FOK Declaration of War

[AirMe]

[quote name='Coursca' date='23 February 2010 - 08:24 PM' timestamp='1266974851' post='2200226']
Piggybacking off Saber's point: Anyone who says TOP is threatening harsh terms for anyone down any line for not accepting their blanket white peace offer is way off base. That is not in the character of the Paradoxians currently occupying government positions. I know and have worked with these people and any implication of "dirty tricks" as I saw earlier is patently ridiculous.

Likewise, I, too have been hearing of certain large alliances making threats of harsh terms arrangements down the line should they not accept white peace expediently. So anyone saying that "we're being fair to the alliances who came in via treaty requirements" is also way off base. And some of the alliances engaging in this behavior are, to me, surprising and disappointing.
[/quote]

Being involved in the leadership of the people fighting TOP, no one has really talked about peace terms officially. There have been no official statement of harsh or crippling reps that is for sure so anyone who tells you otherwise doesn't know what they are talking about. Right now it is all opinion and nothing more.

I will tell you one thing, I will be ticked if the original 5 alliances who attacked C&G are let off with just a slap on the wrists no reps.

[Denial]

[quote name='Feanor Noldorin' date='24 February 2010 - 10:45 AM' timestamp='1266974347' post='2200205']
Agreed. When this war eventually ends (lol) we'll make sure to take full advantage of trolling everyone we dislike and when they have a problem about it we will laugh in their faces. When we start to rebuild, and we will rebuild quickly, I wonder how many people will be looking over their shoulder due to our members posting. I can't wait.
[/quote]
Or maybe, just maybe, an alliance that is more reasonable than TOP would work assiduously towards a peaceful, diplomatic solution to the 'problem' of criticism, rather than aggressively attack the alliances that are perceived to be responsible for such acts.

[Bob Janova]

I guess in Denial's bizarro world, Legion didn't enter GW3, they started a whole new war. Also you were involved etc. You could also link these logs that 'everyone' has seen, though if you don't believe what Crymson posts in an official announcement, there's no reason to believe something else, except if it matches your propaganda line of course. (LM also posted the thinking in Archon's thread.)

[quote]Secondly, just because something is stated within a TOP declaration of war does not automatically ensure that statement's veracity[/quote]
You guys should really stop using that one sentence of Crymson's in your justifications then.

[Sandwich Controversy]

[quote name='Cyber Nationz' date='23 February 2010 - 08:22 PM' timestamp='1266974779' post='2200222']
sad to see this happen.
Why dosent MK just let them have peace and end this ridiculous war.

o/ Cn Apocolypse
[/quote]
What a great plan!

[AirMe]

[quote name='Bob Janova' date='23 February 2010 - 08:28 PM' timestamp='1266975132' post='2200234']



You guys should really stop using that one sentence of Crymson's in your justifications then.
[/quote]

Why not? Apparently every word by every C&G member that has ever been spoken is being held against them? Crymson was the leader of TOP at the time and leaders words are held to a higher standard then the average foot soldier.

[Denial]

[quote name='Bob Janova' date='24 February 2010 - 10:58 AM' timestamp='1266975132' post='2200234']
I guess in Denial's bizarro world, Legion didn't enter GW3, they started a whole new war. Also you were involved etc. You could also link these logs that 'everyone' has seen, though if you don't believe what Crymson posts in an official announcement, there's no reason to believe something else, except if it matches your propaganda line of course. (LM also posted the thinking in Archon's thread.)[/quote]
What Legion did or did not do three years ago is none of my concern. I do not see Complaints & Grievances fighting in the Third Great War. TOP, IRON & co could not possibly enter an ongoing conflict by attacking parties that were entirely uninvolved in that conflict. To join a conflict, you must attack a party that is currently fighting within it. It's very simple, yet somehow you still have trouble putting 2 and 2 together. Furthermore, the exact same argument could be turned against you - if you do not believe what Crymson said in a detailed conversation regarding the exact thought process behind the war, you have no reason to believe what is released in a declaration of war put out for public consumption. Either Crymson is lying in the logged conversation (which would not make sense; why would you lie to make yourself and your alliance appear even worse?), or he is lying in a public announcement that is traditionally aimed to rally support by skimming over details. I wonder which one is more likely! As for LiquidMercury, all his posts equate to is "I'm a brilliant military strategist, but I had no idea preemptively attacking an entire bloc would result in treaty activations."

Edited February 24, 2010 by Denial

[TheThirdMark]

[quote name='RustyNail' date='24 February 2010 - 01:25 AM' timestamp='1266971333' post='2200091']
This disgusts me and I for one, wash my hands of FOK. I truly thought better of you all.
[/quote]

So its safe to presume that we will see a ''Sadly to inform''-topic tomorrow?
Put your money where your mouth is etc.

[Coursca]

[quote name='AirMe' date='23 February 2010 - 08:27 PM' timestamp='1266975086' post='2200230']
Being involved in the leadership of the people fighting TOP, no one has really talked about peace terms officially. There have been no official statement of harsh or crippling reps that is for sure so anyone who tells you otherwise doesn't know what they are talking about. Right now it is all opinion and nothing more.

I will tell you one thing, I will be ticked if the original 5 alliances who attacked C&G are let off with just a slap on the wrists no reps.
[/quote]

I was referring to the secondary and tertiary alliances, not the primary alliances.

I do appreciate your honesty, though.

[Myzebedeeistaken]

[quote name='Denial' date='24 February 2010 - 01:28 AM' timestamp='1266975103' post='2200233']
Or maybe, just maybe, an alliance that is more reasonable than TOP would work assiduously towards a peaceful, diplomatic solution to the 'problem' of criticism, rather than aggressively attack the alliances that are perceived to be responsible for such acts.
[/quote]

Sir, either you are being disingenuous or you are obtuse. In either case, perhaps you could take your thoughts to a more suitable venue than the announcement of a declaration of war between two friends of great history, albeit ones currently lacking in a paper saying of the deep regard which their body republics yet hold each other in? Perhaps I should thank you for continuing to prove some stereotypes are true, but alas that would lead me astray from our purpose for gathering here too.

I understand and appreciate how you must feel Fok. No support or aid when you dive in to fight Polaris, but under immense pressure to once more step into the war. It is sad to see us fight, but sadly not unsurprising.

[ikMark]

I am shocked and horrified by some of the responses here. I can't believe certain TOP'ers actually dare to call this 'betrayal' and start about 'but we gave you money'.

1. It was TOP who put us in this position, not MK. You can try to twist it all you want, but it was TOP who DoW'ed on MK.
2. What happens if you DoW on an alliance? Yes, you force the hand of their allies. MK needs help, and so FOK helps out. TOP knew this [b]before[/b] they attacked, so really.. don't even go there.
3. Saying that this whole war is a 'coalition war' suddenly makes it okay to send aid to direct opponents of FOK?

TOP, you had already attacked FOK before this DoW in 2 ways. Saying that 'you should've let FOK get destroyed in the UJW' and comments like that.. are not necessary and totally out of place. However, I am happy to see that there are also TOP'ers around who do get the situation, and understand FOK's position. You still make me feel warm inside.

Edited February 24, 2010 by ikMark

[Denial]

[quote name='Myzebedeeistaken' date='24 February 2010 - 11:17 AM' timestamp='1266976284' post='2200259']
Sir, either you are being disingenuous or you are obtuse. In either case, perhaps you could take your thoughts to a more suitable venue than the announcement of a declaration of war between two friends of great history, albeit ones currently lacking in a paper saying of the deep regard which their body republics yet hold each other in? Perhaps I should thank you for continuing to prove some stereotypes are true, but alas that would lead me astray from our purpose for gathering here too.[/quote]
No thanks. I'm quite comfortable here.

[Feanor Noldorin]

[quote name='Denial' date='23 February 2010 - 07:28 PM' timestamp='1266975103' post='2200233']
Or maybe, just maybe, an alliance that is more reasonable than TOP would work assiduously towards a peaceful, diplomatic solution to the 'problem' of criticism, rather than aggressively attack the alliances that are perceived to be responsible for such acts.
[/quote]
Our government would inform you that our [i]official[/i] stance towards you is that of neutral and that our our members are given the right to freely post on the OWF. You shouldn't take what they say to heart since they are not in the government. Like I said, it's gonna be a blast.

Edited February 24, 2010 by Feanor Noldorin

[Nizzle]

So this is why Umbrella had to stagger TSO.

[Denial]

[quote name='Feanor Noldorin' date='24 February 2010 - 11:25 AM' timestamp='1266976721' post='2200269']
Our government would inform you that our [i]official[/i] stance towards you is that of neutral and that our our members are given the right to freely post on the OWF. You shouldn't take what they say to heart since they are not in the government. Like I said, it's gonna be a blast.
[/quote]
Fantastic, so you are planning to adopt sensible policy following the war? Rather than immediately declare war because random members #23 and #48 hurt your feelings? I am happy to see Complaints & Grievances has already begun reforming TOP.

[Saber]

[quote name='AirMe' date='24 February 2010 - 02:16 AM' timestamp='1266974406' post='2200209']Unless you have proof other wise, this is a lie.
[/quote]
I have proof. Logs are good enough?

And no, it's not a lie, it's an unverified claim. Unverified claim is not a lie. But I have proof of it. I've said it was done by MHA (with observing and approval I presume of FOK) in an earlier thread. If they wish to challenge that we can arrange something.

[flak attack]

[quote name='Chalaskan' date='23 February 2010 - 04:51 PM' timestamp='1266962073' post='2199714']
There was no need, they had many other allies, as well as 21 or so alliances fighting TOP already. Incompetence was what let nations in PM, not the amount of nations on the top tier. Requesting other alliances to hit TOP would have been the smart move. I am truly saddened to see this in all aspects.
[/quote]
No, it was the number. There have been several nations that escaped into PM that we literally had no one to declare on.

[quote name='Saber' date='23 February 2010 - 05:15 PM' timestamp='1266963531' post='2199783']
Was Crymson in government at the time? Respond through proper channels.
[/quote]
Yes, he was indeed. MHA has been complaining about this since before your new gov was elected.

[quote name='Nizzle' date='23 February 2010 - 08:55 PM' timestamp='1266976753' post='2200271']
So this is why Umbrella had to stagger TSO.
[/quote]
FOK was all asleep anyway. They wouldn't have been able to help even if this wasn't happening.

[AirMe]

[quote name='Saber' date='23 February 2010 - 09:10 PM' timestamp='1266977669' post='2200303']
I have proof. Logs are good enough?

And no, it's not a lie, it's an unverified claim. Unverified claim is not a lie. But I have proof of it. I've said it was done by MHA (with observing and approval I presume of FOK) in an earlier thread. If they wish to challenge that we can arrange something.
[/quote]

Personally, I would like to see the logs.

[Snowbeast]

[quote name='Feanor Noldorin' date='23 February 2010 - 08:55 PM' timestamp='1266976721' post='2200269']
Our government would inform you that our [i]official[/i] stance towards you is that of neutral and that our our members are given the right to freely post on the OWF. You shouldn't take what they say to heart since they are not in the government. Like I said, it's gonna be a blast.
[/quote]
Wow planning the [i]war of words[/i] already? That really makes us want to grant you all peace. Fortunately for you CnG has thicker skin when it comes to [i]words[/i]. As an aside, if you honestly think you can out-[i]trash-talk[/i] MK you are delusional.

EDIT: Got rid of some references to sport fishing that could get me in trouble.

Edited February 24, 2010 by Snowbeast

[mmansfield68]

FOK, I'm sure if you were to desire an old FOK on TOP, there are a bevy of alliances ready to oblige....just sayin.

[Feanor Noldorin]

[quote name='Snowbeast' date='23 February 2010 - 08:18 PM' timestamp='1266978130' post='2200315']
Wow planning the war of words already? That really makes us want to grant you all peace. Fortunately for you CnG has thicker skin when it comes to words. As an aside, if you honestly think you can out-trash-talk MK you are delusional.

EDIT: Got rid of some references to sport fishing that could get me in trouble.
[/quote]
Perhaps I was being sarcastic?

Edit: No worries mate, fixed mine to. Alittle sportsmanship is nice.

Edited February 24, 2010 by Feanor Noldorin

[mmansfield68]

Nobody can FOK like FOK, on TOP or bottom. Masters, they are!

[Londo Mollari]

[quote name='Vladimir Stukov II' date='23 February 2010 - 08:21 PM' timestamp='1266974678' post='2200219']
Well usually when TOP posts bad things about other alliances it means we would like to see them burn. I guess CnG posts this way about everyone though so we had no reason to be concerned.
[/quote]

Interestingly enough, just disliking someone isn't reason enough for us to attack someone. It might be reason enough for you, but we're not used to the... hmm... shall we say, "hegemonic mindset"?

[Snowbeast]

[quote name='Londo Mollari' date='23 February 2010 - 09:25 PM' timestamp='1266978568' post='2200325']
Interestingly enough, just disliking someone isn't reason enough for us to attack someone. It might be reason enough for you, but we're not used to the... hmm... shall we say, "hegemonic mindset"?
[/quote]
I can see through you. You, sir, are a filthy hedge moneyist!

Edited February 24, 2010 by Snowbeast

[silentkiller]

[quote name='Londo Mollari' date='24 February 2010 - 02:25 AM' timestamp='1266978568' post='2200325']
Interestingly enough, just disliking someone isn't reason enough for us to attack someone. It might be reason enough for you, but we're not used to the... hmm... shall we say, "hegemonic mindset"?
[/quote]

Yeah you just attack without any reason whatsoever. I.e Knights of Ni!

[TailsK]

It's disappointing to see people forget about old friendships so easily.

Edited February 24, 2010 by TailsK