Penkala Posted February 8, 2011 Report Share Posted February 8, 2011 Also, 1 war, R&R? Terrible blitz. I love you and all... but come on guys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeroofTime55 Posted February 8, 2011 Report Share Posted February 8, 2011 I think RoK is the one that needs your help, but OK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fronz Posted February 8, 2011 Report Share Posted February 8, 2011 [quote name='Myworld' timestamp='1297140687' post='2625232'] You seriously think that we are going to accept paying 40k in reps to CSN for CSN declaring on DT? [/quote] No mr Myworld...I expect you to die! /me laughs manically as he fires up the 'ol doomsday machine Were a terrible alliance, just terrible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rsoxbronco1 Posted February 8, 2011 Report Share Posted February 8, 2011 Someone is trying to out-TGE the Germans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xiphosis Posted February 8, 2011 Report Share Posted February 8, 2011 [quote name='Myworld' timestamp='1297140687' post='2625232'] You seriously think that we are going to accept paying 40k in reps to CSN for CSN declaring on DT? [/quote] I think you should be awfully careful who you cite ODP's to attack. It has a way of biting you in the ass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penkala Posted February 8, 2011 Report Share Posted February 8, 2011 [quote name='Myworld' timestamp='1297140687' post='2625232'] You seriously think that we are going to accept paying 40k in reps to CSN for CSN declaring on DT? When DT came in to defend LoSS and declared on Legacy. And Legacy isn't asking for reps. Then you would think that those that came in to support their ally in Legacy would follow suit and not ask for such ridiculous reps. CSN declared on us that was their choice to follow the option in the treaty between Legacy and CSN. [/quote] There are consequences for supporting Polar's actions and for attacking SF. Get over it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Stupid Posted February 8, 2011 Report Share Posted February 8, 2011 [quote name='HeroofTime55' timestamp='1297141317' post='2625257'] I think RoK is the one that needs your help, but OK. [/quote] I think we're doing just fine. Going to have some fun with all these new nations joining PC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wickedj Posted February 8, 2011 Report Share Posted February 8, 2011 [quote name='EgoFreaky' timestamp='1297139728' post='2625197'] And yet they are still in the fight. We won't stand in the way of getting LoSS out of the war, just speeding up the process. [/quote] Will you also support the reps that CSN wants? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twodivine Posted February 8, 2011 Report Share Posted February 8, 2011 [quote name='Fronz' timestamp='1297141334' post='2625258'] No mr Myworld...I expect you to die! /me laughs manically as he fires up the 'ol doomsday machine Were a terrible alliance, just terrible. [/quote] And what did DT do to CSN? Nothing. Haven't cared what CSN has been doing up until this war, and even after it I doubt we will then too. Only thing DT did was follow a treaty with an ally to defend them when they asked for help. Just like your own alliance. DT has never asked for extreme reps from any alliance. We have asked of reps but it was a mutual rebuilding of alliances with the terms we gave. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EgoFreaky Posted February 8, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 8, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Style #386' timestamp='1297141082' post='2625248'] Yeah, R&R looks really hard pressed by their 0.4 wars per member. A monumental task, indeed! [/quote] As said, we're here to help out some people that need it. We could have done that without DoW too but last time that happened ... well just ask Umbrella or MK how that ended. But i do feel the need to apologize to the world for not being able to compare to te mighty GATO warmachine. How many wars do your members have at the moment? .. Oh that's right guess being tough is easier after a surrender Edited February 8, 2011 by EgoFreaky Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonsPhyre Posted February 8, 2011 Report Share Posted February 8, 2011 What kind of !@#$%^&* is this? :| Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Co God Ben Posted February 8, 2011 Report Share Posted February 8, 2011 [quote name='EgoFreaky' timestamp='1297139728' post='2625197'] And yet they are still in the fight. We won't stand in the way of getting LoSS out of the war, just speeding up the process. [/quote] If that's your intent, declare more wars on us. Alek's warchest is still set to last for months, even with one more slot taken. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EgoFreaky Posted February 8, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 8, 2011 [quote name='wickedj' timestamp='1297141741' post='2625276'] Will you also support the reps that CSN wants? [/quote] We declared on LoSS so far no reps are asked from LoSS so if that happens we'll see. We ourselves are just here for some support and wont be taking reps for ourselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Style #386 Posted February 8, 2011 Report Share Posted February 8, 2011 [quote name='EgoFreaky' timestamp='1297141807' post='2625278'] But i do feel the need to apologize to the world for not being able to compare to te mighty GATO warmachine. How many wars do your members have at the moment? .. Oh that's right guess being though is easier after a surrender [/quote] I love the smell of an [i]ad hominem[/i] in the morning. Being what? Did you mean "tough"? Me pointing out the blatant hypocrisy in you berating Hydra for their lack of presence has nothing to do with GATO and our war machine, be it mighty or otherwise. But you get a cookie for trying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fronz Posted February 8, 2011 Report Share Posted February 8, 2011 [quote name='Myworld' timestamp='1297141772' post='2625277'] And what did DT do to CSN? Nothing. Haven't cared what CSN has been doing up until this war, and even after it I doubt we will then too. Only thing DT did was follow a treaty with an ally to defend them when they asked for help. Just like your own alliance. DT has never asked for extreme reps from any alliance. We have asked of reps but it was a mutual rebuilding of alliances with the terms we gave. [/quote] Honestly, I'm not sure what the DT proposed and rejected reps has to do with R&R Declaring on LoSS, my response to you was more of a parody joke then anything