A call to those betrayed by Polaris

[Dochartaigh]

[quote name='Chalaskan' timestamp='1296939128' post='2620920']
Polaris hit TOP as hard as they could considering the other front's they had going. They band wagoned and hit to keep us out of PM every opportunity given. In fact I would say we were the main target after they switched sides. Mor than likely most of their offensive war slots were spent on TOP...just they didn't have a lot, and we didn't have many defensive slots open as we were being hit by what 29 alliances? Honestly don't recall how many but it was a !@#$load.
[/quote]

Polaris had a treaty with MK. no bandwagon there mate.

[quote name='Tromp' timestamp='1296941852' post='2620965']
True, it happens almost every war, although I'm not sure to the extent of that particular situation.
Still, I do think it is a legit reason to feel at least unhappy with your ally who does it to you.


That's what I read in the part of the post I quoted initially (although the rest of that post is fine to point at as well):
"[MK] then went about allowing them to be destroyed after Polaris risked everything [b]to ensure MK was not destroyed[/b]. "
This seems horribly inaccurate to me (Grub even pointed TOP/IRON at MK/CnG), but yes, indeed you even admit yourself that Polaris certainly didn't switch sides mainly out of love for MK. I'll drop that point, although I'm not willing to buy Grub cared one single !@#$@#$ bit about MK there, no matter what you say, sorry.

Also, I never made the objectivity argument.

What I was saying is that I don't believe you can say that because they committed a couple of nations to the overall wareffort Polaris cared about MK, which is what you claimed. One can also ask himself whether one should want to accept the help of someone who caused you harm. That's the main issue I think here. You can't expect someone to be thankful for providing help after he made another guy slam you in the face.

Hey, you're doing it again! I object to the bolded part, that should be clear by now. I insist that Polar did it not for MK, and that their behaviour in that war allows for no excuse, no matter how you sugercoat it.


But that's not excuse when you make the argument that Polar defended MK because of treaty obligations, because all treatypartners of MK, including my own alliance, were hurting from it.

Why should I feel sorry for Polaris? They did this out of their own accord, yes even created that war and various events in it. The sympathy-card doesn't work here, sorry to disappoint.
[/quote]

one point- TOP/IRON came to Grub already wanting to hit CnG. Grub never pointed TOP/IRON towards MK or CnG. Nor did Grub force TOP/IRON to hit MK/CnG. in fact, TOP/IRON and co already fessed up to having the idea themselves and only going to Grub to see if Polaris would defend MK. so, that whole bit is just plain false mate. so, Polaris never forced TOP/co to slam MK in the face, as you put it.

which brings me to another point- you can't claim Polaris did not care since you seem to base at least part of your argument on the fact that Grub pointed TOP/IRON towards MK and forced TOP/co to hit MK, which is false. and while Grub was the leader- many in Polaris did like and care for MK.

which brings me to a third point regarding the other treaty partners, including your own alliance bit- would you say then that you don't care about MK since you went in via treaty obligation? i mean it makes no sense to accuse Polaris of only defending MK due to a treaty, when that is why your own alliance did so... so if your alliance cared about MK, then it is easy to say the same of Polaris.

so no matter how you spin it, or completely revise history for that matter, your argument fails on many, many levels.

[quote name='bigwoody' timestamp='1296955908' post='2621193']
You know I like you, but that is an utter steaming pile of self-serving !@#$%^&*.
[/quote]

not exactly sure what you mean by this, since it is the truth. Polaris threw their remaining (as CSM put it) political capital away in order to honor their treaty with MK. you may not like it, but it is completely the truth. Polaris did in fact honor their treaty (hence all the talk about backstabbing TOP/co and switching sides) and as a result threw away all their political capital.

there is just no way to get around that being completely true.

[Tromp]

[quote name='Dochartaigh' timestamp='1296966732' post='2621290']
one point- TOP/IRON came to Grub already wanting to hit CnG. Grub never pointed TOP/IRON towards MK or CnG. Nor did Grub force TOP/IRON to hit MK/CnG. in fact, TOP/IRON and co already fessed up to having the idea themselves and only going to Grub to see if Polaris would defend MK. so, that whole bit is just plain false mate. so, Polaris never forced TOP/co to slam MK in the face, as you put it.
[/quote]
Isn't it common knowledge by now that TOP/IRON wouldn't have attacked without Grub's approval?
This was what I was getting at, so yes Polaris did "point at" and encouraged the attack.
[quote]
which brings me to a third point regarding the other treaty partners, including your own alliance bit- would you say then that you don't care about MK since you went in via treaty obligation? i mean it makes no sense to accuse Polaris of only defending MK due to a treaty, when that is why your own alliance did so... so if your alliance cared about MK, then it is easy to say the same of Polaris.
[/quote]
No, I would not. I was pointing out to you how your argument was !@#$%^&*, as Polaris wasn't caring more then anyone else about MK when they did send some nations in. You're turning the argument upside down. Take a look at my post which you replied to [url=http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=97242&st=240&p=2620913&#entry2620913]here[/url] again. My comment wasn't one of praise, rather it was sarcasm.

