Hyperion321 Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 [quote name='feardaram' timestamp='1300389745' post='2668001'] That would depend on your goal I guess. If your goal is to maintain the strength you have, then it's not. If your goal is to rebuild, continue to grow, and continue to be relevant, then yes, the PM strategy is counter productive. If you have strength but can't use it, do you really have strength? [/quote] Ok...so they're a bunch of pansies...and? Does that give anyone a right to keep them down forever just because they don't want to get their ass beat any harder than it already is? You talk about making the world a better place, but this "let us destroy you or its eternal war" crap is exactly what [i]you[/i] fought against in the first place. Sparta didn't go dicks first into AZTEC just so you could get a window to pull this !@#$, we did it to give our allies a window to win against NpO (which they got). If your front was the same as ours - if hitting Pacifica truly was about keeping them off of PB so that VE could take out NpO, as you all told us it was, then you would have let Pacifica go by now. NPO was neutralized. The was was won. It's time for this to end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeroofTime55 Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 [quote name='Beefspari' timestamp='1300389902' post='2668003'] How many more Methrages do we need anyway? Let's review after we reviewed your review: You're talking to someone with a 5k NS nation. Regardless of how many advantages you have and how much you brag about how you "beat" him, one round of aid is all it's going to take to fix his nation. You nuking and grinding his nation to ash is going to be utterly pointless, considering our side has a significant financial backing. Those we're fighting do not. [/quote] I'm sure Umbrella is fine with being unable to do tech deals for a prolonged period of time, as they are forced to bankroll GOONS and MK nations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chickenzilla Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 (edited) [quote name='HeroofTime55' timestamp='1300390401' post='2668015'] I'm sure Umbrella is fine with being unable to do tech deals for a prolonged period of time, as they are forced to bankroll GOONS and MK nations. [/quote] Umbrella wishes it could just attack all the peace mode nations. Alas. Edited March 17, 2011 by Chickenzilla Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Moldavi Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 [quote name='Antonio Salovega VI' timestamp='1300389543' post='2667996'] Actually, what is asinine is NPO’s hypocrisy in general and your own hypocrisy in particular. You insist that NPO changed when it did not alter anything to the least degree. NPO initiated Karma and had its butt kicked to the curb for its troubles and yet NPO and you, its apparent chief apologist, continue to insist that it was not at fault. Post Karma, it used Sir Paul’s little one step beyond the truth rag to belittle other alliances while maintaining that it had transformed. NPO whined like a cur in heat that nobody would allow it to put its past behind while at the same time feeling no necessity to forgive and forget SethB’s reputed actions. NPO demasked foreign diplomats and closed foreign embassies all the while claiming it was trying to diplomatically mend its fences. NPO makes its self-serving apologies and you defend, without apology, your repudiation of your own apology. There is no change and NPO is getting stomped for the third time because NPO and you could not refrain from being arrogant and egotistical. You are not helping the order’s cause. I suggest that you and NPO alter course and deal with-it. If you do not, NPO is going to be an asterisk in history. [/quote] Really? The best you could do was come up with a picture and some random commentary that has already been addressed and moved past two hours ago? Good job. Perhaps it wasn't clear the other dozen or so times that it has been stated, so I will do so again, just for you: I do not speak for the New Pacific Order or any other alliance in the Cyberverse. I do not claim to hold any influence over any groups within the Cyberverse, in fact I claim quite the opposite and point out repeatedly that I am well aware that I am past my prime here and a non-factor. I do not claim to be remorseful for the sake of remorse so that emo kids like you can get your jollies. I don't care what you think of me. I have never placed any concern whatsoever in the "feelings" of my enemies. You are my enemy for a reason, so why should I care about you? I am arrogant and egotistical to the nth degree. I don't apologize for that either. I have maintained my same persona for nearly a decade in these realms and have no need to change it now. Again, I do not care what you think of me. The fact that you feel the need to address me at all only speaks to your own deficiencies and insecurities. I have no guns. I have no soldiers. I have no tanks. I am a complete non-entity. And yet when I make valid points I can't get people to respond to them, instead they feel they need to attack my persona (and in some cases go outside the realms of the Cyberverse to do so) because they are ridiculously underprepared for even the most germane comment from