Joseph Black Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 If this is not some kind of trick, I support this 200%. A war is a war, :OCC: war for fun, :OCC: and it should remain that way. Again, if this is true, Doomhouse I offer my personal apology for jumping to other conclusions about your character, may admin bless this, so that you all may fight and die with dignity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beefspari Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 [quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1300342954' post='2667314'] Your man Chief is saying that bankers are not needed in the modern era because of huge warchests, not me. Now you're saying that small nations do need bankers. You two chat it up and compare talking points, I'll be over here waiting for you (edit: actually no I won't, let me know what you decided when I wake up. Goodnight Planet Bob, goodnight moon, goodnight mushroom, goodnight goon). [/quote] Are you suggesting that that 5 billion was sent entirely from bankers, thus solidifying the need for them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ardus Posted March 17, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 [quote name='Ryan Greenberg' timestamp='1300343575' post='2667337'] What makes you think NPO should listen to your ultimatums? [/quote] Because I believe they'll enjoy the assault on the Kingdom as much as we'll enjoy tearing up their upper ranks. I have no illusions about this: if they accept, it is my alliance that will stand front and center against their response, more than any other. So many seem to subscribe to this illusion that NPO's emergence will see them destroyed without cost to the destroyers. I do not demand unilateral annihilation. I demand satisfaction, y'all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Greenberg Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 [quote name='Ardus' timestamp='1300343833' post='2667347'] Because I believe they'll enjoy the assault on the Kingdom as much as we'll enjoy tearing up their upper ranks. I have no illusions about this: if they accept, it is my alliance that will stand front and center against their response, more than any other. So many seem to subscribe to this illusion that NPO's emergence will see them destroyed without cost to the destroyers. I do not demand unilateral annihilation. I demand satisfaction, y'all. [/quote] Looking at the posts Pacificans have made here, they won't accept this. I guess that means eternal war until they accept the offer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ardus Posted March 17, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 [quote name='TrotskysRevenge' timestamp='1300343590' post='2667338'] Ardus, NPO has around 563 nashuns. 50-60 nashuns as banks are a bit ovr 10%, not rely that hih of a percetg. [/quote] I only cited the top 61 since it's a glaring and compelling example. Many more of your nations hide in peace mode, the overwhelming majority of which are your strong and capable. I do not wish to thump your meek tiers in perpetuity. I wish to have our fight, the fight MK and NPO have always been destined to have, and end this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ardus Posted March 17, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 [quote name='Ryan Greenberg' timestamp='1300343962' post='2667349'] Looking at the posts Pacificans have made here, they won't accept this. I guess that means eternal war until they accept the offer? [/quote] I think they'll come around soon enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Stuart Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Ardus' timestamp='1300334058' post='2666890'] We near the end. The end of forced disbandment. The end of terms that cripple alliances forever. The end of silence for fear of persecution. The end of the influence of those who would overthrow these goals in favor of their own return to power. The end of cowardice. The end of myth and fear. The end of this war. [/quote] Is that the best you could come up with? Playing the "ebil NPO bogeyman card" is so 2007. Edited March 17, 2011 by Charles Stuart Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vampiro Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 (edited) All I can do is LOL at this whole thread. [quote name='TrotskysRevenge' timestamp='1300340857' post='2667195'] How much mor down? We hav don not one damn thng sinc Karma ekcep rebild NS to #2, befor this war. So just what "notches" ar you talking abot? I cant spek for NPO gov, but I belev DH abot as much as I belev politshuns. [/quote] I Moo. Glad to see you on the forums. o/ Pacifica Edited March 17, 2011 by Vampiro Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ardus Posted March 17, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 [quote name='Charles Stuart' timestamp='1300344063' post='2667353'] Is that the best you could come up with? Playing the "ebil NPO bogeyman card" is so 2007. [/quote] Don't you have a baby to filet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Greenberg Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Ardus' timestamp='1300343971' post='2667350'] I only cited the top 61 since it's a glaring and compelling