Notice of Cancellation

[Il Impero Romano]

[quote name='Ivan Moldavi' date='24 February 2010 - 04:37 PM' timestamp='1267029675' post='2201551']
I was told by Randomly Jim that the beer review was our indication of surrender.

I have never claimed that the NSO was winning. I knew from our first declaration against FOK, an alliance twice our size at the time, that we were entering a losing battle, regardless of any grand plans on the periphery. And yet the NSO declared anyway.

If the original bargain, that the front wouldn't close until all combatants got white peace, had been upheld from the beginning then the sides in regards to the current conflict would have been more even, so that point doesn't fit.

The NSO has lost 70% of it's NS. Obviously we have lost this war, but we will not surrender. I have given my word to my membership in that regard and no amount of discussion will ever see me lie to my members.
[/quote]

I don't understand whats wrong with surrendering when one has been soundly defeated. Personally, I hold realistic admission and recognition of the circumstances in higher regard then martyrdom and making a public spectacle.

I understand Polar's position. Because some misplaced sense of pride stopped you from writing two paragraphs that, for all practical purposes, did not even need to be real, you cost them millions of NS. Yes, when you break it down, its millions of NS for a paragraph. Considering this, them going back into the fray for you all is above and beyond, and staying there for weeks while you continued to stick your feet in the mud over something so trivial is an even further display of loyalty. NSO is no different then any other alliance. Others have accepted the beer review, an admission of surrender, non reentry, etc, what makes you all any different? What is so special about the New Sith Order that an ally, who you apparently held in very high regard prior to this, should sit there and bleed because you have assigned a false principal to a paragraph? At what point does your false sense of self entitlement become disrespectful and insulting to your ally? Right around now I would say.

Now, I'm no "sith hater", I never have been, but honestly this is all not resonating very well with those of us who never really had it out for you guys in the first place.

Edited February 24, 2010 by Il Impero Romano

[deathcat]

[quote name='The Pansy' date='24 February 2010 - 09:24 AM' timestamp='1267032498' post='2201631']
So are my....... wait, never mind
[/quote]


Come on.. say it.. Pimp? Supplier? Sugar Daddy?

sooooo off-topic.. May NSO find the peace they deserve ..

[Choader]

[quote name='Ivan Moldavi' date='24 February 2010 - 09:31 AM' timestamp='1267032885' post='2201637']
NSO declared on FOK a good deal of time before PC entered the war.
[/quote][s]
Sorry, a correction. Aside from NSO no one has had more days at war then PC.[/s]

Edit: Actually, that's not true. You came in four days after we declared on Polar and we re-entered three days after peace on that front.

Edited February 24, 2010 by Choader

[Varianz]

This is quickly degenerating into something it was never supposed to be- an public argument between Polaris and the NSO. I regret that our relationship has come to this, but from our perspective it was necessary. Do we hope to someday rebuild the relationship? Of course. You know where to find us. We've shed blood together, and that will not be forgotten. Thank you for what you did for us Polar. Best of luck.

[The AUT]

[quote name='raasaa' date='24 February 2010 - 03:27 PM' timestamp='1267025472' post='2201463']
Only difference being, he will do it. They are already at war with TOP...TSO isn't too far away. When watchman does wigglie out of peace mode, there is a chance that he gets to meet Grub.

While in your case, its all talk and no action
[/quote]

Look an axe to grind!

Grub's nothing more than a joke, so he hits watchmen and is still the laughing stock of CN. Must be great! Also, I'd take watchmen in such a fight.

Also, don't take this personally, I don't think TFD should be allied to you and think you guys are nothing more than a war weather alliance no matter what you did for Polaris. I said I'd attack ODN, was one of the first in and one of the last out. Whereas you decided to not even defend the alliance that defended you. I've honestly no idea why this treaty is still in place, it's clear it's a one-way relationship. I just don't like you, but there is no place for this in this thread.

Though in terms of Polaris, I think you two are perfect for one another.

[quote]it is right and proper for Polaris to stick to the side more ideologically aligned with itself[/quote]

[list]

[*]So the time line is Polaris starts a war due to \m/'s poor conduct and tech raids.
[*]IRON and TOP agrees with Polaris and fights alongside them.
[*]Many alliances declare on Polaris, NSO counter declares in defense of Polaris.
[*]Polaris seeing it's in a fight that it can't win declares a stalemate with \m/
[*]NSO continues to fight to fulfill its treaty obligations with another alliance.
[*]Polaris feels it shouldn't fight for NSO despite the fact NSO entered into this mess of a two-front war because it doesn't agree with those that supported them when they began the war.
[*]Polaris then runs to the other side begging for forgiveness leaving its allies who stuck up for them out to dry due to "ideological differences."
[/list]

[b][color="#0000FF"]Bi-Polar Order[/color][/b]

Edited February 24, 2010 by The AUT

[Wad of Lint]

[quote name='Il Impero Romano' date='24 February 2010 - 12:33 PM' timestamp='1267032994' post='2201640']
What is so special about the New Sith Order that an ally, who you apparently held in very high regard prior to this, should sit there and bleed because you have assigned a false principal to a paragraph?
[/quote]

First, we were wronged before Polar entered in "defense" of us on GOD. Frankly, we didn't need help with GOD, and they knew it. Their entrance was, in my opinion, a last ditch effort to save diplomatic relations. Unfortunately, it wasn't enough and it was executed poorly. This may be a result of the conditions of this war, or it could be a result of policy decisions. I do not pretend to know. Second, even though we may hold decision-making power in our alliance we do not make the mistake of considering the memberships wishes unimportant. I will not be the one to go above them and surrender.

[AirMe]

[quote name='Ivan Moldavi' date='24 February 2010 - 12:27 PM' timestamp='1267032678' post='2201633']
The NSO never got a ceasefire. Not sure what you are talking about.
[/quote]

You declared a unilateral cease fire yes? Also, it should be noted that I understand about the not wanting to surrender bit. GW2 when I was negotiating peace for the League we settled on an admission of defeat and only one of the opposing alliances complained about it. That alliance was told to sit down and shut up by the rest of you.

So to those saying Surrender = Admission of defeat may technically be correct. But an admission of defeat sounds better, is better for morale and in most cases in this conflict is a more accurate term than surrender.

[Jim Bob the Glorious]

Like all discussions here, the truth means little yet I'll provide it anyways.

As the Polar vs \m/ war wound down, Fark asked everyone for a beer review. From Carpe Diem to STA, that was our condition. STA complained because we had not exchanged even a cruise missile. My membership and gov had a general like for STA and we dropped the demand and moved on. We desired an end to the Shortbus war.

We didn't view the Beer review as a term of surrender and if you look back at that thread you will see that we agreed to do one ourselves. We still don't. Yet we do have our traditions and we will continue them. You fight in anger, you drink in peace.

Its important to note that Ivan Moldavi never came to Fark for peace for NSO during this time. We spoke but the topic was getting out its TC allies. The conversation was short, Ivan had to leave for class, but appointed Lintwad his voice.

Fark, Lintwad, and its allies in TC entered a channel and discussed terms. It was then that we, Fark, mentioned our concern that if we peaced out on NSO then they may still come back and hit us again in support of IRON. Even worse, they may hit one of our allies. Lintwad agreed that it was a possibility, stated that he would talk to Ivan and get back with us.

Days go by and we peace out everyone else but never hear from Ivan or Lintwad. Unable to track them down via IRC during those 4 or 5 days, we spoke with Polar. It is during our talks with Polar trying to arrange peace for NSO that we get declared on.

While Ivan was unable to find the time to talk with us, his post count on these forums grew ever larger. It is from these posts that we learn that his issue is 'Beer Review'. It is in his posts on this forum that he states that a way to move past it would be for Fark to agree to a Health Food review.

