The war on Evil.

[Johnny Apocalypse]

[quote name='Maelstrom Vortex' timestamp='1296449538' post='2612068']
It is never in my best interest to disobey Him.
[/quote]

During the NoCB war you and your alliance disobeyed the very morals your God has told you to live by. How can you possibly say that it will never be in your best interests to disobey him again? You have already gone against his will once and I assure you it will happen again.

[Maelstrom Vortex]

[quote name='Johnny Apocalypse' timestamp='1296449717' post='2612072']
During the NoCB war you and your alliance disobeyed the very morals your God has told you to live by. How can you possibly say that it will never be in your best interests to disobey him again? You have already gone against his will once and I assure you it will happen again.
[/quote]

NoCB war? Ah.. the war not long after I joined the NPO..

Edited January 31, 2011 by Maelstrom Vortex

[tamerlane]

[quote name='Maelstrom Vortex' timestamp='1296446726' post='2612011']
My appeal was a to a majority of most faiths and most religious doctrines. Of course there will be those that differ. There is no cognitive dissonance here. After all, MK worship Archon of late apparently and he's nothing but a pretender to the throne of God.
[/quote]

Pretender to the throne of God? Blasphemer. Infidel. Realize this war isn't being fought solely over the reasons our Lord outlined in his holy proclamation against your damnable alliance of infidels and idolaters. Because you do not believe in the teachings of the Prophet GunhammaD (peace be upon him) and the one true God, Allarchon, we, the pious Mushlim members of Mushqaeda, will annihilate you and any who do not convert and let Him decide your fate. Fear not though for Allarchon is merciful and compassionate. He may decide to show benevolence where benevolence is earned.

Allarchonu Akbar!

Edited January 31, 2011 by tamerlane

[Johnny Apocalypse]

[quote name='Maelstrom Vortex' timestamp='1296449753' post='2612074']
NoCB war? When did that occur?
[/quote]

August 11, 2008 — September 11, 2008

Your aggressive actions against the Mushroom Kingdom directly contradicted the morals you choose to live by. You have already once disobeyed your God, why do you believe this time it will be different?

[Maelstrom Vortex]

@NoCB war.

[quote]
The war began when the Grand Global Alliance attacked Hyperion for conducting a tech deal with a reroll of a member of their Eternal-ZI list. Various alliances and blocs then entered the war for various reasons, some directly relating to the GGA-Hyperion conflict, and some for other reasons, most notably the Coalition's attack of the New Polar Order for various reasons.
[/quote]

In short.. there was a CB thus the name is deceptive. The CB being trading with an enemy, nice try though. I do disagree with the old policies of sentencing a nation to eternal destruction. Those policies are out of date and yes.. evil. We also paid for those evils already.

We have no desire to return to those days, it would continue the downward spiral of the international community.

Edited January 31, 2011 by Maelstrom Vortex

[Johnny Apocalypse]

[quote name='Maelstrom Vortex' timestamp='1296450208' post='2612097']
@NoCB war.



In short.. there was a CB thus the name is deceptive. The CB being trading with an enemy, nice try though. I do disagree with the old policies of sentencing a nation to eternal destruction. Those policies are out of date and yes.. evil. We also paid for those evils already.

We have no desire to return to those days, it would continue the downward spiral of the international community.
[/quote]

You disagree with the policies of eternal destruction now, yet you did not disagree when your alliance felt justified in declaring war because someone traded with someone sentenced to eternal destruction?

This is a perfect example of what I mean when I say your morals exist only when politically convenient. You would have happily continued to act on the policies of old if nobody had stepped forward to put an end to it.

Your alliance has a long history of lying through its teeth so forgive me if I have a hard time believing a single word that any of you have to say.

Edited January 31, 2011 by Johnny Apocalypse

[Letum]

[quote name='Johnny Apocalypse' timestamp='1296450539' post='2612135']
You disagree with the policies of eternal destruction now, yet you did not disagree when your alliance felt justified in declaring war because someone traded with someone sentenced to eternal destruction?
[/quote]

Maelstrom's AA does not say GGA.

But I assume that you think "we don't like you" should have been in the DoW instead?

Edited January 31, 2011 by Letum

[Locke]

[quote name='Johnny Apocalypse' timestamp='1296450539' post='2612135']
You disagree with the policies of eternal destruction now, yet you did not disagree when your alliance felt justified in declaring war because someone traded with someone sentenced to eternal destruction?

This is a perfect example of what I mean when I say your morals exist only when politically convenient. You would have happily continued to act on the policies of old if nobody had stepped forward to put an end to it.

Your alliance has a long history of lying through its teeth so forgive me if I have a hard time believing a single word that any of you have to say.
[/quote]
Yes, because no one ever changes their opinions [b]ever[/b].

[Johnny Apocalypse]

[quote name='Letum' timestamp='1296450747' post='2612155']
Maelstorm's AA does not say GGA.

But I assume that you think "we don't like you" should have been in the DoW instead?
[/quote]

Don't be coy, it certainly doesn't suit you. You may not been the initial aggressors but the true intent of the war was clear from the beginning.

It should also be noted that you have directly declared on an alliance as a result of an EZI target. See: GATO-1V

[quote name='Locke' timestamp='1296450762' post='2612157']
Yes, because no one ever changes their opinions [b]ever[/b].
[/quote]

You missed my point, my point was that their opinion was changed because it was politically convenient to do so, not because they actually wanted to.

Edited January 31, 2011 by Johnny Apocalypse

[Locke]

[quote name='Johnny Apocalypse' timestamp='1296451145' post='2612181']
You missed my point, my point was that their opinion was changed because it was politically convenient to do so, not because they actually wanted to.
[/quote]
Your point was silly because it is wrong. How do I know it is wrong, you ask? Because I've actually happened to talk to them in the past two years.

[Johnny Apocalypse]

[quote name='Locke' timestamp='1296452320' post='2612326']
Your point was silly because it is wrong. How do I know it is wrong, you ask? Because I've actually happened to talk to them in the past two years.
[/quote]

Yes, the timing of the change in their political stance had nothing to do with the fact that they were getting steamrolled.

And how silly of you to actually believe them!

[Locke]

[quote name='Johnny Apocalypse' timestamp='1296452537' post='2612355']
Yes, the timing of the change in their political stance had nothing to do with the fact that they were getting steamrolled.

And how silly of you to actually believe them!
[/quote]
Yes, Karma made them change their minds. This is, however, not mutually exclusive to the concept that they could actually be happy with that change and want to continue following that perspective regardless.

[Louisa]

[quote name='Maelstrom Vortex' timestamp='1296381155' post='2610948']
Unfortunately, most world faiths disagree with Archon. The greatest evil being claiming the throne of God. That's a very dangerous method of making friends and followers.
[/quote]

Clearly the correct thing to do in these situations is constructing a Great Temple and let your people open their hearts to the Glories of Archonism. Overthrow the throne of God and put His Most Holy Tonberry King in the sanctum.

[Maelstrom Vortex]

[quote name='Kalasin' timestamp='1296446538' post='2612004']
Most nation rulers, in their benevolence, allow their people to choose the religion of the state, in the hope that this will make them happier, which equals more revenue. This doesn't mean that most nation rulers subscribe to those beliefs.

As for the rest of your ad hominem attacks, as quiz and I have already pointed out, I am a Christian. In fact, I read the Bible every day! So I'll ask you once again: please provide one logical argument for the existence of objective morality. I'm prepared to listen. Once we've settled that, we can move onto what exactly that morality entails.
[/quote]

If you are a Christian, you must believe in Objective Morality, for morality is defined by God Almighty by doctrine. The sole authority on the issue. Do you deny God as your sovereign? I nowhere attacked your character. I pointed out that your argument is flawed based on demographics. That is thus not an ad hominem, it is a direct attack against your argument, not your character. My guidance towards finding the source of faith is sincere. Faith will not be found in an argument.

Edited January 31, 2011 by Maelstrom Vortex

[Letum]

[quote name='Johnny Apocalypse' timestamp='1296451145' post='2612181']
Don't be coy, it certainly doesn't suit you. You may not been the initial aggressors but the true intent of the war was clear from the beginning.

It should also be noted that you have directly declared on an alliance as a result of an EZI target. See: GATO-1V
[/quote]

Once again, going by your logic, we should have just skipped all that and declared war on people because "we don't like them".

