Decree of the Sith

[WarriorConcept]

[quote name='Corinan' timestamp='1281745722' post='2415096']
That or we're not the types to whine like babies about our predicament like most alliances would do. Like yours will one day.
[/quote]

Actually the attempts at spin do seem like whining, but I'm sure you yourself are enjoying the fight anyway.

[TypoNinja]

[quote name='Jrenster' timestamp='1281743459' post='2415046']
Weren't you in NSO before? Don't you know about our policy?
[/quote]

You mean the policy about how people joining NSO with baggage are required to solve their own issues, exactly to avoid problems like this one?

The policy you already admit you didn't follow when aid was sent to Sedrick?

That policy?

[Corinan]

[quote name='WarriorConcept' timestamp='1281746015' post='2415100']
Actually the attempts at spin do seem like whining, but I'm sure you yourself are enjoying the fight anyway.
[/quote]

Yeah well when doesn't the protests of the alliance being curbstomped seem like whining? Takes me back to my NPO days when we'd kick the teeth in of some alliance and then rip into them for complaining about it. Some things never change.

[TypoNinja]

[quote name='Corinan' timestamp='1281745722' post='2415096']
That or we're not the types to whine like babies about our predicament like most alliances would do. Like yours will one day.
[/quote]

Is that what you've reduced yourself to?

Ok Dr. Claw. Next time it is!

[Sarmatian Empire]

[quote][b]How about the fact that RoK baited us to war?[/b] Certainly much more reasonable than something NPO. Really, keep going on about "lies and misconception" because all I see is someone pulling horse!@#$ out of his $@! because he was butthurt that I didn't care. I don't need to be tough to not care. You just need to be petty enough.[/quote]

Last I checked RoK told you that aiding the rogue would mean war...Silly RoK! You don't tell them about war if you're trying to bait them!

[Heft]

You guys do realize that the only reason the "ulterior motives" talk came up was because the professed motives ("You sent 6M! Oh No! WAR NOW!") don't make any sense, right?

It is of course possible that the "act of war" silliness wasn't given much heed because RoK had just knowingly and apparently deliberately committed an act of war against us thirty minutes earlier. The aid wasn't the right response, but, well, bad diplomacy does tend to beget bad diplomacy.

[HeroofTime55]

[quote name='Heft' timestamp='1281747374' post='2415133']
You guys do realize that the only reason the "ulterior motives" talk came up was because the professed motives ("You sent 6M! Oh No! WAR NOW!") don't make any sense, right?

It is of course possible that the "act of war" silliness wasn't given much heed because RoK had just knowingly and apparently deliberately committed an act of war against us thirty minutes earlier. The aid wasn't the right response, but, well, bad diplomacy does tend to beget bad diplomacy.
[/quote]"Yes heft but HOO TOLD YOU! you should have known better!"

There, how am I doing? Just trying to save the other side a little effort in posting the same thing as a response to every point.

[Arcanis]

[quote name=%26%2339%3BHeft%26%2339%3B timestamp='1281747374' post='2415133']
You guys do realize that the only reason the "ulterior motives" talk came up was because the professed motives ("You sent 6M! Oh No! WAR NOW!") don't make any sense, right?

It is of course possible that the "act of war" silliness wasn't given much heed because RoK had just knowingly and apparently deliberately committed an act of war against us thirty minutes earlier. The aid wasn't the right response, but, well, bad diplomacy does tend to beget bad diplomacy.
[/quote]
Peace is a lie anyway right?

Aiding a nation that is on another nations list has been an ssue for a very long time, the fact that you did it after being explicitly informed of the consequences only makes it worse.

There was no need for diplomacy in that matter as you had already spit in the face of RoK by first accepting the rogue and then by aiding him after being told that it would be considered an act of war.

You and your alliance basically asked Hoo to make good on his promise and he gave you exactly what you asked for.

Edited August 14, 2010 by Arcanis

[WarriorConcept]

[quote name='Heft' timestamp='1281747374' post='2415133']
You guys do realize that the only reason the "ulterior motives" talk came up was because the professed motives ("You sent 6M! Oh No! WAR NOW!") don't make any sense, right?

It is of course possible that the "act of war" silliness wasn't given much heed because RoK had just knowingly and apparently deliberately committed an act of war against us thirty minutes earlier. The aid wasn't the right response, but, well, bad diplomacy does tend to beget bad diplomacy.
[/quote]

How does the motive not make any sense? The fact that you aided a nation at war with RoK's protectorate? In any situation at all, after being forewarned, that is an act of war.

[HeroofTime55]

[quote name='Arcanis' timestamp='1281747959' post='2415148']
Peace is a lie anyway right?

Aiding a nation that is on another nations list has been an ssue for a very long time, the fact that you did it after being explicitly informed of the consequences only makes it worse.

There was no need for diplomacy in that matter as you had already spit in the face of RoK by first accepting the rogue and then by aiding him after being told that it would be considered an act of war.

You and your alliance basically asked Hoo to make good on his promise and he gave you exactly what you asked for.
[/quote]

[quote name='WarriorConcept' timestamp='1281748045' post='2415149']
How does the motive not make any sense? The fact that you aided a nation at war with RoK's protectorate? In any situation at all, after being forewarned, that is an act of war.
[/quote]

Maybe you two didn't read my post - I was covering for you. You didn't have to repeat the same thing I said.

Yay circular arguments!

...

When a circular argument happens, somebody is wrong. Since you lot are the ones making it circular by always jumping back to "WELL HOO SAID SO!" I'm going to go ahead and guess that it's you who is wrong.

[TypoNinja]

[quote name='Heft' timestamp='1281747374' post='2415133']
You guys do realize that the only reason the "ulterior motives" talk came up was because the professed motives ("You sent 6M! Oh No! WAR NOW!") don't make any sense, right?
[/quote]

So you are totally cool with me sending aid to anybody who rogues on NSO? Cause If so, dude I'll draft up a new policy now.

[quote name='HeroofTime55' timestamp='1281748645' post='2415155']
When a circular argument happens, somebody is wrong. Since you lot are the ones making it circular by always jumping back to "WELL HOO SAID SO!" I'm going to go ahead and guess that it's you who is wrong.
[/quote]

You really haven't been paying attention have you?

Hoo said so isn't the argument. The argument is that sending aid to somebody at war is an act of war. The fact that Hoo explicitly warned them about something that should have been common sense anyway before the aid was sent just proves that NSO sent the aid fully informed of what the consequences would be.

Edited August 14, 2010 by TypoNinja

[WarriorConcept]

[quote name='TypoNinja' timestamp='1281748667' post='2415156']


You really haven't been paying attention have you?

Hoo said so isn't the argument. The argument is that sending aid to somebody at war is an act of war. The fact that Hoo explicitly warned them about something that should have been common sense anyway before the aid was sent just proves that NSO sent the aid fully informed of what the consequences would be.
[/quote]

Now you see why he's on my ignore list. He never has a decent argument. Ever.

[HeroofTime55]

[quote name='TypoNinja' timestamp='1281748667' post='2415156']
So you are totally cool with me sending aid to anybody who rogues on NSO? Cause If so, dude I'll draft up a new policy now.[/quote]This is the other one, pretending that the NSO thinks it's OK to send aid to rouges, even though they have repeatedly admitted to their error. Good job! I can count the total number of counter arguments your side has on one hand.

[quote]You really haven't been paying attention have you?

Hoo said so isn't the argument. The argument is that sending aid to somebody at war is an act of war. The fact that Hoo explicitly warned them about something that should have been common sense anyway before the aid was sent just proves that NSO sent the aid fully informed of what the consequences would be.
[/quote]I have been paying attention, and "Hoo said so!" is the argument. If it weren't, and it were about the act itself, then people wouldn't keep bringing up Hoo's name, or the fact that he said something to Heft. But they do.

[Heyman]

Diplomacy -

RoK: Dude, that dude's not cool. We gotta fight if you do that !@#$.
NSO: Why should we believe you?
RoK: Because that dude duded one of our dudes.
NSO: Proof, and btw we're gonna dude this dude.
RoK: Dude, don't be a !@#$%. Here's your proof.
NSO: Look's legit. Go for it, dude.

Edited August 14, 2010 by Heyman

[Krunk the Great]

[quote name='Heyman' timestamp='1281749314' post='2415178']
Diplomacy -

RoK: Dude, that dude's not cool. We gotta fight if you do that !@#$.
NSO: Why should we believe you?
RoK: Because that dude duded one of our dudes.
NSO: Proof, and btw we're gonna dude this dude.
RoK: Dude, don't be a !@#$%. Here's your proof.
NSO: Look's legit. Go for it, dude.
[/quote]

Too Logical, Did not Read

[shilo]

[quote name='WarriorConcept' timestamp='1281748045' post='2415149']
How does the motive not make any sense? The fact that you aided a nation at war with RoK's protectorate? In any situation at all, after being forewarned, that is an act of war.
[/quote]
I wonder why everytime this comes up, it is forgotten that RoK had just previously attacked a member of NSO. Sending aid was the most diplomatic response to just having been DoWed on by RoK. And saying that you are gonna do that doesn't in any way legitimize doing it, it just shows that diplomacy by this definition means "do what we want or you will get stomped in the ground - you have been informed, anything else is your fault".

[TypoNinja]

[quote name='HeroofTime55' timestamp='1281749259' post='2415176']
This is the other one, pretending that the NSO thinks it's OK to send aid to rouges, even though they have repeatedly admitted to their error. Good job! I can count the total number of counter arguments your side has on one hand.
[/quote]

Let me spell it out for you, NSO (and other slackwits like yourself) attempt to paint Rok's DoW as an over reaction, because hey it was only 6 mil its not a big deal. We only sent aid, not worth a war.

When you say that, you say you have no problem with somebody sending aid to rogues/nations engaged in wars/wars by proxy. That is why your position is so silly. For sending aid to a nation at war to not be a big deal you open the door to war by proxy. The fact that I have to spell this out for you is just sad.

[quote]
I have been paying attention, and "Hoo said so!" is the argument. If it weren't, and it were about the act itself, then people wouldn't keep bringing up Hoo's name, or the fact that he said something to Heft. But they do.
[/quote]

You just quoted the text where I explained how the statement you just made was wrong, yet you are still making it. Read before posting, it will make you look smarter.

Hoo said so is not the argument sending the aid is. The fact that Hoo told them just proves the action was a malicious action and not an honest mistake, like say a partially completed tech deal. (which is what most of these cases of "aid at war" usually are.)

Edited August 14, 2010 by TypoNinja

[Adrian LaCroix]

[quote name='shilo' timestamp='1281750743' post='2415207']
I wonder why everytime this comes up, it is forgotten that RoK had just previously attacked a member of NSO. Sending aid was the most diplomatic response to just having been DoWed on by RoK. And saying that you are gonna do that doesn't in any way legitimize doing it, it just shows that diplomacy by this definition means "do what we want or you will get stomped in the ground - you have been informed, anything else is your fault".
[/quote]

...what? Since when do you need to ask someone's permission to attack a rogue?

[WarriorConcept]

[quote name='shilo' timestamp='1281750743' post='2415207']
I wonder why everytime this comes up, it is forgotten that RoK had just previously attacked a member of NSO. Sending aid was the most diplomatic response to just having been DoWed on by RoK. And saying that you are gonna do that doesn't in any way legitimize doing it, it just shows that diplomacy by this definition means "do what we want or you will get stomped in the ground - you have been informed, anything else is your fault".
[/quote]

Really? Attacking a rogue that was fighting their protectorate since before he got admitted into NSO is now a declaration of war?

So I'll just accept the next guy who goes rogue on you and then I can claim a defensive war, right? Oh wait, I have to aid him first then I can say it's a defensive war!

[shilo]

[quote name='WarriorConcept' timestamp='1281751300' post='2415218']
Really? Attacking a rogue that was fighting their protectorate since before he got admitted into NSO is now a declaration of war?

So I'll just accept the next guy who goes rogue on you and then I can claim a defensive war, right? Oh wait, I have to aid him first then I can say it's a defensive war!
[/quote]
Since when is responding to aggressive acts roguery? Does this mean you consider the current coalition fighting NSO a bunch of rogues? Cause it's hard to say yes to one, and no to the other without leaving out logic in the argument.

[WarriorConcept]

[quote name='shilo' timestamp='1281751597' post='2415226']
Since when is responding to aggressive acts roguery? Does this mean you consider the current coalition fighting NSO a bunch of rogues? Cause it's hard to say yes to one, and no to the other without leaving out logic in the argument.
[/quote]

You're getting your definition of rogue wrong here. The nation became a rogue when he started attacking RoK's protectorate and was not absolved of his crimes simply because he joined NSO without them properly checking why he had active wars. He remains a rogue until he accepts punishment for his actions and paying for reps. Just because NSO was too arrogant in trying to look like a tough guy in front of RoK and are getting beat down because of it is their own fault really.

[Keres]

[quote name='Adrian LaCroix' timestamp='1281750873' post='2415210']
...what? Since when do you need to ask someone's permission to attack a rogue?
[/quote]

even better, some argue that we should of asked the rogue's permission before attacking it

[HeroofTime55]

[quote name='TypoNinja' timestamp='1281750827' post='2415209']
Let me spell it out for you, NSO (and other slackwits like yourself) attempt to paint Rok's DoW as an over reaction, because hey it was only 6 mil its not a big deal. We only sent aid, not worth a war.

When you say that, you say you have no problem with somebody sending aid to rogues/nations engaged in wars/wars by proxy. That is why your position is so silly. For sending aid to a nation at war to not be a big deal you open the door to war by proxy. The fact that I have to spell this out for you is just sad.[/quote]No, that's not what we say. We say that it was a small enough act that it was worth a little negotiation, and did not demand an [i]immediate[/i] military response. If RoK went to NSO and NSO told RoK to screw off, then RoK would be in the clear to attack them over the aid. But RoK didn't go to NSO. In fact NSO came to RoK and RoK ignored it.


[quote]You just quoted the text where I explained how the statement you just made was wrong, yet you are still making it. Read before posting, it will make you look smarter.

Hoo said so is not the argument sending the aid is. The fact that Hoo told them just proves the action was a malicious action and not an honest mistake, like say a partially completed tech deal. (which is what most of these cases of "aid at war" usually are.)
[/quote]It does not prove that. You just want it to prove that. Look at things from NSO's view, and specifically from Heft's. RoK attacked a NSO guy with no explanation, and there was confusion over the issue. The money was sent to defend against RoK, but Heft forgot that the nation was still engaged with TENE. I explained this same point to Dopp in private, and he realized why the aid was a mistake. Heft literally sent the aid as an alternative to declaring war on the offending RoK nations, because at the time he thought it was a good middle ground, and was hoping that the matter of Sedrick would be discussed over the coming days.

[HeroofTime55]

[quote name='WarriorConcept' timestamp='1281751908' post='2415233']
You're getting your definition of rogue wrong here. The nation became a rogue when he started attacking RoK's protectorate and was not absolved of his crimes simply because he joined NSO without them properly checking why he had active wars. He remains a rogue until he accepts punishment for his actions and paying for reps. Just because NSO was too arrogant in trying to look like a tough guy in front of RoK and are getting beat down because of it is their own fault really.
[/quote]In other words, you're free to commit aggressive acts against the unaligned, but if they don't bend over and instead choose to fight back, they are 'rogues.'

Thanks for the heads up. Always good to know when the accepted definitions of words change.

[shilo]

[quote name='WarriorConcept' timestamp='1281751908' post='2415233']
You're getting your definition of rogue wrong here. The nation became a rogue when he started attacking RoK's protectorate and was not absolved of his crimes simply because he joined NSO without them properly checking why he had active wars. He remains a rogue until he accepts punishment for his actions and paying for reps. Just because NSO was too arrogant in trying to look like a tough guy in front of RoK and are getting beat down because of it is their own fault really.
[/quote]
So being spied on is just a friendly prank, nothing aggressive deserving a military response? So what you say is only actually attacking a nation means committing an aggressive act?
Then it's clear we currently have a rogue coalition, since no one doubts that RoK hit NSO before NSO had made any supportive move ingame at all.
To me this seems like a clear cut event in trying to bully someone weaker: first the nation because TENE can do what it wants to him, he may not respond but if he does he has to pay reps. And RoK can attack any member of NSO - if they tell NSO before. When NSO does something on the nation level, they were the ones that actually provoked the incident. I admit I love this logic, somehow there NSO and the nation in question is always wrong, and RoK and Tene are nice guys interested in diplomatic solutions for problems.