The Easter Sunday Accords

[Omas Nams]

[quote name='Gamemaster1' date='08 April 2010 - 12:45 AM' timestamp='1270683935' post='2252275']
I call it as I see it. You published the Codex for all to see.
[/quote]

As do I, and I'm in a better position than you (as far as this is concerned).

[Goldie]

[quote name='Omas Nams' date='07 April 2010 - 07:40 PM' timestamp='1270683596' post='2252266']
Just had to reply to this. We do not hate you, and never have, and we are not 'breaking' the Codex (not that it can be) and I do not see why people always feel the need to try and make it out that we are as it has no bearing what so ever and I don't really see why an external source should be commenting on something purely internal.

Anyways, as you were.
[/quote]

I can understand the 'we don't hate IRON' because we aren't mind readers, maybe you guys don't hate them.

What can't be debated is that you guys aren't 'breaking' the Codex. Which I guess is true, seeing as you have already broken several articles of it just in this war alone.

Stay classy Ramlins, the list of alliances that consider you honorable has shrank to nothingness, I can only hope the list of alliances that call you friends or allies can shrink as well.

[Dochartaigh]

[quote name='Omas Nams' date='07 April 2010 - 06:40 PM' timestamp='1270683596' post='2252266']
Just had to reply to this. We do not hate you, and never have, and we are not 'breaking' the Codex (not that it can be) and I do not see why people always feel the need to try and make it out that we are as it has no bearing what so ever and I don't really see why an external source should be commenting on something purely internal.

Anyways, as you were.
[/quote]

if this is true, then should Gremlins ever lose a war, i can't wait for the victors to state that Gremlins need to disband their military and accept an unconditional surrender. but most importantly, i can't wait to see if Gremlins accepts the demands or balks at them as being dishonorable. unfortunately for Gremlins, this action will set a precedent for Gremlins to come. this means should Ram ever leave gov, any future gov will now have to worry about these kinds of demands coming their way.

so, to state you are not breaking the Codex obviously means that Gremlins will accept the demands they are offering to DAWN and IRON. if you do not, then you break the Codex. this may happen in the future, but it will still mean that the Codex is broken and then will be useless. so good job on helping with that.

[AnCapistan]

[quote name='Omas Nams' date='07 April 2010 - 04:40 PM' timestamp='1270683596' post='2252266']
(not that it can be)
[/quote]

Huh? If you can't violate the document doesn't that make it kind of pointless?

Edited April 8, 2010 by Mr Damsky

[Bob Janova]

It can be violated, is being violated and one suspects will continue to be violated as long as Ramirus is in power and in control of their actions on this front.

Regarding Grub's long post, it is mostly self-serving post hoc attempts at justification. If you can't be around all the time during a war that you started, which is understandable, you need to have other government officials who can conduct talks in your absence. You not being around in the critical hours is no justification for Polar selling out TOP and IRON.

I particularly want to pick out one point, though.
[quote]I will respectfully submit my friend that TOP clearly did not state they were joining the Polar Coalition[/quote]
It is clearly stated in the infamous [url=http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=79441]TOP DoW[/url] that they consider themselves a part of the coalition:
[quote]To our opponents: We agree with the New Polar Order's reasons for war against \m/, and we consider ourselves part of that particular side of the war.

...

To [i]all[/i] alongside whom we fight in this larger war: You have our support. We stand together.[/quote]
You can take the debate about the elided section and the later log of Crymson regarding their motivation for entering where they did, but it is clear there that TOP believed they were a part of the coalition and that they were entering to support it. And you peaced out, turned around and attacked them. No amount of justificatory (I know that's not a word but it should be ...) walls of text will change that [i]fact[/i].

[D34th]

[quote name='The Crimson King' date='07 April 2010 - 09:19 PM' timestamp='1270682368' post='2252237']
You could have [b]tried[/b] to get a damn ticker tape parade thrown in Ivan's honor for all it matters.

This has nothing to do with what you tried to do and has everything to do with what you actually [b]did[/b]

No amount of revisionist history is going to change the simple fact that you decided to accept a white peace in a war you started while not first negotiating and ensuring a peace for the ally that came in to defend you.

The fact that you did it twice to the same ally in a matter of weeks...well...lets not even go there
[/quote]

You are just showing how much you don't know about the matter, We didn't accepted white peace, \m/ did, I recognize that one of our big mistakes was left the surrender terms who almost were just white peace open of being accepted any time that \m/ want but I don't remember Ivan or NSO saying they don't agree with that at least in public, so our fault was no communicate that \m/ had accepted the surrender terms to NSO and we already recognized that but this was due communication problems not because we tried to damage NSO.

After that NSO had white peace until they choose to redeclare on FARK and while I understand and don't blame NSO for that you can't blame us for that, and after this they only had to do a beer review to achieve peace, we declared on GOD did our best for NSO accept the terms but is impossible to help who doesn't want help, and whatever was the reason of NSO don't accept to do the beer reviews and get peace we had no obligations in stay in war any longer in the conflict, the curious thing about it is that after we declared peace with SF/VE/Friends and NSO canceled their treaty with us they accepted to do the FARK's review who was available long before.

[Wad of Lint]

[quote name='D34th' date='07 April 2010 - 08:19 PM' timestamp='1270685958' post='2252336']
After that NSO had white peace until they choose to redeclare on FARK and while I understand and don't blame NSO for that you can't blame us for that, and after this they only had to do a beer review to achieve peace, we declared on GOD did our best for NSO accept the terms but is impossible to help who doesn't want help, and whatever was the reason of NSO don't accept to do the beer reviews and get peace we had no obligations in stay in war any longer in the conflict, the curious thing about it is that after we declared peace with SF/VE/Friends and NSO canceled their treaty with us they accepted to do the FARK's review who was available long before.
[/quote]

You were not part of the peace discussions. I was. We were not offered white peace.

[Corinan]

[quote name='D34th' date='07 April 2010 - 08:19 PM' timestamp='1270685958' post='2252336']
After that NSO had white peace
[/quote]

No we didnt.....

Randomly Jim straight up told us that we would not be getting peace.

[mythicknight]

[quote name='D34th' date='07 April 2010 - 08:19 PM' timestamp='1270685958' post='2252336']
After that NSO had white peace until they choose to redeclare on FARK
[/quote]

Erm, wrong. If memory serves, NSO was flatly denied any sort of peace when white peaces began to be handed out like candy before CnG got hit.

edit: grammer

Edited April 8, 2010 by mythicknight

[Jrenster]

[quote name='D34th' date='07 April 2010 - 08:19 PM' timestamp='1270685958' post='2252336']
After that NSO had white peace until they choose to redeclare on FARK and while I understand and don't blame NSO for that you can't blame us for that, and after this they only had to do a beer review to achieve peace, we declared on GOD did our best for NSO accept the terms but is impossible to help who doesn't want help, and whatever was the reason of NSO don't accept to do the beer reviews and get peace we had no obligations in stay in war any longer in the conflict, the curious thing about it is that after we declared peace with SF/VE/Friends and NSO canceled their treaty with us they accepted to do the FARK's review who was available long before.
[/quote]

We did want help. And you did help. Just in the wrong places. Do you just want to ignore the fact that Fark was a better target? And the fact that your Imperator Emeritus just said that you did not declare on Fark just because you liked them better than us?

And that issue on the peace offer is a blatant lie. Fark never once did not come to Moldavi offering peace. You must be talking about that 20-minute ultimatum where Fark told Moldavi to accept the surrender with the beer review before it was withdrawn, while threatening that any future offer would consequently include reparations. That is not a peace offer. That is an attempt to shove surrender down our throats when we were still fighting for our friends. And do you want to know why we got peace? Because we were right in the middle of trying to get peace negotiations started up. The fact that you peaced out during that time shows how much you were helping us get peace.

[Delta1212]

[quote name='mythicknight' date='07 April 2010 - 08:29 PM' timestamp='1270686532' post='2252347']
Erm, wrong. If memory serves, NSO was flatly denied any sort of peace when white peaces began to be handed out like candy before CnG got hit.

edit: grammer
[/quote]
That's not [i]strictly[/i] accurate. Fark initially wanted NSO to guarantee they wouldn't redeclare on them after peace was acheived. NSO didn't like that since no one else had had that stipulation. That was the sticking point up until Ivan redeclared.

Edit: Oh, and I do know that Jim queried Grub not long before NSO redeclared trying to work on peace (since Fark-NSO talks were not exactly productive by that point). I don't actually remember whether that went anywhere, though.