Perhaps I should elaborate for our viewers. A CB is a prompt - a "reason" to go to war. Few wars are genuinely fought because the offence in question is such a grievous threat that it needs to be stamped out on the spot, though there are exemptions.

Let us take the following example, which conveniently bears Umbrella's signature (but of course, Umbrella has [i]chaaanged[/i], unlike big bad NPO - now they don't even need a CB).

[quote]
Please do not join the war against Polaris without our authorization. If you do so, you risk making your alliance a target. Please do not force our hand.
[/quote]

That is from the WoTC declaration. Now, had someone ignored the threat and bandwagoned, would war have been automatic? No, it would have mostly depended on 3 factors: A.) The degree to which Umbrella, TOP and CO were bluffing, B.) Their ability to win against the other alliance and, most importantly: C.) Their desire to see the other alliance harmed.

Much is the same regardless of the "offence" in question. It has been well-known prior to this war that VE was looking for a piece of Polaris - but had this been about an alliance much friendlier to them, would they have gone through the trouble of sending them screenshots to orchestrate a set up? I very much doubt it.

From that perspective, when Umbrella criticises a "flimsy" CB, and then goes on to bypass it completely and declare war because they regard an alliance as a threat, that criticism rings hollow.

The CB's in all those wars, including the ones Umbrella fought in and supported, were usually a reason to launch a war the participants already wanted - because if they had no desire to fight, then overlooking it (and there have been instances where stuff is overlooked) would have been simple, or the punishment confined. When I was leader of GATO and we had LUE plants in my alliance, I just slapped the people around and told them "that's not funny, cut it out". Had it been an alliance that was an "enemy", the response would have been something else.

If you hail from the perspective that a CB must be a response to a "hostile" action, as most of this community does, then you can very well claim that the "hostile action" in previous CB's was of insufficient severity or hostility, but then you would be unable to excuse your own war, which was completely unprovoked.

If you hail from the perspective that a CB need not be a response to some action, but rather just any cause (as most of Doomhouse seems to do), then you cannot claim that the "hostile action" in previous CB's was of insufficient severity or hostility, because "hostile action" is not something you would regard as a necessary condition in the first place.

[Maelstrom Vortex]

[quote name='Johnny Apocalypse' timestamp='1296452537' post='2612355']
Yes, the timing of the change in their political stance had nothing to do with the fact that they were getting steamrolled.

And how silly of you to actually believe them!
[/quote]

As if you have been part and parcel of our community to understand what is or is not changing. You must possess special mind powers like the rest of your peers making this argument.

[Johnny Apocalypse]

[quote name='Locke' timestamp='1296452704' post='2612376']
Yes, Karma made them change their minds. This is, however, not mutually exclusive to the concept that they could actually be happy with that change and want to continue following that perspective regardless.
[/quote]

Oh sure they could be happy with that change, but the point stands. They made that change in policy because it was politically convenient to do so. Had they not been stomped I feel certain that they would have been unlikely to change their ways.

The change in policy was not made in good faith, therefore it is more likely the New Pacific Order is in fact not happy with the change and only continue with this charade as it is in their best interest to do so.

Should the unlikely outcome of this war result in a Pacifican Victory, how do you think they would handle the surrender of Doomhouse? I think that would be telling in how dedicated they really are to their change in policy, fortunately we will not have to see that as I am confident we will emerge victorious.

[Letum]

[quote name='Johnny Apocalypse' timestamp='1296453230' post='2612438']
Should the unlikely outcome of this war result in a Pacifican Victory, how do you think they would handle the surrender of Doomhouse?
[/quote]

We'll ask MK, they have experience handling the surrenders of alliances that attacked them in a pre-emptive strike.

Edited January 31, 2011 by Letum

[Johnny Apocalypse]

[quote name='Maelstrom Vortex' timestamp='1296453046' post='2612415']
As if you have been part and parcel of our community to understand what is or is not changing. You must possess special mind powers like the rest of your peers making this argument.
[/quote]


Tarvu has blessed me with the power of telekinesis. You too can possess such strengths if you let him into your heart.

[quote name='Letum' timestamp='1296453312' post='2612451']
We'll ask MK, they have experience handling the surrenders of alliances that attacked them in a pre-emptive strike.
[/quote]

Wouldn't that make you as bad as them?

