Commonwealth Pizza Delivery Service Delivers

[Shodemofi-NPO]

Do not confuse a sadness over the circumstances for a lack of resolve to do what is needed to win the war. We are sad it came to this. You declared on iFOK and FCO. It came down to a limited few who had conceivable connections to counter your attack. The Stickmen's other allies were already occupied elsewhere, or were not statistically viable options to counter you. Fark could have, but I would hope you agree that them doing so would be a bit overkill. So, we went with Fark to do the actual work, freeing them up for elsewhere.

That said, I hope we can all enjoy ourselves and shake hands with respect come the end of this conflict.

At that point why even have treaties? If you're just going to go in against the one you think best suited for, instead of those who actually attack your treatied allies, what's the point of having treaties? Seems to me they're more of an inconvenience for you guys than anything. Might as well just say you'll defend who you want and attack who you want.

[Jocabia]

That depends. Are you my type? Yes, I think we can.

You're in my alliance. That's kind of hotincestuous.

[SpacingOutMan]

At that point why even have treaties? If you're just going to go in against the one you think best suited for, instead of those who actually attack your treatied allies, what's the point of having treaties? Seems to me they're more of an inconvenience for you guys than anything. Might as well just say you'll defend who you want and attack who you want.

It's fairly useless to assist your allies if you can't actually help them in an effective manner. I'm more than certain STA is aware of wartime strategy. You don't waste assets that can be used to alleviate certain fronts. You can disagree with our motives as much as you want, but we were needed where we are now. Perhaps CSN isn't the prize target everyone would be more than glad to gloat about absolutely wrecking (imagine who will get the trophy for taking out TOP in the future?), but it is what it is.

[Snowbeast]

Good luck to both CSN and STA, two class alliances. CSN, put STA back where you found them when you're done.

[Jocabia]

At that point why even have treaties? If you're just going to go in against the one you think best suited for, instead of those who actually attack your treatied allies, what's the point of having treaties? Seems to me they're more of an inconvenience for you guys than anything. Might as well just say you'll defend who you want and attack who you want.

I'm not sure why it's more palatable to you that CSN be caught in the middle of a treaty issue than for Silence to be in that position? Someone was going to have a conflict that would make it so they couldn't jump in on a side. I'm not sure why you think CSN is obligated to put themselves in that position. CSN made a choice and agreed to handle the consequences. What else, other than to capitulate to doing things exactly your way, could you want?

[Prodigal Moon]

I think Goon said it best, but I'm glad to see recognition on both sides that this is pretty much a nightmare scenario for Silence. We've really tried to avoid FA clashes, but friends are friends. The sooner this is over, the better. I just wish some of the initial combatants could've drawn the line before things spiraled outwards like this.

[Shodemofi-NPO]

It's fairly useless to assist your allies if you can't actually help them in an effective manner. I'm more than certain STA is aware of wartime strategy. You don't waste assets that can be used to alleviate certain fronts. You can disagree with our motives as much as you want, but we were needed where we are now. Perhaps CSN isn't the prize target everyone would be more than glad to gloat about absolutely wrecking (imagine who will get the trophy for taking out TOP in the future?), but it is what it is.

I'm not disagreeing with your motives, I understand that you want to come in on that side, I have no issue with that. My point is that it is clear that it isn't because of treaties that you're coming in, it's because of friendships, so why say it is because of treaties, and to take it a step further, why have treaties at all? I don't mean to be attacking CSN here, I'm moving towards the opinion that any alliance having treaties is pointless.

I'm not sure why it's more palatable to you that CSN be caught in the middle of a treaty issue than for Silence to be in that position? Someone was going to have a conflict that would make it so they couldn't jump in on a side. I'm not sure why you think CSN is obligated to put themselves in that position. CSN made a choice and agreed to handle the consequences. What else, other than to capitulate to doing things exactly your way, could you want?

I don't think we're arguing over the same thing. I'm not saying that CSN shouldn't have entered, I'm saying it's clear you didn't enter over treaties, so why claim you did?

Apparently my first post wasn't very clear, sorry.

Edited January 27, 2010 by Shodemofi

[Jocabia]

I think Goon said it best, but I'm glad to see recognition on both sides that this is pretty much a nightmare scenario for Silence. We've really tried to avoid FA clashes, but friends are friends. The sooner this is over, the better. I just wish some of the initial combatants could've drawn the line before things spiraled outwards like this.

