A Statement from Doomhouse

[Letum]

[quote name='Azaghul' timestamp='1300391584' post='2668041']
"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.
[/quote]

And the logical extension to this is that, for the exact same reason, you might want to "prevent us from rising again" once more a few months after the end of this war. So what's the point of peace?

[mrwuss]

[quote name='Ivan Moldavi' timestamp='1300391770' post='2668043']
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?
[/quote]


It has to carry our packages.

[Il Impero Romano]

[quote name='Letum' timestamp='1300389559' post='2667997']
[b]"Trust" is more complex and long-term than just the narrow view of upholding an agreement that you've presented. [/b]It also involves a judgement on whether the other party is likely to exploit technicalities within the agreement in order to pursue their interest - and in this case, the interest of the other party is our crippling. Furthermore, it also has to do with expecting a certain level of behaviour, outside the strict confines of the contract, that is in line with certain community standards. Given that one such standard is not launching unprovoked attacks, our "trust" of Doomhouse's future behaviour with a peace-agreement is low.

And that's not just a propaganda-driven rehashing of the controversial actions of Doomhouse; it is quite a pertinent form of trust. Since any judgement will be done along cost/benefit lines, it is obvious that a peace where you are crippled but do not face any military threats is more valuable than a peace where you are crippled and have to constantly be on the watchout for a second assault.

It is easy of course to say that should Doomhouse get to "fight" us, they will no longer possess the vengefulness and national interest in us being damaged. But we would find it rather hard to "trust" that would happen. And there's myriads of factors feeding into that: the fact that we were attacked despite (or, according to some, because of) doing nothing and having been peaceful for longer than any non-neutral alliance is obviously one big one. But there are other aspects of our interaction with Doomhouse that urge us towards a lack of trust in that regard; the fact that must of their attempts to cast us as "deserving" this rely on events from 3 years ago. Given the length of that time and that we have already gone through one catastrophic war for those events, there is little reason to believe that more time or an extra war would alter that reasoning. That is of course, assuming that Doomhouse leadership is sincere in their repeated attempts to portray us as a massive threat that needs to be ended - given the disconnect between what leadership says, and the members (who are traditionally more honest) who mostly express a desire to destroy us ranging from damage beyond the point of recovery to disbandment, it is quite hard to judge what exactly the intentions of Doomhouse alliances are.

Said intentions have often been (deliberately?) mis-portrayed; for instance, in our Imperial Degree about our protectorate mere days before their declaration of war, some prominent MK members were attempting to deny that their alliance held some desire to actively "go after" the NPO. Or see the case of Anarch, who allegedly "left" the alliance to go rogue on our Emperor prior, but until this point has not changed AA's or lost his member status in MK's forum. On that point, it might indeed be possible that there is a coincidence he was able to remain a member for the sake of "other realms", a coincidence that a war suddenly made him active again, and a coincidence that MK was suddenly willing to accept a nuclear rogue into their fold - but that is quite a large number of coincidences coming from an alliance that really has it out for us.

And then there is of course the oft repeated demand that we should have "proven" that we do not pose some form of threat to Doomhouse and its allies by proving that we have changed. That too is not something that would have any reason to change - and I am not going to seriously entertain any notions that not using Peace Mode would be a sign of "good conduct".

What all that means is, effectively, that there is quite a high probability that we will find ourselves in the same situation we were before Doomhouse declared on us. At a (even more significant now) military and ally disadvantage, with a group that is highly vindicative and views us as a threat that must not be allowed to grow too big. If anything, the fairly righteous indignation we would have over our treatment might very well be used as an excuse to portray us as wanting revenge - and it is not an illogical line of thought to predict that an alliance that has been mistreated to this extent might not view its oppressors with the noblest of sentiments. We would still be judged for the behaviour we have now faced two catastrophic world wars for, we would still be isolated, we would still have to "prove" we have changed, and we would be even more at the mercy of the same people who perpetrated these crimes on us. And that is where a big load of trust comes in. We would have to "trust" that Doomhouse will suddenly change their desires and attitudes, despite the limited logic or incentives in that process. We do not trust that any such thing will even come close to happening, and that quite obviously affects how much the "peace" they are offering is worth, when we pay for it with being crippled even more than we already are.