example. Many more of your nations hide in peace mode, the overwhelming majority of which are your strong and capable. I do not wish to thump your meek tiers in perpetuity. I wish to have our fight, the fight MK and NPO have always been destined to have, and end this. [/quote] MK and NPO already fought in the noCB War. [quote name='Ardus' timestamp='1300344012' post='2667352'] I think they'll come around soon enough. [/quote] Pathetic. Edited March 17, 2011 by Ryan Greenberg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joseph Black Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Ardus' timestamp='1300343971' post='2667350'] I only cited the top 61 since it's a glaring and compelling example. Many more of your nations hide in peace mode, the overwhelming majority of which are your strong and capable. I do not wish to thump your meek tiers in perpetuity. I wish to have our fight, the fight MK and NPO have always been destined to have, and end this. [/quote] Just a nobody's opinion, but since you have no illusions that you would be their target, how about NPO Vs. MK. No outside aid, not allies, just one on one. Have the fight you have been destine to have, besides I think it would be amazing to watch Honestly though, my money is on Pacifica in that case. Edited March 17, 2011 by Muddog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atahualpa Pachautec Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 [quote name='Ardus' timestamp='1300343833' post='2667347'] Because I believe they'll enjoy the assault on the Kingdom as much as we'll enjoy tearing up their upper ranks. I have no illusions about this: if they accept, it is my alliance that will stand front and center against their response, more than any other. So many seem to subscribe to this illusion that NPO's emergence will see them destroyed without cost to the destroyers. I do not demand unilateral annihilation. I demand satisfaction, y'all. [/quote] I have a better idea, NPO vs MK, 1 on 1, lets do it right now, come on, don't be @#$%^&. We will be very satisfied Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Stuart Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 [quote name='Ardus' timestamp='1300344132' post='2667356'] Don't you have a baby to filet? [/quote] Don't you have more nonsense to spout? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judge X Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 [quote name='AAAAAAAAAAGGGG' timestamp='1300342878' post='2667313'] Warchests aren't needed at low levels precisely because aid drops can easily prop a nation up. I know you're smarter than this, Schatt. [/quote] I have to agree. I have been surviving off of GOONS/friends aid drops to keep fighting. Thanks Umbrella. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beefspari Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 [quote name='Ryan Greenberg' timestamp='1300343962' post='2667349'] Looking at the posts Pacificans have made here, they won't accept this. I guess that means eternal war until they accept the offer? [/quote] If they choose to stay in peace mode and not fight, I don't know why it could be pinned on our side as the badguys. Unless you believe that people should be rewarded for not fighting in, like, wars. And that future conflicts should be decided by who slips into peace first and forces a white peace. No, wars should be fought, not opted out of. If NPO decides to not fight, and there's a resultant "eternal war," they have only themselves to blame. They have avenues out of the war but choose not to take them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ardus Posted March 17, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 [quote name='Ryan Greenberg' timestamp='1300344139' post='2667357'] Pathetic. [/quote] How so? I genuinely believe that Pacifican leadership will ultimately reach the same conclusion that I have: that this is fair conclusion to war. If anything is to be negotiated, it is not their terms, but rather the terms of their myriad allies. If they refuse it will be to buy time to settle those matters before emerging to finish the fight themselves. Pacifica will earn its peace and in the wake be more proud of itself than it could ever be from submitting to some term of reparation or humiliation. It is in their interest to meet this demand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panic King Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 These demands for reps involving papers and plays are just plain stupid. DH taking a game and making it interfere with RL commitments as in the five-act play, oversteps the separation of IC and OCC. I would like to see Admin's take on this. This is no different IMO as Alliance Leaders demanding that individual apologies be published in local newspapers. I know some may feel this is a creative way to end a war but it is just a bad precident to set. Beer reviews, cookie recipies et,al are fine as long as they don't become onerous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feuersturm Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 Let me get this straight. You attack us to prevent us from [u]potentially[/u] committing our forces with NpO. Now with that war concluded, you are worried about our upper tiers not having been attacked. So the war was to keep up out of the war with NpO, but instead drew us in anyway. NpO has peaced, therefore meaning the war to keep us out should not be needed anymore. With their objective complete, why is there no white peace? I mean, you don't have to worry about us attacking you guys 6 months after the war! Of course, this war was never really meant to keep us out, their goal since we left terms was to pull us in one way or the other. When we didn't bite, they got frustrated, and decided 'Wait - why don't we just attack them.'. No CB required. Then there is this part I hear about...'Well NPO did it 3 or 4 years ago, so we can do it too'. I like to think the community has evolved since then. You know this war, KARMA, that was supposed to turn the world around? Then again, I look at Doomhouse and realize that a good number of people have not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Scipio Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 Has anyone pointed out that NPO coming out of Peace mode won't suddenly make them incapable of fighting? They'll still be able to put out the same amount of damage they take. 1 month of war won't significantly cripple banking nations, if they have the billions they should. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earogema Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Beefspari' timestamp='1300344359' post='2667364'] If they choose to stay in peace mode and not fight, I don't know why it could be pinned on our side as the badguys. Unless you believe that people should be rewarded for not fighting in, like, wars. And that future conflicts should be decided by who slips into peace first and forces a white peace. No, wars should be fought, not opted out of. If NPO decides to not fight, and there's a resultant "eternal war," they have only themselves to blame. They have avenues out of the war but choose not to take them. [/quote] White peace in a war that we have obviously lost is hardly a reward. Edited March 17, 2011 by Earogema Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ardus Posted March 17, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 [quote name='Panic King' timestamp='1300344511' post='2667369'] These demands for reps involving papers and plays are just plain stupid. DH taking a game and making it interfere with RL commitments as in the five-act play, oversteps the separation of IC and OCC. I would like to see Admin's take on this. This is no different IMO as Alliance Leaders demanding that individual apologies be published in local newspapers. I know some may feel this is a creative way to end a war but it is just a bad precident to set. Beer reviews, cookie recipies et,al are fine as long as they don't become onerous. [/quote] Schatt has written as much in this thread as a full act of text. Your argument is invalid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Greenberg Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 [quote name='Ardus' timestamp='1300344376' post='2667366'] How so? [/quote] Because you're giving an ultimatum to NPO. "Accept our demands or face eternal war". How can you not see the hypocrisy in this? You knowingly went into this war. There are no refunds. Deal with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ardus Posted March 17, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 [quote name='Ryan Greenberg' timestamp='1300344660' post='2667378'] Because you're giving an ultimatum to NPO. "Accept our demands or face eternal war". How can you not see the hypocrisy in this? You knowingly went into this war. There are no refunds. Deal with it. [/quote] That's how all peace demands are. "Accept or the war goes on." If the defeated party refuses to ever accept anything, the war goes on until war wariness mounts. The only difference between these negotiations and others are that we have a much higher tolerance for war wariness. We recognize this fact and therefore leverage it confidently in our demands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Scipio Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Ryan Greenberg' timestamp='1300344660' post='2667378'] Because you're giving an ultimatum to NPO. "Accept our demands or face eternal war". How can you not see the hypocrisy in this? You knowingly went into this war. There are no refunds. Deal with it. [/quote] Is this not every war ever? If NpO had refused to accept the aid term, would VE really be forcing you with eternal war? No. You are making that choice yourself. The terms are offered, they can accept them or you. Deal with it. But really, why is NPO so scared to fight a month of war? Sure you're outnumbered, but there is a limit to how many wars you can face. You will do more damage to your enemies than they do to you. Is this not a positive? Edited March 17, 2011 by General Scipio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joseph Black Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 [quote name='Ardus' timestamp='1300344615' post='2667376'] Schatt has written as much in this thread as a full act of text. Your argument is invalid. [/quote] Maybe I missed it, but why not one on one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts