Elorian Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 *releases the white doves* Peace is good! Hope you all had enough fun to last for another year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magicninja Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 [quote name='Shadow Slayer' timestamp='1296631954' post='2615928'] 1. Cowardice is defined as lack of resolution. GATO's resolution was to come into the war to defend IAA, not Polar. Again, they defended IAA through diplomacy. They have ensured that IAA will get a white peace + no reps when the IAA are ready to step out. 2. Magicninja explicitly stated that their reason for [b]not remaining[/b] in the war was because of Polar. If you read his posts, he does explicitly state (multiple times, cause you don't seem to get it) that the reason they entered the war is because they wanted to make sure IAA's future was protected. It now is. Therefore, they have successfully defended their ally, and can gracefully step out. I mean, I'm not sure how much clearer we can make this for you. Leaders from all sides are telling you you're wrong, and you sit there telling us that we don't get it? Really? Regardless, if you still disagree, you're beyond hope. [/quote] TBH NSO is just disappointed we didn't burn regardless of the reasons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omniscient1 Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 Ok I refrained from commenting until now, but I think my voice may help sort this out a little. IAA hold no ill will towards GATO for leaving the war. We had told them from day one once they get ready to leave let us know and it's all good. We thank them for sacrificing no matter how great or small. You will see some anger from a few IAA members for other things surrounding the peace process. That anger has been transposed onto this announcement for the first few pages. However, it was deemed more appropriate for IAA members to take these concerns to more private locations. We appreciate the many OWF posters concerned about us though. Good luck in the future GATO. I hope you remember this moment for a while though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jrenster Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Shadow Slayer' timestamp='1296631954' post='2615928'] 1. Cowardice is defined as lack of resolution. GATO's resolution was to come into the war to defend IAA, not Polar. Again, they defended IAA through diplomacy. They have ensured that IAA will get a white peace + no reps when the IAA are ready to step out. 2. Magicninja explicitly stated that their reason for [b]not remaining[/b] in the war was because of Polar. If you read his posts, he does explicitly state (multiple times, cause you don't seem to get it) that the reason they entered the war is because they wanted to make sure IAA's future was protected. Therefore, they have successfully defended their ally, and can gracefully step out. I mean, I'm not sure how much clearer we can make this for you. Leaders from all sides are telling you you're wrong, and you sit there telling us that we don't get it? Really? Regardless, if you still disagree, you're beyond hope. [/quote] It doesn't matter who tells me I'm wrong or right. Whether or not someone believes something one way or another will not influence my opinion. Now it's becoming decisively clear that you are either just plain incapable of understanding, or you just love to make faulty logic. Yes. GATO's resolution was to come into the war to defend IAA. That means defending them until they have no need of being defended anymore. I understand magicninja's little utilitarian argument that they believe they accomplished their goal of defending IAA through ensuring their white peace. And now, they state that they want to leave or "not remain" because they felt that continuing to do so after accomplishing their objective would only be to burn for Polar. What I'm trying to tell you is that leaving because they've accomplished a diplomatic victory for their allies is and creating an ad hoc excuse of not wanting to burn for Polar is what I see as cowardice. I see the "diplomatic victory" and the desire to not fight for Polar as excuses for their cowardice. A diplomatic victory is not the same as a continuance of defending an Ally and is just an excuse to say that they've accomplished their goal. You realize that they still have an entire bloc that is currently fighting a war that they are not fighting, right? Now if you still wish to continue to live in an imagined universe where you think that just because you and other leaders agree on one thing and that makes you right, then I have no business in intruding in your fantasy world. Edited February 2, 2011 by Jrenster Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magicninja Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 [quote name='Jrenster' timestamp='1296633075' post='2615945'] It doesn't matter who tells me I'm wrong or right. Whether or not someone believes something one way or another will not influence my opinion. Now it's becoming decisively clear that you are either just plain incapable of understanding, or you just love to make faulty logic. Yes. GATO's resolution was to come into the war to defend IAA. That means defending them until they have no need of being defended anymore. I understand magicninja's little utilitarian argument that they believe they accomplished their goal of defending IAA through ensuring their white peace. And now, they state that they want to leave or "not remain" because they felt that continuing to do so after accomplishing their objective would only be to burn for Polar. What I'm trying to tell you is that leaving because they've accomplished a diplomatic victory for their allies is and creating an ad hoc excuse of not wanting to burn for Polar is what I see as cowardice. I see the "diplomatic victory" and the desire to not fight for Polar as excuses for their cowardice. A diplomatic victory is not the same as a continuance of defending an Ally and is just an excuse to say that they've accomplished their goal. You realize that they still have an entire bloc that is currently fighting a war that they are not fighting, right? Now if you still wish to continue to live in an imagined universe where you think that just because you and other leaders agree on one thing and that makes you right, then I have no business