Why the war is worth fighting

[nippy]

[quote name='Tidy Bowl Man' date='09 February 2010 - 04:56 PM' timestamp='1265730975' post='2170628']
I'd like to see white peace for two very simple reasons. One, I think we all know that ToP/Iron now realize the errors of their ways. Two, the motivation for acting in the form of Grub is now gone. [/quote]

Failed reasoning. TOP and IRON getting white peace because they 'now realize the errors of their ways'? They didn't jaywalk here, they started a global war....which leads me to the second flawed argument. No one is pretending that TOP and IRON did a preemptive strike on C&G because of Grub. They had nothing to do with the NpO/\m//PC thing, other than providing commentary. Who *doesn't* provide commentary these days?

[Captain Enema]

Yet, had Grub not given Top/Iron the nod, what are the chances they would have attacked? Had he said, "Don't do it," they more than likely would not have done so. Yet, from the looks of it he gave them reason to believe this was a wise course of action. He is now gone from the halls of power at the NpO. ToP/Iron will probably never recover diplomatically and if my guess is correct they are going to end up bleeding a fair bit of their own membership over this.

So really, why stick it to them when they can be converted into potential allies for a possible chaotic and troubled future? I'm not trying to minimize or endorse what they did. However, I see more to be gained from ending the war with a white peace than is to be gained by laying out harsh reps.

Edited February 9, 2010 by Tidy Bowl Man

[Yevgeni Luchenkov]

[quote]No one is pretending that TOP and IRON did a preemptive strike on C&G because of Grub. They had nothing to do with the NpO/\m//PC thing, other than providing commentary.[/quote]
The attacks on CnG were planned as part of the coalition that was built in support of Polaris. To make it anything else is ridiculous revisionism.

[Sephiroth]

[quote name='Jerichoholic' date='09 February 2010 - 10:31 AM' timestamp='1265729504' post='2170593']
Your side keeps saying CnG should give white peace to DAWN/IRON/TOP/TORN (henceforth known as DITT, that side really needs a better name) to prove that CnG isn't a threat to them. Yet DITT attacking CnG without provocation proved they [b]are[/b] a threat to CnG. I'm not aware of any treaties that would have brought CnG in in the event of DITT coming in on defense of NSO (which from what I've read in these discussions is what was going to happen), so it was just a sneak attack on somebody uninvolved in the war because they didn't like CnG.

So how does DITT prove to CnG that they aren't a threat to them? They have already attacked without provocation and now only want white peace because they are at a disadvantage. What are the odds DITT would have given white peace if the roles were reversed?
[/quote]
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]),
[quote name='Chickenzilla' date='27 January 2010 - 03:00 PM' timestamp='1264622450' post='2134195']
Good luck to you Nemesis. Enjoy beating up Valor for us. [/quote]

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]),
[quote name='Chaoshawk' date='27 January 2010 - 05:55 PM' timestamp='1264632950' post='2134790']
Opposite sides again. Good luck out there UPN.
[/quote]

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 name='Xiphosis' date='25 January 2010 - 11:43 PM' timestamp='1264480998' post='2130407']
We'll be blunt and brief, this is a coalition war and NSO hit our side yesterday. Therein we declare on NSO. We will be hitting where and as needed by our allies in the conflict.

/s/
Xiphosis, Dark Lord of GOD
No-Fish, Lord of War
[/quote]

You can ignore reality and believe whatever you want though, although that CnG picked a side already proved they were a threat to the other side.

[nippy]

[quote name='Yevgeni Luchenkov' date='09 February 2010 - 05:07 PM' timestamp='1265731665' post='2170654']
The attacks on CnG were planned as part of the coalition that was built in support of Polaris. To make it anything else is ridiculous revisionism.
[/quote]

...except that C&G had nothing to do with the original reason for the war. Despite whatever 'coalition' in 'support of Polaris' you describe, C&G was pulled into this without being involved in any way other than verbally. TOP and IRON (read: TOP) made the decision on their own to declare offensively.

[Jerichoholic]

[quote name='Methrage' date='09 February 2010 - 11:10 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,



You can ignore reality and believe whatever you want though, although that CnG picked a side already proved they were a threat to the other side.
[/quote]You are making two very big assumptions
1) That simply supporting one side means you are going to attack (even though many alliances/blocs had conflicting treaties and would likely be staying out)
2) If CnG did enter in response to an ally's plight (again, I'm not sure which one you were planning on defending, since the only one I've seen mentioned [NSO] was in wars against 3 SuperFriends), they would be in that coalition. You will remember that during Karma, TOP fought NPO but was not part of the Karma coalition.

