War Ends

[Ragashingo]

[quote name='zenergy' timestamp='1282830807' post='2431728']
Cut 'em some slack - a 10:1 curbstomp over a trivial diplomatic matter is what passes for a "noble crusade" on Planet Bob these days.
[/quote]

Heh. Maybe to some.

Edited August 26, 2010 by Ragashingo

[Mandolus]

Am I the only one who thinks it's a tad odd that the New Sith Order are actually a bunch of whiny crybabies with a moralist streak? I thought Sith were supposed to be evil and menacing and all that.

B-b-b-b-b-b-but Hoo said there would be no terms! He [b]said[/b]!!!!!!

Why don't you guys act like proper Sith and plot behind the scenes to destroy your enemies instead of crying like a class of preschoolers on the OWF about some supposed injustice?

[SpoiL]

[quote name='Mandolus' timestamp='1282847767' post='2431905']
Am I the only one who thinks it's a tad odd that the New Sith Order are actually a bunch of whiny crybabies with a moralist streak? I thought Sith were supposed to be evil and menacing and all that.

B-b-b-b-b-b-but Hoo said there would be no terms! He [b]said[/b]!!!!!!

Why don't you guys act like proper Sith and plot behind the scenes to destroy your enemies instead of crying like a class of preschoolers on the OWF about some supposed injustice?
[/quote]

What do you call discrediting the enemy? The whole 'cry more' thing is so 8 wars ago..

Almost forgot..Boo Hoo!

Edited August 26, 2010 by SpoiL

[Kzoppistan]

Congratulations on peace.

[Ardus]

[quote name='ChairmanHal' timestamp='1282835436' post='2431749']
He implied that having a concrete CB made the war a righteous one. My point was that quality of the CB and whether or not the war was righteous are completely separate issues. At times nations/alliances/treaty partners/blocs declare war on the flimsiest of CBs but the war was unarguably a very good thing and advanced the cause liberty/justice/morality. Conversely, you can have a very solid CB and proceed to crush, in the most brutal way imaginable, someone who didn't particularly earn it.

This war had a good CB. Was it righteous? You can make a good argument that at some point NSO had something like this coming, but on the scale of evil, admitting someone who should have been told to have a seat until the diplomatic issues could be sorted out isn't exactly equivalent to attacking someone over their forced disbandment or EZI policy.
[/quote]
My primary counter-point to this argument is the obvious OOC position, so I'll let Impero continue advocating on my behalf.

[AnCapistan]

[quote name='Jrenster' timestamp='1282842249' post='2431832']
Also, you will find that not many of us have humility. Whereas alliances such as yours treat humility as a virtue, we see it as a strategy used by the weak to avoid being trampled upon by the strong.
[/quote]

Well your alliance is certainly weak. Why don't you try it some time?

[Vol Navy]

[quote name='Captain Flinders' timestamp='1282826816' post='2431707']
Wow, really? The alliances that disbanded under NPO (and TPF's mind you) Hegemony were oftentimes not given terms at all. Alliances like NoV were specifically told that the only terms would be their disbandment, subjugation, and humiliation. At least the NPO and NSO got peace talks and terms. Not every alliance was so lucky.
[/quote]

There isn't any way possible to force any alliance to disband barring you get their log-in info and go and change their AA yourself. As FAN showed, it was all a matter of what you were willing to face to stay in your AA.

[AnCapistan]

But you can give them two options. Eternal war or disbandment.

And Eternal War is pretty !@#$@#$ bad.

[Rayvon]

[quote name='Mr Damsky' timestamp='1282853880' post='2431987']
But you can give them two options. Eternal war or disbandment.

And Eternal War is pretty !@#$@#$ bad.
[/quote]

So push comes to shove, you don't have the conviction to fight for what you believe in.

[Steve Buscemi]

In the past the curbstomping alliance would ask for tons of reps and even wonder destruction, like past NPO curbstomps. I'm glad to see that this new era is different.

Sad to see that the this new generosity is so quickly spat upon by how defiant the OP is. NSO's ex-NPO/IRON leadership still hasn't learned their lesson and are still acting like they are the big kids on the playground. In the end only their unaware membership will be hurt by their leader's arrogance. No doubt they'll lose members over this though.

[AnCapistan]

[quote name='Rayvon' timestamp='1282854364' post='2431994']
So push comes to shove, you don't have the conviction to fight for what you believe in.
[/quote]

Where did I say that?