The best thing anyone could show in this situation is understanding. I hope CSN has shown understanding to the position that you're in and it's nice to hear members of Silence recognize how unpalatable our position is/was.

It's been an interesting war already. It's a bit like the American Civil War. I can practically see some of y'all sitting on blankets, eating your picnic and watching us fight our brothers.

[Penkala]

STA speaks to our treaty partners in private, as should always be done. As you are not our treaty partner, I feel comfortable in letting you know this is uncool in public, rather than saving it for private. We are, after all, at war.

It really is sad the things that have to happen because your ally could not keep his ego in check, but make no mistake, we did not choose the situation we now find ourselves in. That would be your ally, and to blame us for actions we must take as a result of his decisions is ridiculous.

[Jocabia]

I don't think we're arguing over the same thing. I'm not saying that CSN shouldn't have entered, I'm saying it's clear you didn't enter over treaties, so why claim you did?

Apparently my first post wasn't very clear, sorry.

You caught us. We're all just a bunch of dirty liars. To ourselves and to everyone else. How would we know our motives if you weren't there to tell them to us?

We really entered for the twinkies. They'll survive a nuclear war they will. Still taste the same even.

Edited January 27, 2010 by Jocabia

[Benjamin Arouet]

The fact of the matter is we entered to support our allies. We're doing that directly through supporting Fark. Was the utility of our entrance designed to help allies more indirectly than it does directly? Yah sure, but that's how these large conflicts pan out. We entered through treaties, and to support our friends, that doesn't mean we're claiming to be riding to the rescue of direct treaty partners.

Hope that made sense.

[Goose]

I'm not disagreeing with your motives, I understand that you want to come in on that side, I have no issue with that. My point is that it is clear that it isn't because of treaties that you're coming in, it's because of friendships, so why say it is because of treaties, and to take it a step further, why have treaties at all? I don't mean to be attacking CSN here, I'm moving towards the opinion that any alliance having treaties is pointless.

I don't think we're arguing over the same thing. I'm not saying that CSN shouldn't have entered, I'm saying it's clear you didn't enter over treaties, so why claim you did?

Apparently my first post wasn't very clear, sorry.

We hold treaties as a reminder to ourselves and the world at large where our friendship, loyalty, and commitment lay. While not the direct link to our entrance into the war, our treaties clearly indicate that we stand with our allies. I agree that perhaps the world needs to relax from the scrutiny of treaty wording and recognize that they are more a sign of friendship and commitment that can be honored in many different ways. But, I am not brave enough to throw off the years of precedent that surround using treaties and chains of treaties to enter conflicts.

Penkala, this is not the place for a debate on the merits of the start of this war, or controversies surrounding it. We have put Silence into an awkward position, and everyone is free to feel about that how they will. I have apologized to them in private and do so now in public for putting them in this position, and I understand that they are likely angry with us over it. I hope to work through this in the future, but pezstar may call us out on it, as it is exactly what we've done.

[SpacingOutMan]

I'm not disagreeing with your motives, I understand that you want to come in on that side, I have no issue with that. My point is that it is clear that it isn't because of treaties that you're coming in, it's because of friendships, so why say it is because of treaties, and to take it a step further, why have treaties at all? I don't mean to be attacking CSN here, I'm moving towards the opinion that any alliance having treaties is pointless.

Do not confuse us with some idiots who condone the actions of either NpO or \m/. We do not. We would rather have sat this one out, but alas it cannot. We were obligated to come into this war. Why? RnR is in SuperFriends!, which is a MADP bloc. People seem to forget this. We carry a MDoAP with GOD and a MDoAP with Farkistan, along with having a long history of being friendly with FOK. I admit, though, I'm glad some people intended to help out FOK either way because such a prestigious alliance doesn't deserve to be destroyed and wrecked over an issue such as this.

Our treaties are optional, save for the SF!, so we do have treaty-based stakes. Just clarifying this.

Just my two cents.

EDIT: So essentially, helping out our allies but joining their side in the fray.

Edited January 27, 2010 by SpacingOutMan

[Shodemofi-NPO]

You caught us. We're all just a bunch of dirty liars. To ourselves and to everyone else. How would we know our motives if you weren't there to tell them to us?

We really entered for the twinkies. They'll survive a nuclear war they will. Still taste the same even.