Not that the agreement itself is negligible. Even there, leaving ourselves exposed to someone who has a desire to harm us really badly is not something that can be done lightly. Especially given the fact that we abandon a fairly big advantage for a promise that is very incorporeal. Technicalities such as "too many" nations being at peace, or for "too long" can easily arise with such a lack of detail. But, as I explained, that is not our primary concern with trust.

And of course, you have to consider that trust is but one factor in our overall decision. At the end of the day, what Doomhouse is saying is that letting them fulfill their war goal - crippling us - on their terms and as fast as possible would be the best possible course of action for us. That is, a course of action that has a 100% probability of crippling us for the foreseeable future. We are somewhat skeptical of the veracity of such a proposal. And by that I mean that I'd call that logic somewhat absurd. Unlike MK, which even though not faced with a circumstance of similar intensity nonetheless gave up in a mere two weeks in our last meeting (accepting an agreement they have never ceased to complain about), we do not hold the belief that adhering to the immediate demands of an enemy with the intent to harm is always the best course of action. Neither are we in the business of capitulation at the first opportunity due to fear of what the future may bring, or due to a feeling of powerlessness. If we did, we would have accepted the first !@#$%* deals that were offered in Karma, and would have never managed to recover the way we did.

So maybe we might think it's best to keep the Mexican Standoff going. I for one would be interested in seeing how tenacious Doomhouse would be. It can actually be pretty fun when you don't have anything left to lose.
[/quote]

It appears you misread my post to which you responded. The entire point was that this is [i]not [/i]a matter of "trust" at all, literally the exact opposite of what you apparently took from it and replied at length to (I would love to rehash my rationale behind that assertion again, but today is a busy one in the nation of Il Impero Romano, so you are going to have to just go back and review that post and my subsequent exchange with Doitzel on the matter).

Edited March 17, 2011 by Il Impero Romano

[Ivan Moldavi]

[quote name='mrwuss' timestamp='1300392137' post='2668047']
It has to carry our packages.
[/quote]
Do your "packages" hang from your rectums? Just wondering.

NOTE: Not actually interested in an answer.

[Chickenzilla]

[quote name='Chief Savage Man' timestamp='1300391602' post='2668042']
[img]http://i.imgur.com/UEiEz.png[/img]

The Saint Patrick's Day Massacre (of rhetoric)
[/quote]
This is pretty good.

[King Charge]

[quote name='Chief Savage Man' timestamp='1300391602' post='2668042']
[img]http://i.imgur.com/UEiEz.png[/img]

The Saint Patrick's Day Massacre (of rhetoric)
[/quote]

Hahahaha! I love the "We can stay in peace mode, no you can't, yes we can", paradox you have going there. At least something good came from this thread.

[Azaghul]

[quote name='Ivan Moldavi' timestamp='1300390961' post='2668024']
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.
[/quote]
It certainly counts as posturing and inflaming a rivalry, which is what I was talking about. And it makes them less than the peaceful and innocent angels they portray themselves to be.

[quote name='TIEIXIAIS' timestamp='1300391222' post='2668031']
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.
[/quote]
We inflamed it too... so what? Does that change the fact that they did the same?

[quote name='Alterego' timestamp='1300391510' post='2668039']
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.[/quote]
And they still weren't attacked for violating their surrender terms. So your point is?

[Thrash]

[quote name='Ivan Moldavi' timestamp='1300392299' post='2668052']
Do your "packages" hang from your rectums? Just wondering.
[/quote]

You HAD to say that. In b4 Invicta joke.

[Azaghul]

[quote name='Letum' timestamp='1300392006' post='2668046']
And the logical extension to this is that, for the exact same reason, you might want to "prevent us from rising again" once more a few months after the end of this war. So what's the point of peace?
[/quote]
Did you read the paragraph after that?

