Decree of the Sith

[Earogema]

[quote name='Pyroman' timestamp='1281418435' post='2409196']
I have thought about it for more than a second. Don't belittle me simply because you think you know everything. Had Rok waited to do a proper update blitz, the results would have been the same, only 1v1. The NSO wasn't scrambling to get into peace mode. In fact, up until Hoo made his post, we weren't sure war was going to happen. This is something that would have been obvious to anyone with half a brain as the NSO was still making attempts to reconcile the situation with RoK all the way up to that post.

Hoo made a rash decision to go to war, and his friends just came along for the blood. He didn't need them, he doesn't need them, and if anything all they're doing is delaying this (I'm looking you GOD, I figure you guys are behind any abruptly ended peace talks).

Also, are you trying to insinuate that the NSO is a bunch of peace mode warriors. They're not afraid to take on a bigger alliance, regardless of the odds stacked against them. I know their leadership well enough to know that they weren't even considering backing down, and that they still aren't. They're trying to find a fair way to resolve this, and as soon as that happens, all their friends will be there with them patting them on the back for a job well done.
[/quote]
First off, I never suggested they were peace mode warriors. I was a longtime ally of FAN by treaty myself. Peace mode is a tool of war. I support its use simply to mock attackers. I also realize that if you are the attacker, you have to act before they utilize this ridiculously powerful force field.

Secondly, are you certain that Hoo didn't ask his allies for help? I highly doubt you are.

Certainly I can understand why you would want a 1v1 Rok-NSO war. I want that myself. However, Rok needed to fill slots and the only way of effectively doing at that time was via calling in allies.

I mean, I don't get how you can argue you are being more strategic by staying out of a war to help an ally rebuild because they want to, and then argue that it is foolish for an alliance to call in allies to minimize damage taken/maximize the damage dealt.

Edited August 10, 2010 by Earogema

[Pyroman]

[quote name='Van Hoo III' timestamp='1281418721' post='2409209']
Sorry old friend, the NSO has already admitted to sending their nations into peace mode. Going from five to thirty in an hour or two also usually tips off your attacker.


And no, I don't see it as an act of cowardice. It is a universally accepted defensive tactic.
[/quote]
But you're not going to say that my assessment of your own strategy is completely wrong? I mean, I could have sworn that it came up in our conversation yesterday that you never asked for help, but I checked the logs and saw that I misinterpreted something you said.

Also, damn you for speaking up, I thought you would be off in NSO-land with an assault rifle in each hand screaming towards the heavens "tonight we dine in hell". What kind of a wartime leader are you?

Edited August 10, 2010 by Pyroman

[Aurion]

[quote name='Pyroman' timestamp='1281418435' post='2409196']
(I'm looking you GOD, I figure you guys are behind any abruptly ended peace talks).
[/quote]

[i]Impressive, now release your anger!

You must have sensed that your friends are in danger!~[/i]

[Van Hoo III]

[quote name='Pyroman' timestamp='1281418845' post='2409213']
But you're not going to say that my assessment of your own strategy is completely wrong? I mean, I could have sworn that it came up in our conversation yesterday that you never asked for help, but I checked the logs and saw that I misinterpreted something you said.

Also, damn you for speaking up, I thought you would be off in NSO-land with an assault rifle in each hand screaming towards the heavens "tonight we dine in hell". What kind of a wartime leader are you?
[/quote]

We had to ask for help due to our target going into peace mode. It wasn't our initial plan and we didn't want it to be 3, 4, 5 on one. When you tell your alliance to "be on at update" for a possible war, it is sort of hard to suddenly mobilize six hours early. We took whoever we had online with active nations, and that happened to be GOD and VE.

Also, my targets are turtling. Curse you, Krunk!

[Pyroman]

[quote name='Earogema' timestamp='1281418779' post='2409211']
First off, I never suggested they were peace mode warriors. I was a longtime ally of FAN by treaty myself. Peace mode is a tool of war. I support its use simply to mock attackers. I also realize that if you are the attacker, you have to act before they utilize this ridiculously powerful force field.

Secondly, are you certain that Hoo didn't ask his allies for help? I highly doubt you are.

Certainly I can understand why you would want a 1v1 Rok-NSO war. I want that myself. However, Rok needed to fill slots and the only way of effectively doing at that time was via calling in allies.

I mean, I don't get how you can argue you are being more strategic by staying out of a war to help an ally rebuild because they want to, and then argue that it is foolish for an alliance to call in allies to minimize damage taken/maximize the damage dealt.
[/quote]
Alright, I concede that you're probably right about SF's strategy. However, at this point, now that RoK clearly has the time to fill slots on their own, would it not make sense for the rest of SF to back down shortly after? I mean, we're talking about a group of alliances that prides itself on being "better than the hegemony" and favors white peace.

