Jump to content

End of Hostilities


Recommended Posts

[quote name='magicninja' timestamp='1296543268' post='2614377']
Sure but that doesn't make it a separate conflict in any way. I just don;t see the logic here. If NPO was never going to enter the NpO-VE front what threat were they? If they can't be bothered to enter a conflict of that magnitude what threat are they ever going to be? They would basically resign themselves to be neutral. Now I couldn't care any less if MK and pals wanted to whip Pacifica for the fun of it. I have no emotional stake in that but it certainly is a separate conflict.
[/quote]

You're mistaking a belief that NPO was remaining uninvolved to strike when all major players had committed elsewhere, with a belief that NPO was never going to enter. The former being the case the first-strike (pre-emptive attack) was seen as beating Pacifica to the punch on that larger front.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 148
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

[quote name='Vespassianus' timestamp='1296551979' post='2614493']
You fought so long UBD :D

But come on why do you enter to war if you can't take counters?
[/quote]


[quote name='Azaghul' timestamp='1296556387' post='2614536']
UBD yet again shows that it is a joke. Might as well not have bothered fighting.
[/quote]

To both of the above. They didnt need to participate in the war anymore, MCXA has surrendered so we agreed to part ways. Look at teh situation before you troll


[quote name='mdnss69' timestamp='1296557770' post='2614546']
Shame on you two. Shame shame shame. You have my resignation in protest to this farce. Adieu.
[/quote]

Probaly for the better. A triumvate is there for a reason, not for 1 of them to over roule the other 2

[quote name='mdnss69' timestamp='1296563670' post='2614588']
You mean an alliance that gave everything it had in it's war, an alliance that utterly exhausted it's military after being attacked by how many alliances? Last night before I logged out, I asked my members in the Directorate if they would accept peace with conditions. I received an outstanding no response and thus my mandate as an Executive Director was clear. No peace with conditions until our military was spent. My name is not up there because I pointedly refused to sign such [i]surrender terms[/i]. And make no mistake, that is what these are. The Directorate was in a position where a white peace without that second absurd condition was readily achievable. We spent a fraction of our warchests in our wars against BN, SC and NEAT. Several of the members still have well over a billion left in savings. We have two allies who were not engaged in the current war and would have been willing to provide support. I have no doubt that NEAT would have turned around with LSF and The Int to counter, but I would rather bow out in such a style as that then this. This is pathetic. This is the difference.
[/quote]
No, you amde a mid day attack miles away from the update, and out of 80 nations, you only managed to get 20 od wars...thats not even 20 nations engaged, thats jsut 20 wars. We told Int, LSF and another allie that I wont mention not to bother comming (You know who you are :P ), as BN, SC and NEAT had it handled, we were quite content witht eh damage we were causing. UBD lost more NS in the few days they were in than NEAT lost during the entire conflict with THL, MCXA and UBD.

Youre warchests dont matter when you cant even get 25% of youre forces to even engage the enemy anyway.

[quote name='Bordiga' timestamp='1296571673' post='2614649']
Congratulations on the white peace UBD. You entered a war to defend your ally as did we, I'm glad we could part ways once MCXA surrendered.
[/quote]

Likewise, it was a pleasure working with the exects that signed the white peace and some of their other directors and nations.

[quote name='Bordiga']
Mdnss69, I suggest you actually stop whinging and instead of joining an alliance that actually admitted to surrendering, do something to back up your words. Hell, if it wasn't for me arguing continually with BN, NEAT and SC members that your idiocy should be disregarded UBD would still be at war.
...
At least UBD will emerge from this conflict with one less useless embarrassment of a leader.
[/quote]

Agreed. mdnss, you nearly got youre allaince stomped, both for youre threats and by youre refusal to accept peace terms. You should have signed the MCXA terms wth them, you sir caused much hastle.

[quote name='mdnss69' timestamp='1296576660' post='2614720']
Of course it's a forgery. I did what I had to do. In truth, last I checked the vote was 9:1 in favour, any of the others will confirm that.
[/quote]

Forgery in diplomacy, a real pleasure working with you. We should probaly have demanded white peace given the right to perma zi mdnss. But im sure MCXA will enjoy youre company instead.