else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twodivine Posted February 8, 2011 Report Share Posted February 8, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Penkala' timestamp='1297141631' post='2625271'] There are consequences for supporting Polar's actions and for attacking SF. Get over it. [/quote] Both sides of the heart of this cluster have made mistakes and I could really care less. We didn't attack SF. We declared on Legacy. When did they join SF? And the treaty CSN used to declare on us was is considered OPTIONAL due to Legacy going to war off another treaty. As stated in CSN's treaty with Legacy. An Option that DT used to defend a friend. Not Polar, Not NPO. This front was so far removed from any of the Orders that considering it supporting them is a stretch. Edited February 8, 2011 by Myworld Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twodivine Posted February 8, 2011 Report Share Posted February 8, 2011 [quote name='Fronz' timestamp='1297142325' post='2625293'] Honestly, I'm not sure what the DT proposed and rejected reps has to do with R&R Declaring on LoSS, my response to you was more of a parody joke then anything else. [/quote] It's simple when your alliance offered up those reps and we turned them down and LoSS standing by it's ally. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xiphosis Posted February 8, 2011 Report Share Posted February 8, 2011 [quote]And the treaty CSN used to declare on us was is considered OPTIONAL due to Legacy going to war off another treaty[/quote] Your understanding of treaties is still awful. Had you a legal reason to attack Legacy in kind, say, an MDP then that clause does indeed say what you said it does. It does not, however, apply to bandwagoners. This includes !@#$ alliances that attack based on ODP's and PIATs. This means [for those playing at home] that CSN was [b]obligated[/b] to respond to your rather shameless, baseless attack. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janax Posted February 8, 2011 Report Share Posted February 8, 2011 Came for the DoW, stayed for the bawwing. Would read again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alekhine Posted February 8, 2011 Report Share Posted February 8, 2011 [quote name='Xiphosis' timestamp='1297142958' post='2625309'] Your understanding of treaties is still awful. Had you a legal reason to attack Legacy in kind, say, an MDP then that clause does indeed say what you said it does. It does not, however, apply to bandwagoners. This includes !@#$ alliances that attack based on ODP's and PIATs. This means [for those playing at home] that CSN was [b]obligated[/b] to respond to your rather shameless, baseless attack. [/quote] What about CSN's shameless, baseless attack on LoSS through their ???? with Hydra? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibsonator21 Posted February 8, 2011 Report Share Posted February 8, 2011 [quote name='Myworld' timestamp='1297142509' post='2625298'] Both sides of the heart of this cluster have made mistakes and I could really care less. We didn't attack SF. We declared on Legacy. When did they join SF? And the treaty CSN used to declare on us was is considered OPTIONAL due to Legacy going to war off another treaty. As stated in CSN's treaty with Legacy. An Option that DT used to defend a friend. Not Polar, Not NPO. This front was so far removed from any of the Orders that considering it supporting them is a stretch. [/quote] Legacy and CSN rolled together onto LoSS. You jumped onto Legacy, we jumped onto you. I don't see where you get "another treaty" from. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xR1 Fatal Instinct Posted February 8, 2011 Report Share Posted February 8, 2011 [quote name='Xiphosis' timestamp='1297142958' post='2625309'] Your understanding of treaties is still awful. Had you a legal reason to attack Legacy in kind, say, an MDP then that clause does indeed say what you said it does. It does not, however, apply to bandwagoners. This includes !@#$ alliances that attack based on ODP's and PIATs. This means [for those playing at home] that CSN was [b]obligated[/b] to respond to your rather shameless, baseless attack. [/quote] Well its no secret NOIR is used for the economic part of it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Paul Posted February 8, 2011 Report Share Posted February 8, 2011 [quote name='Xiphosis' timestamp='1297142958' post='2625309'] Your understanding of treaties is still awful. Had you a legal reason to attack Legacy in kind, say, an MDP then that clause does indeed say what you said it does. It does not, however, apply to bandwagoners. This includes !@#$ alliances that attack based on ODP's and PIATs. This means [for those playing at home] that CSN was [b]obligated[/b] to respond to your rather [u]shameless, baseless attack.[/u] [/quote] I'd love to interview you for the next issue of the Tabloid Tribune. Would you use the underlined words to describe the Doomhouse attack on the New Pacific Order? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheListener Posted February 8, 2011 Report Share Posted February 8, 2011 [quote name='Xiphosis' timestamp='1297142958' post='2625309'] Your understanding of treaties is still awful. Had you a legal reason to attack Legacy in kind, say, an MDP then that clause does indeed say what you said it does. It does not, however, apply to bandwagoners. This includes !@#$ alliances that attack based on ODP's and PIATs. This means [for those playing at home] that CSN was [b]obligated[/b] to respond to your rather shameless, baseless attack. [/quote] Come on Xiph, I expect better from you. While you may not believe that an ODP requires nothing those of us who believe in the words we right down will use an ODP any day of the week. To state they are bandwagoning into a war on the losing side is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard of hear on Bob. For references sake, Bandwagoning is hoping onto the wagon when it's the cool thing to do, while they are not obligated to defend LoSS by any pieces of paper, they felt they were [b]obligated[/b] to defend LoSS based on their morals. I guess I shouldn't expect this concept to break through your skull though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omniscient1 Posted February 8, 2011 Report Share Posted February 8, 2011 Ok, I have very good friends in both CSN and Legacy. I'm sure they could tell you this. Gibs and I have been close forever. Liz I consider a close friend. Sarms and I were old pals from long ago, but I have two words for this [size="5"]Bull !@#$[/size] I hope this front ends soon. 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.