Imperial Decree - New Polar

[Lord Levistus]

[quote name='Xiphosis' date='06 February 2010 - 02:27 AM' timestamp='1265441267' post='2163878']
I didn't forget, I noted it. You were given a chance to not simply repeat history, you've made a conscious choice to do so. Spinning it as just 'helping friends' went out the door when you guys chained in on IRON/TOP/TORN's offensive war.
[/quote]

Valhalla hardly "chained in"

We came in on Defense when a third party (FAN) decided to attack IRON.

[KIADO]

I cant see any war declarations ?

[scythegfx]

[quote name='bzelger' date='06 February 2010 - 12:41 AM' timestamp='1265434892' post='2163179']
This makes me very angry. Whoever made this request for aid must be packing quite a pair.
[/quote]

It is a well known fact that MK is packing one of the biggest pairs on Bob.

[Firkked]

[quote name='Sunstar' date='05 February 2010 - 11:04 PM' timestamp='1265439860' post='2163759']
Chaoshawk my friend, its reins (as in horse reins) not reigns. Pingu would be most displeased.
[/quote]

Out of all the possible ways to respond to this, what I am sure will be the all time greatest declaration in the history of the world, you choose to attack someone's spelling?

Poor form.

[quote name='CaptainImpavid' date='05 February 2010 - 11:06 PM' timestamp='1265439973' post='2163774']
some people, when they want to retire, go nuke rogue on a few nations.

some people, however, BURN DOWN THE WORLD.

/godspeed, Grub.
[/quote]

This is the best explanation for the events that have led everyone to this point.

I cannot imagine any other scenario that would even come close to this clarity.

[quote name='Xiphosis' date='05 February 2010 - 11:09 PM' timestamp='1265440191' post='2163792']
No, actually, it isn't. For one, we won against Pacifica and their "friends" (I quote for the bailout) which makes it unlike GW1. For two, we let them off [b]free[/b] and clear, the exceptions being Echelon and NPO (Echelon, you'll note, redec'd both in TPF and this - not that they can help much ).

Valhalla, NATO, CDT and countless others from the Hegemony side in Karma have all come out on the same side to oppose us since the Karma War - first in TPF and now in this. TPF was justifiable, we hit first and it's one of the reasons peace was offered so early; it felt wrong to do.

But this war isn't. You attacked without provocation, and all of you jumped in following them. It's for this you don't deserve, nor should you expect, a shred of mercy. You reoffended when you were given a chance (against my advice) and now you've validated my prediction.

Good going, enjoy the grave.
[/quote]

And now I know what to expect from my opponents.

I will be glad to spend the next decade by daily roaming the rubble that was once my nation rather than submit to any pretense of "terms" that will come our way and after the first 3 years I'll expect even mpol will be able to say that we're finally "doin it right"

[Xiphosis]

[quote name='Lord Levistus' date='05 February 2010 - 11:32 PM' timestamp='1265441577' post='2163890']
Valhalla hardly "chained in"

We came in on Defense when a third party (FAN) decided to attack IRON.
[/quote]

Your ally engaged in an offensive pre-emptive attack against an entire bloc. They were hit by that blocs immediate defense partners, hardly 'third parties' and you followed that up by jumping in.

And again, this goes back to you resigning with IRON.

[Ch33kY]

Wow, MK must have offered a really good place for the NpO in their new hegemonic empire.

And this war has become more and more ridiculous. Why are we fighting?

Edited February 6, 2010 by Ch33kY

[Urmom]

[quote name='neneko' date='06 February 2010 - 02:13 AM' timestamp='1265440391' post='2163807']
Just a quick reminder cause I'm pretty forgetful (you already saw that with the NPO deeds). What hegemonic terms have we imposed this war? Or any other war betwen this one and karma for that matter. I try to come up with the hegemonic terms we imposed but for some reason I can't recall any of them.
[/quote]
You technically haven't imposed anything yet, but it doesn't look like you will be imposing anything for a long time at least (if at all). The opinion just seems to be the general opinion of MK, ODN, Vanguard, etc etc:

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=80158&view=findpost&p=2163318
http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=80158&view=findpost&p=2163411

There's more, but I don't have time to find more. Not that Seerow is in MK's government, but Archon doesn't seem keen on giving us peace either until he is sure that we aren't a "threat". Although, he has defined us as always being a threat due to not liking him, and hasn't defined how severely our nations need to be smashed until we can't do much.

[Bob]

[quote name='Fernando12' date='06 February 2010 - 02:29 AM' timestamp='1265441359' post='2163881']
Looks like this statement above and the 2 directly below do fit together after all. If this war can be peaced out then it needs to be if TOP and co. will accept white peace. If not then you Archon and CnG are doing exactly what mhawk stated. Ignoring the possible peace that could be made and use whatever meatshields you can muster to gain victory to crush an opponent. You'd have these alliances with treaty ties to CnG get clobbered just to ensure [s]Security[/s] [s]VICTORY[/s] POWER and that is putting your long term greater interest ahead of the peace that can be had now showing you care little about the alliances that are putting their neck out for CnG.

Again, both sides can get white peace. Take it. Don't use meatshields to further your longterm political agenda and grip on power.
[/quote]
Thank you for agreeing with mhawk. I now know for sure that Archon has made the right decision.

To our allies (meatshiedls?) you know why we fight. Putting this off doesn't make it go away. They have shown a clear desire to hurt us through their actions and through their DoW. We apologize for the damage you will take, but this is coming either way from their attitude clearly shown within that DoW. It is sad, but necessary to continue this war.

[kulomascovia]

[quote name='Ch33kY' date='05 February 2010 - 11:36 PM' timestamp='1265441806' post='2163907']
Wow, MK must have offered a really good place for the NpO in their new hegemonic empire.

And this war has become more and more ridiculous. Why are we fighting?
[/quote]

I agree. Everyone except for the initial belligerents should just peace out.

[Aurion]

[quote name='kulomascovia' date='06 February 2010 - 02:37 AM' timestamp='1265441878' post='2163912']
I agree. Everyone except for the initial belligerents should just peace out.
[/quote]

I somehow doubt C&G's allies are going to leave them alone on the field.

[Bob]

[quote name='Ch33kY' date='06 February 2010 - 02:36 AM' timestamp='1265441806' post='2163907']
Wow, MK must have offered a really good place for the NpO in their new hegemonic empire.[/quote]
We wash their dishes for free :3
[quote]
And this war has become more and more ridiculous. Why are we fighting?
[/quote]
TOP and IRON declared a war on CnG because they don't like us

[quote name='Aurion' date='06 February 2010 - 02:38 AM' timestamp='1265441937' post='2163918']
I somehow doubt C&G's allies are going to leave them alone on the field.
[/quote]

I don't disagree, but I note that CnG was not a belligerent, we were just attacked for no good reason~

Edited February 6, 2010 by Penlugue Solaris

[Caliph]

[quote name='Fernando12' date='05 February 2010 - 11:29 PM' timestamp='1265441359' post='2163881']
Looks like this statement above and the 2 directly below do fit together after all. If this war can be peaced out then it needs to be if TOP and co. will accept white peace. If not then you Archon and CnG are doing exactly what mhawk stated. Ignoring the possible peace that could be made and use whatever meatshields you can muster to gain victory to crush an opponent. You'd have these alliances with treaty ties to CnG get clobbered just to ensure [s]Security[/s] [s]VICTORY[/s] POWER and that is putting your long term greater interest ahead of the peace that can be had now showing you care little about the alliances that are putting their neck out for CnG.

[/quote]
What would the long term strategic benefits be for Mushroom Kingdom and C&G to white peace with TOP/IRON/DAWN/TORN at this point in time, when TOP/IRON/DAWN/TORN attacked C&G agressively with no CB?

[R3nowned]

[quote name='Penlugue Solaris' date='06 February 2010 - 05:37 PM' timestamp='1265441875' post='2163911']
Thank you for agreeing with mhawk. I now know for sure that Archon has made the right decision.

To our allies (meatshiedls?) you know why we fight. Putting this off doesn't make it go away. They have shown a clear desire to hurt us through their actions and through their DoW. We apologize for the damage you will take, but this is coming either way from their attitude clearly shown within that DoW. It is sad, but necessary to continue this war.
[/quote]
So you will let your allies get nuked until there's nothing left of them (potentially speaking), for your own purpose of preserving power?

[Mustakrakish II]

Ah so the trap you set for them is now completed.

I wish you luck then.

[Bob]

[quote name='R3nowned' date='06 February 2010 - 02:40 AM' timestamp='1265442041' post='2163924']
So you will let your allies get nuked until there's nothing left of them (potentially speaking), for your own purpose of preserving power?
[/quote]
...to preserve our power? No, to prevent our allies and us from ending up in this situation in another month or two. They have shown a clear hostile intent, and that will not end here.

If our allies have a problem with us trying to prevent them from aggressively attacking us in the future, then they may address those complaints to us.

Edited February 6, 2010 by Penlugue Solaris

[Fernando12]

[quote name='Caliph' date='06 February 2010 - 01:39 AM' timestamp='1265441978' post='2163922']
What would the long term strategic benefits be for Mushroom Kingdom and C&G to white peace with TOP/IRON/DAWN/TORN at this point in time, when TOP/IRON/DAWN/TORN attacked C&G agressively with no CB?
[/quote]

What would the longterm strategic benefits be for the alliances not in CnG be? This statement again only addresses CnG interest and not the overall interest of [u]ALL[/u] the allies.

[R3nowned]

[quote name='Caliph' date='06 February 2010 - 05:39 PM' timestamp='1265441978' post='2163922']
What would the long term strategic benefits be for Mushroom Kingdom and C&G to white peace with TOP/IRON/DAWN/TORN at this point in time, when TOP/IRON/DAWN/TORN attacked C&G agressively with no CB?
[/quote]
Um, lets see... Moral high ground, positive PR etc etc...

also, stop saying there was no CB. It was a preemptive attack in an existing war.

[Kzoppistan]

I don't see what everybody is puzzled over. This is a perfectly reasonable declaration to make. NpO has, at least since my tenure as a nation leader, straddled the middle ground and has worked one off the other or stood aside as they destroyed each other. To remain mostly independent, you have to make sure that neither power grows stronger than you and the their opposite combined. I'm not sure why anyone would take the word of someone in that position without some concrete action first, like the cancellation of treaties. There is no way NpO wouldn't honor a treaty, as that would risk their reputation the most. The fact that Grub didn't agree to cancel or didn't cancel, should have been a warning sign.

Edited February 6, 2010 by Kzoppistan

[Gunnar Griffin]

Wow, just wow.

[Lord Levistus]

[quote name='Xiphosis' date='06 February 2010 - 02:36 AM' timestamp='1265441804' post='2163906']
Your ally engaged in an offensive pre-emptive attack against an entire bloc. They were hit by that blocs immediate defense partners, hardly 'third parties' and you followed that up by jumping in.

And again, this goes back to you resigning with IRON.
[/quote]

really?

FAN is an immediate defensive partner?

[neneko]

[quote name='Urmom(U)' date='06 February 2010 - 08:37 AM' timestamp='1265441858' post='2163910']
You technically haven't imposed anything yet, but it doesn't look like you will be imposing anything for a long time at least (if at all). The opinion just seems to be the general opinion of MK, ODN, Vanguard, etc etc:

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=80158&view=findpost&p=2163318
http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=80158&view=findpost&p=2163411

There's more, but I don't have time to find more. Not that Seerow is in MK's government, but Archon doesn't seem keen on giving us peace either until he is sure that we aren't a "threat". Although, he has defined us as always being a threat due to not liking him, and hasn't defined how severely our nations need to be smashed until we can't do much.
[/quote]
Oh noes the general population of cng is angry at the people that attacked them without a cb. Well if that isn't proof that cng is evil I don't know what is. I will be resigning from MK to join TOP post-haste.

[Bob]

[quote name='Fernando12' date='06 February 2010 - 02:43 AM' timestamp='1265442182' post='2163931']
What would the longterm strategic benefits be for the alliances not in CnG be? This statement again only addresses CnG interest and not the overall interest of [u]ALL[/u] the allies.
[/quote]
Their allies not being attacked in a few months and having to defend them again?

[quote name='R3nowned' date='06 February 2010 - 02:43 AM' timestamp='1265442196' post='2163933']
Um, lets see... Moral high ground, positive PR etc etc...

also, stop saying there was no CB. It was a preemptive attack in an existing war.
[/quote]
There was a CB. They dislike us.

And a moral high ground and positive PR do nothing for you when people are as obtuse are they are currently. Everyone finds a way to nitpick. We can either help us and our allies, or help out you and yours. I wonder who we are going to pick.

Edited February 6, 2010 by Penlugue Solaris

[The AUT]

[quote name='Ch33kY' date='06 February 2010 - 07:36 AM' timestamp='1265441806' post='2163907']
Wow, MK must have offered a really good place for the NpO in the new hegemonic empire.

And this war has become more and more ridiculous. Why are we fighting?
[/quote]

We're like the giving tree. We did everything for Polaris/NV and co. and gave them all we had. And when there is nothing left of us, they will use us as a stump to sit upon. So is CN, so cruel.

Edited February 6, 2010 by The AUT

[Arcades057]

[quote name='Seerow' date='06 February 2010 - 02:00 AM' timestamp='1265439631' post='2163738']
Now I'm really confused. Are you saying that TOP and IRON DIDN'T aggressively declare on us, or are you referring to something else I am not understanding?
[/quote]

So, wait, perhaps I'm misunderstanding you and Archon and AirMe and... well, seemingly all of the other MK'rs around here these past few days. From what I understand, and correct me if I'm wrong, but you in the Mushroom Kingdom do not support a so-called preemptive war, as you term it; that is, one side declaring on you without provocation.

Understandable. I doubt few would.

However, am I also correct in assuming that you consider this particular branch of the Cluster-you-know-what war to be an entirely new war? A war between CnG against TOP/IRON/allies? That is how I'm reading your comments.

So, if I am correct in that--meaning if the English language is still read today the way it was read last week, or three years ago, then I would have to assume that such a terrible breech of what is right in the world would ALWAYS have been against the collective consciences of MK members, being the defenders of decency and upholders of justice that you perceive yourselves now to be. I mean, it couldn't possibly be that you are NOT OK with this particular instance of a so-called preemptive war because it targeted you, right? That would sort of knock the air out of your just and noble sails.

Well, at least it would to those not drinking your particular brand of mushroom-flavored Kool-Aid.

A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, there was a Great War. We labeled it Great War III, as it was the third such war labeled "great." In that war there were two clearly defined sides; there was a pretty good CB (someone had spied on Pacifica); Pacifica attacked; her allies defended; and someone came out of the wood-work to attack two as-yet uninvolved parties). At the time there was much said about this alliance's choice of targets, but most understood that these as-yet unengaged alliances would have become engaged at the entrance of this unnamed Purple alliance (SPOILER: it was the Legion).

Funny thing is, while perusing the messages from back then found here http://z15.invisionfree.com/Cyber_Nations/index.php?showtopic=59502&st=0 I noticed a few things that stood out.

[quote]AirMe Posted: Mar 21 2007, 10:08 PM


banned member's E-Lawyer


Group: Members
Posts: 1,256
Member No.: 9,446
Joined: 12-August 06



Good luck to my friends in Legion. My best wishes and hopes are with you [/quote]

[quote]Archon Posted: Mar 21 2007, 10:09 PM


King of the Mushroom Kingdom


Group: Members
Posts: 1,226
Member No.: 15,244
Joined: 5-November 06



AVE LEGIO!

May your enemies cower in fear, and may your victory be swift[/quote]

The rest of you with eyes to see and brains and think can follow that link to the messages about those bygone days and see for yourself the thoughts of those now under attack in regards to a similar--some would say identical--situation back then.

I know that this might take a little critical thinking in most of you, but to Archon and the rest of the MK'rs: Srsly, come off it. Stop acting like you were just sitting their minding your own business. I saw your nations prepared for war with Guerrilla Camps and all, and I'm a neutral observer. TOP/IRON and the rest pulled a GWIII Legion on you. Enough with the theatrics about "we were just sitting there in Defcon 1 with full troops and Guerrilla Camps because we LIKE doing that!" and bring some honest discourse back to CN.

You know, like Karma promised?

[Adrian LaCroix]

[quote name='R3nowned' date='06 February 2010 - 02:40 AM' timestamp='1265442041' post='2163924']
So you will let your allies get nuked until there's nothing left of them (potentially speaking), for your own purpose of preserving power?
[/quote]

Just walking away from the war now simply ensures that it will resume at a later date. Their allies get nuked regardless. Why not now, rather than later?