someone like myself. Regardless of all of this, my own actions have no bearing on the position of the New Pacific Order or the position of the NPO's diplomatic actions. To equate myself with Pacifica is an error. I once was the Order, but now I am just me, even if that ideological position has never shifted. The fact that I can say that definitively and without reservation should speak more to the changes that have taken place within the culture of Pacifica more so than any diplomatic envoy could ever convey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Moldavi Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 [quote name='King Charge' timestamp='1300389999' post='2668005'] Maybe we should all just wait for an NPO official statement back? Don't get me wrong these 32 pages of mediocrity are hilarious, but you can only get so many lulz from all these pointless insults. I'm still waiting for the first person to break out the "yo mama's so fat" bit. [/quote] Just for you: Yo mama so fat Batman uses her belly button as the bat cave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerschbs Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 [quote name='Hyperion321' timestamp='1300390354' post='2668014'] Ok...so they're a bunch of pansies...and? Does that give anyone a right to keep them down forever just because they don't want to get their ass beat any harder than it already is? You talk about making the world a better place, but this "let us destroy you or its eternal war" crap is exactly what [i]you[/i] fought against in the first place. Sparta didn't go dicks first into AZTEC just so you could get a window to pull this !@#$, we did it to give our allies a window to win against NpO (which they got). If your front was the same as ours - if hitting Pacifica truly was about keeping them off of PB so that VE could take out NpO, as you all told us it was, then you would have let Pacifica go by now. NPO was neutralized. The was was won. It's time for this to end. [/quote] Holy hell, I'm agreeing with a member of Sparta? This is just ridiculous. Also, while these terms actually aren't terrible, I can see why NPO doesn't want to accept them considering the animosity between DH and NPO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azaghul Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 [quote name='youwish959' timestamp='1300389138' post='2667989'] Not really, not really at all. I do recalll a bunch of MK posturing and random "non governmental" postings regarding your fetish for the New Pacific Order. [/quote] Did you miss most of their posts and the content of their official publications before the war? I don't think they had a single newsletter that didn't focus on attacking us or a direct ally, and most were focused on us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beefspari Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 [quote name='HeroofTime55' timestamp='1300390401' post='2668015'] I'm sure Umbrella is fine with being unable to do tech deals for a prolonged period of time, as they are forced to bankroll GOONS and MK nations. [/quote] Who are you trying to convince, them or yourself? Do you really think relations are strained between GOONS and Umbrella as they're "forced" to give us money? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Moldavi Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 [quote name='Azaghul' timestamp='1300390770' post='2668021'] Did you miss most of their posts and the content of their official publications before the war? I don't think they had a single newsletter that didn't focus on attacking us or a direct ally, and most were focused on us. [/quote] Attacking or slandering? Or are the two equivalent to your side these days? I know I fought wars over slander but I figured in the enlightened present age such things couldn't possibly happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndrewHG Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 [quote name='Henry' timestamp='1300335662' post='2666966'] Wow you guys are getting antsy aren't you? It's only been 2 months, relax. [/quote] Life isn't easy being evil dictator is it? 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='Antonio Salovega VI' timestamp='1300389543' post='2667996'] Actually, what is asinine is NPO’s hypocrisy in general and your own hypocrisy in particular. You insist that NPO changed when it did not alter anything to the least degree. NPO initiated Karma and had its butt kicked to the curb for its troubles and yet NPO and you, its apparent chief apologist, continue to insist that it was not at fault. Post Karma, it used Sir Paul’s little one step beyond the truth rag to belittle other alliances while maintaining that it had transformed. NPO whined like a cur in heat that nobody would allow it to put its past behind while at the same time feeling no necessity to forgive and forget SethB’s reputed actions. NPO demasked foreign diplomats and closed foreign embassies all the while claiming it was trying to diplomatically mend its fences. NPO makes its self-serving apologies and you defend, without apology, your repudiation of your own apology. There is no change and NPO is getting stomped for the third time because NPO and you could not refrain from being arrogant and egotistical. You are not helping the order’s cause. I