Kemal Ergenekon Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Wow, how delusional can one be. Alpha wasn't even an alliance with which we ever had hostilities with IIRC. Talk about paranoia. In other news, Pfeiffer is literally Hitler. Confirmed. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buorhann Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Mensa has held onto 3 allies the entire time they've been around. Always been up front with themselves and never delayed it's aid. Unlike some alliances who "Hold on guys, we need to take a week to build up then we'll join you." 1 Quote Warrior of Dio https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfPCFQfOnLg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clarke Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 (edited) After days of 'bugging' (your words, not mine), Steve affirmed that Alpha 'might take a role in the war but that it would not affect the outcome of the war or t$ allies' (who also held a Mensa treaty). SK is a t$ ally. Arguably, SK being taken out by Alpha had a huge impact, as the loss of a mostly unengaged upper tier reserve meant added pressure to all other fronts. SK was also a party that, by Steve's own admission, *did* have business defending Mensa, considering their MDP. For all intents and purposes it seemed one side won the war very quickly but that is neither here nor there as the true discussion is about who is in the right and who is in the wrong overall. While I'm not saddened to see the treaty disappear you aren't the victim you claim to be and what Alpha did was justified from a moral standpoint, you could have chose to recognize your faults and ultimately keep the treaty. Edited February 18, 2016 by Clarke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pfeiffer Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 >right and wrong >moral standpoint It's a game in which we wage wars. Get some !@#$ing perspective. This is why you're a joke, Clarke. 2 Quote ☾☆ Chairman Emeritus of Mensa HQ ☾☆ "It's not about the actual fish, themselves. Fish are not important in this context. It's about fish-ing, the act of fishing itself." -Jack O'Neill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clarke Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 (edited) >right and wrong >moral standpoint It's a game in which we wage wars. Get some !@#$ perspective. This is why you're a joke, Clarke. Then what are you guys complaining about? It's a game. But no this game isn't beyond morals, right and wrong is used for reasoning in a lot of wars. Just because you choose to be play the game a certain way doesn't mean you're beyond it as well because otherwise your members wouldn't be complaining when someone does something they see as wrong as it is simply a game. Edited February 18, 2016 by Clarke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buorhann Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 what Alpha did was justified from a moral standpoint, you could have chose to recognize your faults and ultimately keep the treaty. LOL, what? 1 Quote Warrior of Dio https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfPCFQfOnLg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buorhann Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Actually Clarke, if you want to talk about morals here, you know what was morally wrong? You using your sister. 5 1 Quote Warrior of Dio https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfPCFQfOnLg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clarke Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Actually Clarke, if you want to talk about morals here, you know what was morally wrong? You using your sister. Actually no because that never happened. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boony Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 For all intents and purposes it seemed one side won the war very quickly but that is neither here nor there as the true discussion is about who is in the right and who is in the wrong overall. While I'm not saddened to see the treaty disappear you aren't the victim you claim to be and what Alpha did was justified from a moral standpoint, you could have chose to recognize your faults and ultimately keep the treaty. Can you please expand on this? I'm very curios. I've always been wary of the fact that I could be biased, but it seems we are in the right here. Alpha lied to us. <- easily proven with logs Alpha opted in to defend Rose even though their treaty didn't require it. <- Proven Alpha continues to bullshit on this thread. <- Logs would show that they are in fact lying on this thread Again, maybe I'm biased but it seems that we are in the right here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buorhann Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Actually no because that never happened. https://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?/topic/10519-a-final-announcement-from-the-dutch-east-india-company/?p=189297 https://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?/topic/9520-deic-bank-content-anomaly/?p=166608 Ok. 1 Quote Warrior of Dio https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfPCFQfOnLg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clarke Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 (edited) Can you please expand on this? I'm very curios. I've always been wary of the fact that I could be biased, but it seems we are in the right here. Alpha lied to us. <- easily proven with logs Alpha opted in to defend Rose even though their treaty didn't require it. <- Proven Alpha continues to bullshit on this thread. <- Logs would show that they are in fact lying on this thread Again, maybe I'm biased but it seems that we are in the right here. I don't know enough to say you're wrong in all of them but you're wrong in almost everything that preceded the start of the war. It doesn't make you right overall after you already done so much wrong. https://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?/topic/10519-a-final-announcement-from-the-dutch-east-india-company/?p=189297 https://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?/topic/9520-deic-bank-content-anomaly/?p=166608 Ok. I was alluding to the fact I never had a sister make an actual nation let alone inform one of my sisters about this game. Edited February 18, 2016 by Clarke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valakias Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 When Clarke sides with you, you know you did something wrong 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prefonteen Posted February 18, 2016 Author Share Posted February 18, 2016 (edited) I don't know enough to say you're wrong in all of them but you're wrong in almost everything that preceded the start of the war. It doesn't make you right overall after you already done so much wrong. I was alluding to the fact I never had a sister make an actual nation let alone inform one of my sisters about this game. It is indeed the lying which we take issue with. Alpha's stance on the war- while we disagreed with it- was not what led to this breakup. What did, is the lying to our face followed by a hit on our treaty partner. It is something we view as a betrayal and as unbecoming of a treaty partner. Therefore, the treaty was cancelled. I would inquire though, what specifically do you believe tS to be wrong in in the lead up to this war? Is it our attempts at finding a diplomatic solution? Or do you classify us as wrong simply because we defended mensa? Edited February 18, 2016 by Partisan 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roy Mustang Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 I don't know enough to say you're wrong Please just stop there, as it's clear you have little to no understanding of what occurred in the leadup to the war as well. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clarke Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 I would inquire though, what specifically do you believe tS to be wrong in in the lead up to this war? Is it our attempts at finding a diplomatic solution? Or do you classify us as wrong simply because we defended mensa? Your diplomatic solution was basically everyone forgets about it and moves on. If you actually tried being reasonable I'm sure it could have being avoided. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buorhann Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Your diplomatic solution was basically everyone forgets about it and moves on. If you actually tried being reasonable I'm sure it could have being avoided. Give an example of being reasonable? 1 Quote Warrior of Dio https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfPCFQfOnLg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Roy Mustang Posted February 18, 2016 Popular Post Share Posted February 18, 2016 (edited) Your diplomatic solution was basically everyone forgets about it and moves on. If you actually tried being reasonable I'm sure it could have being avoided. I mean, for one thing, it's not particularly as if anyone (Rose or Vanguard) ever actually asked for reps, to the best of my knowledge. I've heard a lot of people say "well why didn't Mensa offer reps" as if it was their job to read Vanguard's mind. Do any of you realize how inane that concept is? If you want something, you ask for it. Most of us learn that as toddlers, that we actually need to use our words. Unless, of course, you're referring to something else that Mensa (or t$, trying to negotiate a peace) should have offered because they somehow psychically knew that is what Rose and Vanguard wanted? Basically, you don't get to pretend that "being reasonable" meant catering to desires that were never communicated. That's a load of crap. Edited February 18, 2016 by Roy Mustang 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Prefonteen Posted February 18, 2016 Author Popular Post Share Posted February 18, 2016 Your diplomatic solution was basically everyone forgets about it and moves on. If you actually tried being reasonable I'm sure it could have being avoided. This is entirely incorrect. May I ask who tried feeding you this line of bullshit? We: 1. Literally asked Rose what they were looking for prior to the war. What we could do diplomatically to help avoid this. We got nothing but 'sit back and let us take out Mensa'. 2. Offered (with Mensa's permission) to set up a 1v1 scenario in which Rose would get to attack Mensa (thus getting the offensive). Only stipulation? Vanguard peaces out (because a 1v1 should be that, and not a 3v1 since arrgh was still engaged as well). No counter offers were provided, and we were told Rose would go in- and that it was up to us whether we'd counter. And so we did. 8 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buorhann Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Rose would've lost to Mensa 1v1, and then it would've been delicious to see what kind of demands Pfeiffer sets. 3 1 Quote Warrior of Dio https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfPCFQfOnLg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayne Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Rose ain't got the bottle for a 1v1 it would seem after all. 170 odd days ago, I'm sure oblige offered us one (cba to look for the post, maybe one of you kind fellas will do it for me). Shame, would have been more entertaining then what actually transpired. 