Edited by cheezy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='ChairmanHal' timestamp='1296577599' post='2614734']
You seem to be taking this kind of personally...lose a bar bet did we? <_<

FYI: This war has two theaters of operation and is very much a single war with related causes, alliances, blocs, and objectives. Let the historians sort it out when all this is over.
[/quote]

Did you quote the right post? :huh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='auto98' timestamp='1296578422' post='2614748']I seem to remember posting on this issue 2 years ago, so how come people still don't know what "white peace" means. If there are terms, it isn't white peace.[/quote]
Yeah, it is pretty funny. And sad. It is also pretty sad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Epiphanus' timestamp='1296538092' post='2614122']
Enjoy not getting terms!
[/quote]

Heh, this post is quite amusing, especially when you consider the person who posted it.

Good luck with this one pip.

As far as the rest of the thread, not surprising. UBD came in for MCXA, so once they peaced out, doesn't make much sense to stay in. I think the NPO-DH clause is a little ridiculous, but I fully expected it to be used on alliances fighting on the polar sphere of things.

P.S- Watchman, you were tougher as part of TSO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='watchman' timestamp='1296573194' post='2614665']

Despite some of their posting ITT, BN, SC, and NEAT were really a great group of people to work with. Things remained civil and honorable. We hold no ill will toward them at all.


o/ Peace
[/quote]

Likewise, both yourself and Port Royale did well holding everything together, and with MCXA peacing it was always going to end quickly. No ill will there...I think that mdness' ranting just irked a few of our members.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Schad' timestamp='1296580709' post='2614778']
Likewise, both yourself and Port Royale did well holding everything together, and with MCXA peacing it was always going to end quickly. No ill will there...I think that mdness' ranting just irked a few of our members.
[/quote]
There was that other thing too, but at least it got resolved.

kerschbs, we saw the no entry into any war clause as a substitute for some sort of disarmament clause, not as a way to support Doom House. We're neutral in that conflict and enjoying the popcorn immensely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='auto98' timestamp='1296578422' post='2614748']
I seem to remember posting on this issue 2 years ago, so how come people still don't know what "white peace" means. If there are terms, it isn't white peace.
[/quote]


The wording was to please UBD. The word "surrender" was not to be used, but the terms were need on our end for them to achieve peace. Also, the terms do not necessarily show a recognition of the same war, but rather the terms reflect our ability to enforce a peace in the world at this current moment.

Every alliance that does not engage in this battle, is one less expansion of the web. We can only do our part to keep alliances from joining war in the future.

It was a pleasure dealing with many of the UBD in this war. Only Mdness was the exception and I would highly encourage no alliance to accept him after his selfish ego almost got his alliance and his allies curbstomped.

Edited by iamwalrus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='mdnss69' timestamp='1296563670' post='2614588']
You mean an alliance that gave everything it had in it's war, an alliance that utterly exhausted it's military after being attacked by how many alliances? Last night before I logged out, I asked my members in the Directorate if they would accept peace with conditions. I received an outstanding no response and thus my mandate as an Executive Director was clear. No peace with conditions until our military was spent. My name is not up there because I pointedly refused to sign such [i]surrender terms[/i]. And make no mistake, that is what these are. The Directorate was in a position where a white peace without that second absurd condition was readily achievable. We spent a fraction of our warchests in our wars against BN, SC and NEAT. Several of the members still have well over a billion left in savings. We have two allies who were not engaged in the current war and would have been willing to provide support. I have no doubt that NEAT would have turned around with LSF and The Int to counter, but I would rather bow out in such a style as that then this. This is pathetic. This is the difference.
[/quote]

<_<

Congratulations, mdnss69...you are the first person who has seriously tempted me to break my own self-imposed rules about speaking in public (OOC: on OWF). However, thankfully others have made the points I would have made and thus there is no reason. Best of luck in you new alliance. I hope things work out there for you.

To the rest of UBD - :salute:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='watchman' timestamp='1296573194' post='2614665']
There is way too much to respond to here. So, let me simply say that MCXA and her enemies came to an acceptable agreement for cessation of hostilities. Since we got into the war for the sake of MCXA, it seemed counter-productive to continue.

As to the re-entry term, that was certainly a sticking point in talks, but in the end, we really had no legitimate way of re-entering the war, anyway. We checked with our allies and came to a conclusion that this was a redundant clause - 'we won't re-enter a war that we weren't going to re-enter anyway.' If members of the international community want to stoop to using such semantics to lambaste UBD, they are perfectly welcome to do so. It matters little.

Mdnss is Mdnss. <_< Farewell, Mdnss and good luck to you.