[Yevgeni Luchenkov]

[quote]...except that C&G had nothing to do with the original reason for the war. Despite whatever 'coalition' in 'support of Polaris' you describe, C&G was pulled into this without being involved in any way other than verbally. TOP and IRON (read: TOP) made the decision on their own to declare offensively.[/quote]
Doesn't change anything. The decision was taken in light of the fact that C&G was going to be directly involved against our coalition. In short, the decision to preemptively strike our future enemies was part of the Polaris war; heck, without the Polaris war, it would have never happened.

That's all. I'm not saying it's Polaris fault or anything but it is still part of the same war, just a different front.

[nippy]

[quote name='Methrage' date='09 February 2010 - 05:10 PM' 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,



You can ignore reality and believe whatever you want though, although that CnG picked a side already proved they were a threat to the other side.
[/quote]

How interesting that two of the three people you selected to quote as evidence that C&G was a threat to TOP and IRON [b]aren't actually part of C&G.[/b]

[Sephiroth]

[quote name='nippy' date='09 February 2010 - 11:24 AM' timestamp='1265732649' post='2170682']
How interesting that two of the three people you selected to quote as evidence that C&G was a threat to TOP and IRON [b]aren't actually part of C&G.[/b]
[/quote]
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.

Anyways I don't expect CnG to accept white peace yet, the war can still go on for a while. I think white peace eventually though would be a nice way to end it to not leave any lingering grudges, which harsh terms can tend to do.

[nippy]

[quote name='Methrage' date='09 February 2010 - 05:39 PM' 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.

Anyways I don't expect CnG to accept white peace yet, the war can still go on for a while. I think white peace eventually though would be a nice way to end it to not leave any lingering grudges, which harsh terms can tend to do.
[/quote]

I'd venture to say that unfinished business leads to lingering grudges more than harsh terms would...I know this from first-hand experience, being a prior member of the Goon Order of Neutral Shoving.

[Ashoka the Great]

I don't know if this war is worth fighting for or not. Like all of us on the periphery, I'm in this because my friends are. My adversaries and I are able to merrily destroy each other while getting along just fine.

At the center of this conflict, however, it is very personal. Quite apart from being unattractive to behold, it would seem to indicate that we're going to be at this for a while.

[Puppet Master]

My personal stand point on this entire war is that its 100% based around the grudges of a few alliances and alliance leaders and everyone else just got dragged along for the ride, some willing and some not so willingly. In the end I think we should all just ZI those who caused this stupid mess and kick out alliance leaders who cant seem to get over themselves and are willing to throw the work of thousands just to beat down a few people they don't like.

I'm all for war, but I need to have a good reason for the war, something I can stand by later when I'm rebuilding and look back and say I'm proud I went to ZI for. This war is missing that something, its 100% a grudge war and nothing else, for both sides.

[Buds The Man]

[quote name='Caliph' date='09 February 2010 - 01:58 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]
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.

[quote name='Caliph' date='09 February 2010 - 03:39 AM' timestamp='1265704786' post='2170311']
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.
[/quote]
C&G was a threat to the coalition that TOP/IRON were in.

[quote name='Arthur Blair' date='09 February 2010 - 08:36 AM' timestamp='1265722590' post='2170485']
Do you or anyone on your side have anything but imagination to base yourselves on? I mean really. Give us somethig tangible, not all these would bes and what ifs.
[/quote]
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 name='lebubu' date='09 February 2010 - 08:53 AM' timestamp='1265723589' post='2170500']
It was nothing more than a possibility. Countless other things could have happened, had the war kept its natural course.
[/quote]
Sure it could have but it still doesnt change the fact that CnG had alliances waiting for TOP/IRON to enter the war.

[quote name='Tidy Bowl Man' date='09 February 2010 - 11:06 AM' timestamp='1265731576' post='2170650']
[b]Yet, had Grub not given Top/Iron the nod, what are the chances they would have attacked? [/b]Had he said, "Don't do it," they more than likely would not have done so. Yet, from the looks of it he gave them reason to believe this was a wise course of action. He is now gone from the halls of power at the NpO. ToP/Iron will probably never recover diplomatically and if my guess is correct they are going to end up bleeding a fair bit of their own membership over this.

So really, why stick it to them when they can be converted into potential allies for a possible chaotic and troubled future? I'm not trying to minimize or endorse what they did. However, I see more to be gained from ending the war with a white peace than is to be gained by laying out harsh reps.
[/quote]
To answer the bolded part, NONE no way does this go with out Grubs aproval as this action was to neutralize the threat to the coalition.

[quote name='nippy' date='09 February 2010 - 11:15 AM' timestamp='1265732132' post='2170665']
...except that C&G had nothing to do with the original reason for the war. Despite whatever 'coalition' in 'support of Polaris' you describe, C&G was pulled into this without being involved in any way other than verbally. TOP and IRON (read: TOP) made the decision on their own to declare offensively.
[/quote]
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 name='Ashoka the Great' date='09 February 2010 - 11:52 AM' timestamp='1265734366' post='2170718']
I don't know if this war is worth fighting for or not. Like all of us on the periphery, I'm in this because my friends are. My adversaries and I are able to merrily destroy each other while getting along just fine.

At the center of this conflict, however, it is very personal. Quite apart from being unattractive to behold, it would seem to indicate that we're going to be at this for a while.
[/quote]
Could be man but I have cold mead and some very fine brandy Ill send it over via Air mail to my future oppenent.


Look this fight isnt about Freedome from or Freedom To: there are grudges on both sides and to deny it is assinine. To continually play the victim that my side is trying to ruin the game is BS. We have seen what happens when to much freedom is granted 30-50 people at a time become the victim there is a happy medium and as some one who supports tech raiding I believe it can be found. Had Grub not peaced out as he was forced to do the point of the pre empt would be moot. The only reason this war continues is because C&G have the advantage and will continue to try and beat the hell out of us all. Im no mind reader as to what terms will be or if WP will rule the day, I know this much for a fact, Feanor in our coalition channel said WP would be granted at the end of any conflict, Bigwoody said the same damn thing so think about that for a minute. When they entered in to the war they had no intentions of doing anything else other than gaining victory for the coalition they were apart of. This war has nothing to do with freedom and to try and score simple PR points based on that is ridiculous.

[Bob Janova]

[quote]Yet DITT attacking CnG [b]without provocation[/b][/quote]


[quote]What are the odds DITT would have given white peace if the roles were reversed? [/quote]
Extremely good.

[quote]There's a huge difference between your examples and our war. They attacked us with the claim that we are a threat that must be pacified. How do you rationally respond to that? Give them a quick peace and pat on the back? It isn't just rhetoric that they are a threat, they actually ARE. The only sane thing we can do is keep the war on until they agree to surrender their technological superiority to us so that they will not be succesful in future attacks. If they refuse to surrender, we must attack until they are nothing and we are something. The perennial war is then on their shoulders,[/quote]
This is so amazingly out of the NPO 2007 playbook that I am almost speechless. 'We are going to keep rolling them indefinitely and it's [i]their fault[/i].'

They attacked you because you were going to counter attack them anyway, as part of a plan cleared with the Polar coalition that they entered as a part of. As Yevgeni says, anything other that that is revisionism.

[bigwoody]

[quote name='Buds The Man' date='09 February 2010 - 12:00 PM' timestamp='1265738440' post='2170823']
I know this much for a fact, Feanor in our coalition channel said WP would be granted at the end of any conflict, Bigwoody said the same damn thing so think about that for a minute.
[/quote]
Confirmed. To us, this was a theater in the Polar-\m/ war, and we were fully intending to offer white peace to any/all of CnG. Quickly, to boot.

[NLights]

Because it gives us all something to talk about? Or am I wrong [IMG]http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll53/DoItNowLickItGood/lookaround.gif[/IMG]

[Ivan Moldavi]

NSO is fighting this war because we entered to support our allies and friends, even if our allies left while we were still on the battlefield. We are not part of any damned crusade and never will be.

While I disagree with the aggressive actions of IRON and TOP in regards to their pre-emptive declaration against CnG that does not mean I will run to peace and let them die alone.

I do not believe TOP and IRON would have declared on CnG had Grub not told them it was "okay" with Polar to do so. I do not agree with that position and was very surprised to see that such an accommodation had been made but it was their sovereign right to make it so I can not judge. I was told that the pre-emptive plan was a done deal and that Grub had signed off on it. I was not happy with it but couldn't exactly stop it either as at that time we were in a 10-to-1 odds war of our own.

Going back and forth over it does not matter at this point. People make stupid decisions in times of war. It happens all the time. Sometimes they get lucky and it doesn't backfire and sometimes it comes back and bites them in the $@!.

From what I can tell, cracks are appearing on both "sides" in this conflict among some of the alliances. Many have members that are questioning their leadership on both alignments because entering into the Cluster$%&@ War because of a chain and then getting locked into a brutal nuclear war that could conceivably go on for a very very long time isn't everyone's idea of fun. Lucky for me every time I take the vote to the membership on whether we should continue to fight or find resolution, that most likely would involve leaving one of our allies behind, they support the continued giving of blood. We already know what it is like to be left on the battlefield.