Edited April 8, 2010 by Delta1212

[Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz]

[quote name='Some-Guy' date='08 April 2010 - 09:13 AM' timestamp='1270678402' post='2252145']
TOP only has room for one grudge at a time, thank you very much.
[/quote]
TOP's mistake in this war just past was forgetting about that grudge, mind you.

[Lord Curzon]

[quote name='D34th' date='07 April 2010 - 08:19 PM' timestamp='1270685958' post='2252336']
You are just showing how much you don't know about the matter, We didn't accepted white peace, \m/ did, I recognize that one of our big mistakes was left the surrender terms who almost were just white peace open of being accepted any time that \m/ want but I don't remember Ivan or NSO saying they don't agree with that at least in public, so our fault was no communicate that \m/ had accepted the surrender terms to NSO and we already recognized that but this was due communication problems not because we tried to damage NSO.

After that NSO had white peace until they choose to redeclare on FARK and while I understand and don't blame NSO for that you can't blame us for that, and after this they only had to do a beer review to achieve peace, we declared on GOD did our best for NSO accept the terms but is impossible to help who doesn't want help, and whatever was the reason of NSO don't accept to do the beer reviews and get peace we had no obligations in stay in war any longer in the conflict, the curious thing about it is that after we declared peace with SF/VE/Friends and NSO canceled their treaty with us they accepted to do the FARK's review who was available long before.
[/quote]

No they definitely can blame you for that. They were backing up an ally who came in to support you because of their ties to NSO. They were finishing the job you started and doing the correct thing in backing their allies and doing everything they could not to leave a war before their allies.

NSO can also blame you for peacing out \m/. Obviously \m/ accepted peace, but you had to put your signature on that document. You could have held off and ensured that your allies were out first. You could have done a ceasefire in the meantime, but by no means did the fact that \m/ accepted mean you had to immediately peace out. You were leading a coalition but were only concerned with your own selfish war aims. When people started hoping in to defend you, it was no longer about you, it was about the group you were leading. Everyone knows that which is why your attempts to change the narrative are laughable.

And with respect to TOP not being part of the coalition, that is flagrantly not true. They were in the planning room and were in contact with coalition leadership. Any attempt to spin that is ridiculous.

[Näktergal]

[quote name='Delta1212' date='07 April 2010 - 08:34 PM' timestamp='1270686862' post='2252352']
That's not [i]strictly[/i] accurate. Fark initially wanted NSO to guarantee they wouldn't redeclare on them after peace was acheived. NSO didn't like that since no one else had had that stipulation. That was the sticking point up until Ivan redeclared.

Edit: Oh, and I do know that Jim queried Grub not long before NSO redeclared trying to work on peace (since Fark-NSO talks were not exactly productive by that point). I don't actually remember whether that went anywhere, though.
[/quote]
I thought the sticking point was that Ivan demanded the semantic distinction that the NSO was being given peace rather than actually surrendering, and that upon being told that no one else felt like playing his particular game, he decided to prolong the war indefinitely?

[Lord Curzon]

[quote name='mythicknight' date='07 April 2010 - 08:29 PM' timestamp='1270686532' post='2252347']
Erm, wrong. If memory serves, NSO was flatly denied any sort of peace when white peaces began to be handed out like candy before CnG got hit.

edit: grammer
[/quote]

after CnG got hit.

[Heft]

[quote name='D34th' date='07 April 2010 - 05:45 PM' timestamp='1270680307' post='2252177']
Exactly because unlike NSO we appreciated and were thankful for what they did for us and we don't say that they efforts were useless and symbolic. If fact if there are a ungrateful alliance it is NSO.
[/quote]
Even when it was clear that the attack on GOD was done more to pacify the Polaris Body Republic than to materially help us, we didn't really complain, at least not publicly. The reaction was more "Well that's an odd choice, but I guess they're at least doing something." It wasn't until after you declared war on TOP and began materially helping the forces against us that complaints started to become more frequent, and still we managed to stay remarkably patient, all things considered, up until we learned [i]from our enemies[/i] that Polar was yet again completely leaving us on the field.

Yes, after that point, we began to make our displeasure more publicly known.

[quote name='Omas Nams' date='07 April 2010 - 06:40 PM' timestamp='1270683596' post='2252266']
Just had to reply to this. We do not hate you, and never have, and we are not 'breaking' the Codex (not that it can be) and I do not see why people always feel the need to try and make it out that we are as it has no bearing what so ever and I don't really see why an external source should be commenting on something purely internal.