*sigh*

The CB outlined in the OP was that you were entering via the oA clause in your treaty with Fark. They aren't actually at war with us, they just declared to give you a CB. I can't imagine how you can claim that your entering this war against us to defend your allies, we are not fighting any of your allies. I do understand how military planning works, and I understand that's how you ended up against us. I'm not attacking you for entering the war. You entered to fight on the same side as your friends, I get that, there's nothing wrong with it. I'm just asking why you feel the need to claim this war is because of your treaty with Fark.

[Jocabia]

Do not confuse us with some idiots who condone the actions of either NpO or \m/. We do not. We would rather have sat this one out, but alas it cannot. We were obligated to come into this war. Why? RnR is in SuperFriends!, which is a MADP bloc. People seem to forget this. We carry a MDoAP with GOD and a MDoAP with Farkistan, along with having a long history of being friendly with FOK. I admit, though, I'm glad some people intended to help out FOK either way because such a prestigious alliance doesn't deserve to be destroyed and wrecked over an issue such as this.

Our treaties are optional, save for the SF!, so we do have treaty-based stakes. Just clarifying this.

Just my two cents.

Whatever, man, I did it for the twinkies. And the "hand" shaking afterward.

[Jocabia]

*sigh*

The CB outlined in the OP was that you were entering via the oA clause in your treaty with Fark. They aren't actually at war with us, they just declared to give you a CB. I can't imagine how you can claim that your entering this war against us to defend your allies, we are not fighting any of your allies. I do understand how military planning works, and I understand that's how you ended up against us. I'm not attacking you for entering the war. You entered to fight on the same side as your friends, I get that, there's nothing wrong with it. I'm just asking why you feel the need to claim this war is because of your treaty with Fark.

Now, setting aside that we both know this isn't your first war and that I'm mostly kidding, we both know that what you're saying as slowly morphed since the beginning. First, it was because we put Silence in a bad position. Then it was because we weren't really following treaties. Now it's because we are really following treaties, but not the treaties we said we were following.

Seriously, CSN, I hope you're destroyed in this war. I'm ashamed to be associated with you and you ability to morph the very laws of time and space. You're such huge liars that you what you're lied about in OP keeps changing by the minute. It's almost as if you can bend reality to make your motives for the OP and your meaning change based on what argument Shodomofi is making at the time.

Setting aside the sarcasm, honestly, I think this is where I give it up. You're not arguing a point. You're arguing. If you actually believed what you're saying it wouldn't change by the post. Say what you mean, that you're annoyed with us because of the position of Silence because you like Silence. That's fine. But stop rationalizing it. Things are what they are and the fact that your rationalizations keep changing is starting get silly. You're annoyed. Full stop.

[Shodemofi-NPO]

Now, setting aside that we both know this isn't your first war and that I'm mostly kidding, we both know that what you're saying as slowly morphed since the beginning. First, it was because we put Silence in a bad position. Then it was because we weren't really following treaties. Now it's because we are really following treaties, but not the treaties we said we were following.

Seriously, CSN, I hope you're destroyed in this war. I'm ashamed to be associated with you and you ability to morph the very laws of time and space. You're such huge liars that you what you're lied about in OP keeps changing by the minute. It's almost as if you can bend reality to make your motives for the OP and your meaning change based on what argument Shodomofi is making at the time.

Setting aside the sarcasm, honestly, I think this is where I give it up. You're not arguing a point. You're arguing. If you actually believed what you're saying it wouldn't change by the post. Say what you mean, that you're annoyed with us because of the position of Silence because you like Silence. That's fine. But stop rationalizing it. Things are what they are and the fact that your rationalizations keep changing is starting get silly. You're annoyed. Full stop.

When did I ever mention Silence?! I swear, I never had them in mind when I wrote any of my posts, I apologize if that's what it looked like, but I really never intended it. Where did you think I was talking about Silence?

I've always been saying the same thing, but perhaps it's gotten more clear as I've gone on. I do like Silence however, so I suppose we can agree on that. :/

I'll say what I said before, I really don't think we're arguing over the same thing.

