A Statement from Doomhouse

[lamuella]

[quote name='AlmightyGrub' timestamp='1300396925' post='2668173']
Will you ever apologize for all the bad things you have done? It would take a long long post to cover them all, I just can not see you bothering cause you are not that kind of guy are you? OR have you ever been the slightest bit repentant for your past actions.

Cut the crap please, some of us actually know you.... all too well.
[/quote]

Grub, exactly what accusation are you making about Sardonic here. I'd quite like to know what you think he should apologize for.

[neneko]

[quote name='Hadrian' timestamp='1300396740' post='2668166']
Though since you're begging for an answer to a question that you should already know the answer to, I'll humour you. First of all, the core situation is different to that in other wars because Doom House has declared an aggressive war against Pacifica with a flimsy cassus belli, at best. Secondly, you are actually making my point for me there; "if terms cannot be agreed upon the war will naturally continue". That is no different to VietFAN. Thirdly, you're really overdoing the eternity thing there, by the way. It's more like perma-war.
[/quote]
First of all I think this is probably among the least flimsy CBs out there, you might not agree with it but it's pretty clear in reason and intent.

Second, yes if terms cannot be agreed upon the war will continue just like in vietfan and also every other war fought by anyone ever. How is that strengthening your point? If terms cannot be agreed upon the war continues until both parties can agree on a set of terms or alternatively no terms beyond ending the war, this is still true for every war.

Your third point isn't even a point. Call it whatever you want. I'm not here to argue semantics.

[quote name='Hadrian' timestamp='1300397483' post='2668187']
The move is nothing more than a deceitful act designed to drag NPO out of peace mode.
[/quote]
While it is of course in your full right to think that's true you can hardly hold something against us that we haven't done and you just think that we might do.

Edited March 17, 2011 by neneko

[pezstar]

[quote name='Hadrian' timestamp='1300396928' post='2668174']
And you are quite right. Why should anyone, who's been here for three or four years, trust Pacifica? But then again, why should anyone trust Doom House?
[/quote]

I can't speak about GOONS or Umbrella because STA has never really had dealings with either alliance. We were just at war with Umbrella, but it was a ghost declaration, and we exchanged zero wars. It ended with me messaging Roquentin and saying "Peace now?" and him saying "Sure!" Those are the extents of our official dealings with those two alliances.

But I can speak about MK. STA and MK are not friends, and we are very different these days. But we were friends for a very long time. Over three years, I believe. I can't think of a single time they've ever lied, during our friendship or after it. I can't think of any clearly "evil" things they've done, either. I mean, sure, attacking NPO was bad. But the evilness of it isn't quite clear cut, as more than a few folks who aren't directly allied to NPO kinda think they deserve it still. NPO didn't just hunt folks down and plot their demise once and then let it go. It was over and over and over again.

Essentially, NPO has no definitive proof that Doomhouse should be trusted, but there IS evidence that MK is an honest, if questionably "moral", alliance. They've never lied that I can think of.

All that being said, were I in charge of making these choices, I wouldn't take the deal for reasons I stated earlier in the thread.

Edited March 17, 2011 by pezstar

[pezstar]

[quote name='Il Impero Romano' timestamp='1300397435' post='2668183']
I agree with the bold actually, but draw a different conclusion. "The war will continue until they agree to the term" hardly says anything about possible future alternatives, which, I believe, is why any sort of hard line statement on that aspect of things was left out of the OP, where it easily could have been included and probably would be to their benefit if that is their intent. In any war, once an offer is made fighting continues until that offer is agreed to...or another offer (usually worse) is made in its place. The fact that they don't want reps and simply just want to fight and win points to them not [i]wanting [/i]to have to make another offer anywhere down the line, not to them having the steadfast, unbreakable intent to hold Pacifica in eternal war.
[/quote]

You're right about the offers getting progressively worse. The only examples I can think of to the contrary are when folks are forced to peace out because of other wars. NPO's mass peace outs in Karma are an example.