[shahenshah]

[quote name='Dochartaigh' timestamp='1296966732' post='2621290']
one point- TOP/IRON came to Grub already wanting to hit CnG. Grub never pointed TOP/IRON towards MK or CnG. Nor did Grub force TOP/IRON to hit MK/CnG. in fact, TOP/IRON and co already fessed up to having the idea themselves and only going to Grub to see if Polaris would defend MK. so, that whole bit is just plain false mate. so, Polaris never forced TOP/co to slam MK in the face, as you put it.
[/quote]

You've attempted to simplify this so much that it's not accurate anymore. I'm not trying to come up with "NO U" arguments or "U WRONG" arguments, It seems you are unaware of a few set of logs while you were researching this topic.

Edited February 6, 2011 by shahenshah

[Haflinger]

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1296938214' post='2620898']
I don't even get it, isn't MVP fighting on Polaris's side right now?
[/quote]
No, he's in Sanitarium which is at war with GOONS.

[potato]

[quote name='Haflinger' timestamp='1296997671' post='2622024']
No, he's in Sanitarium which is at war with GOONS.
[/quote]

So the answer is yes.

[Dochartaigh]

[quote name='Tromp' timestamp='1296996810' post='2622015']
Isn't it common knowledge by now that TOP/IRON wouldn't have attacked without Grub's approval?
This was what I was getting at, so yes Polaris did "point at" and encouraged the attack.

No, I would not. I was pointing out to you how your argument was !@#$%^&*, as Polaris wasn't caring more then anyone else about MK when they did send some nations in. You're turning the argument upside down. Take a look at my post which you replied to [url=http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=97242&st=240&p=2620913&#entry2620913]here[/url] again. My comment wasn't one of praise, rather it was sarcasm.
[/quote]

that is what TOP/IRON is saying now. considering TOP/IRON don't much like Polaris, i would bet they would say anything to make Polaris look bad. There is no way to actually tell whether they would or would not attack without Polar go ahead. to state otherwise, is just pure conjecture and not really valid whatsoever unless you already don't like Polaris.

i never said that Polaris cared more than any other alliance, just that due to them defending MK, they lost more than other MK allies. but, thank you for stating that Polaris did care about MK. that right there basically destroys your own argument that Polaris did not care about MK. that is all i wanted. now that you have sided with me on Polaris caring about MK, we can move on from this argument since you realized you were wrong.

and i got that it was sarcasm. hence my explanation of what i stated.

[quote name='shahenshah' timestamp='1296997562' post='2622023']
You've attempted to simplify this so much that it's not accurate anymore. I'm not trying to come up with "NO U" arguments or "U WRONG" arguments, It seems you are unaware of a few set of logs while you were researching this topic.
[/quote]

what is there to not simplify mate? TOP/IRON went to Polaris wanting to hit CnG, including MK. Grub said okay, Polaris won't get involved. then Grub/Polaris defended MK. so i am not seeing how my timeline is inaccurate at all?

the point i was making was that TOP/IRON went to Polaris with the plan to pre-emptively attack CnG. Not, as Tromp seems to believe, that Polaris went to TOP/IRON to get/force TOP/IRON to pre-emptively attack CnG including their ally MK.

[quote name='potato' timestamp='1297012888' post='2622249']
So the answer is yes.
[/quote]

so you are going against the party line of your side in stating that the wars are not separate in the least. thank you for the confirmation.

Edited February 6, 2011 by Dochartaigh

[bigwoody]

[quote name='Dochartaigh' timestamp='1297019643' post='2622423']
i never said that Polaris cared more than any other alliance, just that due to them defending MK, they lost more than other MK allies. but, thank you for stating that Polaris did care about MK. that right there basically destroys your own argument that Polaris did not care about MK. that is all i wanted. now that you have sided with me on Polaris caring about MK, we can move on from this argument since you realized you were wrong.
[/quote]
Polar, at least Grub, DIDN'T give a damn about MK, calling them worthless for being on the other side of that war.

What Grub DID care about was petty revenge by any means necessary. Not nobly expending political capital to defend their beloved MK. That twist on the story is a load of crap.

[Dochartaigh]

[quote name='bigwoody' timestamp='1297019857' post='2622429']
Polar, at least Grub, DIDN'T give a damn about MK, calling them worthless for being on the other side of that war.