Anyways, as you were.
[/quote]
No, you are breaking your codex. Also, war is not an internal matter.

[Sephiroth]

[quote name='Näktergal' date='07 April 2010 - 08:43 PM' timestamp='1270687418' post='2252363']
I thought the sticking point was that Ivan demanded the semantic distinction that the NSO was being given peace rather than actually surrendering, and that upon being told that no one else felt like playing his particular game, he decided to prolong the war indefinitely?
[/quote]
It was because of the no re-entry clause mostly. NSO didn't want to agree to letting an ally get beat on by whoever feels like it for as long as they want in what was being called a new war by CnG. At least that was why I was against it.

I had felt NSO should retain the power to help IRON should alliances attack IRON for unrelated reasons or pull stuff like Gremlins are now. I think Ivan agreed and wouldn't accept peace terms with a no re-entry clause for so long due to that.

Edited April 8, 2010 by Methrage

[Delta1212]

[quote name='Näktergal' date='07 April 2010 - 08:43 PM' timestamp='1270687418' post='2252363']
I thought the sticking point was that Ivan demanded the semantic distinction that the NSO was being given peace rather than actually surrendering, and that upon being told that no one else felt like playing his particular game, he decided to prolong the war indefinitely?
[/quote]
That's basically what it devolved to after the redeclaration. At the start, Fark had just helped counter IRON's blitz. They didn't want to declare peace with NSO and then have them turn around and immediately redeclare with Fark no longer able to effectively re-engage. NSO didn't like that because everyone else just peaced out, but really, nobody else was in a position where an immediate attack by the person they were already fighting seemed like a probable outcome. It made that front problematic.

Edited April 8, 2010 by Delta1212

[Eddard Stark]

I am fairly sure that NpO or NSO are not the subject of this topic. I am also fairly sure there was already a warning about this. So, let's stop the derailment or the topic will be closed and warnings handed. This is the last warning.

[AlmightyGrub]

Did Polaris screw TOP? Yep.

Did it do it intentionally (initially)? No

Did it subsequently take a dump on them from a great height? Yep.

Do I particularly care? Maybe not so much anymore.

Did Polaris screw NSO? Yep

Did Polaris screw NSO twice? Nope, the second time you screwed yourselves, but if you feel happier blaming me, feel free I dont actually care.

Did Polaris do plenty of things in a substandard manner? Yep, I have already stated clearly that I did so.

Are there lots of other factors, variables and egos involved? Yep, plenty.

If you want to crucify me, feel free, some time on the cross with Walford may cleanse me of my sins. I don't really care either way to be honest. I have stated what I believed to be the truth, you can accept it, reject it or merely laugh, it will not change what I did, what I believe about other people nor will it bring back all your lovely pixels. If it is easier to blame me for everything, take no personal responsibility for your own positions or agendas, then do so. I ceased caring a fair while ago about what the peanuts gallery thinks.

Ultimately I started a global conflict..whoops. Like it hasn't been done before and like it wont happen again. See you next time the nukes are flying I guess. I have some regrets, I made some errors and I upset some people, you wont absolve me or even give credence when I try to explain , so learn to live with it.. I will.

See most of you in hell? Sounds like a date.

[The Crimson King]

Edit: Disregard... not derailing the topic further

Edited April 8, 2010 by The Crimson King

[Sephiroth]

Congrats on peace to all.

Edit: Don't want to go off topic. >_>

Edited April 8, 2010 by Methrage

[poach]

[quote name='AlmightyGrub' date='07 April 2010 - 09:05 PM' timestamp='1270688724' post='2252421']

Ultimately I started a global conflict..whoops. Like it hasn't been done before and like it wont happen again.
[/quote]

You deserve some kind of badge for that. Right or wrong, good or bad, it's not everyone who can make that claim and back it up.

[Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz]

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='08 April 2010 - 04:24 AM' timestamp='1270661046' post='2251790']
I contend that moral obligations are of a higher necessity than are treaty obligations.
[/quote]
Alternatively, I'd prefer to posit that they can be, and often are, one and the same in terms of "necessity".

[Sephiroth]

Gremlins respond to force and still have plenty of nations with lots of fighting strength left, trying to argue with words alone won't get you anywhere. Either IRON unconditionally surrenders or Gremlins get hit hard enough they would rather end it. I don't think they're prepared to just peace out yet.