Edited January 27, 2010 by Shodemofi

[Benjamin Arouet]

*sigh*

The CB outlined in the OP was that you were entering via the oA clause in your treaty with Fark. They aren't actually at war with us, they just declared to give you a CB. I can't imagine how you can claim that your entering this war against us to defend your allies, we are not fighting any of your allies. I do understand how military planning works, and I understand that's how you ended up against us. I'm not attacking you for entering the war. You entered to fight on the same side as your friends, I get that, there's nothing wrong with it. I'm just asking why you feel the need to claim this war is because of your treaty with Fark.

I think it's somewhat unfortunate that you felt the need to quote the only person who was responding who wasn't CSN .gov, but whatever. As Goose said, we understand what you're saying and to a large degree agree with it. Despite that, convention and the overriding feeling in the cyberverse dictates that we have a treaty chain to declare with, so since we had one we made use of it. Is that right? Should that be an essential requirement? I don't think so, but it's up for debate, and until the debate is resolved I feel better to include our "legal" justification.

[zzzptm]

Boo, hiss!

/me shakes fist at the CSN marauders

Remember to be careful with those nukes! They're only fun until someone loses an eye!

[Mussolandia]

When did I ever mention Silence?! I swear, I never had them in mind when I wrote any of my posts, I apologize if that's what it looked like, but I really never intended it. Where did you think I was talking about Silence?

I've always been saying the same thing, but perhaps it's gotten more clear as I've gone on. I do like Silence however, so I suppose we can agree on that. :/

I'll say what I said before, I really don't think we're arguing over the same thing.

I love how everyone's high and dandy and slapping each other's butts over this declaration when the point is this is a cowardly, dickish move to take what probably is STA's willing ally out of the picture.

Good luck to you, STA. CSN, you'll be dead in ditch with all your friends when this is over. That's more like it.

[Corinan]

I love how everyone's high and dandy and slapping each other's butts over this declaration when the point is this is a cowardly, dickish move to take what probably is STA's willing ally out of the picture.

Good luck to you, STA. CSN, you'll be dead in ditch with all your friends when this is over. That's more like it.

And not a moment too soon. I knew they would be too cowardly to attack us though. Total waste of an alliance.

[Jocabia]

When did I ever mention Silence?! I swear, I never had them in mind when I wrote any of my posts, I apologize if that's what it looked like, but I really never intended it. Where did you think I was talking about Silence?

I've always been saying the same thing, but perhaps it's gotten more clear as I've gone on. I do like Silence however, so I suppose we can agree on that. :/

I'll say what I said before, I really don't think we're arguing over the same thing.

Ope. I, uh, confused you with another poster. Look over there... Something shiny!!

EDIT: Or, rather, I quoted to the wrong poster. Your position makes a lot more sense. As I said, I was mostly jokin=g, but I do agree that are bound by legal precedent and military strategy. We did what made the most sense and had legal backing. It was driven by treaties and the OP is completely honest. Read it. It says that we were driven into war by treaties. True. It also said that the means by which we were entering against STA was what we gave. Also true. That would be my more meaningful reply to what you actually said. My original reply was intended to be to the person saying that we should have entered due to Silence.

Involved or not, my argument would be that with treaty web that exists if the existence of Silence had been a reason to hold back, then basically most of Bob would be required to hold back .

Edited January 28, 2010 by Jocabia

[GinoTheRoman]

I love how everyone's high and dandy and slapping each other's butts over this declaration when the point is this is a cowardly, dickish move to take what probably is STA's willing ally out of the picture.

Good luck to you, STA. CSN, you'll be dead in ditch with all your friends when this is over. That's more like it.

Hey look, it's Mussolandia, everyone's favourite NSO goon. Still taking marching orders from Moldavi I see?

Edited January 28, 2010 by GinoTheRoman

[jtpizzalover]

And not a moment too soon. I knew they would be too cowardly to attack us though. Total waste of an alliance.

It was considered. And before you ask,

We are totally serious.

[Goose]

I love how everyone's high and dandy and slapping each other's butts over this declaration when the point is this is a cowardly, dickish move to take what probably is STA's willing ally out of the picture.

Good luck to you, STA. CSN, you'll be dead in ditch with all your friends when this is over. That's more like it.

We have been dead in a ditch before, and are stronger for it. If that is where we end it, we shall rebuild again stronger than before.

And not a moment too soon. I knew they would be too cowardly to attack us though. Total waste of an alliance.

I'm afraid that we were not scheduled to fight you. Since you failed to fall into our trap we so carefully laid out before, we have moved on to other machinations.

Before anyone asks, I'm totally serious.