[nippy]

[quote name='HeroofTime55' timestamp='1300391400' post='2668038']
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]

You must be a psychopath of some sort.....there's no other way you couldn't understand how relationships function. Judging by the above post, every single man that gets married is forced into it, every single donation given in a church is forced into it, and every single adopted child isn't adopted as a means to provide love to an individual in need, but in some sick, twisted way, it's somehow forced.


[quote name='Alterego' timestamp='1300391510' post='2668039']
Read whay you said genius.
[/quote]

I love typos in sentences like these.

[Ivan Moldavi]

[quote name='Azaghul' timestamp='1300392408' post='2668055']
It certainly counts as posturing and inflaming a rivalry, which is what I was talking about. And it makes them less than the peaceful and innocent angels they portray themselves to be.
[/quote]
Indeed. So I ask again, is posturing and "inflaming a rivalry" what you would consider a valid CB going forward? Since it is apparent that it was sufficient here I believe I could extrapolate the answer but I figured I would ask just the same.

If so, does this mean that you guys really are just trying to make friends and have everyone "like" like you instead of just like you or not like you or else you will give them a swirly in the gym bathroom? You guys are so cool.

[Ivan Moldavi]

[quote name='nippy' timestamp='1300392645' post='2668062']
I love typos in sentences like these.
[/quote]
You mean, for example, taking one singular sentence and stating "like these" in which you reference an inferred (and grammatically incorrect) plural instead of saying "like this"?

Yeah, me too.

[HeroofTime55]

[quote name='Azaghul' timestamp='1300392408' post='2668055']
And they still weren't attacked for violating their surrender terms.
[/quote]
Indeed, they were attacked for nothing at all.

If you're going to point out the areas where this diverges from what NPO did to FAN, at least do yourself a favor and pick the divergences that don't make you look worse than NPO.

[nippy]

[quote name='Ivan Moldavi' timestamp='1300392810' post='2668065']
You mean, for example, taking one singular sentence and stating "like these" in which you reference an inferred (and grammatically incorrect) plural instead of saying "like this"?

Yeah, me too.
[/quote]

Under your skin much, Ivan? Wow, you were easier than I thought.

Yes, one singular sentence like the one I quoted, and others like it. Imagine that...."like these" means this isn't an isolated issue. You're quite a moron, Ivan. I used to expect better from you.

[Ivan Moldavi]

[quote name='nippy' timestamp='1300393022' post='2668068']
Under your skin much, Ivan? Wow, you were easier than I thought.

Yes, one singular sentence like the one I quoted, and others like it. Imagine that...."like these" means this isn't an isolated issue. You're quite a moron, Ivan. I used to expect better from you.
[/quote]
You are funny.

As I said, I know what you inferred, you just did so incorrectly. I can't help it if you can't "own up to" your mistakes. That's a hard life for you then.

[Beefspari]

[quote name='HeroofTime55' timestamp='1300392884' post='2668066']
Indeed, they were attacked for nothing at all.
[/quote]
People really need to stop repeating this "no CB" bull. There was a whole thread giving the reasons for the war, and plenty of reasons from each alliance. Just because you don't agree with them doesn't mean they don't exist. NPO is being attacked by five different alliances. Do you really believe that [i][b]none[/b][/i] of those five alliances had any reason to attack them at all?

Actually don't answer that, you already more than filled your quota of idiotposting in this thread.

[HeroofTime55]

[quote name='nippy' timestamp='1300392645' post='2668062']
You must be a psychopath of some sort.....there's no other way you couldn't understand how relationships function. Judging by the above post, every single man that gets married is forced into it, every single donation given in a church is forced into it, and every single adopted child isn't adopted as a means to provide love to an individual in need, but in some sick, twisted way, it's somehow forced.
[/quote]
Wow, at least try to make analogies that make even a vague degree of sense.

All cited examples are analogous to the signing of a new treaty.

