Preemptive Warfare

[Azaghul]

[quote name='King Charge' timestamp='1297021948' post='2622501']
I just want to know what NPO could have done to avoid this? Is there anything?[/quote]
Not had a constant of propaganda against us and our allies? Not allied others hostile to us?

[quote]You attacked NPO because they avoided going to war for so long that you were concerned that they would eventually go to war one day. Do you realize how absurd that sounds? Then after attacking them for not doing anything because you wanted to destroy them while you were still in a position of power, you have the nerve to call THEM opportunists. I understand why you did it, but I don't like the fact that NPO couldn't have done anything to avoid it.[/quote]
They were clearly looking for an opportunity to strike us when they would have the upper hand and avoiding wars, even when a direct ally was attacked, when they wouldn't. We were tired of that and weren't going to let them get away with it.

I won't deny that there was some opportunism in our declaration of war. Any good alliance uses good opportunities.

[quote name='silentkiller' timestamp='1297022172' post='2622507']
So Archon's op was basically a lie to hide the real intentions for the war. K[/quote]
Where did you get that from?

Nothing in Archon's declaration of war contradicts my points here.

[quote]I love how everyone is able to mind read Cortath these days.[/quote]
Can I read his mind? No. But the actions of NPO say plenty. Allying people hostile to us. Creating a constant stream of propaganda against us. It was very obvious to everyone that you were opposed to us.

[MrMuz]

[quote name='King Charge' timestamp='1297021948' post='2622501']
I just want to know what NPO could have done to avoid this? Is there anything?
[/quote]

I suppose they could've been nice and not destroyed embassies? It's not the first time they've dodged a war with the promise of providing rebuilding aid to their allies. If someone is seen as a bank for the enemy or as a backup, is it any surprise that they were hit? It may well be paranoia, but as they say, better safe than sorry.

There was a [url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=97791"]good thread[/url] on it by FAN, but NPO's supporters just went "u mad" instead of acknowledging that there was a problem. The massacre was entirely avoidable. But NPO's been playing themselves as an enemy of MK for the past few months. If NPO had also adhered to this unipolar world concept like most of the alliances out there, they wouldn't be seen as the enemy.

[Dochartaigh]

[quote name='bigwoody' timestamp='1297020090' post='2622437']
To be fair, they pretty much have openly admitted that they are attacking NPO for the lulz.
[/quote]

well lately. at first iirc, they stated that NPO could be coming in or some such.

[quote name='MrMuz' timestamp='1297020411' post='2622447']
Where did you get that? The only people spouting crap (or who even care) about a multipolar world are the ex-Vox and CoJ sympathizers and the other neglected microalliances who are losing out this war looking for someone to blame. MK simply doesn't want NPO to be one of those poles.


On the topic itself, decent points, but seems to be missing the big picture. I don't think the FanDoom/NPO strike was meant as a pre-emptive war to anything. It's only been referred to a preemptive strike for MK's respect of TOP's preemptive strike during Bipolar.

The objective was to remove NPO from power. The right moment was when any possible NPO allies and further chains, especially NpO, were distracted by another war. In keeping everyone distracted and too weak to defend NPO, they succeeded brilliantly, even more so when NPO's allies focused all their attacks on GOONS.
[/quote]

read up on Azaghul's posts and the ones from his side stating how true he is on the multi-polar world. that is not Ex-Vox or CoJ sympathizers stating that.

as for the rest- i agree, which is why they at first tried to keep the war on NPO separate from the one on NpO.

[quote name='DictatatorDan' timestamp='1297023283' post='2622525']
[color="#FF0000"]This seems to be a regular occurrence between us. I am honored, I truly am.

No. The reason is right there in front of you, in my post, and in the DoW. NPO was attempting to remain out of the conflict in spite of it's obligations, and its constant adversarial role against DH/MK/PB and its constant arrogance. In my opinion, the Sir Paul "Pretender Act" was enough to roll NPO. Luckily I dont set MK policy and am not good friends with High Prophet Archon.[/color]
[/quote]

so wait, if Sir Paul "pretender Act" was enough to roll NPO, then VE should have happily gone with Polaris rolling fist for SCM impersonating Grub (when he was MoD) on IRC. glad that you agree with that war.

as for the reason- NPO was not getting involved, so they involved NPO. to my knowledge, NPO had done nothing really against MK or DH/PB (MK is part of DH) except for being a bit mouthy on the forums. which according to MK/et al is perfectly acceptable. So basically because NPO did not like DH/PB that is now enough to roll them? heh. and things supposedly got better. now if you don't like the hegemony you get rolled... wait, sounds exactly the same as before.

as for regular occurrence, i tend to ignore your posts over all. i have only replied to you in 2 possibly 3 threads despite you posting in a lot more than that. i ignore your posts cuz really, they are usually quite ignorant.