Edited January 31, 2011 by Johnny Apocalypse

[Locke]

[quote name='Johnny Apocalypse' timestamp='1296453230' post='2612438']
Oh sure they could be happy with that change, but the point stands. They made that change in policy because it was politically convenient to do so. Had they not been stomped I feel certain that they would have been unlikely to change their ways.

The change in policy was not made in good faith, therefore it is more likely the New Pacific Order is in fact not happy with the change and only continue with this charade as it is in their best interest to do so.

Should the unlikely outcome of this war result in a Pacifican Victory, how do you think they would handle the surrender of Doomhouse? I think that would be telling in how dedicated they really are to their change in policy, fortunately we will not have to see that as I am confident we will emerge victorious.
[/quote]
Even before they got stomped, they were making moves here and there; they had realized that the world was turning against them.

Heh, I think you'd be surprised how they handle your surrender, should that come to pass.

[Letum]

[quote name='Johnny Apocalypse' timestamp='1296453378' post='2612455']
Wouldn't that make you as bad as them?
[/quote]

I am sure that the combination of their experience and our "moral high ground™" will lead to something acceptable to all. After all, MK would have a vested interest in seeing a fair resolution, so they would make good advisers.

Edited January 31, 2011 by Letum

[Johnny Apocalypse]

[quote name='Locke' timestamp='1296453389' post='2612458']
Even before they got stomped, they were making moves here and there;[u] they had realized that the world was turning against them.[/u]

Heh, I think you'd be surprised how they handle your surrender, should that come to pass.
[/quote]

Again, they made the change in policy because it was necessary to do so. If there were no threats to their power they would have happily carried on with business as usual. You know the saying; If it ain't broke, don't fix it

Maybe I would, however I'd be more surprised if we surrendered.

[Kalasin]

[quote name='Maelstrom Vortex' timestamp='1296452790' post='2612383']
If you are a Christian, you must believe in Objective Morality, for morality is defined by God Almighty by doctrine. The sole authority on the issue. Do you deny God as your sovereign? I nowhere attacked your character. I pointed out that your argument is flawed based on demographics. That is thus not an ad hominem, it is a direct attack against your argument, not your character. My guidance towards finding the source of faith is sincere. Faith will not be found in an argument.
[/quote]

I believe in objective morality. I have spent the last three or four years reading various authors in order to justify that position. I'm asking you to have some intellectual integrity and provide reasons for your claims that objective morality exists, and not to dismiss everyone who calls you out on this as a close-minded bigot who isn't worth your time.

[Maelstrom Vortex]

[quote name='Kalasin' timestamp='1296453713' post='2612488']
I believe in objective morality. I have spent the last three or four years reading various authors in order to justify that position. I'm asking you to have some intellectual integrity and provide reasons for your claims that objective morality exists, and not to dismiss everyone who calls you out on this as a close-minded bigot who isn't worth your time.
[/quote]

Faith is the only evidence for Objective Morality. Man alone cannot self-originate objective morality. Science cannot prove it. I'm not dismissing anyone. Everyone is worth my time unless they have a closed mind. If they have a closed mind I have no hope for a fruitful discussion, but it doesn't mean I have dismissed them. They have already in essence.. dismissed themselves. You want evidence of Objective Morality and you are a Christian as myself, the best place to find proof is in the Bible by faith.

When God wrote the rules of reality he could have defined good or evil however he chose. He chose the way he now governs us by.

Edited January 31, 2011 by Maelstrom Vortex

[Kalasin]

[quote name='Maelstrom Vortex' timestamp='1296455240' post='2612554']
Faith is the only evidence for Objective Morality. Science cannot prove it. I'm not dismissing anyone. Everyone is worth my time unless they have a closed mind. If they have a closed mind I have no hope for a fruitful discussion, but it doesn't mean I have dismissed them. They have already in essence.. dismissed themselves. You want evidence of Objective Morality and you are a Christian as myself, the best place to find proof is in the Bible by faith.
[/quote]

And thus the argument is closed. If the evidence for objective morality is non-existent and dependent on belief, then your OP is irrelevant, and even the rulers who believe in objective morality have no reason to.

Edit: typo.

Edited January 31, 2011 by Kalasin