KaitlinK Posted March 8, 2011 Report Share Posted March 8, 2011 [quote name='Il Impero Romano' timestamp='1299545200' post='2655976'] Wouldn't you say though, that focus should be on finding a workable solution, rather then absolutest statements? [/quote] We did offer them a haiku. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Impero Romano Posted March 8, 2011 Report Share Posted March 8, 2011 [quote name='Van Hoo III' timestamp='1299545333' post='2655981'] "Polar is out so we have no reason to fight" [b]is[/b] a workable solution. Demanding a surrender is pointless. [/quote] Man I'm sorry but I have to say, I really just don't think you actually believe that's true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshgazza1992 Posted March 8, 2011 Report Share Posted March 8, 2011 [quote name='Il Impero Romano' timestamp='1299545576' post='2655985'] Man I'm sorry but I have to say, I really just don't think you actually believe that's true. [/quote] Well it's more likely to happen than Ragnarok surrendering. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Velocity111 Posted March 8, 2011 Report Share Posted March 8, 2011 [quote name='KaitlinK' timestamp='1299545537' post='2655984'] We did offer them a haiku. [/quote] Could we trouble you for an original Shakespeare-style sonnet? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueski Posted March 8, 2011 Report Share Posted March 8, 2011 [quote name='Van Hoo III' timestamp='1299545119' post='2655973'] Despite that several members of RoK past and present (leadership included) have stated that such a clause exists, blueski of GOONS does not believe one ever did. Noted. Consider yourself free from the burden of arguing your point now. [/quote] Its not just a belief, now is it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berbers Posted March 8, 2011 Report Share Posted March 8, 2011 I just don't see why PC is being so obtuse with it's "no equal peace treaty clause" that it won't just sign a peace treaty without anybody surrendering. I don't think PC is being fair to it's allies by holding up that entire front of the war, especially when MK needs more people to dogpile NPO. For shame PC, your eventually going to peace out anyways, why delay the inevitable? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Van Hoo III Posted March 8, 2011 Report Share Posted March 8, 2011 [quote name='blueski' timestamp='1299545763' post='2655990'] Its not just a belief, now is it. [/quote] Well, yes it is. You're in GOONS, an alliance I have no issue with, but doesn't know anything about the internal workings of Ragnarok. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USMC123 Posted March 8, 2011 Report Share Posted March 8, 2011 [quote name='Van Hoo III' timestamp='1299545210' post='2655977'] OcUK didn't have to surrender, they were offered white peace. Repeatedly. [/quote] I was there Hoo. They viewed it as surrender. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wickedj Posted March 8, 2011 Report Share Posted March 8, 2011 Does the wording really matter, PC? Rok has a no surrender clause...write the stupid terms another way. Do you or do you now accomplish the same thing, getting Rok out of the war and you stop taking damage and CK, you can piss and moan to rsox till the cows come home that im being mean to you..Sorry i just happen to prefer to speak my mind on subjects Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaitlinK Posted March 8, 2011 Report Share Posted March 8, 2011 [quote name='Velocity111' timestamp='1299545760' post='2655989'] Could we trouble you for an original Shakespeare-style sonnet? [/quote] I am sure that can be arranged. See? We can be flexible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Van Hoo III Posted March 8, 2011 Report Share Posted March 8, 2011 [quote name='USMC123' timestamp='1299546062' post='2655997'] I was there Hoo. They viewed it as surrender. [/quote] Awesome. I declared the war and offered them terms. Surrender was not required and they knew that. They decided that war and trying to infiltrate RoK was more fun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Van Hoo III Posted March 8, 2011 Report Share Posted March 8, 2011 [quote name='wickedj' timestamp='1299546101' post='2655998'] and CK, you can piss and moan to rsox till the cows come home that im being mean to you..Sorry i just happen to prefer to speak my mind on subjects [/quote] CK pissing and moaning? Egads man, say it isn't so! Also: WickedJ sucks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incitatus Posted March 8, 2011 Report Share Posted March 8, 2011 [quote name='Garrow' timestamp='1299541697' post='2655900'] Great, then offer new terms reflecting this statement so that we can all move on. [/quote] [i]Swish.