[silentkiller]

[quote name='Azaghul' timestamp='1297023811' post='2622535']
Not had a constant of propaganda against us and our allies? Not allied others hostile to us?[/quote]

Sir Paul's tabloids are as official as MK's sigs on our reps.

[quote]Where did you get that from?

Nothing in Archon's declaration of war contradicts my points here.[/quote]

Was what Archon posted the main reason for war or not? You don't seem to think so. One of you is a liar.


[quote]Can I read his mind? No. But the actions of NPO say plenty. Allying people hostile to us. Creating a constant stream of propaganda against us. It was very obvious to everyone that you were opposed to us.
[/quote]

Yeah why did we ally ourselves with alliances that stood with us during Karma war. The horror! And we tried building relationships with "non-hostile" alliances but their masters/treaty partners would have none of it.

Edited February 6, 2011 by silentkiller

[potato]

[quote name='TheyCallMeJeezy' timestamp='1297022475' post='2622514']
The paranoia is strong in this one.
[/quote]

Are you trying to say NPO wouldn't have loved to take a shot at us? And that they didn't do everything in their power to piss us off?

[Branimir]

[quote name='Azaghul' timestamp='1297023811' post='2622535']Not had a constant of propaganda against us and our allies? [/quote]
Again with Sir Pauls tabloid? Because, that is the only thing that comes to mind,...a tabloid. Didn't know you were so fragile to take excessive grievance over a tabloid.
[quote name='Azaghul' timestamp='1297023811' post='2622535']Not allied others hostile to us?[/quote]
Who, Invicta? Legion? TPF? TIO?

Only thing I know about them is that you constantly bombard them with banter unprovoked on here this medium.
Is it,...NSO? lol

Well maybe we would sign with some other people if they didn't get !@#$ from their other allies for considering it. Our friends are who they are, we are not going to change them. You dont like them? Too bad. But dont come complaining how they are hostile to you when you are the ones who constantly instigate verbal hostility at them.
[quote name='Azaghul' timestamp='1297023811' post='2622535']They were clearly looking for an opportunity to strike us when they would have the upper hand and avoiding wars,...[/quote]
Except, not. Except, that is just your speculation and attacking alliances out of your own insecurities and fears was historically laughed at and critiqued.
[quote name='Azaghul' timestamp='1297023811' post='2622535']I won't deny that there was some opportunism in our declaration of war. Any good alliance uses good opportunities.[/quote]
Some? Id say it was dripping with it.
[quote name='Azaghul' timestamp='1297023811' post='2622535']But the actions of NPO say plenty. [/quote]
Like what actions?
Did we harass and provoke you in our embassy in your halls?
No.

Did we cheered a rogue and gave him subtle support in his attack on you?
No.

OOC: Did we bring it OOC and harassed you in your other game adventures? No

It was all you.

Edited February 6, 2011 by Branimir

[Doug Falkner]

At the risk of taking this risk off topic, it has always struck me that war on Planet Bob is generally a matter of establishing one's coalition's place in the grand scheme of things. That being the case, whatever the stated CB is for any whatever the alliance, coalition, or whatever, in general war on Planet Bob tends to always be about the same things for the same reasons and the only real differences are the strategy employed to get the people you need to fight to fight you.

So it strikes me the real thing to talk about is whether one prefers the old fashion way of doing things, which was best characterized by NPO's modus operandi prior to the Karma War, that involved either finding an excuse or maneuvering one's enemy into attacking or the new way of doing things, which is characterized by Doomhouse's declaration on NPO, and simply declaring war when one believes that a war would be strategically advantageous. In the end, the question is whether one prefers directness or subtlety or nuance.