Also, NSO's allies can think for themselves. Of this, I assure you. If NSO says we should stay out, then we should stay out. And this doesn't even have anything to do with any crackpot "get da NPO" conspiracy theories. This is simply because the NSO feels this war is unjustified and that they'd be doing further injustice to drag us all into this. Its not even so that the rest of us can avoid a curb stomp, because the NSO has confided in us that they think this whole thing won't last very long. Not a single one of us is dumb enough to escalate a war that could end within a week otherwise.

[quote name='Aurion' timestamp='1281418928' post='2409214']
[i]Impressive, now release your anger!

You must have sensed that your friends are in danger!~[/i]
[/quote]
You're cute, can I keep you?

[Thunder Strike]

[quote name='Pyroman' timestamp='1281418435' post='2409196']
The NSO wasn't scrambling to get into peace mode. In fact, up until Hoo made his post, we weren't sure war was going to happen. This is something that would have been obvious to anyone with half a brain as the NSO was still making attempts to reconcile the situation with RoK all the way up to that post.
[/quote]

NSO's logic confuses me.

When told aiding a rogue will be considered an act of war you aid the rogue and call it a 'compromise'.
Then when after committing this act you believe war isn't going to happen.
Also, reconciling should come before the act of war, not after.

[Earogema]

[quote name='Pyroman' timestamp='1281419251' post='2409218']
Alright, I concede that you're probably right about SF's strategy. However, at this point, now that RoK clearly has the time to fill slots on their own, would it not make sense for the rest of SF to back down shortly after? I mean, we're talking about a group of alliances that prides itself on being "better than the hegemony" and favors white peace.

Also, NSO's allies can think for themselves. Of this, I assure you. If NSO says we should stay out, then we should stay out. And this doesn't even have anything to do with any crackpot "get da NPO" conspiracy theories. This is simply because the NSO feels this war is unjustified and that they'd be doing further injustice to drag us all into this. Its not even so that the rest of us can avoid a curb stomp, because the NSO has confided in us that they think this whole thing won't last very long. Not a single one of us is dumb enough to escalate a war that could end within a week otherwise.
[/quote]
I will concede that Rok can at this point fight the war on their own easily, and I will also concede that you have the right to stay out both on the grounds that you are a sovereign alliance and that your ally even told you to stay out.

[Pyroman]

[quote name='Van Hoo III' timestamp='1281419144' post='2409217']
We had to ask for help due to our target going into peace mode. It wasn't our initial plan and we didn't want it to be 3, 4, 5 on one. When you tell your alliance to "be on at update" for a possible war, it is sort of hard to suddenly mobilize six hours early. We took whoever we had online with active nations, and that happened to be GOD and VE.

Also, my targets are turtling. Curse you, Krunk!
[/quote]
Then I clearly stand corrected. So when are you going to call off the lackeys with a cool "we can take this from here guys"?

Krunk is an expert at annoying people. I know it first hand.

[quote name='Thunder Strike' timestamp='1281419273' post='2409220']
NSO's logic confuses me.

When told aiding a rogue will be considered an act of war you aid the rogue and call it a 'compromise'.
Then when after committing this act you believe war isn't going to happen.
Also, reconciling should come before the act of war, not after.
[/quote]
Its been proven that I was wrong in my statement. As for the "compromise", I suppose they felt that because sedrick was being attacked unjustifiably they would aid him to even things out a little. Its not exactly what I would call a "compromise" myself, but perhaps heft couldn't think of a better word.

[quote name='Earogema' timestamp='1281419420' post='2409226']
I will concede that Rok can at this point fight the war on their own easily, and I will also concede that you have the right to stay out both on the grounds that you are a sovereign alliance and that your ally even told you to stay out.
[/quote]

Thank you. And as per vanhoo's post above, you were definitely right, and I'm sorry I thought less of you for trying to prove me wrong.

Edited August 10, 2010 by Pyroman

[Heft]

[quote name='Thunder Strike' timestamp='1281419273' post='2409220']
NSO's logic confuses me.

When told aiding a rogue will be considered an act of war you aid the rogue and call it a 'compromise'.
Then when after committing this act you believe war isn't going to happen.
Also, reconciling should come before the act of war, not after.
[/quote]
Given the situation the other options were retaliate and actually defend the guy or do nothing and enable RoK's apparent disregard for us. That was my logic.

Also, if every alleged act of war resulted in war then everyone would basically always be at war.

[BlkAK47_002]

[quote name='the masheen' timestamp='1281418594' post='2409203']
I like it too, but what side of the treaty web am I on again?
[/quote]
You can't be serious....