[/i] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Impero Romano Posted March 8, 2011 Report Share Posted March 8, 2011 [quote name='Van Hoo III' timestamp='1299546184' post='2656000'] Awesome. I declared the war and offered them terms. Surrender was not required and they knew that. They decided that war and trying to infiltrate RoK was more fun. [/quote] And NSO? (sorry, I had to, your killin me smalls) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Van Hoo III Posted March 8, 2011 Report Share Posted March 8, 2011 [quote name='Il Impero Romano' timestamp='1299546345' post='2656003'] And NSO? (sorry, I had to, your killin me smalls) [/quote] Why, I am glad you brought that up. The NSO wronged us and we required an admission of guilt and surrender. RoK honored a treaty and did not wrong PC in the slightest. Furthermore, we didn't really care if they declined and eventually we would have just let them go once we decided enough damage was done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Janova Posted March 8, 2011 Report Share Posted March 8, 2011 It's not a 'clause' if it's not written down, it's a nebulous cultural thing, and it makes it even more ridiculous to send your alliance into the crapper over it. Now you've got an ex-RoKker saying he doesn't recognise it. Everyone else knows you've lost, hell even [i]you[/i] know you've lost, and yet you won't take a peace in which the only thing that is required is for you to admit that you've lost. Sure, you can keep fighting forever, but a FAN style resistance isn't going to work against a top-heavy alliance like PC. Do you really want to throw away years of history over a word? As stated already, PC aren't complaining and really have no reason to bow to your demands. Your friends might like to still have an ally left at the end of this though. James, we appreciate SF alliances fighting on our side, but that doesn't mean they get a free pass from criticism when they pull shenanigans during peace negotiations. (Something which doesn't apply to RIA, as far as I'm aware.) At this point the war is won and first CSN and now GOD are using our NS, as well as that of others (mostly PB), to push their own agendas with which I don't agree, and in the case of GOD it's not just me. GOD jumped onto UPN, an alliance that was already well covered and was not a serious player in the opposition coalition; I'd say their target selection had more to do with Xiph wanting a piece of them than it did to helping us. We may thank you for fighting (tangentially) on our side but we certainly don't thank you for prolonging the war with this kind of shenanigans and increasing the number of Polar nukes we have to eat. And once again, 'you' meaning SF and in particular CSN and GOD, not RIA or R&R. RoK absolutely did switch sides, they were informed as to our plans, gave us the okay and then jumped in on the other side. They will give you an explanation for [i]why[/i] that happened, but it isn't a matter of debate that it did. And in case anyone hasn't worked it out yet, my opinions are my own, and so on. I've never really liked SF apart from Fark, and they got out while the going was good. I've always suspected that some of you were waiting to abuse any power that eventually came your way, and we're seeing that now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Impero Romano Posted March 8, 2011 Report Share Posted March 8, 2011 [quote name='Van Hoo III' timestamp='1299546438' post='2656005'] Why, I am glad you brought that up. The NSO wronged us and we required an admission of guilt and surrender. RoK honored a treaty and did not wrong PC in the slightest. Furthermore, we didn't really care if they declined and eventually we would have just let them go once we decided enough damage was done. [/quote] Mmm, I recall a number of conversations between you, xiph, and myself on the subject of them surrendering, possible refusal to surrender, etc. Whatever I guess, I won't go any farther with this line of convo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denial Posted March 8, 2011 Report Share Posted March 8, 2011 [quote name='berbers' timestamp='1299545908' post='2655993'] I don't think PC is being fair to it's allies by holding up that entire front of the war, especially when MK needs more people to dogpile NPO. [/quote] We're just fine, but thanks for your concern. [quote name='wickedj' timestamp='1299546101' post='2655998'] Does the wording really matter, PC? Rok has a no surrender clause...write the stupid terms another way. Do you or do you now accomplish the same thing, getting Rok out of the war and you stop taking damage and CK, you can piss and moan to rsox till the cows come home that im being mean to you..Sorry i just happen to prefer to speak my mind on subjects [/quote] It's just ridiculous that anyone believes having some 'unwritten no surrender clause' somehow excuses an alliance that has been entirely bested in warfare from surrendering and admitting defeat. As far as I see it, if an alliance that has clearly lost a war does not surrender, they stay at war for as long as necessary to provoke the realisation in their collective mind that it is not possible to claim a crushing defeat was a triumphant victory. I say this as someone who was amongst Ragnarok's earliest allies, and still holds the alliance in high regard: this entire "we won't admit defeat or surrender, but it's our opponents' faults if the war continues" line of argument is ludicrous. It will not fool anyone even if you do somehow manage to pull it off; it'd be as laughable as NPO's historical revisionism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
President S O Posted March 8, 2011 Report Share Posted March 8, 2011 Well Haf, come on. Now is your opportunity to enlighten us all, I am certainly intrigued. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berbers Posted March 8, 2011 Report Share Posted March 8, 2011 [quote]I've always suspected that some of you were waiting to [b]abuse[/b] any [b]power[/b] that eventually came your way, and we're seeing that now.[/quote] Wow... Aren't you involved in a huge demonstration of abuse of power as we speak right now? Flimsy CB's, unequal firepower and from what I understand from your PB friends, GOONS and Umbrella, reps on an unforseen scale? I keep a kettle here for just such an occasion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omniscient1 Posted March 8, 2011 Report Share Posted March 8, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Van Hoo III' timestamp='1299517975' post='2655517'] Then shut up and fight. The only complaints I have seen have come from PC and their allies. You know their stance and it isn't going to change no matter how much you complain about it. [/quote] Actually, I'll say right here when I heard what VE's terms were to Polar and that everyone was ready to get this thing over I was excited. When I heard SF had decided they were going to hold the entire world up over their ego problems I was pretty disappointed. IAA has taken quite a hard hit for Polar. We've dropped out of the top 80 lost several members and countless infra levels, but we really don't care because we're helping an ally that was wronged. We're not even in the worst shape. People like our allies at UINE have had it much worse. Now though we're in a war simply because two alliances have decided their egos are more important than their friends. I know from experience when you reach that point you need to take a step back. So yea, it's more than just your enemies pissed off at your behavior. I admire RoK for coming to war with us and standing up for what they believe in. I am very close to certain members of CSN gov. (read Gibs; maybe Liz). I have always seen Xiph as a sort of mentor to me and consider him a close friend too. (even though we often disagree on moral issues). However, despite all of this I don't understand why all these great people would let me burn. Maybe I just need to find new friends or something. Edited March 8, 2011 by Omniscient1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Brendan Posted March 8, 2011 Report Share Posted March 8, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Bob Janova' timestamp='1299546618' post='2656009'] At this point the war is won and first CSN and now GOD are using our NS, as well as that of others (mostly PB), to push their own agendas with which I don't agree, and in the case of GOD it's not just me. [/quote] Pardon me, but the Commonwealth did what we did by the might of our own nations and those of our direct allies. Never at any point did we attempt to use Pandora's Box as leverage in any way, why would we need to? If you want to share some of the responsibility go ahead, but you really had nothing to do with it. On a related note, refusing to surrender when you are beaten is not honor, it is foolishness. Edited March 8, 2011 by Lord Brendan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omniscient1 Posted March 8, 2011 Report Share Posted March 8, 2011 [quote name='Lord Brendan' timestamp='1299547297' post='2656021'] Pardon me, but the Commonwealth did what we did by the might of our own nations and those of our direct allies. Never at any point did we attempt to use Pandora's Box as leverage in any way, why would we need to? If you want to share some of the responsibility go ahead, but you really had nothing to do with it. On a related note, refusing to surrender when you are beaten is not honor, it is foolishness. [/quote] But had their not been a war already going on you would not have been able to extort an alliance. You almost didn't get away with it anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berbers Posted March 8, 2011 Report Share Posted March 8, 2011 [quote name='Lord Brendan' timestamp='1299547297' post='2656021'] Pardon me, but the Commonwealth did what we did by the might of our own nations and those of our direct allies. Never at any point did we attempt to use Pandora's Box as leverage in any way, why would we need to? If you want to share some of the responsibility go ahead, but you really had nothing to do with it. On a related note, refusing to surrender when you are beaten is not honor, it is foolishness. [/quote] Didn't you guys lose a couple million NS? I guess that was just corporate downsizing since it was obviously PB's NS that you were using to fight with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chalaskan Posted March 8, 2011 Report Share Posted March 8, 2011 [quote name='Ryan Greenberg' timestamp='1299527512' post='2655672'] Don't say anything unless you actually know what happened. [/quote] I know the rest of their allies were pissed they made the decision to roll with your crew. That's enough for my statement to be justified in my mind. Thanks for your input though. Oh wai... 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.