in intruding in your fantasy world. [/quote] We get it. Everyone should blindly burn for their allies regardless of the situation. I hope someday you get to do it again and are able to do it time and time again until Bob's end if that's what makes you happy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jrenster Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 (edited) [quote name='magicninja' timestamp='1296633494' post='2615949'] We get it. Everyone should blindly burn for their allies regardless of the situation. I hope someday you get to do it again and are able to do it time and time again until Bob's end if that's what makes you happy. [/quote] Actually my philosophy is that it's rude for people to leave the dinner table before their friends do. Especially when their bloc of allies is purported to always "roll together". But it would appear that it is getting late and that I have to make an exit. Edited February 2, 2011 by Jrenster Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Buscemi Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 [quote name='Shadow Slayer' timestamp='1296631954' post='2615928'] 1. Cowardice is defined as lack of resolution. GATO's resolution was to come into the war to defend IAA, not Polar. Again, they defended IAA through diplomacy. They have ensured that [b]IAA will get a white peace + no reps[/b] when the IAA are ready to step out. [/quote] I'm glad I didn't see iFOK's signatures on this then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azaghul Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 [quote name='magicninja' timestamp='1296633494' post='2615949'] We get it. Everyone should blindly burn for their allies regardless of the situation. I hope someday you get to do it again and are able to do it time and time again until Bob's end if that's what makes you happy. [/quote] What's funny is that his alliance is the same distance from Polar treaty-wise as yours is, but they hadn't entered yet (and some have claimed that they weren't going to enter) until we did it for them. That being said I agree with a lot of his argument. The problem with the "we achieved what we wanted by insuring that they'd get white peace" argument is that I doubt that you needed to go to war to do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xiphosis Posted February 2, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 [quote]They have ensured that IAA will get a white peace + no reps when the IAA are ready to step out. [/quote] From RIA, just to be clear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crymson Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 (edited) [quote name='SirWilliam' timestamp='1296631600' post='2615917'] What, really? All 6 of you? [/quote] I do remember his alliance's dashingly brave declaration of war on GPA, made against a hopelessly outnumbered opponent and made in spite of the fact that we all--including his alliance's protector (TPF)--had told him to stay out of it. The grand contribution of he and his alliance was to mess up our target assignments, provoking many Q government members to verbally tear into him. And that's my only real memory of HeroOfTime55 or of 64digits. Edited February 2, 2011 by Crymson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyperion321 Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 Wait....what about the rest of Synergy... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Corrupt Teacher Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 [quote name='Jrenster' timestamp='1296633625' post='2615953'] Actually my philosophy is that it's rude for people to leave the dinner table before their friends do. Especially when their bloc of allies is purported to always "roll together". But it would appear that it is getting late and that I have to make an exit. [/quote] Sorry thats CnG thats the suicide pact. Synergy just isn't as cool. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heyman Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 [quote name='Hyperion321' timestamp='1296634616' post='2615964'] Wait....what about the rest of Synergy... [/quote] This is heretoforth known as the summary of all previous discussion regarding the announcement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow Slayer Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 [quote name='Xiphosis' timestamp='1296634162' post='2615956'] From RIA, just to be clear. [/quote] Yeah, sorry -- forgot to mention that tidbit. Edited my post accordingly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James IV Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 Something about this just lacks Synergy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lincongrad Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 (edited) If GATO's allies wanted them out, then they should go ahead and hop out. As they did. Although I find the argument that GATO would do nothing by staying in the war slightly odd: if nothing else, they'll be absorbing nukes. Edited February 2, 2011 by Lincongrad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D34th Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 [quote name='magicninja' timestamp='1296628178' post='2615816'] Well let's nip this stupidity in the bud shall we? First of all it was never GATO's intention to burn for Polar. We were in the war to ensure our friends and allies received a fair peace settlement. As it is they all have offers of white peace as far as we were told. Our staying in was in no way going to better their position. They choose to tie their fate to Polaris. That's fine and admirable but GATO is simply not willing to do that. Our allies can leave whenever they like. It's up to them. [/quote] If you didn't knew for what you were fighting was best that you leave the battlefield, Polaris didn't ask our allies or other alliances to burn for us, but to do what is right, if your alliance prefer to live in a world where wars are declared just based on the mere principle that might is right, it's up to you. This and the fact that you leaved some your closest allies fighting in the battlefield just shows how compromised GATO is and how much you worry for your infrastructure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avakael Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 Lame! Now R&R can't sneakily overtake GATO in the middle of the war... Oh well. o/ GATO o/ GOD o/ RIA o/ CRAP o/ Anyone else I forgot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Venizelos Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 This was a good outcome. btw, wasn't it obvious from the beginning that GATO's allies would get white peace? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaiar Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 [quote name='Venizelos' timestamp='1296637774' post='2615990'] This was a good outcome. btw, wasn't it obvious from the beginning that GATO's allies would get white peace? [/quote] Yes, most likely. Not only GATO's allies but many other alliances out there fighting will get white peace/review/non-re-entry clause, but none will get terms that are money and tech reparations. I don't see the point of these so called "going in to defend allies". Defend allies from what? If they face disbandment, war to cripple them, or months of reparations, then yes I see the point of "going in to defend allies" because you would actually be defending them from some awful fate. Otherwise, most alliance that enter a war are entering to defend allies that if they bothered to ask would be told, yeah your allies are getting an easy peace if they leave now. GATO, did not achieve white peace for TIO, IAA, and LoSS. That peace was already there, they just didn't bother to ask before entering the war. If they ask and are told, yeah your buddies will get white peace it is the same result that we got here. Lot's of arguing for nothing. And not enough talking before going to war. Instead, everyone gets too excited about war and are just waiting to see where they can go in and counter for their allies. Instead of actually doing some leg work diplomatically to get the same result. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Locke Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 [quote name='kriekfreak' timestamp='1296627103' post='2615760'] I'm missing the part about not re-entering. [/quote] Yeah, magicninja made a good case against that; it benefits the above alliances more if they don't take that. [quote name='Jrenster' timestamp='1296627995' post='2615807'] I thought IAA and GATO were BFFs. [/quote] Well, history showed how much IAA valued GATO, at least. [quote name='magicninja' timestamp='1296629011' post='2615844'] No that is what it would have been. When our allies decided to tie their fate to Polar we would have had to do the same thing by staying in. Our fate would have been tied to Polar. We didn't agree with what Polar (or VE for that matter) did in the first place. At least now we have secured that they will receive white peace when they are done and will be in a position to help them rebuild. [/quote] Curious, did you actually [i]secure[/i] white peace, or did they say "we offered white peace" to you? One is vastly different than the other. Yes, they may offer white peace now, but they could very well change that as the war drags on. [quote name='Sir Sci' timestamp='1296629234' post='2615854'] For the record, this decision is not universally supported by the entire GATO membership. Such is the beauty of democracy. EDIT: For grammar. [/quote] And this is why I hate democracy. [quote name='Xiphosis' timestamp='1296629695' post='2615869'] It's funny to see the level of complaining from non-GATO allies about how raw GATO allies must feel. Just so you can conveniently overlook it again; GATO was encouraged by her allies to leave this war. [/quote] I for one don't see it as "wrong" that GATO peaced out, however...I must say it's never something I could support either. I've been in an alliance that peaced out at the request of it's ally, and I know how !@#$%* it feels to leave them behind, requested or not. At the time I didn't have any power to influence the decision, nor do I have any to influence GATO's (naturally ), but it's not a move I could ever, in good conscience, support myself. Especially if I was in GATO defending IAA, heh; NoVision was one of my biggest reasons and arguments in getting the Invicta/IAA MDoAP signed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poyplemonkeys Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 (edited) Enjoy your pixels GATO [quote name='Xiphosis' timestamp='1296634162' post='2615956'] From RIA, just to be clear. [/quote] If your diplomatic victory was to secure white peace from RIA for your allies (when was the last time RIA demanded reparations?) whilst leaving the rest of the alliances at war with them to take whatever pound of flesh they can, than it may just be the most hollow 'victory' I've seen anyone claim since Vladimir and GW I. Edited February 2, 2011 by Poyplemonkeys Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balkan Banania Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 [quote name='Letum' timestamp='1296631347' post='2615913'] If GATO's allies believe that this is the long term strategy that is in their best interest, and they have a good argument for it, then it should stop at that. [/quote] I agree with Letum on this, enjoy peace. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ironfist Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Locke' timestamp='1296639988' post='2615994'] Curious, did you actually [i]secure[/i] white peace, or did they say "we offered white peace" to you? One is vastly different than the other. Yes, they may offer white peace now, but they could very well change that as the war drags on. [/quote] Yes, we did secure white peace. They didn't take it. I don't see the two scenarios you offer differing that greatly. They won't be getting reps from RIA, though. So yes, we did secure it for them. To all the haters: - If you're not in GATO, and you're not a GATOan ally, and you feel the need to criticise us, we don't care. - If you're here because you don't like GATO, go join the crowd and talk about how terrible we are, while we continue to not care. - To anyone who sees our stance as weak, dishonourable, or unnacceptable, you're not an ally of GATO and we're still not caring. Also, Democracy works for us, bro. Brown works too. We GATO. Get off our lawn. Edited February 2, 2011 by Ironfist Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cataduanes Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 You should have held on so you could exit with IAA, but hey I love GATO regardless. All the best with rebuilding Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.