[Midkn1ght]

[quote name='Haflinger' timestamp='1281418297' post='2409191']
Alliance for Happy Evolution And Defence
Hell-Fighters
Nations Empowered Against Totalitarianism
Piranha Platoon
The Buccaneers
The Corps
The Guard
The Red Rose
The Triple Entente
[/quote]

Thats so cute to try to hang that ragtag bunch of folks who called themselves non-alliances around us. But then again, reality tends to warp itself to what you want to see anyway.

[HeroofTime55]

[quote name='Thunder Strike' timestamp='1281419273' post='2409220']
Also, reconciling should come before the act of war, not after.
[/quote]Many of you don't seem to have a grasp on the concept of time. How can NSO reconcile an act of war before it occurs?

Of course the leadership (Read: those above Heft) are going to try and negotiate after the act, in an attempt to come to a reasonable, diplomatic solution. This is the way the world has always functioned. But apparently, things have changed, and it's now completely acceptable to ignore diplomatic efforts when you just really want a war that bad. I mean, RoK made no attempt to even feign diplomacy. It's a new low for CN as a whole.

Edited August 10, 2010 by HeroofTime55

[Mussolandia]

Best of luck, guys.

[the masheen]

[quote name='BlkAK47002' timestamp='1281419594' post='2409231']
You can't be serious....
[/quote]

Check it again. Until GATO flaked out I was more closely linked to NSO.

[thisperson]

[quote name='Heft' timestamp='1281419547' post='2409230']
Also, if every alleged act of war resulted in war then everyone would basically always be at war.
[/quote]
Cute.

No, we would have people with manners and level heads, not to mention some balls or ovaries.

Tread softly and carry a big stick.

Edited August 10, 2010 by thisperson

[BlkAK47_002]

[quote name='the masheen' timestamp='1281420360' post='2409246']
Check it again. Until GATO flaked out I was more closely linked to NSO.
[/quote]
I find that funny since last war you and NSO were on opposite sides.

Also the fact that you're allied to \m/, IAA, and in bed with NOIR. I definitley would classify that as the other side.

[the masheen]

[quote name='BlkAK47002' timestamp='1281421194' post='2409261']
I find that funny since last war you and NSO were on opposite sides.

Also the fact that you're allied to \m/, IAA, and in bed with NOIR. I definitley would classify that as the other side.
[/quote]

Things change, and Nemesis entitles all it's members to free speech and their own opinions. The last war I fought, my alliance surrendered to GOONS.

[Thunder Strike]

[quote name='HeroofTime55' timestamp='1281419786' post='2409238']
Many of you don't seem to have a grasp on the concept of time. How can NSO reconcile an act of war before it occurs?

Of course the leadership (Read: those above Heft) are going to try and negotiate after the act, in an attempt to come to a reasonable, diplomatic solution. This is the way the world has always functioned. But apparently, things have changed, and it's now completely acceptable to ignore diplomatic efforts when you just really want a war that bad. I mean, RoK made no attempt to even feign diplomacy. It's a new low for CN as a whole.
[/quote]

You reconcile the situation before it turns into a full blown war.

ie send 6mil to TENE instead of the rogue. That would have fixed it instantly.

[James IV]

[quote name='the masheen' timestamp='1281417890' post='2409178']
Don't look now, this topic is now about the NPO. How did that happen?
[/quote]
[quote name='James IV' timestamp='1281339703' post='2407081']
"As a thread grows larger, the probability of a comparison involving NPO or its former allies approaches 1."
[/quote]

That's all folks.

[Antonio Salovega VI]

[quote name='HeroofTime55' timestamp='1281419786' post='2409238']This is the way the world has always functioned. But apparently, things have changed, and it's now completely acceptable to ignore diplomatic efforts when you just really want a war that bad. I mean, RoK made no attempt to even feign diplomacy. It's a new low for CN as a whole.[/quote]

Thank you, HeroofTime55 for providing a textbook illustration of being clueless about being clueless. There are diplomatic logs available which show RoK giving the Sith an upfront notice that aiding the rogue would be considered an “act of war.” I suggest you read them.

RoK is not at fault. If anything Rok’s direct and forthright diplomatic dialogue left absolutely no room for misunderstanding. It was the Sith who disregarded RoK’s diplomatic admonition by aiding the rogue. That flagrant disregard was the first act of war which precipitated the current conflict. It is apparent to all but the most myopic, that it was the Sith who initiated this war by deliberately rebuffing and/or ignoring RoK’s counsel. If you insist of pointing fingers at an alliance which did not "even feign diplomacy", I suggest that you look at the Sith leadership. It was they who were warned and it was they who blew it. Sadly it is the member nations of the Sith who are paying the price for their leader’s obvious incompetence.

[HeroofTime55]

[quote name='Thunder Strike' timestamp='1281422348' post='2409268']
You reconcile the situation before it turns into a full blown war.

ie send 6mil to TENE instead of the rogue. That would have fixed it instantly.
[/quote]That doesn't make any sense. Heft did absolutely nothing wrong until he sent aid to the rogue. NSO has a longstanding policy since their formation of accepting members with baggage. They also have an internal policy of not aiding members until they solve all their conflicts, which Heft violated.

There simply was no problem until the aid was sent. No problem to reconcile until then.

Which renders your demand to reconcile nonexistent problems laughable.

[caligula]

[quote name='Antonio Salovega VI' timestamp='1281424346' post='2409285']
Thank you, HeroofTime55 for providing a textbook illustration of being clueless about being clueless. There are diplomatic logs available which show RoK giving the Sith an upfront notice that aiding the rogue would be considered an “act of war.” I suggest you read them.

RoK is not at fault. If anything Rok’s direct and forthright diplomatic dialogue left absolutely no room for misunderstanding. It was the Sith who disregarded RoK’s diplomatic admonition by aiding the rogue. That flagrant disregard was the first act of war which precipitated the current conflict. It is apparent to all but the most myopic, that it was the Sith who initiated this war by deliberately rebuffing and/or ignoring RoK’s counsel. If you insist of pointing fingers at an alliance which did not "even feign diplomacy", I suggest that you look at the Sith leadership. It was they who were warned and it was they who blew it. Sadly it is the member nations of the Sith who are paying the price for their leader’s obvious incompetence.
[/quote]

I was going to reply and be like "Has this guy had even the slightest of what went on? Gee, It really even makes me mad that he said that despite having what actually happened agreed upon by both parties involved...I mean, I have to reply just to show him he's a....."

But then I saw your post and realized it had already been done.
I just wanted to let you know that I wanted to thank you so much I quoted it and typed the above words.

[agafaba]

NSO already admitted they caused the war, but its like heft said.

They either
1. did nothing and let RoK do as they please with their members without consulting them first (see wars declared before aid sent)
2. Send aid to help a member who this far had done nothing wrong in their eyes. Thus causing a war.

Lose/lose situation.

[Thunder Strike]

[quote name='HeroofTime55' timestamp='1281424495' post='2409287']
That doesn't make any sense. Heft did absolutely nothing wrong until he sent aid to the rogue. NSO has a longstanding policy since their formation of accepting members with baggage. They also have an internal policy of not aiding members until they solve all their conflicts, which Heft violated.

There simply was no problem until the aid was sent. No problem to reconcile until then.

Which renders your demand to reconcile nonexistent problems laughable.
[/quote]

It was a situation with a rogue that needed to be 'reconciled' ...

Simple.

[HeroofTime55]

[quote name='Antonio Salovega VI' timestamp='1281424346' post='2409285']
Thank you, HeroofTime55 for providing a textbook illustration of being clueless about being clueless. There are diplomatic logs available which show RoK giving the Sith an upfront notice that aiding the rogue would be considered an “act of war.” I suggest you read them.

RoK is not at fault. If anything Rok’s direct and forthright diplomatic dialogue left absolutely no room for misunderstanding. It was the Sith who disregarded RoK’s diplomatic admonition by aiding the rogue. That flagrant disregard was the first act of war which precipitated the current conflict. It is apparent to all but the most myopic, that it was the Sith who initiated this war by deliberately rebuffing and/or ignoring RoK’s counsel. If you insist of pointing fingers at an alliance which did not "even feign diplomacy", I suggest that you look at the Sith leadership. It was they who were warned and it was they who blew it. Sadly it is the member nations of the Sith who are paying the price for their leader’s obvious incompetence.
[/quote]As I have stated in other places to other people, you are pinning things on the Sith which the Sith did not do. Heft is responsible for those issues. People superior to Heft immediately sought to negotiate a solution with RoK, seeing the problems Heft had caused. RoK blatantly ignored this. And now in an effort to paint RoK in a positive light, you twist reality, to try and make them look like something other than the aggressive warmongers they are. NSO has held out the branch of peace and diplomacy since the moment Heft made his error. RoK completely ignored this diplomacy.

NSO is not responsible, simply because people superior to Heft have been reaching out to RoK from the start of this to discuss a peaceful and diplomatic solution. But RoK didn't want peace. And it's clear VE didn't either. And of course you're not going to agree with me, you're going to keep spouting the same lines, you must, you can't admit that this is war for the sake of war.

If someone wants to negotiate with 64Digits, I'd expect they would come to me with their issue, not some lower member and then claim that whatever that lower guy said is our official policy - Especially if I'm trying to contact that someone myself to rectify whatever situation it might be.