Why the war is worth fighting

[Baldr]

My alliance is fighting on the TOP side, but not for any "freedom of speech" or "freedom from speech" nonsense.

It's simply how the treaty chains work out.

Personally, and I believe this is true for many people in ML, I think this is the stupidest war I've ever seen. I don't really want to be fighting it. War is fun, but honestly I'd rather fight for a reason other than "someone distantly related via multiple treaties did something stupid".

[Bob Janova]

[quote]When did we plan this? Show me some evidence, please. I have seen nothing stating that we were going to attack them. I'd attempt to provide evidence for my side except that I have none, since [b]we aren't idiots and leak our plans[/b][/quote]
Fixed that for you. No, of course there is no evidence in the public domain, because you aren't total fools and you didn't leak the logs of the coalition planning channels – and it's possible that the counter for IRON and TOP hadn't been allocated yet, although that seems unlikely considering the competence of many people within the coalition. If I had hard evidence, I'd be in breach of confidence by posting it anyway. But there not being any publically admissible hard evidence of you being slated to be the TOP/IRON counter doesn't mean it's not true, and considering that C&G was the only major undeployed group of alliances in the coalition that could reasonably challenge TOP, and that the rumour mill was leaking that during at least the day before TOP declared, you'd really need to explain who was supposed to be countering TOP and IRON without C&G getting involved to make a convincing case.

[quote]I remember the time NPO was attacked and people complained that they kept attacking them after less than a week[/quote]
There's a fundamental difference. NPO started a war. TOP and IRON entered an existing war.

[Lord Brendan]

Even if C&G was prepared to counter TOP, that proves nothing except that they honor their treaties.

"If we attack your treaty partners you'll attack us, so we are justified in attacking you" is a pretty absurd argument.

[Itsuki Koizumi]

I'm fighting in this war for fun and lulz, nothing more. I don't care about much else, i fight because i want some cheap lulz.

[Arcturus Jefferson]

[quote name='The Warrior' date='09 February 2010 - 04:45 PM' timestamp='1265751959' post='2171205']
I cannot speak on behalf of the entire alliance of IRON since I am not gov, but do I feel that if the roles were reversed, IRON would grant white peace?

[b]Yes.[/b]

I think that by the time this conflict does draw to a close all of the major parties will have sustained enough damage and we should all move on with our lives. There is truly only one way for that to happen though, and i think you all know what it is.
[/quote]
Like when IRON gave GPA white peace.

[ChairmanHal]

[quote name='Vilien' date='09 February 2010 - 06:31 PM' timestamp='1265758299' post='2171401']
Thanks for letting us know that this war is really about freedom, motherhood, and apple pie, James. I would have never guessed otherwise.
[/quote]

Maybe the pie...dutch apple pie is certainly worth fighting over.

[Caliph]

[quote name='Arcturus Jefferson' date='09 February 2010 - 06:07 PM' timestamp='1265767650' post='2171636']
Like when IRON gave GPA white peace.
[/quote]
Careful now with that [i]ancient history[/i], I thought the Karma was absolved them of all prior wrong doings?

[Mack Truck]

[quote name='Buds The Man' date='10 February 2010 - 04:00 AM' timestamp='1265738440' post='2170823']
Im not the log dumping kind of guy but I know for a FACT by admission from a CnG govt member they were set to counter IRON/TOP where ever they entered. That is why they were in PM. If that doesnt make them part of the coalition I dont know what else does. TOP/IRON werent even involved yet and were being targeted. It didnt matter where they came in with GODs blanket DOW it would have chained back to CnG. Now CnGs motto is take one of us take us all no one stands alone. They are very adimant about that so why would anyone think any different so by Declaring on all of CnG it just saves time. CnG placed them selves in this war and were waiting for TOP/IRON. They were just beaten to the punch.
[/quote]

Probably the stupidest argument that's been popping up this war.

How is us being in peace mode and waiting for TOP/IRON to attack a treaty partner of ours the same as them aggressively attacking us? Was Fark "just as bad" as IRON last war when they counter-blitzed them? TORN for doing the same against GR in the NoCB War (from memory they did so)? Knowing that an ally is about to be attacked and preparing to defend them [b]after they have been attacked[/b] in the most effective, and still legally justifiable, way isn't the same as preemptively attacking someone.

[quote name='Methrage' date='10 February 2010 - 02:10 AM' timestamp='1265731812' post='2170657']
I don't see how many ways a comment like this from CnG can be interpreted ([url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=79315"]First Post in Nemesis DoW where the CB given is defense of SLCB, but they are doing it for Vanguard?[/url]),


Or comments like these from CnG stating they are on the opposite side well before the DoW by TOP([url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=79327"]UPN & INVICTA DoW on R&R[/url]),


Although CnG will of course spin this to make themselves out to be the victim and some will believe it as long as its repeated. Although when coupled with GOD's delcaration of war stating this was a coalition war,

[/quote]

I guess those NPO members who posted in the DoW threads supporting their former allies have put their alliance in danger by establishing that they are on the same side as TOP/IRON?