[color="#00BFFF"][b]Despite some of their posting ITT, BN, SC, and NEAT were really a great group of people to work with. Things remained civil and honorable. We hold no ill will toward them at all. [/b][/color]


o/ Peace
[/quote]

Thanks so much for the kind words watchman. We at SC appreciate it. :)

And yeah, we're also sorry that you had to deal with mdnss as much as we had to deal with mdnss. :D

--Mags

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Schad' timestamp='1296580709' post='2614778']
Likewise, both yourself and Port Royale did well holding everything together, and with MCXA peacing it was always going to end quickly. No ill will there...I think that mdness' ranting just irked a few of our members.
[/quote]

irked a few of our members, also.

[quote name='Max Power' timestamp='1296581279' post='2614787']
There was that other thing too, but at least it got resolved.
[/quote]

Aye. Sorry about that. You guys were very understanding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Bordiga' timestamp='1296571673' post='2614649']
Congratulations on the white peace UBD. You entered a war to defend your ally as did we, I'm glad we could part ways once MCXA surrendered.

Mdnss69, I suggest you actually stop whinging and instead of joining an alliance that actually admitted to surrendering, do something to back up your words. Hell, if it wasn't for me arguing continually with BN, NEAT and SC members that your idiocy should be disregarded UBD would still be at war.



Another tall tale. The largest warchest in the alliance was just over 1 billion, belonging to a nation in peace mode with 60,000 NS. Your largest nation (no longer) had a war chest less than half that. The overall picture of UBD was far worse with most warchests inadequate. The nation I was fighting, with 25,000 NS only had 51 million and now has only 30 million. If the war had last even one week it would have devastated UBD.

At least UBD will emerge from this conflict with one less useless embarrassment of a leader.
[/quote]

His commentary is his own, he posted his resignation from the alliance shortly before his commentary.

The stance of UBD is we wish all involved parties good luck and congratulations on a great fight all around. It is excellent to see so many allies standing by each other and honoring their word. ^_^

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Theres little doubt that UBD had a few solid nations in peace mode and that it would have helped to stem some of the 5:1 losses they were incurring.

Theres also little doubt that BN knew about them, and was prepared and waiting for those nations to come out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='magicninja' timestamp='1296537726' post='2614098']
Obviously, it doesn't if they have to actually go out of their way point out that it doesn't. If it was connected to the Polar-VE bit no one would have to mention the NPO-Doomhouse front at all would they? You're godddamn right they wouldn't.
[/quote]

Do you care? GATO getting ready to jump in there?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm glad we were able to get into the mix and of course fight beside our old friends in SC, and with NEAT as well.

My admittedly limited interaction with UBD members (basically Port Royale since he hung out in our IRC channel) was pleasant (although to the gentleman I attacked, a couple counters woulda been nice :P )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='SirWilliam' timestamp='1296577649' post='2614736']
You're mistaking a belief that NPO was remaining uninvolved to strike when all major players had committed elsewhere, with a belief that NPO was never going to enter. The former being the case the first-strike (pre-emptive attack) was seen as beating Pacifica to the punch on that larger front.
[/quote]

That still doesn't make any sense. The "major players" never needed to enter as is apparent. VE's side on the Polar front are handling themselves just fine from the look of things. The major players could have simply waited for Pacifica to get involved. They certainly would have had a better reason and still not given up any strength advantage they have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='magicninja' timestamp='1296614056' post='2615370']
That still doesn't make any sense.
[/quote]

I'm sorry you're not understanding this but I can't really be any clearer.

[quote name='magicninja' timestamp='1296614056' post='2615370']
The "major players" never needed to enter as is apparent. VE's side on the Polar front are handling themselves just fine from the look of things.
[/quote]

That would be a fair assessment to make [i]after[/i] the fact and if we were content with waiting. Neither was the case.

[quote name='magicninja' timestamp='1296614056' post='2615370']
The major players could have simply waited for Pacifica to get involved. They certainly would have had a better reason and still not given up any strength advantage they have.
[/quote]

Wait for NPO's eventual entrance? Wait while our allies burn? Wait and give up the tactical advantage? Yeah, no thanks, no thanks, and no thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='magicninja' timestamp='1296614056' post='2615370']
That still doesn't make any sense. The "major players" never needed to enter as is apparent. VE's side on the Polar front are handling themselves just fine from the look of things. The major players could have simply waited for Pacifica to get involved. They certainly would have had a better reason and still not given up any strength advantage they have.
[/quote]
As I see it we were in the right either way.

Either we were just short-circuiting the treaty chains and getting war sooner. Or NPO were going to stay out, in which case they deserved to get attacked anyway for cowardice and for the sake of keeping things interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...