[ChairmanHal]

[quote name='neneko' timestamp='1300396499' post='2668161']
Who were deceived or misdirected in karma by Archon?
[/quote]

Anyone who thought it was a war for righteous and reform...but that's just for starters.

[Karolina]

[quote name='Hadrian' timestamp='1300397483' post='2668187']
It's HARDLY an assumption without evidence! Have you not heard some of what comes out of the mouths of Doom House employees and employers? [i]Seriously[/i]...

Again, you're making my argument up for me. Look here:

"I think it's been made quite clear that DH wants to have a full-on fight" - you.

"NPO must come out of peace mode, fight for a month, and then surrender with no terms" - from OP.

Now, if Doom House wants a full-on fight, why would they make that up at all? "Surrender with no terms"? What kind of !@#$%^&* is that?

The move is nothing more than a deceitful act designed to drag NPO out of peace mode.
[/quote]
So your reason for not believing them is basically you think that those terms are not heavy enough?

The difference between me and you is I actually base my views on alliances on what they do, and not on rhetoric/propaganda/whatever else you wish to call it. As of yet, DH has not done anything to suggest they will not honour peace terms. In fact, their conduct as alliances individually gives quite the opposite impression. No terms given by DH to surrendered alliances thus far have been what I consider excessive (I'm sure you'll disagree), and I fully believe that once those terms are honoured, the alliances will be free to go on their own, as will NPO.

As I said in different words earlier, innocent until [i]proven[/i] guilty, not, guilty because I'm a paranoid victim of propaganda.

[chefjoe]

[quote name='neneko' timestamp='1300396499' post='2668161']
Who were deceived or misdirected in karma by Archon?
[/quote]

Lets start out with Bigwoody and Moo, the line start there.

Edited March 17, 2011 by chefjoe

[nippy]

[quote name='HeroofTime55' timestamp='1300397416' post='2668180']
By this point, I have better things to do than argue grammar with an illiterate. If breaking it down to the most basic level can't help you, nothing can. No point in further wasting my time on a hopeless cause.
[/quote]


I knew that presenting you with an unarguable scenario would make you brush it off your shoulders and move on. Even [i]you[/i] couldn't continue the extreme stupidity you were conducting in continuing that line of argument. I'd appreciate it in the future if you would be man enough to accept when you've been bested, however. You're obviously not completely stupid, I'm obviously not illiterate, and I'm the one that broke it down to the most basic level. One thing is true, however....there's no point in you wasting your time on a hopeless cause.

[lamuella]

[quote name='neneko' timestamp='1300397528' post='2668190']
Second, yes if terms cannot be agreed upon the war will continue just like in vietfan and also every other war fought by anyone ever. How is that strengthening your point? If terms cannot be agreed upon the war continues until both parties can agree on a set of terms or alternatively no terms beyond ending the war, this is still true for every war.
[/quote]

Exactly, and I think it's worth reiterating that unless I'm badly mistaken talks will continue even if agreement cannot currently be reached on this particular clause. We're not calling a ceasefire during these negotiations, but I can't think of many wars in CN where anyone [i]did[/i] call a ceasefire.

[Hadrian]

[quote name='neneko' timestamp='1300397528' post='2668190']
First of all I think this is probably among the least flimsy CBs out there, you might not agree with it but it's pretty clear in reason and intent.

Second, yes if terms cannot be agreed upon the war will continue just like in vietfan and also every other war fought by anyone ever. How is that strengthening your point? If terms cannot be agreed upon the war continues until both parties can agree on a set of terms or alternatively no terms beyond ending the war, this is still true for every war.