suggest that you and NPO alter course and deal with-it. If you do not, NPO is going to be an asterisk in history. tl;dr: [IMG]http://i143.photobucket.com/albums/r160/qinqe/CN%20Graphics/AS6NPOmoldavi.png[/IMG] [/quote] Really? That's the best you got? Not only is it 100% biased, but it is a pretty weak reasoning for a CB. You make GGA look like the god of finding great CB's Edited March 17, 2011 by Ryan Greenberg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Itsuki Koizumi Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 bravo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Letum Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 [quote name='Beefspari' timestamp='1300390931' post='2668023'] Who are you trying to convince, them or yourself? Do you really think relations are strained between GOONS and Umbrella as they're "forced" to give us money? [/quote] I think he was referring more to the opportunity cost of this war for Umbrella's nations without anyone to fight, rather than a strain in relations because of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIEIXIAIS Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 [quote name='Azaghul' timestamp='1300390770' post='2668021'] Did you miss most of their posts and the content of their official publications before the war? I don't think they had a single newsletter that didn't focus on attacking us or a direct ally, and most were focused on us. [/quote] MK does the same stuff and more. This is not a viable argument. You are better off with the argument that the war is just for fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndrewHG Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 [quote name='D34th' timestamp='1300388901' post='2667987'] "Eternal war." [/quote] Surrender or everything must die? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beefspari Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 [quote name='Letum' timestamp='1300391211' post='2668030'] I think he was referring more to the opportunity cost of this war for Umbrella's nations without anyone to fight, rather than a strain in relations because of it. [/quote] If NPO and other large nations continue to sit around being unable to import tech, their growth will freeze. If Umbrella has nobody to fight, and we run out of people to smack, then we can begin to export tech again. I don't really see this as some sort of problem that Umbrella is going to have to deal with. It's just standard wartime tech deal freeze. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lusitan Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Doitzel' timestamp='1300390241' post='2668010'] First and third point: wait wait, I'm sorry. They are being held at war and were attacked to "prevent them from rising again" or some crap, and that is somehow not connected to their last beating and the last set of conditions imposed to stop them from rising? If you are attacking them over "past issues" that are not amended why didn't you address those [i]last time[/i]? I'm not sure how they were supposed to know they'd be curbstomped for not cozying up to various alliances. Indeed it's not unreasonable that they thought keeping out of the broader treaty tangle was best so as to not give the impression that they were clawing their way back. That's not to say they didn't have terrible foreign policy, but that wasn't why you declared war anyway. It's just an [i]ex post facto[/i] justification supplanting the fact that you didn't really have a reason. [/quote] Doitzel, please explain me how the way the war started is relevant to the way NPO decided to fight it. Feel free to elaborate if you believe NPO would be in war mode right now if the war had happened in a different way. In case you do not believe that's possible, that's no problem, please proceed to explain me how the clear way to get peace - fighting for 1 month - is keeping them at war eternally. Thank you. PS: otherwise, you might be a bit off-topic, just sayin. EDIT: for clarification Edited March 17, 2011 by Lusitan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biff Webster Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 [quote name='Antonio Salovega VI' timestamp='1300389543' post='2667996'] tl;dr: [IMG]http://i143.photobucket.com/albums/r160/qinqe/CN%20Graphics/AS6NPOmoldavi.png[/IMG] [/quote] Nice sig. Here, you can take a break for the next month or so: [img]http://i470.photobucket.com/albums/rr63/BiffWebsterGPA/AS6sig.jpg[/img] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeroofTime55 Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Beefspari' timestamp='1300390931' post='2668023'] Who are you trying to convince, them or yourself? Do you really think relations are strained between GOONS and Umbrella as they're "forced" to give us money? [/quote]Relations would be strained if they suddenly stopped. It's not forced by any group of people, it's forced by the nature of your relationship and the nature of the world. It's forced by your desire to not have strained relations. [quote name='Letum' timestamp='1300391211' post='2668030'] I think he was referring more to the opportunity cost of this war for Umbrella's nations without anyone to fight, rather than a strain in relations because of it. [/quote] Also, this. Edited March 17, 2011 by HeroofTime55 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Azaghul' timestamp='1300387312' post='2667950'] Two key differences: [b]- [s]FAN [/s]NPO had already surrendered once and was attacked again at the end of those terms, they had a direct reason not to trust [s]NPO[/s] MK.[/b] [/quote] Read whay you said genius. They surrendered and got terms the terms were met and they got attacked again for among other reasons past crimes against FAN. Edited March 17, 2011 by Alterego Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varianz Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 [quote name='Hyperion321' timestamp='1300390354' post='2668014'] Ok...so they're a bunch of pansies...and? Does that give anyone a right to keep them down forever just because they don't want to get their ass beat any harder than it already is? You talk about making the world a better place, but this "let us destroy you or its eternal war" crap is exactly what [i]you[/i] fought against in the first place. Sparta didn't go dicks first into AZTEC just so you could get a window to pull this !@#$, we did it to give our allies a window to win against NpO (which they got). If your front was the same as ours - if hitting Pacifica truly was about keeping them off of PB so that VE could take out NpO, as you all told us it was, then you would have let Pacifica go by now. NPO was neutralized. The was was won. It's time for this to end. [/quote] Lmao, you actually believed that it was about protecting VE and co's ability to destroy Polaris? Seriously? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azaghul Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Doitzel' timestamp='1300390241' post='2668010'] First and third point: wait wait, I'm sorry. They are being held at war and were attacked to "prevent them from rising again" or some crap, and that is somehow not connected to their last beating and the last set of conditions imposed to stop them from rising? If you are attacking them over "past issues" that are not amended why didn't you address those [i]last time[/i]? I'm not sure how they were supposed to know they'd be curbstomped for not cozying up to various alliances. Indeed it's not unreasonable that they thought keeping out of the broader treaty tangle was best so as to not give the impression that they were clawing their way back. That's not to say they didn't have terrible foreign policy, but that wasn't why you declared war anyway. It's just an [i]ex post facto[/i] justification supplanting the fact that you didn't really have a reason.[/quote] "Preventing them from rising again" has two separate parts. Those terms were meant to materially hurt them, but there really is no way you can change an alliance's attitude or relationships with peace terms except by imposing a viceroy and directly taking over or by forcing them to disband. The Karma peace terms had to do with their material power and capabilities. Sardonic's point had to do with their attitude and relationships. Two separate spheres. The Karma terms wasn't a reset on relationships or attitudes and wasn't meant as such. I'll also reiterate again that while Archon used "preventing them from rising again" and maybe their pre-karma actions in his DoW, the preempt was about a lot more than that, at least for Doomhouse. They haven't exactly ignored us since then, and plenty has been done on both sides to inflame the rivalry. Edit: Clarifying a little bit: We are hitting them again to hurt them materially, just because Karma and its terms hurt them materially doesn't mean that they are directly related. Trying to equate that with directly attacking someone for breaking their surrender terms because both terms and this war involve material power is a major stretch, to say the least. [quote]Second point: lol that is such rubbish and you know it. Archon's signature is on the surrender terms and MK and Umbrella both had central roles in the coalition, which made collective decisions. I am almost positive those terms were negotiated with an MK presence, and if I'm not mistaken Roquentin played a part as well (though I might be thinking of the pre-war negotiations).[/quote] Yes we played a major part in the coalition but none of our alliance signatures are on those terms, and we haven't sited those terms in any of our reasons for this war. Unlike NPO which directly attacked FAN for supposedly violating its surrender terms. Edited March 17, 2011 by Azaghul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Savage Man Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 [img]http://i.imgur.com/UEiEz.png[/img] The Saint Patrick's Day Massacre (of rhetoric) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Moldavi Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 [quote name='Chief Savage Man' timestamp='1300391602' post='2668042'] The Saint Patrick's Day Massacre (of rhetoric) [/quote] I never lost composure. Simply because I comment quickly doesn't mean I am having a fit, I just type fast. Also, why does the DH diaper look like it is sagging? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thrash Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 [quote name='Chief Savage Man' timestamp='1300391602' post='2668042'] The Saint Patrick's Day Massacre (of rhetoric) [/quote] Very well done. I approve! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts