A Statement from Doomhouse

[Choson]

[quote name='Hyperbad' timestamp='1302042981' post='2685012']
Those who weren't attacked did choose to become involved.
[/quote]
HoT, it's really telling when someone on your own side trots this out against you.

[Borsche]

[quote name='NoMercy' timestamp='1302046070' post='2685047']
He said he read the reasons, and he understood them. He also says that he doesn't like them because fact is that there wasn't a real reason for this war. I kinda like it that you claim that he can't comprehend and at the same time....oh well...this deserves a NO U!
[/quote]

And I can say the sky is purple. That doesn't make it true.

[Dochartaigh]

[quote name='Borsche' timestamp='1302047755' post='2685069']
And I can say the sky is purple. That doesn't make it true.
[/quote]

Just like you claiming your reasons for attacking NPO make sense, actually makes them make sense. Nor does ya'll saying that they are true, does not make them true. See how that works?

[the rebel]

[quote name='Dochartaigh' timestamp='1302048778' post='2685084']
Just like you claiming your reasons for attacking NPO make sense, actually makes them make sense. Nor does ya'll saying that they are true, does not make them true. See how that works?
[/quote]

Dochartaigh i dont know why you're wasting your time arguing with that degenerate Borsche who is a little kid in this world, a know it all who knows $%&@ all

[Felix von Agnu]

[quote name='Dochartaigh' timestamp='1302046845' post='2685059']
The problem I see with pre-emptive strikes are that they are inherently hard to classify as anything other than an almost completely unwarranted aggressive attack. Claims can be made but there is no hard evidence or proof that can be provided typically. That is my issue.

Now as for NPO changing, it does not all hinge on NPO winning a war and giving light terms or even just white peace (though I freely admit that that is part of whether they have completely changed or not) but part of it is simply that NPO/allies hand a nasty little habit of starting wars for bs reasons and curbstomping their opponents (sound familiar...). The last bit has not been done since Karma. Not even a single war that I can recall.

As for the war ending, I agree wholeheartedly with you.
[/quote]
They are essentially bald aggression, but that is why they are risky. The entire point is to enter an offensive war on your own terms rather than have a war declared on you on theirs. Yes, proof is hard to come by, but if one would follow treaty chains, and the two parties would have been fighting anyways, they would come to the conclusion that the attack was a preemptive strike.

I agree that NPO can change without winning a war. My point was that until they do, we won't know. We all know actions speak louder than words. As far as curbstomps go, I would rather have a close war than a curbstomp any day. On the topic of the wars being 'bs,'no side is going to say, "Oh darn, you caught us!" when they are being attacked. They're going to throw a fit. It's part of what makes wars fun (the debates and such). That's how the arguments boil down, what "side" am I going to be on this war.


[quote name='NoMercy' timestamp='1302046560' post='2685054']
Pre-empts are a vlid strategy, I won't disagree with that. What I have a problem with, is that it is supported when convenient. I think you don't need to be pointed to the sigs.
[/quote]

I dislike the thinking that once you are opposed to something, you must always be opposed to it. It makes everything so static. If someone changes their mind, their a hypocrite or something. If they changed their minds on pre-empts, then fine. If they fall victim to one again, they've lost all right to complain. If they do, then yeah, it would be supporting something when its convenient.
[quote]
If this were about increasing the excitement for all players like claimed at times, NPO would have received peace by now. And that is another problem I have. This game was exciting when there were even sides. They haven't done anything since Karma, isn't that the biggest evidence they changed?
[/quote]

The absence of action is no indicator that their actions have changed. When they have the ability and clout to act on things again, we shall see if they have changed. Right now, as we can see, they are in a rather precarious spot politically, and this may have prevented them in acting in the way they desire (no matter what type of action that may be).

[Joe Izuzu]

[quote name='speakerwire' timestamp='1302045912' post='2685043']
...Your leader is guilty of treason, providing almost a million dollars in aid to enemy nations in a time of 'unprovoked war'[/quote]

OK, that did get a small chuckle.

[quote name='speakerwire' timestamp='1302045912' post='2685043']...That aside, you honestly expect nations around the world to beleive that your 'Emperor' actually runs your Order?
[/quote]

You honestly believe that NS and/or cash reserves have any bearing whatsoever on a leader's authority? Or is it that you believe that the leader must be the "Hindmost"? (OOC: to borrow a title from Larry Niven :OOC) The truth is that nation stats have absolutely nothing to do with competent leadership. In fact, the knowledge that our Fantabulous Dragon Emperor (o/ Mary!) puts her nation in the forefront of our struggle only increases the loyalty that we give to her.

Some of the most respected and most powerful people in the Order and in other alliances have the weakest nations. Respect and allegiance is given to those that serve and sacrifice in the cause of their alliances. Whether that is for a banking nation that has zero to few casualties, or for a warrior that leads the pack in that regard, it is the willingness to set aside personal gain for the benefit of your Comrades that matters. Age does not matter; we have nations that are relatively young, but have ascended the heirarichal ladder because of their commitment and competence and we have extremely old and statistically significant nations that have little or no role in governance. The most important factor is the acumen and prowess in various aspects of alliance governance that the member has demonstrated. It is not who has the most tech, infra, or any other basically irrelevant statistic.

[Achilles]

[quote name='Sardonic' timestamp='1302017280' post='2684673']
You assumed wrong. Dead wrong.
[/quote]
Well, then there was no point to the KARMA war, there was no point in the reps NPO paid, and there is no point to this war either. I'm glad you were here to make those points.

[quote name='Beefspari' timestamp='1302017996' post='2684677']
Wow, I guess we should've consulted you before moving. It seems you're the expert on just how much justice was received by each alliance and how much is enough for each party. I'd answer your question but I don't have the same insight into NPO's inner workings and politics as you do to FAN, MK, and GOONs.
[img]http://meru.xfury.net/images/aeris/aeriso_oL2.jpg[/img]
[/quote]

My apologies, I didn't realize I took Over YOUR position as the expert in the needs of CN. I thought that when the KARMA war ended, it was because everyone got what they wanted.

[Sardonic]

[quote name='Achilles' timestamp='1302051557' post='2685114']
Well, then there was no point to the KARMA war, there was no point in the reps NPO paid, and there is no point to this war either. I'm glad you were here to make those points.
[/quote]
Not this again. Just because you paid somebody money doesn't mean they have less reason to hate you. In a world such as this hate can flourish regardless of monetary ties.

[LittleRena]

[quote name='speakerwire' timestamp='1302045912' post='2685043']
Your leader is guilty of treason, providing almost a million dollars in aid to enemy nations in a time of 'unprovoked war'
[/quote]

Keep posting stuff like this and battle logs, you are making me feel clever.
[right][IMG]http://i55.tinypic.com/14b3l8k.jpg[/IMG][/right]

[Feuersturm]

[quote name='speakerwire' timestamp='1302045912' post='2685043']

That aside, you honestly expect nations around the world to beleive that your 'Emperor' actually runs your Order?
[/quote]

I think speakerwire and mrwuss are intentionally competing for 'worst poster award'.

Over my 4 and a half years on Planet Bob, I have never seen such idiocy, and there has been plenty of that over the years. These two are officially tied for the top of that list!

Congratulations!

Edited April 6, 2011 by Feuersturm

[General Milienius]

My god shut up and get on with killing each other already lol. I just want to eat popcorn and cheer when some nation gets eviscerated but you people are ruining my fun

Seriously, stop arguing, no agreements will be made and this will prolly go on until everyone gets tired of it and starts ignoring it, and then maybe you will start fighting again...or make peace maybe....riggghhhttt

[Achilles]

[quote name='Sardonic' timestamp='1302052282' post='2685122']
Not this again. Just because you paid somebody money doesn't mean they have less reason to hate you. In a world such as this hate can flourish regardless of monetary ties.
[/quote]

Ok, but apparently the CB for this war isn't "We just hate NPO". Obviously, DH has just been lying this whole time. Thanks for clearing that up. I bet your friends at DH love it when you contradict them.

[Felix von Agnu]

[quote name='Achilles' timestamp='1302053678' post='2685144']
Ok, but apparently the CB for this war isn't "We just hate NPO". Obviously, DH has just been lying this whole time. Thanks for clearing that up. I bet your friends at DH love it when you contradict them.
[/quote]
He isn't saying that hating you is the CB, so much as he is trying to say that paying reps doesn't make people not hate you. Or in other words, hate is independent of money. It means that just because you paid reps after Karma means that people don't hate you.

EDIT: At least that is my interpretation of it.

Edited April 6, 2011 by Felix von Agnu

[Sardonic]

[quote name='Felix von Agnu' timestamp='1302054141' post='2685150']
He isn't saying that hating you is the CB, so much as he is trying to say that paying reps doesn't make people not hate you. Or in other words, hate is independent of money. It means that just because you paid reps after Karma means that people don't hate you.

EDIT: At least that is my interpretation of it.
[/quote]
Pretty much, the karma reps have no bearing on the situation, or the various reasons for the war.

[General Milienius]

WHO CARES ANYMORE. Oy you are like old women in a beauty parlor

[speakerwire]

[quote name='Joe Izuzu' timestamp='1302050105' post='2685100']The truth is that nation stats have absolutely nothing to do with competent leadership.[/quote]

I agree, numbers don't make the nation. The moves made by it's leadership make the nation.

In this particular case, it was a dramatically poor move which did the exact opposite of it's intention. Unless your Emperor did in fact do it on purpose, in which case I would purport it to be treasonous.

[quote]It is not who has the most tech, infra, or any other basically irrelevant statistic.
[/quote]

Once again, my point doesn't revolve around numbers. Just poor, novice-like decisions. Which is why I question both the direction and competence of your supposed leadership.

[quote name='LittleRena' timestamp='1302052304' post='2685124']
Keep posting stuff like this and battle logs, you are making me feel clever.
[/quote]

Watching your leadership fight makes me feel clever.

Edited April 6, 2011 by speakerwire

[Williambonney]

[quote name='speakerwire' timestamp='1302039113' post='2684962']
If you have no intent to discuss anything, why are you participating in this discussion?
[/quote]
I didn't say I have no intent to discuss anything, I said I have no intent to be empathetic to dh. Why exactly should I? cn did that once, and now here we are.

[quote]
Why would DH/GOONS be crying when they are winning the current engagement by all available metrics?
[/quote]
Because they aren't getting their way? Its common behavior among children I hear.

[quote]
Also, it's hard to play the moral highground when you too are guilty of all of those things.
[/quote]

I am? I bet I can round up at least a hundred people who would say the contrary buster, and I take that as an insult.
[quote]
Honour is worthless as every nation reserves the right to have a different definition of it.
[/quote]
Anyone who can convince someone that dh have honour in this would have to be a Jedi...or a Sith?

[Dochartaigh]

[quote name='Felix von Agnu' timestamp='1302049733' post='2685094']
They are essentially bald aggression, but that is why they are risky. The entire point is to enter an offensive war on your own terms rather than have a war declared on you on theirs. Yes, proof is hard to come by, but if one would follow treaty chains, and the two parties would have been fighting anyways, they would come to the conclusion that the attack was a preemptive strike.

I agree that NPO can change without winning a war. My point was that until they do, we won't know. We all know actions speak louder than words. As far as curbstomps go, I would rather have a close war than a curbstomp any day. On the topic of the wars being 'bs,'no side is going to say, "Oh darn, you caught us!" when they are being attacked. They're going to throw a fit. It's part of what makes wars fun (the debates and such). That's how the arguments boil down, what "side" am I going to be on this war. [/quote]

Oh I get the point behind a pre-emptive strike. On the same point, if you already know the treaty chains, then it is still fairly easy to plan a strategy based on that. As for reasons, there are some reasons that have universally become valid reasons for war.



[quote]I dislike the thinking that once you are opposed to something, you must always be opposed to it. It makes everything so static. If someone changes their mind, their a hypocrite or something. If they changed their minds on pre-empts, then fine. If they fall victim to one again, they've lost all right to complain. If they do, then yeah, it would be supporting something when its convenient.[/quote]

This would work I suppose except one major flaw. MK demanded reps for the pre-emptive strike against them. That makes it go beyond just simply opposing it. Also, MK members have already stated that the complaining done then was all political, thus already validating that it was something of convenience versus actually opposing it. Despite all that, they still demanded reps.


[quote]The absence of action is no indicator that their actions have changed. When they have the ability and clout to act on things again, we shall see if they have changed. Right now, as we can see, they are in a rather precarious spot politically, and this may have prevented them in acting in the way they desire (no matter what type of action that may be).
[/quote]

Actually this is pretty much wrong. If someone of action were to become inactive for a long period, most would note that that is a major behavioral change. The same thing occurs with alliances. If we were to rely on clout, then NPO would never regain the clout they once had. Even with them being the victim in this war, they still have not regained much in the way of clout.

[Williambonney]

[quote name='speakerwire' timestamp='1302045912' post='2685043']
That aside, you honestly expect nations around the world to beleive that your 'Emperor' actually runs your Order?
[/quote]

psst.. I'll let you in on a seekrit. The true rulers name is Pico. But you didn't hear it from me, Bilrow will be very cross.

Edited April 6, 2011 by William Bonney

[Joe Izuzu]

[quote name='speakerwire' timestamp='1302056317' post='2685190']
I agree, numbers don't make the nation. The moves made by it's leadership make the nation.

In this particular case, it was a dramatically poor move which did the exact opposite of it's intention. Unless your Emperor did in fact do it on purpose, in which case I would purport it to be treasonous.


Once again, my point doesn't revolve around numbers. Just poor, novice-like decisions. Which is why I question both the direction and competence of your supposed leadership.


Watching your leadership fight makes me feel clever.
[/quote]



That's pretty much my reaction here. The concept that losing a couple of GAs has any correlation to alliance leadership capabilities is just too ridiculous for words. Moreover, the irony of a 2 week old nation leader judging military competence of a ruler with more than 4 million casualties is just too much. Are you familiar with the word, "presumptuous"?

[Letum]

[quote name='Felix von Agnu' timestamp='1302054141' post='2685150']
He isn't saying that hating you is the CB, so much as he is trying to say that paying reps doesn't make people not hate you. Or in other words, hate is independent of money. It means that just because you paid reps after Karma means that people don't hate you.
[/quote]

The point is that if someone is going to agree to the heaviest and longest reparations ever, they expect to be actually getting some genuine peace out of it. If instead, you are still hated, and will end up being rolled a few months after you finish paying reps, then what's the point of agreeing to them? And in a similar vein, since hate is independent of our top-tier, what's the point of giving it up if we are still going to be hated and end up rolled a few months after they finish getting dismantled?

[Kubla Khan]

NPO in Peace Mode 38.4%
MK in Peace Mode 40%

[Felix von Agnu]

[quote name='Letum' timestamp='1302058576' post='2685215']
The point is that if someone is going to agree to the heaviest and longest reparations ever, they expect to be actually getting some genuine peace out of it. If instead, you are still hated, and will end up being rolled a few months after you finish paying reps, then what's the point of agreeing to them? And in a similar vein, since hate is independent of our top-tier, what's the point of giving it up if we are still going to be hated and end up rolled a few months after they finish getting dismantled?
[/quote]
I would actually agree with you on this whole point. I think it is a valid one.

You could look at reparations as the act of "buying" peace if you will. It does nothing to actually ebb any hate towards you, it just removes you from the current conflict before the aggressors get to the point of giving you white peace (or one of the parties disbanding).

Edited April 6, 2011 by Felix von Agnu

[speakerwire]

[quote name='Joe Izuzu' timestamp='1302058546' post='2685214']


That's pretty much my reaction here. The concept that losing a couple of GAs has any correlation to alliance leadership capabilities is just too ridiculous for words. Moreover, the irony of a 2 week old nation leader judging military competence of a ruler with more than 4 million casualties is just too much. Are you familiar with the word, "presumptuous"?
[/quote]

Actually they were offensive victories.

Your leader won and somehow left behind diamonds. Which is funny because it was avoidable. If mistakes like that are made when defending ones particular stretch of scratch, what type of mistakes will happen within the larger scheme?

I guess one can attribute it to war weariness but that then begs the question if a war weary leadership is making the best decision for their body politic.

I suppose the whole scenario is akin to leaving ones house without pants but mixed with war and death. Simple mistakes often indicate larger mistakes.

Also, judging a nations success by number of casualties is pretty funny. Throwing meat into a grinder doesn't make you a capable leader or competent strategist.

Edited April 6, 2011 by speakerwire

[Haflinger]

[quote name='TypoNinja' timestamp='1301874708' post='2683651']
Well yes, but as I previously mentioned I think the WCE logs amply demonstrate our willingness to be pretty liberal about where that line is. It was a room full of government of various alliances trying to decide how to fabricate a war against us. If we didn't move on that I think it proves that an alliance is going to have to try pretty hard to actually provoke a DoW.
[/quote]
That's one way of looking at it.

A more truthful way of looking at it would be to say that it was a room full of government members, mostly junior members, most of which were soon to be former government members.

The only people who took an active role in those discussions who were still government in the same alliances 2 months later were Schattenham and Hero of Time.

Yet another way of looking at it would be to realize the truth: you knew that those logs weren't anywhere close to a decent CB, so you waited until you could manage to fabricate a better one on Polar.

[quote name='r00tn00b' timestamp='1301896068' post='2683840']
We just want them to fight in a war that they brought upon themselves.
[/quote]
They brought upon themselves?

Have you stopped beating your wife yet?