Why the war is worth fighting

[Sephiroth]

Members of C&G have already admitted on OWF they saw TOP as an enemy before this war began, so to claim TOP had nothing to worry about from C&G before they delcared is just propaganda. If you guys actually wanted to show TOP they don't need to worry about you guys you would give white peace, but instead you would rather continue the failed policy of keeping former enemies down that ended badly for NPO. Karma gets everyone eventually I suppose.

[Moridin]

Can we please not pretend this war is at all about ideology or freedom or any of that, except to the extent that it started as a war about tech raiding? This is a war where there are two sides fighting for dominance, it's not TOP wanting to infringe on your free speech or C&G valiantly fighting for the oppressed. Maybe if the winning side does curbstomps on alliances it doesn't like for the next year you can have a nice war about helping out the little man, but this is not it.

[Kzoppistan]

[quote name='James Dahl' date='09 February 2010 - 01:26 AM' timestamp='1265693187' post='2169967']
Let me ask you something, if SF went collectively insane and attacked TOP and IRON "pre-emptively", what terms would you offer us?
[/quote]

I'd want that dope $@! gold chain that's hanging around your cactutronsformer

Edited February 9, 2010 by Kzoppistan

[Heft]

Are these your OOC opinions?

Because arguing crap about freedom and ideology for CN alliances and nations OOC is pretty bad.

If the war is "worth fighting" in an OOC thread it's because the war is crazy insane and gives people a reason to pay attention and be engaged.

[Caliph]

[quote name='Methrage' date='08 February 2010 - 10:26 PM' timestamp='1265696795' post='2170150']
Members of C&G have already admitted on OWF they saw TOP as an enemy before this war began, so to claim TOP had nothing to worry about from C&G before they delcared is just propaganda. If you guys actually wanted to show TOP they don't need to worry about you guys you would give white peace, but instead you would rather continue the failed policy of keeping former enemies down that ended badly for NPO. Karma gets everyone eventually I suppose.
[/quote]
So someone attacks you because they believe you are a threat, and to get out of it you say "oh please stop attacking me I will white peace with you"?

I am seriously baffled as to the logic of that viewpoint.

It is essentially letting anyone walk up to your randomly, beat you for a while, then to show you pose no threat let them get away with it with no reprocussions.

There is no keeping enemies down here, it is about fighting a front that was started by TOP/TORN/IRON/DAWN because they believed C&G to pose a threat to them, and now you say that to prove TOP and friends were wrong C&G should just white peace with TOP and friends?

If this is the best you can do for propoganda, please stop trying.

This war continues because both TOP and C&G want it to. It is true members of both sides have viewed each other as threats. But the fact is TOP/IRON/TORN/DAWN declared first and drew first blood in an oppurtunistic strike. Now that the sides have aligned themselves to give the advantage to C&G your side is wanting to white peace to prove C&G posed no threat?

I am utterly baffled as to why anyone would take your advise.

Edited February 9, 2010 by Caliph

[Sephiroth]

I suppose from an OOC perspective trying to get harsh reps out of an alliance can cause grudges that can make for interesting future wars. Anyways I would be disappointed if it ended to quickly, maybe after blowing stuff for a while more alliances will get it out of their system.

[junkahoolik]

[quote name='Caliph' date='09 February 2010 - 08:58 AM' timestamp='1265698681' post='2170204']
So someone attacks you because they believe you are a threat, and to get out of it you say "oh please stop attacking me I will white peace with you"?

I am seriously baffled as to the logic of that viewpoint.

It is essentially letting anyone walk up to your randomly, beat you for a while, then to show you pose no threat let them get away with it with no reprocussions.

There is no keeping enemies down here, it is about fighting a front that was started by TOP/TORN/IRON/DAWN because they believed C&G to pose a threat to them, and now you say that to prove TOP and friends were wrong C&G should just white peace with TOP and friends?

If this is the best you can do for propoganda, please stop trying.

This war continues because both TOP and C&G want it to. It is true members of both sides have viewed each other as threats. But the fact is TOP/IRON/TORN/DAWN declared first and drew first blood in an oppurtunistic strike. Now that the sides have aligned themselves to give the advantage to C&G your side is wanting to white peace to prove C&G posed no threat?

I am utterly baffled as to why anyone would take your advise.
[/quote]

no, not really... we would like for CnG members and allies to stop acting like they are the victims in this whole mess.

[Caliph]

[quote name='junkahoolik' date='08 February 2010 - 11:04 PM' timestamp='1265699074' post='2170215']
no, not really... we would like for CnG members and allies to stop acting like they are the victims in this whole mess.
[/quote]
C&G are the ones who were attacked, and thus [b]defending[/b] against, TOP/IRON/DAWN/TORN, correct?
It was TOP/IRON/DAWN/TORN who declared war on C&G without any C&G declaring war on TOP/IRON/DAWN/TORN first, correct?

Now I can't speak for C&G, but it would sure seem to me by these facts that if anyone is a 'victim' in this war, it is C&G.
Although I am pretty sure C&G, like TOP, is having much fun in this war, and I am very sure this war is not ending in white peace any time soon between C&G and TOP/IRON/DAWN/TORN.

[Stetson76]

[quote name='Caliph' date='09 February 2010 - 12:58 AM' timestamp='1265698681' post='2170204']
It is essentially letting anyone walk up to your randomly, beat you for a while, then to show you pose no threat let them get away with it with no reprocussions.
[/quote]

Now where have I heard this before? Oh right "Tech Raid, PM for peace".

You guys crack me up.

[Bjornoya]

Pfft, there can be no freedom without responsibility. This world is becoming void of responsibility...

[Caliph]

[quote name='Stetson' date='08 February 2010 - 11:18 PM' timestamp='1265699939' post='2170230']
Now where have I heard this before? Oh right "Tech Raid, PM for peace".

You guys crack me up.
[/quote]
So you are saying that TOP/IRON/DAWN/TORN is tech raiding C&G?

[Sephiroth]

[quote name='Caliph' date='09 February 2010 - 02:33 AM' timestamp='1265700801' post='2170251']
So you are saying that TOP/IRON/DAWN/TORN is tech raiding C&G?
[/quote]
Tech raiding is an aggressive war, so under your arguments the raid victim should get reps or keep the war going as long as possible.

[Caliph]

[quote name='Methrage' date='08 February 2010 - 11:36 PM' timestamp='1265700994' post='2170254']
Tech raiding is an aggressive war, so under your arguments the raid victim should get reps or keep the war going as long as possible.
[/quote]
It is always an option for the raid victim to respond militarily.

If the raiders get smashed hard enough and wish to offer reps to stop getting smashed, that is always an option.

Than again, check out my war screen: http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=199347
And keep checking it, I have not raided in over a year, nor will I raid anyone that is not in an alliance war against my alliance.

But really, let your hate flow out, let your hatred of tech raiding flow through you, and let it override all your reason to believe that the defenders of a war should offer white peace to stop being attacked by your allies.

Oh wait ...that already has happened.

[LegendoftheSkies]

[quote name='Heft' date='09 February 2010 - 01:37 AM' timestamp='1265697428' post='2170171']
If the war is "worth fighting"...it's because the war is crazy insane and gives people a reason to pay attention and be engaged.
[/quote]

That's exactly how I see it, both IC and OOC.

[Sephiroth]

[quote name='Caliph' date='09 February 2010 - 02:43 AM' timestamp='1265701433' post='2170261']
It is always an option for the raid victim to respond militarily.

If the raiders get smashed hard enough and wish to offer reps to stop getting smashed, that is always an option.

Than again, check out my war screen: http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=199347
And keep checking it, I have not raided in over a year, nor will I raid anyone that is not in an alliance war against my alliance.

But really, let your hate flow out, let your hatred of tech raiding flow through you, and let it override all your reason to believe that the defenders of a war should offer white peace to stop being attacked by your allies.

Oh wait ...that already has happened.
[/quote]
You seem to be doing nicely in letting your hatred flow, maybe you should apply for NSO.

I never accused you of tech raiding, I was making a statement about tech raiding in general.

[Leftbehind]

Your throwing around freedom like it exist on Planet Bob. It don't exist for the majority of players in this game because we are not with the "in" crowd. If I went around saying/doing things that upsets an alliance they will put me in my place at some point down the road. So the freedom you speak of is going to be your freedom not mine.

[Caliph]

[quote name='Methrage' date='08 February 2010 - 11:46 PM' timestamp='1265701596' post='2170266']
You seem to be doing nicely in letting your hatred flow, maybe you should apply for NSO.

I never accused you of tech raiding, I was making a statement about tech raiding in general.
[/quote]
This war is not about tech raiding though, it is now about TOP/DAWN/IRON/TORN declaring war on C&G.
As for tech raiding in general, as a raider if you find yourself in a war against someone who does fight back, tough luck. If the raidee can force the raider to give them reps, so be it. But such talks are not really relating to the topic at hand ...

As for NSO, so far I've disagreed with much of what you guys say, and from what I can see you guys disagree with me too ...

So perhaps it would be a match

Later ....perhaps ...

[Caliph]

[quote name='Left_Behind' date='08 February 2010 - 11:52 PM' timestamp='1265701935' post='2170270']
Your throwing around freedom like it exist on Planet Bob. It don't exist for the majority of players in this game because we are not with the "in" crowd. If I went around saying/doing things that upsets an alliance they will put me in my place at some point down the road. So the freedom you speak of is going to be your freedom not mine.
[/quote]
The "in" crowd. The last "in" crowd I've been in was ...well, perhaps never. I joined \m/ after GW3, and have been on the "wrong" side ever sense.

Freedom does exist in Planet Bob, you just have to learn how to act. If you run around foaming at the mouth calling everyone out, you will get smacked down. But if you disagree, respectfully, as I have done mostly through my 3 years here, you can get "away" with saying a lot.

I have been heavily critical of certain moves in the past done by the most powerful blocs in the game, and have never been put on a ZI list of any sort. But I have seen plenty who have been put on such lists. What I don't agree with here is the folks claiming that C&G is the new hegemony because they won't white peace with TOP/IRON/TORN/DAWN after C&G was attacked by them. Not peacing out with a coalition who attacks you is not a sign of hegemonic behavior, I've been there and seen Hegemony behavior in the past, and have been heavily critical of it both in this life, and in my past one (OOC: my first nation and with my current one). This is not hegemonic behavior, this is the behavior that every alliance would perform if attacked in the same way as C&G was attacked.

[Stetson76]

[quote name='Caliph' date='09 February 2010 - 01:33 AM' timestamp='1265700801' post='2170251']
So you are saying that TOP/IRON/DAWN/TORN is tech raiding C&G?
[/quote]

No, I would never say that.

You as a member of \m/ signs off on that theory though. Let me quote from your wiki:

[quote]Tech Raiding

\m/ takes pride in being the first to establish that all wars are tech raids and all tech raids are wars, and the subsequent moral outrage from this. This was thrown into the spotlight when Alterego raised concerns about \m/ taking part in a joint tech raid with Poison Clan and GOONS against FoA. Many attempted to e-lawyer otherwise but none have been able to effectively defame this concept undertaken by \m/. [/quote]

Caliph, you seem much to reasonable to be trying to argue for these guys...it would be so much easier for you if they hadn't already cut you off at the kneecaps before you ever had a chance to make a point. <sigh>

[Caliph]

[quote name='Stetson' date='09 February 2010 - 12:06 AM' timestamp='1265702781' post='2170281']
No, I would never say that.

You as a member of \m/ signs off on that theory though. Let me quote from your wiki:



Caliph, you seem much to reasonable to be trying to argue for these guys...it would be so much easier for you if they hadn't already cut you off at the kneecaps before you ever had a chance to make a point. <sigh>
[/quote]
Who do you think I'm arguing for?

\m/ is currently not involved in the current situation with TOP/IRON/DAWN/TORN vs C&G and associated friends of both sides.

All I'm arguing is against such a belief that C&G should white peace with TOP/IRON/DAWN/TORN immediately and end this. That is what I am arguing against, nothing more, nothing less.

Edit: It seems to be you bringing up the subject of tech raiding, which we both know is a "hot topic" here, one that causes heated responses on both sides of such a debate. I don't tech raid, nor have I tech raided in over a year. Look up my nation, view my wars, and you will find only alliance wars, and no tech raiding of unaligned nations.

Edited February 9, 2010 by Caliph

[Caesius]

[quote name='Stetson' date='09 February 2010 - 01:21 AM' timestamp='1265696479' post='2170139']
So...you're saying that ODN who recently signed onto C&G was actively trying to isolate IRON, and yet TOP/IRON were paranoid about C&G's intentions...right...
[/quote]

IRON was trying to isolate us as well; this was the "grabass on Orange politics" that led to GGA canceling on us and aligning itself with IRON. IRON was not a victim of ODN's foreign policy any more than ODN was a victim of IRON's foreign policy. There are however two facts that make IRON more culpable for their current situation:

1. ODN was open to the possibility of re-establishing embassies. IRON was not.
2. IRON struck first. ODN did not.


If anyone needs to prove they are not a threat, it is IRON and TOP. Demanding white peace only shows that they wish to take advantage of the post-Karma climate to preclude us from imposing terms they deserve and ensuring our own continued security. If they want security as well, then they will have to stop plotting to take us out and at least [i]try[/i] to have amicable relations.

And somehow I doubt that if TOP and IRON were in our shoes, they would white peace. Anyone who thinks otherwise is hopelessly naive.

[Sephiroth]

[quote name='Caliph' date='09 February 2010 - 02:54 AM' timestamp='1265702066' post='2170272']
This war is not about tech raiding though, it is now about TOP/DAWN/IRON/TORN declaring war on C&G.
As for tech raiding in general, as a raider if you find yourself in a war against someone who does fight back, tough luck. If the raidee can force the raider to give them reps, so be it. But such talks are not really relating to the topic at hand ...

As for NSO, so far I've disagreed with much of what you guys say, and from what I can see you guys disagree with me too ...

So perhaps it would be a match

Later ....perhaps ...
[/quote]
I don't disagree with you on everything, depends on the situation if its worth accepting white peace or drag the fight out hoping to get reps eventually. Also the more viewpoints the better.

Edited February 9, 2010 by Methrage

[Caliph]

[quote name='Methrage' date='09 February 2010 - 12:17 AM' timestamp='1265703425' post='2170295']
I don't disagree with you on everything, depends on the situation if its worth accepting white peace or drag the fight out hoping to get reps eventually. Also the more viewpoints the better.
[/quote]
Well I don't disagree with you or NSO on everything, although I do agree with some of your policies, like the war with folks for one round of wars then peace out. i had a blast during the NSO/RAD war

And as for white peace, the only TOP figure I've talked to about that was a TOP applicant, who was fairly adamant that TOP was not offering White Peace to C&G. If that is the case, than the entire line of thinking that "just have C&G declare white peace" seems fairly moot, does it not?

If TOP and friends have indeed offered white peace to end this conflict, that would be news to me, and, pending proof of such a claim, I would have to examine my views on the subject before commenting further.

Edited February 9, 2010 by Caliph

[Aeternos Astramora]

I think it's funny how people are still trying to cling to the illusion that CnG wasn't going to be attack TOP/IRON in the war (and just for who they were a year ago). This is the third time in two months that they were ready for any chance to jump them.

Edited February 9, 2010 by Aeternos Astramora

[Caliph]

[quote name='Aeternos Astramora' date='09 February 2010 - 12:30 AM' timestamp='1265704251' post='2170306']
I think it's funny how people are still trying to cling to the illusion that CnG wasn't going to be attack TOP/IRON in the war (and just for who they were a year ago). This is the third time in two months that they were ready for any chance to jump them.
[/quote]
I agree with you, and would expand on that to say that [b]both[/b] C&G and TOP/IRON were planning for a war with each other. Both were waiting for the other to make the first move so they could active their treaty chains and pull their allies into the war to the eventual goal of smashing the other.

But TOP/IRON/DAWN/TORN made the first move without a valid CB, and attacked people who were not involved in the then coalition war involving NpO, \m/, and PC. They made the first move, but both sides wanted war eventually.

My take is let them fight. I am just arguing against people trying to tell C&G to white peace out to prove to TOP/IRON that C&G is not a threat to TOP/IRON.