The NSO does not fight this war to win. The odds have been overwhelmingly against that since the earliest stages and even with the peace with FOK we went from a 10-to-1 underdog to 7-to-1 with everyone else we are engaged with so statistically speaking, we know the realities. We entered against opponents much larger than us with that realization and understand it to be true to today. But we are making our long march towards destruction sting for those attacking us. And we will do what the Sith always do. We will survive.

The strong will survive.

[Stetson76]

[quote name='Caliph' date='09 February 2010 - 03:04 AM' timestamp='1265706265' post='2170329']
You find it ironic that an \m/ member does not believe that it is in the best interests of C&G to white peace out of this war right now after TOP/IRON/DAWN/TORN declared war on them for the reason "i don't like you"?[/quote]

No, my comment on irony was relating to the tech raiding conversation we were having. Which, is why I ended that line of thinking and moved on to the ODN poster's points.

(It does still tickle me however that an alliance that considers all tech raids war, and all wars tech raids would find an alliance wide "PM for peace" difficult to accept.)

[quote name='Caliph' date='09 February 2010 - 03:04 AM' timestamp='1265706265' post='2170329']
If you desire to view the events as such, you must also concede the flipside that TOP/IRON/DAWN/TORN proved beyond any doubt they were a threat to C&G when they declared war on them. Therefore, by your logic here, C&G viewing TOP/IRON/DAWN/TORN as a potential threat was perfectly sound, and not flawed at all. TOP/IRON, by their own actions, were and are a direct threat to C&G.[/quote]

Yes, they were threats to each other...anyone who has been paying attention to these forums for the last few months realized that. In fact, the only people disputing it are the members of C&G who claim they were merely sitting on the sidelines painting their nails when out of nowhere they were attacked by TOP/IRON. LOL

[Rebel Virginia]

[color="#0000FF"]Bah, what rubbish. You scream that they're attacking your freedoms. Not anymore than you are theirs. You want your freedoms and will take away theirs to satisfy that. You have no moral high ground, so quit acting like one.

Although, I know the specific "freedom" you are talking about is your "right" to senselessly and without mercy wage unjustified wars against weaker parties. Tech raiding you call it, but I will describe it as what it is. It seems what you are actually fighting for is your "right" to do whatever you want without consequences. I could care less for that.[/color]

[Bob]

[quote name='Bob Janova' date='09 February 2010 - 01:03 PM' timestamp='1265738607' post='2170828']
This is so amazingly out of the NPO 2007 playbook that I am almost speechless. 'We are going to keep rolling them indefinitely and it's [i]their fault[/i].'
[/quote]
I remember the time NPO was attacked and people complained that they kept attacking them after less than a week.

Ohwait..

[quote]They attacked you because you were going to counter attack them anyway, as part of a plan cleared with the Polar coalition that they entered as a part of. As Yevgeni says, anything other that that is revisionism.[/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 it never happened.

[The Warrior]

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.

[Owned-You]

I'm fighting for a sustained peace for my allies...because every other month someone has beef with one of them (I have way too many actually...but I'm a popular guy; so I'm used to it) so I'm in it to try and crush this potential tech-buying interruption for a good few months. Because I'm tired of my tech-cycles interrupted over stupid !@#$.

[SpoiL]

[quote name='Dontasemebro' date='09 February 2010 - 12:09 AM' timestamp='1265692175' post='2169892']
Except the NpO \m/ war ended, the CB was apologized for, and the TOP war was started because TOP feels CnG is a threat and will take any and every chance to attack them. That is why we are fighting.
[/quote]

Yes, hence the 'preemptive strike'. CnG would have been entering the war when they activated a treaty and they admit that.

[Vilien]

Thanks for letting us know that this war is really about freedom, motherhood, and apple pie, James. I would have never guessed otherwise.

[Tautology]

[quote name='Tidy Bowl Man' date='09 February 2010 - 03:56 PM' timestamp='1265730975' post='2170628']
I'd like to see white peace for two very simple reasons. One, I think we all know that ToP/Iron now realize the errors of their ways. ...[/quote]
Anyone who's realized the error of their ways on this or any other planet will have discovered that even though you make the "honey, I screwed up big-time" speech, there's no guarantee that your admission will get you what you really want. Given that, expecting TOP/IRON to make that kind of admission in a public arena like OWF is unkind, and I wouldn't blame them in the least for wanting to say it in a more private setting.

I guess I'm saying that you're in danger of putting TOP/IRON on a daytime talk show which, while it can be very entertaining and great for the ratings, is often humiliating. Maybe they should be allowed to express their contrition out of the spotlight and maybe I'm wrong and the gallery deserves a good show.