Review the logs I have already posted. You will see our agreement, at that time, to exchange reviews. Also notice that Ivan has repeatedly lied that he was never offered peace yet the logs exist. Fark was working to get NSO out.

Ivan also likes to claim that he has gave White Peace during Karma. A quick check of the terms given TPF proves interesting. You see trivial joke reps, you see a recognition of surrender. A quick check of the terms given DOOM and ML is also interesting. It contains provisions about staying out of war, not aiding the enemy, and a notice of surrender.

When Ivan gives 'White Peace' to others, it contains many of the same things he rejected in our 'peace'. This isnt a shock. He's long claimed one thing and done another. He doesn't play CN, he plays OWF.

Going forward, NSO will not be getting 'White Peace' from Fark. They have been given many chances to get out at terms they found acceptable only to back away without notice. Like everyone else that Fark fights today, if they want peace it will come through surrender.

[Laserwolf]

I'm saddened to see the relationship between Polaris and NSO deteriorate to this point. I hope amends can be made in the future.

Good luck to both Polaris and NSO.

[Stormsend]

[quote name='The AUT' date='24 February 2010 - 11:39 AM' timestamp='1267033391' post='2201650']
Look an axe to grind!

Grub's nothing more than a joke...
[/quote]
Pot and kettle.

[uaciaut]

[quote name='delendum' date='24 February 2010 - 08:43 AM' timestamp='1266994044' post='2200926']
Pretty much how the NSO would never force their allies to remain in a war by virtue of refusing to accept something silly like doing a beer review?
[/quote]

Pretty much. And i don't want to go into the whole "making a beer review is such a humiliating way of accepting this bad thing called surrender" issue. Defeat means exactly that - death or surrender, there's no gray between it like Vladimir used to say when revising the whole WW1 thing or how Ivan claimed "i lost the war, not NPO".

Maybe you'll get some white peace in a non-so-near future out of Fark's being too tired to hear the same stubborness over and over again and you'll be proud of it much like a child is proud of getting his toy after screaming to his parent for so long (OOC: reminds me of a funny commercial) but i doubt it will actually mean anything by then.

Still as much as i don't like you keeping NpO to the opposite front of MK for that reason props for not being all talk and staying to your word i guess

[Branimir]

[quote name='Il Impero Romano' date='24 February 2010 - 06:33 PM' timestamp='1267032994' post='2201640']I understand Polar's position. Because some misplaced sense of pride stopped you from writing two paragraphs [/quote]

I understand that some want to push this line in some kind of really failed attempt at making things look better for Polars. And if they repeat that line for 156783 times as they usually do in such cases of propaganda push, they hope they will succeed in selling it.

But lets put things into context here. Polaris had a political, moral, military, friendship and treaty obligation to secure peace for NSO when they pulled out originally. They failed.

Ivan said openly here, how initially there was no plan to re enter and to correct this. That came to be only after a epic backfire in public opinion for Polaris. Then they deploy marginally justification for that how they can not muster more although they later on continue to declare on TOP (the most war prepared alliance out there) also effectively putting themselves on the side in opposition to NSO completely then nulling any possible effort in defending NSO to begin with.

After everything, they again sell out NSO, by peacing out leaving them again to dry. NSO didn't want to make a beer review? Their right to have that stand, irrelevant what you think of it, and Polaris obligation after everything to help their ally and back them in what their ally deems right as NSO did when declaring in their defense in the first place-- in a stupid war NpO started. Allies back allies, friendship>infra, isn't that the mantra here?

Whatever really, this all makes my head hurt.

Edited February 24, 2010 by Branimir

[Electron Sponge]

[quote name='The AUT' date='24 February 2010 - 05:39 PM' timestamp='1267033391' post='2201650']
:words:
[/quote]
You're trying way, way too hard and still failing.

[The AUT]

[quote name='Electron Sponge' date='24 February 2010 - 05:50 PM' timestamp='1267034013' post='2201676']
You're trying way, way too hard and still failing.
[/quote]

Excellent refutation. But honestly, how does this make you feel:

[IMG]http://i473.photobucket.com/albums/rr96/TheAUT/naac.jpg[/IMG]

[hizzy]

[quote name='The AUT' date='24 February 2010 - 09:51 PM' timestamp='1267034129' post='2201677']
Excellent refutation. But honestly, how does this make you feel:

[IMG]http://i473.photobucket.com/albums/rr96/TheAUT/naac.jpg[/IMG]
[/quote]

It's like the harder you try the harder you fail.

[CaptainImpavid]

Now, I may be mistaken, but hasn't every alliance Fark has been engaged with, or well near all of them, that has peaced out been asked/required to do a beer review? If so, then how is asking NSO to do likewise now "offering them the same terms everyone else got?"

From the logs Jim posted, it looked like the beer review was going to be met with the reciprocation of Fark doing a health food review, so it isn't exactly like you were being degraded because your opponent was going to be doing THE EXACT SAME THING, a concession I don't believe they offered to anyone else. Is that the treatment that "no one else got" that irks you? That they were more fair and magnanimous with you than with anyone else, and more by far then they had to be?

The jabber about Fark, CSN, GO, GOD, or anyone wanting to keep NSO in the war to hurt or destroy them is utterly absurd. However, given that we aren't being hurt as badly by NSO as they are being hurt by us, it IS true that we don't have quite the vested interest in peace that NSO has. They (apparently) desperately want peace. Us? Well, it would be ok, I guess, but it isn't making us sweat either way. And if NSO wants peace so much more they have to be willing to be more flexible.

As I pointed out in the thread where NSO re-declared on Fark in defense of IRON, you can't simultaneously boast "we'll gladly fight to the last" and at the same time lament "oh it hurts us so bad you aren't playing fair!" Those songs aren't in the same key.

I will reiterate for all those interested enough to listen or comprehend: CSN, Fark, et al do not seek the destruction of NSO, or get any other kicks at their humiliation. The poetic justice of their beating after months of swagger and libelous attacks on CSN was pretty sweet, but that enjoyment lasted all of a few minutes, after which our collective attentions were taken up with fighting our best on many fronts. NSO isn't, in our eyes, in any way special or significant except in terms of their persistent attempts to smear our names in public.

To which, as Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Commonwealth of Sovereign Nations, my official response is: meh. You can think whatever you want about us, but propagating falsehoods will be met with, well, the truth.

[SpiderJerusalem]

You may not have the support of my alliance, but you do have my personal support Polar

[Chief Savage Man]

[quote name='The AUT' date='24 February 2010 - 12:51 PM' timestamp='1267034129' post='2201677']
Excellent refutation. But honestly, how does this make you feel:

[IMG]http://i473.photobucket.com/albums/rr96/TheAUT/naac.jpg[/IMG]
[/quote]

Christ, that was like three years ago.

[Wad of Lint]

[quote name='Jim Bob the Glorious' date='24 February 2010 - 12:42 PM' timestamp='1267033536' post='2201654']
Review the logs I have already posted. You will see our agreement, at that time, to exchange reviews. Also notice that Ivan has repeatedly lied that he was never offered peace yet the logs exist. Fark was working to get NSO out.
[/quote]

Peace talks always included the review which has been a sticking point to our membership.

[Il Impero Romano]

[quote name='Wad of Lint' date='24 February 2010 - 05:39 PM' timestamp='1267033394' post='2201651']
First, we were wronged before Polar entered in "defense" of us on GOD. Frankly, we didn't need help with GOD, and they knew it. Their entrance was, in my opinion, a last ditch effort to save diplomatic relations. Unfortunately, it wasn't enough and it was executed poorly. This may be a result of the conditions of this war, or it could be a result of policy decisions. I do not pretend to know. Second, even though we may hold decision-making power in our alliance we do not make the mistake of considering the memberships wishes unimportant. I will not be the one to go above them and surrender.
[/quote]

All may be very true, but not exactly of high bearing on the crux of the issue. You may not want to go over your memberships head, but there comes a time when a realistic chat is needed if they are not naturally taking to reason.

The fact still stands that there is nothing different about the NSO in this war when put pound for pound alongside any other alliance who's fought well but been/will be/whatever ultimately defeated. Whether or not its the membership or the government that believes there is some type of entitlement that sets you all apart from everyone else, it does not make a difference because in reality no such differential exists. The fact of the matter is friends were unnecessarily taking a beating because of that belief, and I don't understand how anyone, such as the OP, can blame them for saying enough is enough.

If, as you allude, its the members and not the gov who are dead set on the believing you guys are entitled to something you (or anyone) are not, I believe a long, blunt chat is needed. In the nation of Il Impero Romano, children are often upset when they first learn Papa Natale is not real, but soon they get over it and are just as happy as before.

Edited February 24, 2010 by Il Impero Romano

[Stormsend]

[quote name='Electron Sponge' date='24 February 2010 - 11:50 AM' timestamp='1267034013' post='2201676']
You're trying way, way too hard and still failing.
[/quote]
It's like he's making the propaganda for us.

[Branimir]

[quote name='CaptainImpavid' date='24 February 2010 - 06:54 PM' timestamp='1267034266' post='2201682']I will reiterate for all those interested enough to listen or comprehend: CSN, Fark, et al do not seek the destruction of NSO, or get any other kicks at their humiliation. [/quote]
That line would have some meaning behind it, if you dropped the beer review clause.

If what you say is true, and you do not want to humiliate NSO, then how benign you see that clause to be is irrelevant as its only relevant how NSO sees it. If they see it as humiliating, forcing it on them is to try to humiliate them. If its a irrelevant clause to you, dropping it wouldn't be a problem would it?

If you do not seek destruction of NSO which already lost big majority of strength they had-- at this point when they are being reduced to rubble-- you would back off and end it. To continue at this point is purely to completely destroy them.

Maybe you should think about what you are trying to sell here.

[Electron Sponge]

[quote name='The AUT' date='24 February 2010 - 05:51 PM' timestamp='1267034129' post='2201677']
Excellent refutation. But honestly, how does this make you feel:

[IMG]http://i473.photobucket.com/albums/rr96/TheAUT/naac.jpg[/IMG]
[/quote]
It makes me feel like Grub moved up in the world after NAAC's second straight loss to my alliance. Seriously, you're going to trot out NAAC? Do you think this is February 2007 and I'll turn into a frothing, rampaging lunatic at the sight of an old enemy's flag? Trying too hard.

But anyway we're talking about NSO canceling on Polar and not old, failed alliances like NAAC.
[quote name='Mundokiir' date='24 February 2010 - 06:01 PM' timestamp='1267034693' post='2201703']
It's like he's making the propaganda for us.
[/quote]
Imagine a whole alliance filled with people like that.

[Wad of Lint]

The crux of the issue, my friend, is that we have been jerked around, and as a result have made our decision in regards to Polaris. The points behind any other "issue" as people wish to twist them, does not make a difference as far as how we've been treated by the very alliance we came in to defend.

[AirMe]

[quote name='The AUT' date='24 February 2010 - 12:51 PM' timestamp='1267034129' post='2201677']
Excellent refutation. But honestly, how does this make you feel:

[IMG]http://i473.photobucket.com/albums/rr96/TheAUT/naac.jpg[/IMG]
[/quote]

I personally request you stop using that image.

I should also note that the situations are not the same...in the least. And your use of LUE 2.0 propaganda is o so clever. You disgust me, which is sad because I was probably one of the last people on this planet to respect you.