant; it's a pathetic and impotent insult that's best saved for IRON members to use), rather it just shows that a number of people are tired of your deplorable actions whilst hiding behind the Polar shield.

[Denial]

Well, I wouldn't have you watch your supposedly close allies fight against four alliances and be wide open to more declarations because you have already publically said you will not be taking up the optional defense that you have with STA right now.

Okay, that's one thing that you believe we should not have done (despite the fact there has been no such public declaration from either Vanguard or Mushroom Kingdom making such a statement).

So, I'll ask again. What would you have Vanguard, Mushroom Kingdom and Complaints & Grievances as a whole do in this conflict?

[Rodger Waldie]

o/csn

go get them guys

[TehChron]

GOD, RnR and a very small portion of Fark is half of what bloc, exactly? Besides, the fact that a few alliances have engaged the New Sith Order does not bequeath any relevancy (we'll ignore the fact that I have not once said the New Sith Order is irrelevant; it's a pathetic and impotent insult that's best saved for IRON members to use), rather it just shows that a number of people are tired of your deplorable actions whilst hiding behind the Polar shield.

So GOD is just so fed up with our actions they just decided to declare on us and hope we'd slap them around a bit to get their engines started or something?

Right.

[Lord Brendan]

Well, what is simply is. We knew we would be hit. It was a good hit.

Was? Was? My good sir, I have not yet entered the fray.

Fear not my friend, you still have a few hours to surrender before I arrive.

Edited January 28, 2010 by Lord Brendan

[HeinousOne]

Okay, that's one thing that you believe we should not have done (despite the fact there has been no such public declaration from either Vanguard or Mushroom Kingdom making such a statement).

So, I'll ask again. What would you have Vanguard, Mushroom Kingdom and Complaints & Grievances as a whole do in this conflict?

I do not care what CnG does as a whole. It is of no concern of mine but the fact that two individual alliances that we hold treaties with have to run their actions by CnG first before they can aid us is a concern of mine. So really....maybe this is just the way it had to be eventually huh?

[Heft]

GOD, RnR and a very small portion of Fark is half of what bloc, exactly? Besides, the fact that a few alliances have engaged the New Sith Order does not bequeath any relevancy (we'll ignore the fact that I have not once said the New Sith Order is irrelevant; it's a pathetic and impotent insult that's best saved for IRON members to use), rather it just shows that a number of people are tired of your deplorable actions whilst hiding behind the Polar shield.

Yea, it really was wrong of us to attack that unprotected alliance just to steal their stuff and then act like immature dicks about it.

I trust that after this incident no one will ever complain about us like that again. Surely that level of insane hypocrisy would just be too much to engage in with a straight face.

[TehChron]

Yea, it really was wrong of us to attack that unprotected alliance just to steal their stuff and then act like immature dicks about it.

I trust that after this incident no one will ever complain about us like that again. Surely that level of insane hypocrisy would just be too much to engage in with a straight face.

I'm sure SCM will be able to manage it.

Edited January 28, 2010 by Chron

[Benjamin Arouet]

You just admitted your alliance is terrible and full of cowards, lol.

Damn, we've been exposed!

[Denial]

I do not care what CnG does as a whole. It is of no concern of mine but the fact that two individual alliances that we hold treaties with have to run their actions by CnG first before they can aid us is a concern of mine. So really....maybe this is just the way it had to be eventually huh?

It's the nature of a bloc. STA acted the same way whilst in Frostbite. Anyway, you're avoiding the question again. I'll make it easier for you.

What would you have Vanguard and Mushroom Kingdom do in this conflict?

[TehChron]

It's the nature of a bloc. STA acted the same way whilst in Frostbite. Anyway, you're avoiding the question again. I'll make it easier for you.

What would you have Vanguard and Mushroom Kingdom do in this conflict?

I personally would have had them suspend their treaties, turn neutral, and go into the fetal position for the duration of the conflict.

If you give up, then step away from the game, don't decide that you're gonna spite a friend just because he didnt agree with your objections.

[SirWilliam]

I do not care what CnG does as a whole. It is of no concern of mine but the fact that two individual alliances that we hold treaties with have to run their actions by CnG first before they can aid us is a concern of mine. So really....maybe this is just the way it had to be eventually huh?

Admittedly I've only been following the last few pages of this thread (so perhaps I'm missing out on the context of some things), but C&G, an MADP bloc, trumps any lesser treaties. It's never the intent of any signatories to slight any allies, but our closest allies are our closest allies, and the nature of the relationship can't exactly be ignored.

In previewing this post I see Denial has beaten me to making this point. Rats.

[Denial]

I personally would have had them suspend their treaties, turn neutral, and go into the fetal position for the duration of the conflict.

If you give up, then step away from the game, don't decide that you're gonna spite a friend just because he didnt agree with your objections.

A suggestion of neutrality from a Sith? There are many differences between C&G alliances and the New Sith Order, but one distinct similarity is that we do not do neutrality.

[Fantastico]

It's the nature of a bloc. STA acted the same way whilst in Frostbite. Anyway, you're avoiding the question again. I'll make it easier for you.

What would you have Vanguard and Mushroom Kingdom do in this conflict?

If what you are saying is membership in a bloc has made it impossible for some alliances to think for themselves, the answer seems obvious.

[HeinousOne]

It's the nature of a bloc. STA acted the same way whilst in Frostbite. Anyway, you're avoiding the question again. I'll make it easier for you.

What would you have Vanguard and Mushroom Kingdom do in this conflict?

I would have had you show us the same respect I know we would have shown you if the tables were turned and you were in our shoes. Unfortunately we are two different alliances that stand in two entirely different ideologies when it comes to treaties and this war in my opinion is showing how those two ideologies just arent working together.

Admittedly I've only been following the last few pages of this thread (so perhaps I'm missing out on the context of some things), but C&G, an MADP bloc, trumps any lesser treaties. It's never the intent of any signatories to slight any allies, but our closest allies are our closest allies, and the nature of the relationship can't exactly be ignored.

In previewing this post I see Denial has beaten me to making this point. Rats.

You think STA would have acted any differently in defending either one of you if you were in some similiar position as NpO? What you are saying is that STA is a second rate treaty to you guys because of the Charter of CnG and I am saying that just doesnt work considering how STA treats its treaty signing policies.