[Ardus]

[quote name='Rayvon' timestamp='1282854364' post='2431994']
So push comes to shove, you don't have the conviction to fight for what you believe in.
[/quote]
Ray Ray, I'm not sure what stick got lodged up your hindquarters, but given the impossibility of removing it the NSO seems a reasonable enough fit for you. I mean, you just condemned Mr Damsky for being in an alliance that showed you mercy. One, no offense to Mr Damsky, but that's a soft target and two, that's just silly.

[Rebel Virginia]

[quote name='Steve Buscemi' timestamp='1282854586' post='2431996']
In the past the curbstomping alliance would ask for tons of reps and even wonder destruction, like past NPO curbstomps. I'm glad to see that this new era is different.
[/quote]
[color="#0000FF"]While I hate to do this, I feel the need to. Understand that I am not discussing the NSO here, as we've received rather fair terms. However, MK and SF have requested harsher reps than the NPO ever did. Being that they demanded tech from both the NPO and TOP, only payable by the top tier, both alliances are now at a permanent tech disadvantage. Or at leas the NPO is. The NPO may have asked for heavy reps in the past, but it was all monetary, which is a lot easier to replace that tech, and tech for them always came from the usual sellers.

Again, note that I do believe the NSO enjoyed some fairly light terms here, but this new regime you think so highly of is not made out of the sun and rainbows you're saying it is.

You sunk my battleship.[/color]

[AnCapistan]

[quote name='Rebel Virginia' timestamp='1282855004' post='2432002']
[color="#0000FF"] The NPO may have asked for heavy reps in the past, but it was all monetary, which is a lot easier to replace that tech, and tech for them always came from the usual sellers.[/color]
[/quote]

Wasn't MK charged tech?

I think Athens was too.

Edited August 26, 2010 by Mr Damsky

[Rebel Virginia]

[quote name='Mr Damsky' timestamp='1282855364' post='2432007']
Wasn't MK charged tech?

I think Athens was too.
[/quote]
[color="#0000FF"]And as I said in the bit you just quoted, while they did have tech to pay tech it could have come from nations with low levels of tech, where it could be replaced easily. NPO on the other hand had to pay three times the total tech, and only from nations with an abundance of tech already. That had the end result of putting them at a permanent tech deficit. Say what you will about the types of reps demanded by the NPO in the past, I didn't like them either, but they never did have such a permanent effect.

You sunk my battleship.[/color]

[Jrenster]

[quote name='Mr Damsky' timestamp='1282853010' post='2431972']
Well your alliance is certainly weak. Why don't you try it some time?
[/quote]

If you think that NS is everything to an alliance, then you already have failed. Physical strength is nothing without the will. Which people such as you do not have.

[AnCapistan]

[quote name='Rebel Virginia' timestamp='1282855764' post='2432013']
[color="#0000FF"]Say what you will about the types of reps demanded by the NPO in the past, I didn't like them either, but they never did have such a permanent effect.

You sunk my battleship.[/color]
[/quote]

Uhm I disagree. MK was forced to destroy it's WRCs and HNMSs. Athens had to pay almost 90% of it's tech. I have no idea what percent MK had to pay but I'm assuming it was huge.

Also you specifically said "NPO never charged tech reps" that is false.

[Carfre Inpor]

[quote name='Rebel Virginia' timestamp='1282855764' post='2432013']
[color="#0000FF"]And as I said in the bit you just quoted, while they did have tech to pay tech it could have come from nations with low levels of tech, where it could be replaced easily. NPO on the other hand had to pay three times the total tech, and only from nations with an abundance of tech already. That had the end result of putting them at a permanent tech deficit. Say what you will about the types of reps demanded by the NPO in the past, I didn't like them either, but they never did have such a permanent effect.

You sunk my battleship.[/color]
[/quote]

noCB terms against NpO clearly stated that reparations had to be paid by the top 30 nations of Polaris. The reparations were exclusively tech...

[Rebel Virginia]

[quote name='Mr Damsky' timestamp='1282856345' post='2432019']
Uhm I disagree. MK was forced to destroy it's WRCs and HNMSs. Athens had to pay almost 90% of it's tech. I have no idea what percent MK had to pay but I'm assuming it was huge.