2 Quote ☾☆ Warrior of Dio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ekaterina Kalmyk Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Then what are you guys complaining about? It's a game. But no this game isn't beyond morals, right and wrong is used for reasoning in a lot of wars. Just because you choose to be play the game a certain way doesn't mean you're beyond it as well because otherwise your members wouldn't be complaining when someone does something they see as wrong as it is simply a game. In that case, t$ was right to stand by their ally Mensa HQ when Rose declared war on Mensa and Alpha was wrong to turn on their ally t$ when they jumped into the war on the Rose-led side and days later attacked a fellow treaty partner of t$ after saying that they wouldn't. The most morally right thing to do in such a difficult position would have been to side with neither the The Syndicate nor Rose, thereby siding against neither ally which which you have a MnDoAP. Doing so might not have made a person feel important/relevant, it might not make that person happy or satisfied, but diplomatic compromises rarely do. Given all of that, I don't see The Syndicate's loyalty as a "fault" about themselves they need to recognize to keep their treaty with Alpha. (See, I can play the morality game, too, however pointless it may be in a game.) However, it seems Partisan wasn't taking it from a particularly moral point of view and really just took issue with the lying and the continued bullshit. Obviously, default to what he said for the best explanation, but I just wanted to play the morality game with you for a second. 1 Quote Original Art Credit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaguar Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Lol, it's because you keep your nations in mid tier and don't grow.You up-declare while they can't declare on you, so yeah, don't put yourself too high Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James II Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Can you please expand on this? I'm very curios. I've always been wary of the fact that I could be biased, but it seems we are in the right here. Alpha lied to us. <- easily proven with logs Alpha opted in to defend Rose even though their treaty didn't require it. <- Proven Alpha continues to bullshit on this thread. <- Logs would show that they are in fact lying on this thread Again, maybe I'm biased but it seems that we are in the right here. What was the time stamp on those logs, and what was the time stamp on the logs when STeve gave the official position? Quote "Most successful new AA" - Samuel Bates Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Prefonteen Posted February 18, 2016 Author Popular Post Share Posted February 18, 2016 What was the time stamp on those logs, and what was the time stamp on the logs when STeve gave the official position? Steve's official position was given during a query between him and I following your decision to hit Roz Wei. This position was on the same night confirmed during a continuation of that conversation in which you, Roy, Steve and I were all present. I explicitly asked whether Alpha would stick with just Roz Wei. Steve confirmed. The timestamp of those logs were: Feb 5th. You have between Feb 5th and your attack on SK on Feb 9th, at no point mentioned your intent to expand your involvement and hit SK, nor have you approached t$ for clarification on SK's stance. At the time we had already placed a white peace offer (coalitionwide) on the table for Rose. Something you were aware of since 1 day after the war started. Furthermore, Steve declared on SK while you and I were in a query, and while I had tried to contact him (he ignored my query until after his declaration). There has been no attempt at reconciliation and talks in private channels have shown us that you have no remorse for your actions. Instead you have continuously attempted to justify your actions by trying to spin the events that transpired during the war into a crooked version that fits your narrative. Now you have reverted to a weak attempt at spinning this cancellation as the unfortunate result of a war developing outside of either our control, pushing us to opposite sides. I understand that it is prudent for you to spin in order to mitigate PR damage, but it is too transparent. The truth is that you knew well what you were doing, and that you deliberately failed to inform t$ about your intended strike on SK. A strike which broke your word to t$ in the process, during a war that was arguably none of your business anyway. Your involvement in the war was unfortunate but something we could talk out. The bullshit surrounding it is not. Not as long as you spit in our face with twisted facts, crooked logic and outright lies. 9 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karrde Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Now this is truly delicious. Rose was offered 1v1 and turned it down? Glorious. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.