Joint Statement

[Haflinger]

[quote name='Voodoo Nova' date='18 February 2010 - 08:48 PM' timestamp='1266544113' post='2190873']
You know that is not what he is referring to. No one can guarantee anything for an entire side, especially if there is at least one alliance on the side missing from the list of people stating they would.
[/quote]
I think the OP actually pretty much just did guarantee that.

If you think every alliance in the OP peaced out at once with all the alliances fighting us, that the remaining alliances at war on our "side" would have the power to demand reparations... well that would be [i]shocking.[/i]

That actually was my point though: he's claiming that VA got the same offer as the one the OP's giving. VA didn't.

[Marginali]

i somehow glad that Nusantara Elite Warriors is not in the list, if it is i will be pretty furious towards my govt...

as suggested, we are not going to be in the list, because we honor mutual decision only between alliances we fight with... not doing this political move which i think somehow so wrong...

but yes, whatever NEW's ally wanted to do, we will support her. but this time, sorry, i'm just glad not to get involve...

RoK, Iunctus, The Corp, ToJ, NNK, lets talk alone... we don't have to do mass begging like this...

[President Sitruk]

[quote name='Johnny Apocalypse' date='18 February 2010 - 07:47 PM' timestamp='1266544067' post='2190869']
I agree, also with the white peace comment. But I get the feeling this thread was not created for the reasons which you claim it was for (Maybe now I'm being paranoid )



That sounds more like "we were only wrong because the tables turned unexpectedly, had it all gone to plan we wouldn't need to be sorry"

Not very apologetic or sincere.
[/quote]

that's because i wasnt apologizing, not my place to. but you didnt hear what i was saying apparently. what i was saying is that the pre-emptive strike was in regards to the \m/-Polar conflict and all this should've ended there but it hasnt.

[Johnny Apocalypse]

[quote name='President Sitruk' date='19 February 2010 - 01:58 AM' timestamp='1266544705' post='2190902']
that's because i wasnt apologizing, not my place to. but you didnt hear what i was saying apparently. what i was saying is that the pre-emptive strike was in regards to the \m/-Polar conflict and all this should've ended there but it hasnt.
[/quote]
Apologies I mis-interpreted what you said.

A pre-emptive strike is only pre-emptive if we were actually going to attack you. I'm pretty sure C&G weren't going to declare as a whole on TOP et al the way you have done to us, if have you evidence proving otherwise, I would like to see it.

[Believland]

[quote name='Johnny Apocalypse' date='18 February 2010 - 08:52 PM' timestamp='1266544326' post='2190880']
Well, you barely know me, and can't claim to, so I would suggest you get to know me before making such suggestions.


And so much for trying to set out an argument in a reasonable and logical manner if all you can do is create an awful ad hominem attacking me personally.
[/quote]
That's true. I don't know you, nor do I have interest in knowing you. But, seeing your past views, see my sig, I would not be surprised that you would insult an alliance just to do so. Which in the past you have. I have "argued"(I personally prefer the term "debate) and you ended up saying something stupid and never replied.

If you really want to, please just choose a topic. And let's begin. We can do it by PM or whatever you want to. I don't care.

Also, nothing is wrong with preemptive strikes. If Polaris would have continued their war with \m/ this would have been hailed. Oh well. Win some and you lose some.

[Voodoo Nova]

[quote name='Haflinger' date='18 February 2010 - 08:54 PM' timestamp='1266544490' post='2190889']
I think the OP actually pretty much just did guarantee that.

If you think every alliance in the OP peaced out at once with all the alliances fighting us, that the remaining alliances at war on our "side" would have the power to demand reparations... well that would be [i]shocking.[/i]

That actually was my point though: he's claiming that VA got the same offer as the one the OP's giving. VA didn't.
[/quote]

It is missing at least two alliances. How can it guarantee white peace for the entire side if the entire opposing side does not agree? It can't.

[Saber]

[quote name='jerdge' date='19 February 2010 - 02:41 AM' timestamp='1266543675' post='2190854']
I know that I personally mentioned that those that [i]attacked[/i] us are probably going to be asked something, because of their continued aggression and especially if they continue to insist in it. I don't see anything wrong in that: our nations are going to suffer more for this war and the benefit we could get from said reparations is in perspective becoming increasingly important.
Although I am not in the MHA government, I think I can hope to correctly interpret most of the Hitchhikers' attitude when I say that we don't believe in harsh reparations as a mean to keep "down" the people we might otherwise "perceive as a threat": we simply have a culture mostly immune to paranoia (at least, this far), and there's nobody that I know of that we consider an "irreducible enemy", that we might think we need to "control".
Quite the opposite, most of us believe in the strenght of fairness and in developing friendly relationships with everybody, including and sometimes [i]especially[/i] with the people we've been fighting against.