Also you specifically said "NPO never charged tech reps" that is false.
[/quote]
[color="#0000FF"]Damksy, are you illiterate or something? I said in the first line you quoted specifically that the NPO did charge tech reps occasionally, but never forced them from the top tier. Also, Athens had a lot less tech. It was a small alliance. It was able to buy those back.

As for wonder decommissions, I never agreed with those, but that had a far less crippling effect than the tech reps.

And Carfre, the NPO did not give Polaris those terms. And both of you, considering I was on your side in that war I doubt you'll find me saying those terms were at all fair. They were extreme terms and never should have been given, but we're not arguing those terms, nor Karma even. My point is simply that the new order is not beacon of justice and fairness that you all make it out to be, and it is certainly capable of doing the same things most of us fought the NPO in order to stop (or at least I think that's why we did it).

And once again, since I know a lot of you are a little slow, I am not complaining about the terms the NSO got. Again, I think they're fairly light, and I can live with them. But when you start yakking about justice and honor and values, I'm just going to point and laugh, because I know you well enough to see through that charade. You like to use it as a cloak, pretending you're some sort of crusader, but you're not. In the end you're all about keeping and holding your positions at the top. That is why you crippled the NPO, and that is why you did a similar reduction to TOP.

Justice had nothing to do with any of it, and if you truly had the principles you barked about in Karma you never would have issued terms with such a permanent effect. So don't think you're fooling anyone with your rhetoric.

You sunk my battleship.[/color]

[SpoiL]

[quote name='Steve Buscemi' timestamp='1282854586' post='2431996']
Sad to see that the this new generosity is so quickly spat upon by how defiant the OP is.
[/quote]

There isn't a whole lot of content in the OP. What are you talking about?

[HeroofTime55]

[quote name='Carfre Inpor' timestamp='1282856356' post='2432021']
noCB terms against NpO clearly stated that reparations had to be paid by the top 30 nations of Polaris. The reparations were exclusively tech...
[/quote]
Oh, I wasn't aware NPO had declared war against NpO, and received tech reps from them. Hooray for history revisionism!

I suppose every now and then SG needs to have a good curbie like this last war, to give out light terms so they can brag "Look! We're not like the NPO!" Most people can see the bigger picture, though.

Edited August 26, 2010 by HeroofTime55

[Liam Shepard]

Wow, this whole thread is like reading wiki-pedia entries mixed with the deep plot in a harlequin novel. Amazing. Simply.. Amazing. Anyhow, thanks for the nukes it was good times. Glad it's over.

[o-dog]

[quote name='Steve Buscemi' timestamp='1282854586' post='2431996']
In the past the curbstomping alliance would ask for tons of reps and even wonder destruction, like past NPO curbstomps. I'm glad to see that this new era is different.

Sad to see that the this new generosity is so quickly spat upon by how defiant the OP is. NSO's ex-NPO/IRON leadership still hasn't learned their lesson and are still acting like they are the big kids on the playground. In the end only their unaware membership will be hurt by their leader's arrogance. No doubt they'll lose members over this though.
[/quote]

You are and always will be a tool.

An unproportionate war calls for an unproportionate thread. This has delivered.

[Rayvon]

[quote name='O-Dog' timestamp='1282861875' post='2432092']
An unproportionate war calls for an unproportionate thread. This has delivered.
[/quote]

Someones finally on to something here

[Heft]

[quote name='Sweeeeet Ronny D' timestamp='1282838277' post='2431779']
Also I find it pretty interesting how vocal on the OWF Heft has been. I would think he should be too busy apologizing to the 150 or so members of NSO for putting them in a situation that causes most of their nations some pretty significant damage, rather than complain about terms...

If it was me and I put my alliance in the same position Heft did, I would think I would be too embarrassed to even show my face on the OWF for a while.

That's just me tho.
[/quote]
I apologized in private to DC for putting us in a compromised position the night that it happened (note that I didn't apologize for doing something "wrong" beyond that, though, for all the people who think my act was some grave crime).

I then returned fairly early the next day and stayed on the entire time to try and rectify the error and then, after it was clear that wouldn't be allowed to happen, to at least be around to help where I could throughout the war, with the exception of a few days where I was away.

Being a responsible leader, I decided this course of action was a lot better than wallowing in self-pity and hiding in shame.

Maybe one day you'll understand this, and maybe that will be the day when you can address an issue without dismissing those who disagree with you as "crybabies" or trying to ridicule someone for having to gall to show up, and instead actually contribute something meaningful.