War Ends

[Tarikmo]

[quote name='Shifty Stranger' timestamp='1282681013' post='2429755']
This is makes me cringe. You went to war because you didn't get to beat down Sedrick properly and you didn't get reps yet now that you've won the war and destroyed plenty of your own nations, you don't ask for reps?
[/quote]
Hello there shifty, just here to say that what you said didn't really make sense. If that was the real reason for war, it wouldn't be a reason for reps. This situation under no circumstances should of ended in reps.

[DictatatorDan]

[color="#FF0000"]Well this is certainly hillarious. Let it be known, that Hoo's word will only be as good as long as it benifits him. Anyone surprised? I hope not, because that's the way the game has always been played. I am sure the shoe would have been on a different foot if the treaty web didn't favor RoK as a victor.

Then we have RoK promising to "walk away" at the end of the week, but at the urging of it's allies they draft surrender terms, with the inclusion of (ohnoes) a beer review, and for NSO to admit fault at the last minute.

The surrender terms were deemed acceptable "enough" for Lintwad to sign, or face a longer war. If speculation suffices, the next offer would undoubtedly would be at best, the same offer, and at worst, include repreations.

All the while, we get another outstanding show of GOD/VE's decorum, which as no surprise to anyone, is non-existant.[/color]

[Van Hoo III]

[quote name='DictatatorDan' timestamp='1282681476' post='2429773']
[color="#FF0000"]Well this is certainly hillarious. Let it be known, that Hoo's word will only be as good as long as it benifits him. Anyone surprised? I hope not, because that's the way the game has always been played. I am sure the shoe would have been on a different foot if the treaty web didn't favor RoK as a victor.

Then we have RoK promising to "walk away" at the end of the week, but at the urging of it's allies they draft surrender terms, with the inclusion of (ohnoes) a beer review, and for NSO to admit fault at the last minute.[/color]
[/quote]

Perhaps you missed it, but RoK did walk away after two weeks ... as promised. The difference is that we took our allies with us and all it took was the statement in the OP.

[Goldie]

[quote name='DictatatorDan' timestamp='1282681476' post='2429773']
[color="#FF0000"]
All the while, we get another outstanding show of GOD/VE's decorum, which as no surprise to anyone, is non-existant.[/color]
[/quote]

Why don't you go talk to Lint about our 'decorum' during two weeks of talks.

[Shifty Stranger]

[quote name='Tarikmo' timestamp='1282681277' post='2429770']
Hello there shifty, just here to say that what you said didn't really make sense. If that was the real reason for war, it wouldn't be a reason for reps. This situation under no circumstances should of ended in reps.
[/quote]

It says so here

[quote]The New Sith Order hereby announces its surrender to the forces of The Empire of the New Evolution, Ragnarok, the Viridian Entente, the Global Order of Darkness and R&R.
We acknowledge that we knowingly accepted a rogue involved in two offensive wars with TENE an alliance under the protection of Ragnarok.
We acknowledge that threatening The Empire of the New Evolution when they desired to defend their alliance from unwarranted attacks by an unaligned nation was wrong,
and was an aggressive and interventionist action.
We further acknowledge that Ragnarok made clear their position and that we knowingly crossed the line they had set down, and they acted in full accordance with their duty to protect their charge.
We concede that our actions constituted a deliberate provocation, and that we were aware of what the result would be by aiding the rogue nation in question.
+ a beer review
[/quote]

It is like taking someone to court for helping the guy who punched you and not asking for money due to damages even though you already won the case.

Edited August 24, 2010 by Shifty Stranger

[The Crimson King]

[quote name='Van Hoo III' timestamp='1282677813' post='2429692']
Incorrect. JBone asked me how long we wanted this to go on the day we declared and I said "a few days to a week, we're not looking to crush TPF here."

However, this isn't about TPF/RoK ... I guess we'll just have to go to PM or agree to disagree here.
[/quote]

Sorry, but no. I have the logs of the conversation between you and JBone that you are referring to and at no point in time did you ever reference any time frame. In fact the only references you made were exactly the opposite and were statements to the effect of "We will duke it out for a while and then discuss peace". In fact when when you were asked directly about how long this would take or if it would escalate you told him that is was to early to begin discussing ending the war. You are free to go back and check these logs yourself or if you don't have them I can supply you with a copy.

The reason this is being brought up is because you tried to use the TPF war as an example of how what you say actually happens. IE: I told TPF "X" and lo and behold it came to pass. This is only true if you actually told TPF what you claim you did.

[quote]
Initially such a term was requested, but we decided just to end it instead of continuing to bicker over something so small that TPF would not mean anyway.

[/quote]

So if in our situation you realized that the admission of "guilt" was a point of contention for TPF, and was as small and meaningless as you claim, then why bother pursuing it all with NSO at all when you realized their view of this term was basically the same as ours?

[shilo]

[quote name='Van Hoo III' timestamp='1282681221' post='2429767']
Your terrible attempt at implying that someone "ran" the war and also dictated terms to everyone else. SuperFriends (and also RoK's allies) aren't this giant entity with a single leader calling the shots. We are a group of alliances with our own opinions, views, and sovereignty. Just because one alliance doesn't require a statement on the OWF, it doesn't mean we'll all feel the same way. We will, however, support our allies desire to see such a statement should it end the war for [b]all parties.[/b]

I've already explained to you how these terms came to be, you simply refuse to pay full attention. In the future we will be sure to place an asterisk next to the terms complete with a "***As previously stated and so the dense masses of the OWF understand, RoK still has no interest in terms and never did. They simply wanted the war to end and for their allies to achieve peace at the same time."

Next time we'll let our opponent sit and get rolled by our allies so we don't have to put up with so many horrible forum posters ... though, as I have stated before, you'll [b]still[/b] find something to complain about in regard to myself and Ragnarok.
[/quote]
Can't help it if everything from how you started the war to how you ended it is worthy complaining about

That said, how is what you stated above contradicting what I implied? You do stand by that you consider the statement worthless? We both agree that you started the war, based on your protectorate etc, so obviously it's your business, your allies did as they should and supported you. Sounds good so far?
You then say, based on your opinion, to NSO you want to end this after a specific period of time and all walk away free.
Your allies (one which you yourself named as someone "always wanting harsher terms than me") want something you promised to NSO you don't want, in your war, and the result is:
you break your word, do something against your conviction, and do what you allies who supposedly/originally only entered to support you want - extort a hollow statement from NSO. And by what you just wrote above, the option seemed to have been either that or RoK peaces out alone.

To me, all of this looks like you clearly had not much to say in your war.

[Van Hoo III]

[quote name='The Crimson King' timestamp='1282681797' post='2429785']



So if in our situation you realized that the admission of "guilt" was a point of contention for TPF, and was as small and meaningless as you claim, then why bother pursuing it all with NSO at all when you realized their view of this term was basically the same as ours?
[/quote]

The rest of your post is off topic and we can discuss it elsewhere. I have in fact already PMed you.

As far as the second part goes, once again I will repeat this ... we didn't want terms, reps, statements, or anything else. I am not sure how many different ways I can say that.

[DictatatorDan]

[quote name='Van Hoo III' timestamp='1282681658' post='2429780']
Perhaps you missed it, but RoK did walk away after two weeks ... as promised. The difference is that we took our allies with us and all it took was the statement in the OP.
[/quote]

[color="#FF0000"]You and your allies told NSO to accept the terms that you laid out at the last minute, and it was strongly implied that the war would continue with all parties if they were not accepting. This does not equate to "walking away" as you would put it.[/color]

[Van Hoo III]

[quote name='shilo' timestamp='1282681808' post='2429786']
Can't help it if everything from how you started the war to how you ended it is worthy complaining about

That said, how is what you stated above contradicting what I implied? You do stand by that you consider the statement worthless? We both agree that you started the war, based on your protectorate etc, so obviously it's your business, your allies did as they should and supported you. Sounds good so far?
You then say, based on your opinion, to NSO you want to end this after a specific period of time and all walk away free.
Your allies (one which you yourself named as someone "always wanting harsher terms than me") want something you promised to NSO you don't want, in your war, and the result is:
you break your word, do something against your conviction, and do what you allies who supposedly/originally only entered to support you want - extort a hollow statement from NSO. And by what you just wrote above, the option seemed to have been either that or RoK peaces out alone.

To me, all of this looks like you clearly had not much to say in your war.
[/quote]

I don't know if you're purposely missing this or not, but ... I control Ragnarok. That happens to be the alliance that I lead. I decide when we enter a war, I decide what we want out of it, and I decide when we end it. Other alliances decide for themselves when they enter a war, what they want out of it, and when they want to stop fighting. You, and to a lesser extent the NSO, keep harping on this "control" thing and I am not sure why. I control what my alliance does. Period. I have no idea why this aspect is so confusing to you.

I do hope that this statement clears everything up for you though.

[nitropenta]

Looking forwards to that beer review. Great that peace terms could be agreed upon.

[Rebel Virginia]

[color="#0000FF"]Hoo, I believe he is simply saying that if you bring your allies into your war you better make sure that they don't turn it into their war, because everything they do reflects on you in the end.[/color]

Edited August 24, 2010 by Rebel Virginia

[Van Hoo III]

[quote name='DictatatorDan' timestamp='1282682234' post='2429794']
[color="#FF0000"]You and your allies told NSO to accept the terms that you laid out at the last minute, and it was strongly implied that the war would continue with all parties if they were not accepting. This does not equate to "walking away" as you would put it.[/color]
[/quote]

And I repeatedly stated that [b]Ragnarok[/b] wanted no terms and would just walk away, both of which actually happened. I even repeatedly stated that I only speak for my alliance.

Note the bolded portion. That does not say GOD, VE, R&R, or anyone else.

[Van Hoo III]

[quote name='Rebel Virginia' timestamp='1282682407' post='2429798']
[color="#0000FF"]Hoo, I believe he is simply saying that if you bring your allies into your war you better make sure that they don't turn it into their war, because everything they do reflects on you in the end.[/color]
[/quote]

I know what he is trying to imply, but that is absurd. We said we wanted nothing before, during, and after this conflict. We also maintained that it would only last two rounds, which it did. I also stated that I do [b]not[/b] speak for the other alliances involved. None of this is overly complex.

[LJ Scott]

Congrats on an amazing victory NSO o/

[Heft]

[quote name='nitropenta' timestamp='1282682406' post='2429797']
Looking forwards to that beer review. Great that peace terms could be agreed upon.
[/quote]
The beer review was actually posted last night, about an hour, hour and a half, after this was, and has, umm.....let's say "magically vanished."

[shilo]

[quote name='Van Hoo III' timestamp='1282682235' post='2429795']
I don't know if you're purposely missing this or not, but ... I control Ragnarok. That happens to be the alliance that I lead. I decide when we enter a war, I decide what we want out of it, and I decide when we end it. Other alliances decide for themselves when they enter a war, what they want out of it, and when they want to stop fighting. You, and to a lesser extent the NSO, keep harping on this "control" thing and I am not sure why. I control what my alliance does. Period. I have no idea why this aspect is so confusing to you.

I do hope that this statement clears everything up for you though.
[/quote]
But... your allies supposedly entered to support you and RoK, did they not? It was said they were needed to prevent NSO from reaching PM etc.
Are you saying that in a war you start, call in your longterm MADP allies and friends for support, you have nothing to say on how the war is conducted beyond your alliance?
I am not saying that this is untruthful, I admit I just thought that RoK at least had some pull with its own allies...

At least to me (and I clearly admit this is my opinion) it seems you'd have to be really weak to let your allies force you to break your own word in your own war to get them to follow your lead. I admit, that's not something I would expect from friends and allies at all.

[shahenshah]

Gratz too all parties, personally I think Hoo's getting bit more than his share of criticism. Sometimes you take flak for an action of your freind you invited to the party :/...just how it has here since like forever.

Edited August 24, 2010 by shahenshah

[Rebel Virginia]

[quote name='Van Hoo III' timestamp='1282682645' post='2429807']
I know what he is trying to imply, but that is absurd. We said we wanted nothing before, during, and after this conflict. We also maintained that it would only last two rounds, which it did. I also stated that I do [b]not[/b] speak for the other alliances involved. None of this is overly complex.
[/quote]
[color="#0000FF"]And I am saying that if you bring allies in you better keep them on their leashes. I'm not saying you view your allies as puppets or inferiors, or even that you should, but you should understand that is something that is your show you keep it as your show. Letting your friends drag you around and take over your show just doesn't reflect well on you.[/color]

[quote name='LJ Scott' timestamp='1282682673' post='2429808']
Congrats on an amazing victory NSO o/
[/quote]
[color="#0000FF"]Thank you. You might even say we pulled this one out of a hat.

Abracadabra![/color]

Edited August 24, 2010 by Rebel Virginia

[Van Hoo III]

[quote name='shilo' timestamp='1282682832' post='2429813']
But... your allies supposedly entered to support you and RoK, did they not? It was said they were needed to prevent NSO from reaching PM etc.
Are you saying that in a war you start, call in your longterm MADP allies and friends for support, you have nothing to say on how the war is conducted beyond your alliance?
I am not saying that this is untruthful, I admit I just thought that RoK at least had some pull with its own allies...

At least to me (and I clearly admit this is my opinion) it seems you'd have to be really weak to let your allies force you to break your own word in your own war to get them to follow your lead. I admit, that's not something I would expect from friends and allies at all.
[/quote]

That is indeed the reason they were brought in, yes. I didn't make them enter though, they agreed to do so. The same goes for exiting a war. Should an alliance decide that they require more to end a war, then that is their right to do so. I am not sure why you see it as some sort of weakness. I do not pretend to control other alliances.

Lastly, I did not break my word. Once again, we said we'd leave after two rounds and that Ragnarok wanted nothing. This happened.

[Lord Fingolfin]

[quote name='Van Hoo III' timestamp='1282682235' post='2429795']
I don't know if you're purposely missing this or not, but ... I control Ragnarok. That happens to be the alliance that I lead. I decide when we enter a war, I decide what we want out of it, and I decide when we end it. Other alliances decide for themselves when they enter a war, what they want out of it, and when they want to stop fighting. You, and to a lesser extent the NSO, keep harping on this "control" thing and I am not sure why. I control what my alliance does. Period. I have no idea why this aspect is so confusing to you.

I do hope that this statement clears everything up for you though.
[/quote]

I think the issue here stems from the fact that you were the aggrieved party. It was your conflict, not that of your allies. The only reason GOD was fighting instead of say, my own home in the RIA, was that they had more people ready to jump in the trenches at the time than we did. If you're the aggrieved party, and you are satisfied then those who jumped in to help you really have no right to dictate anything. You can draw a lot of parallels between this and the Easter Sunday Accords fiasco with Gramlins. MK, the party that Gramlins entered to defend, felt satisfied with the terms offered and wished to bring the conflict to a close, while Gramlins, wanted to pursue some idealistic crusade/grudge match. They drew flak from all across CN for this, as it was viewed it was not their decision to make and that once the party they entered to defend was ready to leave the conflict, they had no justification in prosecuting the conflict, by way of terms or direct fighting, any further. Now, I'm not trying to paint the requests of GOD/Others in the same light as Gramlins unconditional surrender request, far from it, as far as terms go these are quite mild and harmless and they hardly give me a negative view of my allies in VE, R&R, and GOD. However, it does pose a question regarding what rights, if any, alliances who enter in defense of allies have in regards to seeking terms when the aggrieved party is satisfied.

[Sardonic]

NSO are lucky they fought such kind alliances.

[Beefspari]

Wow 24 pages. Well, sad to see it end. Good luck on your whatevers.

[Van Hoo III]

[quote name='shahenshah' timestamp='1282682891' post='2429814']
Gratz too all parties, personally I think Hoo's getting bit more than his share of criticism. Sometimes you take flak for an action of your freind you invited to the party :/...just how it has here since like forever.
[/quote]

Unexpected coming from you, but thanks.


[quote name='Rebel Virginia' timestamp='1282682907' post='2429815']
[color="#0000FF"]And I am saying that if you bring allies in you better keep them on their leashes. I'm not saying you view your allies as puppets or inferiors, or even that you should, but you should understand that is something that is your show you keep it as your show. Letting your friends drag you around and take over your show just doesn't reflect well on you.[/color]


[color="#0000FF"]Thank you. You might even say we pulled this one out of a hat.

Abracadabra![/color]
[/quote]

We don't look at a war as "our show", once other alliances post that DoW it is a group effort. We stated our intentions, made sure you were aware that our allies may not be okay with zero terms or an end at two weeks, yet were able to end it in two weeks anyway ... allies included. I am not seeing the injustice, dishonesty, or heinous act here.

Edited August 24, 2010 by Van Hoo III

[KingEd]

[quote name='Sardonic' timestamp='1282683240' post='2429823']
NSO are lucky they fought such kind alliances.
[/quote]

My thoughts exactly. I don't know what all this blabbering is about...