A more analogous set of, er, analogies, would be to compare Umbrella stopping aid to GOONS with, say, telling your wife she has to sleep on the floor from now on, taking your money back out of the collection basket at church, or locking an adopted child in the basement and forcing them to do work. And expecting no strain to come from any of those situations.

But by all means, Umbrella is free to stop shipping aid to GOONS and GOONS are free to tell Umbrella to stop and get back to buying tech. Go for it.

[TheMeatOne]

[quote name='Ivan Moldavi' timestamp='1300392299' post='2668052']
Do your "packages" hang from your rectums? Just wondering.

NOTE: Not actually interested in an answer.
[/quote]

Its easy to see that our balls hang from our rectums. Those two stick figures are medically correct in every way and accurately represent human beings in shape and composure.

Cool picture overall, shows how dumb most arguments are.

[Juggernaut123]

NPO still gives terms: http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=99045. Accept them DH, thanks.

Edited March 17, 2011 by Juggernaut123

[nippy]

[quote name='Ivan Moldavi' timestamp='1300393094' post='2668071']
You are funny.

As I said, I know what you inferred, you just did so incorrectly. I can't help it if you can't "own up to" your mistakes. That's a hard life for you then.
[/quote]

Did you think about me during lunch, Ivan? That would seem to be the only possible explanation that you would jump on the first post I made after you had your peanut butter sandwich. I commend you for not backpedaling...however, your claims that I am incorrect are incorrect in themselves. I can't fault you for trying...your brethren in this thread are quite easily the type to believe your mediocre attempted cover-up.

[Centurius]

No peace for an alliance because it has members in peace mode. Quite a déja vu i have to say.

[HeroofTime55]

[quote name='Beefspari' timestamp='1300393254' post='2668074']
People really need to stop repeating this "no CB" bull. There was a whole thread giving the reasons for the war, and plenty of reasons from each alliance. Just because you don't agree with them doesn't mean they don't exist.

Actually don't answer that, you already more than filled your quota of idiotposting in this thread.
[/quote]Oh right, I forgot.

"We hate NPO" is the CB. My bad.

[feardaram]

[quote name='Chief Savage Man' timestamp='1300391602' post='2668042']
[img]http://i.imgur.com/UEiEz.png[/img]

The Saint Patrick's Day Massacre (of rhetoric)
[/quote]
You are like McDonalds, because I'm lovin it.

[Hadrian]

[quote name='Ardus' timestamp='1300334058' post='2666890']
And finally, last night Pacifica learned of the fate demanded by our leaders: abandon peace mode, fight for one month, and surrender without further terms. They must fight this war. No more. No less.[/quote]
Pathetic. Why you even offered such a thing, I don't know. Is it me, or do you actually think Pacifica is stupid? They aren't going to neglect peace mode just because you gave them an offer of war for a month and peace with no terms (C'mon, who are you [i]really[/i] trying to fool with this lie?).


[quote name='Quiziotle' timestamp='1300334332' post='2666899']
Not even the vaunted hippie shield will save them now.
[/quote]
I don't know buddy, it seems to be saving them quite well at the moment.

[nippy]

[quote name='HeroofTime55' timestamp='1300393288' post='2668075']
Wow, at least try to make analogies that make even a vague degree of sense.

All cited examples are analogous to the signing of a new treaty.

A more analogous set of, er, analogies, would be to compare Umbrella stopping aid to GOONS with, say, telling your wife she has to sleep on the floor from now on, taking your money back out of the collection basket at church, or locking an adopted child in the basement and forcing them to do work. And expecting no strain to come from any of those situations.

But by all means, Umbrella is free to stop shipping aid to GOONS and GOONS are free to tell Umbrella to stop and get back to buying tech. Go for it.
[/quote]

Amazing. You failed to explain your use of the word 'forced', which was precisely the subject of debate in my post. Your response is to abandon that stance and attack my analogies? Perhaps you can come up with a better analogy for your perception of our relationship with Umbrella. I'm all ears.