[TheyCallMeJeezy]

[quote name='potato' timestamp='1297024470' post='2622568']
Are you trying to say NPO wouldn't have loved to take a shot at us? And that they didn't do everything in their power to piss us off?
[/quote]

You've put yourself in a position where a lot of people probably want to take a shot at you. Most wouldn't though, and I honestly don't think NPO would have either. They were keeping their head low as far as I'm concerned. Kind of like Polaris. But alas, people want to kill us. I'm fine with that. It makes me feel good inside.

About doing everything in their power to piss you off...they didn't do what you did, which [i]was[/i] well within their power.

[potato]

[quote name='TheyCallMeJeezy' timestamp='1297024926' post='2622579']
You've put yourself in a position where a lot of people probably want to take a shot at you. Most wouldn't though, and I honestly don't think NPO would have either. They were keeping their head low as far as I'm concerned. Kind of like Polaris. But alas, people want to kill us. I'm fine with that. It makes me feel good inside.

About doing everything in their power to piss you off...they didn't do what you did, which [i]was[/i] well within their power.
[/quote]

I don't think any of us in MK really cares if we're liked or not, to be honest.

As for your second point, if they had done what we did, they'd have been in the same situation as they are now: getting rolled and, this time, they may not have been backed by a bunch of incompetent allies.

Edited February 6, 2011 by potato

[Burnsey]

[quote name='zzzptm' timestamp='1297019788' post='2622426']
Doomhouse and FAN simply want to destroy NPO. This is no surprise to any student of history.
[/quote]
Take heed of this man, he IS the Lord of History after all...

[2burnt2eat]

[quote name='der_ko' timestamp='1297022117' post='2622504']
There are not many things I am 100 % certain about, but the NPO and MK being on opposite sides in a future war is one things I am totally confident about. Given the inevitble war between our alliances we choose when and where we would fight instead of waiting until the odds were no longer in our favor. It doesn't get more rational then that. Also, it's incredible entertaining and isn't that the ultimate goal of any alliance?
[/quote]

I could guarantee that both of you would be on opposite sides too in the future, especially when you do !@#$ like this. That's a big duh. Attacking someone for something they might not do for 10 or even 100 years isn't a solid reason for war [i]at all[/i]. That's just paranoia. Did they even have plans to attack you when you decided to "preempt"? No. Would they be on opposite sides in the future? Duh. There's only two sides; it's inevitable in the unending flow of time for any alliance to be against "your side". And that means every alliance here is open to your "casus belli".

The only reason you have for attacking them is because they didn't fit under the thumb of your own little world order.

But that isn't a reason for war. At this point, your alliance has just thrown just about every little talking point it used in Karma and onward, and replaced it with completely contradictory ones. I wouldn't call that rational. I would call that brazenly short-term thinking, with significant long term consequences.

[Banksy]

The entire piece rests on the fact it's "pre-emptive." It's not, it's because we don't like you. You're the one calling it pre-emptive which means all you've done is rebut your own strawman. Congratulations, I guess.

[King Charge]

[quote name='MrMuz' timestamp='1297023947' post='2622542']
I suppose they could've been nice and not destroyed embassies? It's not the first time they've dodged a war with the promise of providing rebuilding aid to their allies. If someone is seen as a bank for the enemy or as a backup, is it any surprise that they were hit? It may well be paranoia, but as they say, better safe than sorry.

There was a [url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=97791"]good thread[/url] on it by FAN, but NPO's supporters just went "u mad" instead of acknowledging that there was a problem. The massacre was entirely avoidable. But NPO's been playing themselves as an enemy of MK for the past few months. If NPO had also adhered to this unipolar world concept like most of the alliances out there, they wouldn't be seen as the enemy.
[/quote]

Do you know what they're talking about when they say that they were giving Doomhouse money? I didn't particularly like that thread because of the tone. Like I said, I understand why it was done. It makes total sense. I just think that they jumped the gun a little bit. NPO was already punished for their actions. I wasn't around for Karma, but I imagine that the reps deemed by the people who beat them down was punishment enough. If it wasn't punishment enough, then it is only the fault of the people that gave them the reps. They only have themselves to blame if they think they let them off too easy. I can't fathom that after suffering reparations that they would go to the people who dismantled them and apologize. Sure it would be a nice gesture, but I don't understand how you could possibly expect something like that. I'm just under the impression that NPO will never get over their past, regardless of what they do. Obviously they could have been nicer to their enemies, but even so, I don't believe it would have done them any good.