I am in the end curious about your experience of Hitchhikers threatening "harsh" terms, would you mind to try document your assertions? I find them quite extravagant, but I might just be ignorant.
[/quote]
I'm going to follow lead of Archon and not log dump. If someone feels need to challenge my statements you know where to find me. But this thread is not about that in fact. This thread is about our offer of white peace for all and promise of no terms for opposing side regardless of circumstances.

[quote name='Voodoo Nova' date='19 February 2010 - 03:05 AM' timestamp='1266545109' post='2190925']
It is missing at least two alliances. How can it guarantee white peace for the entire side if the entire opposing side does not agree? It can't.
[/quote]
So you are coming down to a technicality? Offer has been out for hours and this was best you could think of. Sad.

List is not complete for several reasons. First some alliances do not want to be considered part of the coalition as they entered only on behalf of their direct treaty partners. Ivan Moldavi elaborated on this in his post and as such have not signed on on this document. Some alliances we were not able to contact in a timely manner but they have expressed unofficially in earlier time that they will accept white peace for their allies and themselves as well.

So, realistically, everyone on our side would accept these terms and everyone who is on the list makes a written promise that they will keep that word. If you have real intention of accepting the terms then you can state so and I am sure that alliances that haven't signed on can comment whether they are ok with it.

But seriously, technicality?

Edited February 19, 2010 by Saber

[joracy]

[quote name='Saber' date='18 February 2010 - 08:42 PM' timestamp='1266543778' post='2190857']
Our intentions are not to further our goals of pushing terms and reparations on remaining alliances. Our goal is to end this war for everyone. This is why we are giving guarantees that we will not be extracting any reps or imposing any terms. If you really want to give a bad name to our offer worse you can do is "Divide and White Peace".

I don't think it's a dirty tactic to be honest. Archon had something he needed to say on OWF and some things to clarify. We had some things to say, offer and state.

Now if you want to look at a dirty tactic it's bullying an alliance that is outnumbered by giving them ultimatums. Accept peace now or you will get harsh terms later on. It really says much about those alliances that even against the odds and threats they are still alongside us.
[/quote]

Believe it or not; I'm not really attempting to give a bad name to your offer. As I said; I agree with it. If I was in your position, I would do the same thing. I simply see a contradiction between continually going on about how we are dividing and conquering, and thats bad, and that you aren't, when you signed a document that is clearly designed to do that. The offer it's self I have no problem with, albeit it I find it somewhat humorous if you expect your entire side to get white peace.

[Johnny Apocalypse]

[quote name='Believland' date='19 February 2010 - 02:04 AM' timestamp='1266545094' post='2190923']
That's true. I don't know you, nor do I have interest in knowing you. But, seeing your past views, see my sig, I would not be surprised that you would insult an alliance just to do so. Which in the past you have. I have "argued"(I personally prefer the term "debate) and you ended up saying something stupid and never replied.

If you really want to, please just choose a topic. And let's begin. We can do it by PM or whatever you want to. I don't care.

Also, nothing is wrong with preemptive strikes. If Polaris would have continued their war with \m/ this would have been hailed. Oh well. Win some and you lose some.
[/quote]

if you're willing to provide me an example of something I said which was 'stupid', I'll be happy to clear it up with you via PM. I likely never replied because I have other issues to attend to rather than "debating" with you on a public forum.

Also as I said in an earlier post, pre-emptive strikes are okay if you have solid evidence that your opponent was going to attack you.

Edited February 19, 2010 by Johnny Apocalypse

[Voodoo Nova]

[quote name='Saber' date='18 February 2010 - 09:06 PM' timestamp='1266545193' post='2190929']
I'm going to follow lead of Archon and not log dump. If someone feels need to challenge my statements you know where to find me. But this thread is not about that in fact. This thread is about our offer of white peace for all and promise of no terms for opposing side regardless of circumstances.


So you are coming down to a technicality? Offer has been out for hours and this was best you could think of. Sad.

List is not complete for several reasons. First some alliances do not want to be considered part of the coalition as they entered only on behalf of their direct treaty partners. Ivan Moldavi elaborated on this in his post and as such have not signed on on this document. Some alliances we were not able to contact in a timely manner but they have expressed unofficially in earlier time that they will accept white peace for their allies and themselves as well.