Your third point isn't even a point. Call it whatever you want. I'm not here to argue semantics.[/quote]
No neneko, it is as flimsy as it possibly could be. Your bloc declared on the premise that NPO would, sooner or later, return to power and re-establish enough ties to bring about another "golden age" of NPO dominance. By declaring war, you (note by "you", I mean DH by extension) want to negate any possibility, no matter how remote, of NPO being able to do this. What you didn't seem to realise (or perhaps what you didn't [i]want[/i] to realise) was that NPO was in a heavily isolated atmosphere, with all but a few treaties linking it to some of its real allies (The Legion, NSO, etc.), not to mention the huge crosshairs on its back from the watchful eyes of Doom House and Pandora's Box. How can they possibly return to a previously world-dominating scenario when they have so much arrayed against them? I don't put it past them, not by a long shot, but in that type of situation, where too much is without certainty, that assumption is just plain silly.

It's strengthening my point because you asked "how is this not like any other war?" which you have already answered; it's not like any other war because it has a heavy similarity to VietFAN. "Any other war" is not VietFAN.

[ChairmanHal]

[quote name='pezstar' timestamp='1300397884' post='2668194']
You're right about the offers getting progressively worse. The only examples I can think of to the contrary are when folks are forced to peace out because of other wars. NPO's mass peace outs in Karma are an example.
[/quote]

The classic example, my dear pezstar involves your own alliance. The terms initially presented to STA during the War of the Coalition were more severe than the terms they ended up settling on when peace was finally declared.

No, making the terms harsher if the war continues is not something that is a natural consequence by any means.

Sorry, Impero, had to help her out.

[HeroofTime55]

[quote name='nippy' timestamp='1300398091' post='2668200']
I knew that presenting you with an unarguable scenario would make you brush it off your shoulders and move on. Even [i]you[/i] couldn't continue the extreme stupidity you were conducting in continuing that line of argument. I'd appreciate it in the future if you would be man enough to accept when you've been bested, however. You're obviously not completely stupid, I'm obviously not illiterate, and I'm the one that broke it down to the most basic level. One thing is true, however....there's no point in you wasting your time on a hopeless cause.
[/quote]
Ha ha ha, oh wow. I knew I should have called some sort of idiotic "HA THAT ONLY PROVES IM RIGHT!" comment.

I suppose I should have taken your strategy, and just kept repeating myself [i]ad infinitum[/i]?

You goonies are just all too predictable. It's hardly even any fun.

Edited March 17, 2011 by HeroofTime55

[Ardus]

[quote name='pezstar' timestamp='1300397735' post='2668192']
I can't speak about GOONS or Umbrella because STA has never really had dealings with either alliance. We were just at war with Umbrella, but it was a ghost declaration, and we exchanged zero wars. It ended with me messaging Roquentin and saying "Peace now?" and him saying "Sure!" Those are the extents of our official dealings with those two alliances.

But I can speak about MK. STA and MK are not friends, and we are very different these days. But we were friends for a very long time. Over three years, I believe. I can't think of a single time they've ever lied, during our friendship or after it. I can't think of any clearly "evil" things they've done, either. I mean, sure, attacking NPO was bad. But the evilness of it isn't quite clear cut, as more than a few folks who aren't directly allied to NPO kinda think they deserve it still. NPO didn't just hunt folks down and plot their demise once and then let it go. It was over and over and over again.

Essentially, NPO has no definitive proof that Doomhouse should be trusted, but there IS evidence that MK is an honest, if questionably "moral", alliance. They've never lied that I can think of.

All that being said, were I in charge of making these choices, I wouldn't take the deal for reasons I stated earlier in the thread.
[/quote]

If the Kingdom breaks its end of the terms, may Admin smite my nation so that it never again may grow.

[pezstar]

[quote name='ChairmanHal' timestamp='1300398269' post='2668207']
The classic example, my dear pezstar involves your own alliance. The terms initially presented to STA during the War of the Coalition were more severe than the terms they ended up settling on when peace was finally declared.

No, making the terms harsher if the war continues is not something that is a natural consequence by any means.

Sorry, Impero, had to help her out.
[/quote]

That's a little different. Our terms got better because our membership publicly told Valhalla to shove it and nearly the entire world agreed, thus embarrassing Valhalla to the point where you demanded an apology for embarrassing you. (Where "You" is your alliance. Not "you" chairman hal.)

[neneko]

[quote name='chefjoe' timestamp='1300398086' post='2668199']
Lets start out with Bigwoody and Moo, the line start there.
[/quote]
How were Moo and bigwoody deceived? Did Archon give his blessing for them to attack ordo verde?

[lamuella]

[quote name='Hadrian' timestamp='1300398222' post='2668205']
It's strengthening my point because you asked "how is this not like any other war?" which you have already answered; it's not like any other war because it has a heavy similarity to VietFAN. "Any other war" is not VietFAN.
[/quote]

I don't think you can say that any war is similar to VietFAN less than two months in.

Plus, your reason for this being not like any other war was that he said "if terms cannot be agreed upon the war will naturally continue"

Can you name me a war where terms were not agreed on that [i]didn't[/i] continue?

[nippy]

[quote name='HeroofTime55' timestamp='1300398366' post='2668208']
Ha ha ha, oh wow. I knew I should have called some sort of idiotic "HA THAT ONLY PROVES IM RIGHT!" comment.

I suppose I should have taken your strategy, and just kept repeating myself [i]ad infinitum[/i]?

You goonies are just all too predictable. It's hardly even any fun.
[/quote]

HeroofTime, ignoring reality? Shudder the thought. Very well.

[Sardonic]

We're not interested in Eternal war with NPO. We are more than willing to negotiate with them to a fair compromise. Eternal war is something that nobody deserves, there should always be a clear path to peace.

[lamuella]

[quote name='ChairmanHal' timestamp='1300398269' post='2668207']
The classic example, my dear pezstar involves your own alliance. The terms initially presented to STA during the War of the Coalition were more severe than the terms they ended up settling on when peace was finally declared.

No, making the terms harsher if the war continues is not something that is a natural consequence by any means.

Sorry, Impero, had to help her out.
[/quote]

OOC:

I was in wars in other worlds and at other times where terms that started out as heavy reparations were argued down to white peace. Terms can go either way, depending on how the fighting goes after terms are offered.

[Il Impero Romano]

[quote name='Sardonic' timestamp='1300398560' post='2668216']
We're not interested in Eternal war with NPO. We are more than willing to negotiate with them to a fair compromise. Eternal war is something that nobody deserves, there should always be a clear path to peace.
[/quote]

But now what will people cry about?

[chefjoe]

[quote name='neneko' timestamp='1300398468' post='2668212']
How were Moo and bigwoody deceived? Did Archon give his blessing for them to attack ordo verde?
[/quote]

How were they deceived? Now you are just playing obtuse as there have been numerous topics, discussions and posts from those parties regarding said subject and how Archon played woody and moo off against each other.

[lamuella]

The supposedly damning evidence of us wanting perma-war seems to be a series of statements that essentially say "War will continue until both sides agree to peace terms", which isn't so much an obvious statement as a tautology.

[Baldr]

During the Karma was, the Karma side told NPO that all the NPO nations in peace mode must come out and fight or some amount (I forget how much) would be added to the reps for every day.

Eventually, they realized that wasn't getting them anywhere, so that was dropped.

Next, they made NPO an offer of X amount of reps, plus something very similar to this "Bring all of your banks and other PM nations out so we can beat them down for a month". And NPO refused.

NPO counter-offered, saying that they would pay even higher reps, in return for getting rid of the "everyone leaves Peace Mode and gets beat down for a month" part. And that's the agreement that was eventually made.

Then NPO spent a year paying reps, and now Doomhouse and friends have rolled them again, and are back to that same basic demand that NPO refused last time.

The beating they took and reps they paid for Karma war didn't actually end anything. There was a break, and then Doomhouse started it all again. I can't see why NPO would give Doomhouse what they want in this case. They paid extra last time specifically to avoid what is being demanded now, and all it did was to buy a little time.

It's easy to see why DH would want NPO to do this. It's hard to see what's in it for NPO.

[neneko]

[quote name='Hadrian' timestamp='1300398222' post='2668205']
No neneko, it is as flimsy as it possibly could be. Your bloc declared on the premise that NPO would, sooner or later, return to power and re-establish enough ties to bring about another "golden age" of NPO dominance. By declaring war, you (note by "you", I mean DH by extension) want to negate any possibility, no matter how remote, of NPO being able to do this. What you didn't seem to realise (or perhaps what you didn't [i]want[/i] to realise) was that NPO was in a heavily isolated atmosphere, with all but a few treaties linking it to some of its real allies (The Legion, NSO, etc.), not to mention the huge crosshairs on its back from the watchful eyes of Doom House and Pandora's Box. How can they possibly return to a previously world-dominating scenario when they have so much arrayed against them? I don't put it past them, not by a long shot, but in that type of situation, where too much is without certainty, that assumption is just plain silly.

It's strengthening my point because you asked "how is this not like any other war?" which you have already answered; it's not like any other war because it has a heavy similarity to VietFAN. "Any other war" is not VietFAN.
[/quote]
You don't see how it's in any way weakening your claim that we're hegemonic for continuing the war if we can't agree on terms when you admit that this is exactly the same for every other war ever fought?

I realize that you really don't like DH but could you at least try to apply some basic logic to your arguments?

Edited March 17, 2011 by neneko

[Hadrian]

[quote name='pezstar' timestamp='1300397735' post='2668192']
I can't speak about GOONS or Umbrella because STA has never really had dealings with either alliance. We were just at war with Umbrella, but it was a ghost declaration, and we exchanged zero wars. It ended with me messaging Roquentin and saying "Peace now?" and him saying "Sure!" Those are the extents of our official dealings with those two alliances.

But I can speak about MK. STA and MK are not friends, and we are very different these days. But we were friends for a very long time. Over three years, I believe. I can't think of a single time they've ever lied, during our friendship or after it. I can't think of any clearly "evil" things they've done, either. I mean, sure, attacking NPO was bad. But the evilness of it isn't quite clear cut, as more than a few folks who aren't directly allied to NPO kinda think they deserve it still. NPO didn't just hunt folks down and plot their demise once and then let it go. It was over and over and over again.

Essentially, NPO has no definitive proof that Doomhouse should be trusted, but there IS evidence that MK is an honest, if questionably "moral", alliance. They've never lied that I can think of.

All that being said, were I in charge of making these choices, I wouldn't take the deal for reasons I stated earlier in the thread.
[/quote]
I agree that MK doesn't have much reason to lie, but again, I have very very little doubt that it's part of the plan to get NPO out of peace mode. It's important to note that, as you yourself say, you were allies with them for over three years and, well, MK doesn't lie to their allies. The same can't really be said of their foreign policy towards enemies, if you see my meaning.

Doom House are only partly justified in attacking NPO like this. Certainly, NPO did a lot of questionable things in their time, but if all DH/PB is going to do is carry that on, then it's not much in the way of a good change.


[quote name='Karolina' timestamp='1300398047' post='2668198']
So your reason for not believing them is basically you think that those terms are not heavy enough?

The difference between me and you is I actually base my views on alliances on what they do, and not on rhetoric/propaganda/whatever else you wish to call it. As of yet, DH has not done anything to suggest they will not honour peace terms. In fact, their conduct as alliances individually gives quite the opposite impression. No terms given by DH to surrendered alliances thus far have been what I consider excessive (I'm sure you'll disagree), and I fully believe that once those terms are honoured, the alliances will be free to go on their own, as will NPO.

As I said in different words earlier, innocent until [i]proven[/i] guilty, not, guilty because I'm a paranoid victim of propaganda.
[/quote]
That's correct, I do not believe that those are the terms DH would normally ask for.

Unlike you, I actually base my views on what alliances say and do. If I see the majority of DH members foaming at the mouth for NPO to throw away the "vaunted hippy shield", then I am going to include that in my arguments.

You're being very naive.