Just like you play the "What if" game, that is, saying that if you didn't attack them now they would eventually rise to power and opportunistically attack and destroy their enemies. Isn't it fair that I can play the "What if" game and say that even if they were nice to FAN and Doomhouse and kept their embassies, you would have attacked them all the same.

[TheyCallMeJeezy]

[quote name='potato' timestamp='1297025435' post='2622591']
I don't think any of us in MK really cares if we're liked or not, to be honest.

As for your second point, if they had done what we did, they'd have been in the same situation as they are now: getting rolled and, this time, they may not have been backed by a bunch of incompetent allies.
[/quote]

I don't think many alliances care if they are liked either, to be honest. That wasn't my point. Alliances that are liked usually don't have to try. (<3 STA)

I don't know, with the natural ebb and flow of this world they might have been backed more significantly without a separate war going on in the background. You guys went against the grain so to speak, imo. It's all perspective really though.

[Zero-One]

[quote name='bigwoody' timestamp='1297020090' post='2622437']
To be fair, they pretty much have openly admitted that they are attacking NPO for the lulz.
[/quote]

Where did you get that? NPO were chomping at the bit to jump in as soon as the conditions are favorable to them. You would be a damn fool if you thought NPO were sitting innocently in the corner signing kumbayah. Spare us the dribble.

[alyster]

[quote name='Banksy' timestamp='1297025946' post='2622605']
The entire piece rests on the fact it's "pre-emptive." It's not, it's because we don't like you. You're the one calling it pre-emptive which means all you've done is rebut your own strawman. Congratulations, I guess.
[/quote]


Why on earth does Roq go around calling it preemptive then O.o

[GeoLauzier]

brb, resigning from MK.

[bigwoody]

[quote name='Zero-One' timestamp='1297026109' post='2622611']
Where did you get that? NPO were chomping at the bit to jump in as soon as the conditions are favorable to them. You would be a damn fool if you thought NPO were sitting innocently in the corner signing kumbayah. Spare us the dribble.
[/quote]
Of course they are and always will be.

OOC: My point is that your attacking coalition admitted that they tossed aside all notions of in-game politics and just decided to have their war. That's fine, but my statement stands, really.

[silentkiller]

[quote name='Zero-One' timestamp='1297026109' post='2622611']
Where did you get that? NPO were chomping at the bit to jump in as soon as the conditions are favorable to them. You would be a damn fool if you thought NPO were sitting innocently in the corner signing kumbayah. Spare us the dribble.
[/quote]

I thought we were getting attacked because we were being opportunistic cowards who were going to avoid the war?

Edited February 6, 2011 by silentkiller

[Louisa]

[quote name='2burnt2eat' timestamp='1297025873' post='2622604']
The only reason you have for attacking. . . .

But that isn't a reason for war. . . .
[/quote]
How does this work? A reason for attacking is not a reason for war?

Are we going to have this massive scholarly debate about the mythical valid :cb: again?

[alyster]

[quote name='silentkiller' timestamp='1297027395' post='2622642']
I thought we were getting attacked because we were being opportunistic cowards who were going to avoid the war?
[/quote]


I guess they should make a vote and call us back once they decide

[Banksy]

[quote name='mikk206' timestamp='1297026214' post='2622612']
Why on earth does Roq go around calling it preemptive then O.o
[/quote]
I don't know, you should ask him. Probably because it's a commonly accepted term. But as the DoW said, we weren't expecting the NPO to enter, so it's hardly pre-emptive.

[Zero-One]

nm

Edited February 6, 2011 by Zero-One

[Monster]

[quote name='Banksy' timestamp='1297027932' post='2622655']
I don't know, you should ask him. Probably because it's a commonly accepted term. But as the DoW said, we weren't expecting the NPO to enter, so it's hardly pre-emptive.
[/quote]

That's not actually it. The OP says that they were being held off by others. NPO's neutrality was not a certainty when we attacked. What the OP describes is saving NPO for when it could do the most damage and if the conditions were right. In other words, a deployment strategy.

Edited February 6, 2011 by Antoine Roquentin

[Penkala]

[quote name='King Charge' timestamp='1297021299' post='2622477']
You guys must be raising some good points
[/quote]

Yes points such as "it is not possible to declare war with one kind of CB versus another kind"...

And "it's not preemptive!"