What Grub DID care about was petty revenge by any means necessary. Not nobly expending political capital to defend their beloved MK. That twist on the story is a load of crap.
[/quote]

MK was uninvolved other than in peace talks. a few Polar members may have had their own opinion, but i am loving how a few people all of a sudden become an entire alliance. again, the spin ya'll given is your own little petty revenge attempt to make Polaris look worse than they already did.

i am stating that Polaris looked bad, but that they were not as bad as ya'll keeping making out.

it appears what Bigwoody cares about is petty revenge by any means necessary.

[bigwoody]

[quote name='Dochartaigh' timestamp='1297020141' post='2622438']
MK was uninvolved other than in peace talks. a few Polar members may have had their own opinion, but i am loving how a few people all of a sudden become an entire alliance. again, the spin ya'll given is your own little petty revenge attempt to make Polaris look worse than they already did.

i am stating that Polaris looked bad, but that they were not as bad as ya'll keeping making out.

it appears what Bigwoody cares about is petty revenge by any means necessary.
[/quote]
Grub was the Emperor of Polar, not a rank and file member.

Also, MK has admitted many times they were prepared to be involved. The uninvolved claim was leverage for more reps.

[potato]

[quote name='Dochartaigh' timestamp='1297019643' post='2622423']
so you are going against the party line of your side in stating that the wars are not separate in the least. thank you for the confirmation.
[/quote]

That's the party line? Man, I must pay better attention these days. Anything else I should know about my side?

[Dochartaigh]

[quote name='bigwoody' timestamp='1297020293' post='2622442']
Grub was the Emperor of Polar, not a rank and file member.

Also, MK has admitted many times they were prepared to be involved. The uninvolved claim was leverage for more reps.
[/quote]

and where did Grub ever state he did not care for MK? (honestly, at that time there was a lot going on, so if i missed it, please post a link to it).

and yes, MK was prepared to get involved, but were not other than peace talks at the time. that is a fact. you can't change that. though, in my opinion they would have attempted to leverage for more reps had ya'll not pre-emptively attacked them.

[quote name='potato' timestamp='1297023130' post='2622522']
That's the party line? Man, I must pay better attention these days. Anything else I should know about my side?
[/quote]

umm...i think the party line for my side is ya'll are ebil.

[bigwoody]

[quote name='Dochartaigh' timestamp='1297024288' post='2622562']
and where did Grub ever state he did not care for MK? (honestly, at that time there was a lot going on, so if i missed it, please post a link to it).

and yes, MK was prepared to get involved, but were not other than peace talks at the time. that is a fact. you can't change that. though, in my opinion they would have attempted to leverage for more reps had ya'll not pre-emptively attacked them.
[/quote]
I believe the line was "$%&@ em if they wont side with us", but someone with logs can get the exact wording.

[Crymson]

[quote name='Tromp' timestamp='1296996810' post='2622015']
Isn't it common knowledge by now that TOP/IRON wouldn't have attacked without Grub's approval?
This was what I was getting at, so yes Polaris did "point at" and encouraged the attack.

No, I would not. I was pointing out to you how your argument was !@#$%^&*, as Polaris wasn't caring more then anyone else about MK when they did send some nations in. You're turning the argument upside down. Take a look at my post which you replied to [url=http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=97242&st=240&p=2620913&#entry2620913]here[/url] again. My comment wasn't one of praise, rather it was sarcasm.
[/quote]

You're wasting your time with Doch. He'll always make his case, point at it, call it objective, and then talk to those who disagree as if they're students in a class he's teaching.

[Tromp]

Yeah, I have conceded a couple of points even went along with some of his, but it simply never is enough for Doch it seems.

@Doch
No harm done, don't get me wrong, but I feel like it's useless to talk any further on the topic. It's not like there is a chance we're going to convince each other...

Edited February 7, 2011 by Tromp

[Haflinger]

[quote name='potato' timestamp='1297012888' post='2622249']
So the answer is yes.
[/quote]
GOONS isn't fighting anyone on Polar's side. The answer is no.

[mrwuss]

[quote name='Haflinger' timestamp='1297263878' post='2626975']
GOONS isn't fighting anyone on Polar's side. The answer is no.
[/quote]

It's GOONs now.


Thank you.

[Keve69]

[quote name='The Reccesion' timestamp='1295327810' post='2580231']
This is funny. NpO's allies had all that time to cancel on them when they were mad. If NpO's allies don't defend them, they need to have their balls dropped. It's like having NpO as a showpiece when people $%&@ with you, you pull them out. But when they need help, morons go ahead and say, "Weellllll they did $%&@ us over, so lets try avoiding this war".

Someone please come to the batters box and come swinging.
[/quote]

Meh, I've been doing my fair share of heavy lifting from the get go so hush.

[Minilla Island]

Though I am a Triumvir of UINE, I would not be where I am if I did not spend 18 months learning at the icecap known as Polaris. So, I have no ill will towards Polar.