So, realistically, everyone on our side would accept these terms and everyone who is on the list makes a written promise that they will keep that word. If you have real intention of accepting the terms then you can state so and I am sure that alliances that haven't signed on can comment whether they are ok with it.

But seriously, technicality?
[/quote]

I'm not referring to NSO, but two alliances that have attacked my ally. Neither have stated they wish to declare white peace and if they would, I am positive their opponents would listen.

[ironchef]

[quote name='Barnaby von Farter' date='18 February 2010 - 05:46 PM' timestamp='1266543994' post='2190865']

And regarding Tiggah...the ODN member you are at war with. I can assure you that he eagerly awaits your 1 remaining nuke. With a disturbing degree of pleasure, etc.
[/quote]

I know Tiggah and I have had crazy fun this round of war. I have much respect for him and have enjoyed our time together. I’m just sorry he is now too small for me to re-declare on.

[SiCkO]

Judging by Sparta's sigs they want more than reps


as for TOP, I tip my hat to you, you certainly don't back down

[Infidel Israeli]

[quote name='Saber' date='18 February 2010 - 07:25 PM' timestamp='1266542707' post='2190809']
I did not speak out of place.

When I said FOK and MHA have threatened alliances to accept white peace now or face consequences and harsh terms later on, it is a fact. I am not referring to Wolfpack's allies.


Guys get it in your head that there are hundred or so alliance in this war. TOP alone is fighting 21 or so, number of different wars between alliances is probably over a thousand. You don't need to point out your specific alliance did not threaten. However many have and it has started to happen much more often. I guess it's mob mentality.

Kudos to you for not threatening and using dirty tactics. Main reason we made this thread is to provide an avenue to ending the war for all, and to establish standards which our side will follow no matter what. Also I believe it may help improve standards in CN overall by exposing dirty tactics that are used in wars such as these.
[/quote]
I got that, it's why i stated that I was only talking about VA bro. You must not have understood the point of my post. I was calling VA out for being hypocrites, not preaching for the morality of the lenient terms.

[quote name='Haflinger' date='18 February 2010 - 07:38 PM' timestamp='1266543498' post='2190850']
Ah, you guaranteed to VA that if they accepted these terms, every single other alliance on their side would also be offered white peace?

Good to know.
[/quote]

no, we offered to VA, and only VA. how many times do I have to say this? stop trying to sound smart.

Edit: Oh, and also to WFF, they too declined.

Edited February 19, 2010 by Infidel Israeli

[Londo Mollari]

You do realize that stunts like this aren't going to make your terms any better, don't you?

[Johnny Apocalypse]

[quote name='SiCkO' date='19 February 2010 - 02:25 AM' timestamp='1266546347' post='2190985']
Judging by Sparta's sigs they want more than reps
[/quote]


You know what a joke is right?

[ironchef]

[quote name='Londo Mollari' date='18 February 2010 - 06:27 PM' timestamp='1266546459' post='2190992']
You do realize that stunts like this aren't going to make your terms any better, don't you?
[/quote]

Will this offer we have made of peace without reparation make our terms worse?

[Johnny Apocalypse]

[quote name='ironchef' date='19 February 2010 - 02:31 AM' timestamp='1266546700' post='2190999']
Will this offer we have made of peace without reparation make our terms worse?
[/quote]


More likely he meant you're less likely to get white peace if you keep pulling 'stunts' like this I guess.

Edited February 19, 2010 by Johnny Apocalypse

[Saber]

[quote name='joracy' date='19 February 2010 - 03:07 AM' timestamp='1266545237' post='2190932']
Believe it or not; I'm not really attempting to give a bad name to your offer. As I said; I agree with it. If I was in your position, I would do the same thing. I simply see a contradiction between continually going on about how we are dividing and conquering, and thats bad, and that you aren't, when you signed a document that is clearly designed to do that. The offer it's self I have no problem with, albeit it I find it somewhat humorous if you expect your entire side to get white peace.
[/quote]
We are not expecting everyone will jump up today and say the war is over. Rather we expect that it will take some time to wrap it up. However we have decided to make a first step. Now at least we are moving in the right direction and we have stopped discussing in circles.

[quote name='Voodoo Nova' date='19 February 2010 - 03:12 AM' timestamp='1266545569' post='2190952']
I'm not referring to NSO, but two alliances that have attacked my ally. Neither have stated they wish to declare white peace and if they would, I am positive their opponents would listen.
[/quote]
First time I hear of this. As we are talking on IRC right now we can discuss it there. Hopefully we can clear up this situation and find a suitable solution.

[quote name='Londo Mollari' date='19 February 2010 - 03:27 AM' timestamp='1266546459' post='2190992']
You do realize that stunts like this aren't going to make your terms any better, don't you?
[/quote]
When Archon clarifies you position and points a few fingers you hail it. When we offer a global white peace and vow not to push any terms on anyone on opposing side regardless of situation changes you do this? It almost looks like a threat.

[Feanor Noldorin]

[quote name='Londo Mollari' date='18 February 2010 - 08:27 PM' timestamp='1266546459' post='2190992']
You do realize that stunts like this aren't going to make your terms any better, don't you?
[/quote]
You do realize that your threats don't really matter to us?

[lanceman1972]

[quote name='Marginali' date='18 February 2010 - 05:57 PM' timestamp='1266544633' post='2190896']
i somehow glad that Nusantara Elite Warriors is not in the list, if it is i will be pretty furious towards my govt...

as suggested, we are not going to be in the list, because we honor mutual decision only between alliances we fight with... not doing this political move which i think somehow so wrong...

but yes, whatever NEW's ally wanted to do, we will support her. but this time, sorry, i'm just glad not to get involve...

RoK, Iunctus, The Corp, ToJ, NNK, lets talk alone... we don't have to do mass begging like this...
[/quote]

And that is why, even though we are on different sides, I have come to respect NEW greatly during this war. They are one tough alliance and an honorable group of nations.

[Homura]

Will any of these alliances pay the costs for peace, or merely "offer" it?

It's foolish to assume this is a reasonable request. Your advantaged opponents would have offered it if it was. An outpouring of universal mercy is not to be expected, no matter how many nations burn to mountains of ash. Some will live without surrender terms, and some will pay dearly for their sins. See this reality, retract your signatures, and make a choice:

Either fight on to victory or accept your demise. [i]Escape is an impossibility.[/i]



/s/
[color="#0000FF"]Mio[/color], Voice of Fate

[President Sitruk]

[quote name='Johnny Apocalypse' date='18 February 2010 - 08:01 PM' timestamp='1266544913' post='2190912']
Apologies I mis-interpreted what you said.

A pre-emptive strike is only pre-emptive if we were actually going to attack you. I'm pretty sure C&G weren't going to declare as a whole on TOP et al the way you have done to us, if have you evidence proving otherwise, I would like to see it.
[/quote]

i'm not TOP. but IRON has an MDP with NSO and MK has an MDoAP with FOK.

[Johnny Apocalypse]

[quote name='President Sitruk' date='19 February 2010 - 02:39 AM' timestamp='1266547184' post='2191016']
i'm not TOP. but IRON has an MDP with NSO and MK has an MDoAP with FOK.
[/quote]

I don't see what you are getting at here, could you elaborate?

[Owned-You]

Personally speaking as I'm no longer in an official government position. I wouldn't be accepting towards a blanket White-Peace offer when my allies had been attacked without a cause I deem acceptable to warrant those actions. Especially when my side was winning the overall war, and by accepting that peace would only strengthen the opposing sides ability to quickly re-muster it's strength and strike from a position of confidence later on. Albeit, I'm older and watched the mistake of The League and many others have as well so I'm quite sure many of those same "oldies" aren't content repeating past mistakes. Those being, allowing a clearly defined enemy the means of rebuilding or position of strength for further attacks down the road.

Although, it ultimately depends on your brand of playing. Some believe White-Peace and cordial relations are the best deterrent to future aggression. Others believe delivering heavy war-damages and heavy-post war reps as the best means of deterrence or outright disposal of a threat. Surely there will be various arguments against them both for a plethora of reasons, and perspectives. But it's all up to the men and women at the top.

As for what I would do if I were still in government, I personally believe it would be foolish to grant a blanket white-peace agreement at this point it time. So I wouldn't accept this deal. If this makes me evil, then so be it.

[Londo Mollari]

[quote name='Feanor Noldorin' date='18 February 2010 - 09:36 PM' timestamp='1266546990' post='2191010']
You do realize that your threats don't really matter to us?
[/quote]

Oh, I never threaten. I was merely making an observation. The august collection of alliances that are signatories to this fine document are essentially asking our entire side to surrender to them, while said august alliances are in a losing position. I am but one man, and was simply questioning the wisdom of poking the bear with a stick, so to speak.