[Mack Truck]

[quote name='Methrage' date='10 February 2010 - 02:39 AM' timestamp='1265733551' post='2170700']
That was showing they had chosen a side and were in a coalition. I can respect that GOD was upfront about it and just declared, what I'm tired of is revisionism by some that CnG was neutral and an innocent victim. I know MK isn't stupid and doesn't march into war blindly, in order to win alliances coordinate and declare where needed. TOP/IRON just decided to skip to it rather than fiddle around with treaties to justify something that was going to happen anyways.
[/quote]

There's a difference between pointing out the flaws in reasoning that keep coming from apologists for TOP/IRON and acting like victims. Painting us as one and the same is obviously false since we didn't behave the same, so people should stop saying it. We weren't going to preemptively attack them while they did preemptively attack us. I don't think what they did is bad but I do think it's less justifiable that entering a war to defend an ally, which is what we would have done.

[The Warrior]

[quote name='Arcturus Jefferson' date='10 February 2010 - 02:07 AM' timestamp='1265767650' post='2171636']
Like when IRON gave GPA white peace.
[/quote]

So what you are saying is that IRON is exactly the same as it was back then? We clearly must believe the [i]exact[/i]same things. That assertion is absolutely false.

[quote name='Caliph' date='10 February 2010 - 04:15 AM' timestamp='1265775331' post='2171852']
Careful now with that [i]ancient history[/i]
[/quote]

Ancient history is ancient history.

[shahenshah]

[quote name='Arcturus Jefferson' date='10 February 2010 - 07:07 AM' timestamp='1265767650' post='2171636']
Like when IRON gave GPA white peace.
[/quote]

Its been ~2 years since then, the last time that IRON took reps. Tell us about RoK, reps and viceroys.

[Tautology]

[quote name='shahenshah' date='10 February 2010 - 10:19 AM' timestamp='1265797170' post='2172395']
Tell us about RoK, reps and viceroys.[/quote]
[b]RoK[/b] is a Norse mythology-themed Aqua alliance that is justly proud of its undefeated war record. We follow the selfless principle of "RoK > Rokkers > Self"
IRON gave us [b]reps[/b] after their surrender in the Karma War. They were delicious, and they certainly didn't leave a bitter taste in our mouths.
Hoo was appointed [b]viceroy[/b] of The Illuminati by the leaders of the coalition that defeated them.

Thanks for asking.

[ChairmanHal]

[quote name='Mack Truck' date='09 February 2010 - 11:29 PM' timestamp='1265776171' post='2171891']
Probably the stupidest argument that's been popping up this war.

How is us being in peace mode and waiting for TOP/IRON to attack a treaty partner of ours the same as them aggressively attacking us? Was Fark "just as bad" as IRON last war when they counter-blitzed them? TORN for doing the same against GR in the NoCB War (from memory they did so)? Knowing that an ally is about to be attacked and preparing to defend them [b]after they have been attacked[/b] in the most effective, and still legally justifiable, way isn't the same as preemptively attacking someone.[/quote]

You do have a point...I thought we already established in the Karma War that your preferred tactic is to set bait forth (even if they don't know they are bait) in hope the fish will bite, so that you can then scream in faux moral outrage on these forums and then unleash the dogs of war at a time and place of your choosing.

If IRON and TOP cut to the chase, then that was their call. Not necessarily the call I would have made with all due respect to them, but then I tend to play things a bit more conservative that way.

Actually if logs exist of C&G planning an offensive against IRON and TOP, those should really see the light of day on the OWF so we can stop a lot of the "did they or didn't they?" crap.

[quote]I guess those NPO members who posted in the DoW threads supporting their former allies have put their alliance in danger by establishing that they are on the same side as TOP/IRON?
[/quote]

Why? They are still "properly" caged. The caged bird may sing as it pleases.

[Timmmehhh]

[quote name='The Warrior' date='09 February 2010 - 10:45 PM' timestamp='1265751959' post='2171205']
I cannot speak on behalf of the entire alliance of IRON since I am not gov, but do I feel that if the roles were reversed, IRON would grant white peace?

[b]Yes.[/b]

I think that by the time this conflict does draw to a close all of the major parties will have sustained enough damage and we should all move on with our lives. There is truly only one way for that to happen though, and i think you all know what it is.
[/quote]
But if they weren't giving enough damage you would keep them in war for over a year like you did with FAN?

[Bob Janova]

[quote]I don't think what they did is bad[/quote]
Then we are not arguing with you. Nobody thinks the pre-emptive strike was a clever move (in retrospect certainly), but nor is it justification for demonising TOP or saying you'll not give them peace as some of your bloc mates are doing.

[Jerichoholic]

[quote name='Methrage' date='09 February 2010 - 11:39 AM' timestamp='1265733551' post='2170700']
That was showing they had chosen a side and were in a coalition. I can respect that GOD was upfront about it and just declared, what I'm tired of is revisionism by some that CnG was neutral and an innocent victim. I know MK isn't stupid and doesn't march into war blindly, in order to win alliances coordinate and declare where needed. TOP/IRON just decided to skip to it rather than fiddle around with treaties to justify something that was going to happen anyways.
[/quote]
You can fight on the same side and not be in the coalition. See: TOP during Karma

[quote name='Buds The Man' date='09 February 2010 - 01:00 PM' timestamp='1265738440' post='2170823']
IF C&G win there handling of the peace will truly state whether the KARMA war was just or was it simply an oppurtunity to take out NPO and the rest was simple propoganda. Time will only tell.
C&G was a threat to the coalition that TOP/IRON were in.
[/quote]
How so? Even if they were preparing for an attack on one of their allies (I'm not in CnG so I don't know), that doesn't justify attacking them. Since when is simply being allied to somebody you are going to attack a CB?

[quote name='Buds The Man' date='09 February 2010 - 01:00 PM' timestamp='1265738440' post='2170823']
Im not the log dumping kind of guy but I know for a FACT by admission from a CnG govt member they were set to counter IRON/TOP where ever they entered. That is why they were in PM. If that doesnt make them part of the coalition I dont know what else does. TOP/IRON werent even involved yet and were being targeted. It didnt matter where they came in with GODs blanket DOW it would have chained back to CnG. Now CnGs motto is take one of us take us all no one stands alone. They are very adimant about that so why would anyone think any different so by Declaring on all of CnG it just saves time. CnG placed them selves in this war and were waiting for TOP/IRON. They were just beaten to the punch.
[/quote]
This argument is completely without merit if you aren't going to provide proof. Anybody can say "I know for a FACT by admission from a <insert alliance A here> govt member that they are going to DOW on <insert alliance B/bloc here>", it doesn't mean it's true.
[quote name='Buds The Man' date='09 February 2010 - 01:00 PM' timestamp='1265738440' post='2170823']
Sure it could have but it still doesnt change the fact that CnG had alliances waiting for TOP/IRON to enter the war.

NOPE TOP/IRON went out in a coalition effort. As soon as peace was signed all that had to be done was an offer of WP and walk away. No real damage had been done yet everyone could have gone home. I didnt see any offers from the other side, they wanted this war, and by Archons request that as soon as these forces enter to take the peace they got exactly what they wanted. NO im not saying all this was a plot to take out IRON/TOP what I am saying is there came an oppurtunity and it was utilized brilliantly by C&G. I can do naught but tip my hat to them.
[/quote]
So what you're saying is that a bloc which had none of its members fighting in the war was part of a coalition? Your attack was simply to try and destroy a bloc because of mutual dislike. DITT didn't do it to protect their ally or the coalition, otherwise they would have attacked alliances already involved. Hell, you didn't even bother to attack the bloc that already had 3 members involved in wars against your "coalition"

Edited February 10, 2010 by Jerichoholic

[Cataduanes]

[quote name='Bob Janova' date='10 February 2010 - 01:01 PM' timestamp='1265806865' post='2172499']
Then we are not arguing with you. Nobody thinks the pre-emptive strike was a clever move (in retrospect certainly), but nor is it justification for demonising TOP or saying you'll not give them peace as some of your bloc mates are doing.
[/quote]
Not only not clever but unwarranted surely , since when have pre-emptive strikes been an acceptable option in CN?

[Drostan]

Why the war is worth fighting: so that not only the most powerful alliances on Planet Bob can make up the rules as they go with impunity. It's funny, that sounds like another war that happened fairly recently.

Whether both CnG and TOP were sizing each other up in private is more or less irrelevant the moment one side declares a broad spectrum war with no reason nor attempt at diplomacy. At that point, you're the bad guy, and you know it.

I don't understand why anyone thinks white peace is acceptable here (except for TOP due to the major monetary advantage they have). Why should those who were attacked out of nowhere feel a spirit of magnanimity towards their aggressors? If CnG manages to come out on top of this war, I fully expect there to be reparations and will be honestly dismayed if there are not.

It is clear that we are living in a time of much upheaval and conventions are being challenged. War is the means of negotiation. I can only hope that TOP will not emerge victorious because of the dangerous precedent it will set. If you start wielding too much power, expect a knock on you and yours' doors one night and not even the trouble of a justification. Don't be fooled, this war is about what most wars are about: what can the big guy(s) get away with?

EDIT: I just figured I'd put forth one more troubling piece of information: the war that CnG was apparently baiting TOP into was over that same night. CnG must have known Polar was trying for peace, and so... You really have to shove that tinfoil hat on tight to make that justification work.

MAYBE CnG HEARD LEAKED STUFF THAT TOP PLANNED TO ATTACK ONE OF THEIR TREATY PARTNERS AND SO PREPARED TO COUNTER IF/WHEN THAT HAPPENED?

For shame?

Edited February 10, 2010 by Drostan

[avernite]

[quote name='Cataduanes' date='10 February 2010 - 03:24 PM' timestamp='1265811872' post='2172556']
Not only not clever but unwarranted surely , since when have pre-emptive strikes been an acceptable option in CN?
[/quote]

Since forever, notable examples being the first Polar War if I heard it right, in some sense GW1, GOONS-Fark (IE GW2), Legion in GW3, WoTC...

[Arcturus Jefferson]

[quote name='The Warrior' date='10 February 2010 - 01:23 AM' timestamp='1265782995' post='2172166']
So what you are saying is that IRON is exactly the same as it was back then? We clearly must believe the [i]exact[/i]same things. That assertion is absolutely false.
[/quote]
You never really payed for your sins. Here's hoping someone makes you this round.

[quote name='Shahenshah']Its been ~2 years since then, the last time that IRON took reps. Tell us about RoK, reps and viceroys. [/quote]
Actually, there was also the time you beat up GATO and [url=http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=28756]GATO gave them a viceroy[/url] - July 21 2008
Or that time in the Coalition War where you [url=http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=32556]took reps from Nueva Vida[/url] - August 23 2008

In contrast, the Illuminati War [url=http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=18394]ended March 28[/url].

So you're memory is faulty, Shah. You've given terms out more recently than RoK (overlooking the K-war, of course, which really wasn't finished satisfactorily). And no one's going to buy that you'd have given Karma white peace or anyone in the current war white peace - you've never done it before when you were helping the NPO with their beatdowns. But you can keep playing the world's most independent violin.

[Cataduanes]

[quote name='avernite' date='10 February 2010 - 03:41 PM' timestamp='1265816472' post='2172646']
Since forever, notable examples being the first Polar War if I heard it right, in some sense GW1, GOONS-Fark (IE GW2), Legion in GW3, WoTC...
[/quote]
Well i never , it must be all CnG's fault then....damn you CnG!.

[The Warrior]

[quote name='Arcturus Jefferson' date='10 February 2010 - 03:50 PM' timestamp='1265817036' post='2172658']
You never really payed for your sins. Here's hoping someone makes you this round.

So you're memory is faulty, Shah. You've given terms out more recently than RoK (overlooking the K-war, of course, which really wasn't finished satisfactorily). And no one's going to buy that you'd have given Karma white peace or anyone in the current war white peace - you've never done it before when you were helping the NPO with their beatdowns. But you can keep playing the world's most independent violin.
[/quote]

You cannot just [i]overlook[/i] the Karma War. There is your retribution. In fact I believe that is what that whole war was about. By the time IRON left the Karma War we were subjected to some of the largest reparations, if not the largest, up to that point in cybernations history. Then of course once NPO left the war they were, but that's a different story.

IRON is not the same as it was in your examples. We do not believe in collecting reps and therefore we wouldn't and won't.

Edited February 10, 2010 by The Warrior

[Epik High]

Does anyone really care about this freedom TO and freedom FROM bullcrap? Oh yeah I bet CnG is fighting to eliminate alliance sovereignty--or TOP is fighting to crush freedom of speech.

[Heft]

[quote name='Arcturus Jefferson' date='10 February 2010 - 09:50 AM' timestamp='1265817036' post='2172658']
Actually, there was also the time you beat up GATO and [url=http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=28756]GATO gave them a viceroy[/url] - July 21 2008
Or that time in the Coalition War where you [url=http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=32556]took reps from Nueva Vida[/url] - August 23 2008
[/quote]
Reps were given to NV at the request of PC and possibly RoK (they certainly didn't object). Both MHA and IRON waived their portions of the reps after peace was signed. I don't honestly know if RoK or PC did or didn't, as I didn't care to follow up with either of them.

[Banksy]

[quote name='Drostan' date='11 February 2010 - 03:37 AM' timestamp='1265816227' post='2172640']
EDIT: I just figured I'd put forth one more troubling piece of information: the war that CnG was apparently baiting TOP into was over that same night. CnG must have known Polar was trying for peace, and so... You really have to shove that tinfoil hat on tight to make that justification work.

MAYBE CnG HEARD LEAKED STUFF THAT TOP PLANNED TO ATTACK ONE OF THEIR TREATY PARTNERS AND SO PREPARED TO COUNTER IF/WHEN THAT HAPPENED?

For shame?
[/quote]

Certain members of C&G alliances have a bad habit of baiting EVERYONE into a war