Jump to content

Will t$ protect their protectorate?


Critters
 Share

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

You forgot NPO hitting their ally's prot in defence of a co belligerent they ostensibly have no ties with.

I've been told npos hit on our protectorate was non chaining according to npo so it does not count or trigger our treaty with our protectorate. 

  • Haha 3

 

os9LcJK.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Roquentin said:

The issue is you seem to only want me to do stuff that I see as screwing myself.

For instance, with tS, the treaty has a non-chaining clause and they made a new sphere and had jettisoned us and signed new allies which provided comfort and succor to the enemy in addition to the previous succor rendered to our enemies when they peaced out and trashed us openly to them while we were getting threats of severe consequences and fighting. The people they've protected throughout have been enemy combatants and they put one into the gov of their cadet alliance. 

I hadn't read past this yet, so I don't know if anyone else said something similar but:

If your goals were to ensure everyone endures significant damages then why wouldn't you want to take your ally's side and hit BK? There's still a lot of damage to be dealt to both your sphere, and BK's sphere. To me it seems like a missed opportunity not only to act upon your goals (like Ripper pointed out), but also to gain a lot of positive PR, and perhaps even prove to t$ that you two could still work together. I'm not FA, so maybe I missed the mark here, but that's what it looks like to me.

Edited by REAP3R

Look up to the sky above~

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Hodor said:

I'm gonna bite on this one because it really isn't even close to the same and you really should be able to see that:

Scenario 1:
Adrienne is asked how she would respond to being attacked by N$O. I imagine she said she'd fight? Cus what else do you do? If someone says, "Hey Hodor, how are you gonna react to Tiberius smacking you in the face?", And I respond with "I'll smack them back." You can't say I was plotting to smack you in the face. Or well, you can, but you'd be making no sense.

Scenario 2:
BK and co actively plot an aggressive war on CHAOS. So uh, that seems pretty clearly different?

 

So either you're spinning harder than Charlotte, or we've just got a case of reading too quickly and comprehending too slowly.

Seems a little suspect that you know she would delete the logs of it and deny they existed and then lie further by saying it was only pre-IQ logs. I mean you guys are quick enough to jump on anything Roq says or does and call him a liar etc when you have your own Queen pri copyn spinning a web of tales. 

A plot is only active if the opportunity is there to enact it. Otherwise it just becomes a hypothetical situation. You can plan and hope the dominos fall into place. Even so the BK plot never got past the hypothetical stage since you decided to pre-empt any opportunity. 

  • Like 3
  • Downvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Seems a little suspect that you know she would delete the logs of it and deny they existed and then lie further by saying it was only pre-IQ logs. I mean you guys are quick enough to jump on anything Roq says or does and call him a liar etc when you have your own Queen pri copyn spinning a web of tales. 

A plot is only active if the opportunity is there to enact it. Otherwise it just becomes a hypothetical situation. You can plan and hope the dominos fall into place. Even so the BK plot never got past the hypothetical stage since you decided to pre-empt any opportunity. 

Do you know what's one of the definitions of insanity? Doing same thing over and over again expecting a different result.

At first Roq tried to spin that story, claiming to have logs.

Then Keshav had a go with same lies. 

Now you.

Edited by alyster
  • Upvote 4
  • Downvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tiberius said:

She has then slipped up in that post by saying she had planned how to tackle NPO/t$ in a hypothetical situation of NPO/t$ joining the war aggressively.

That's not what I said at all but okay.

Edit: This is what I was referencing wrt the conversation on t$/NPO; I posted the logs on it here ages back: https://forum.politicsandwar.com/index.php?/topic/25900-how-long-will-this-war-go-on-for/&do=findComment&comment=413207

Edited by Nizam Adrienne

BrOQBND.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Seems a little suspect that you know she would delete the logs of it and deny they existed and then lie further by saying it was only pre-IQ logs. I mean you guys are quick enough to jump on anything Roq says or does and call him a liar etc when you have your own Queen pri copyn spinning a web of tales. 

A plot is only active if the opportunity is there to enact it. Otherwise it just becomes a hypothetical situation. You can plan and hope the dominos fall into place. Even so the BK plot never got past the hypothetical stage since you decided to pre-empt any opportunity. 

If the first paragraph is true, sure it is suspect. I was commenting on your misinterpretation of what she said in this thread. I don't live in Adrienne's DMs sadly.

Again I agree in principle, but that's not what you said. You said a hypothetical response to a specific prompt which included being the victim of an aggression was the same as a hypothetical, unprompted, aggressive war.

Edited by Hodor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, alyster said:

At first Roq tried to spin that story, claiming to have logs.

 

This is indeed true. I just don't see the need in posting it here and burning the person. Those logs played a huge role in convincing us of the necessity for hitting TKR at that start of all of this. 

21 minutes ago, Nizam Adrienne said:

That's not what I said at all but okay.

 

Your cop-out was "this war." Thanks for playing. 

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Shadowthrone said:

This is indeed true. I just don't see the need in posting it here and burning the person. Those logs played a huge role in convincing us of the necessity for hitting TKR at that start of all of this. 

Your cop-out was "this war." Thanks for playing. 

Those logs would do a fabulous job convincing me that you genuinely havent tried to frick tS over.

 

If they are indeed incriminating.

  • Like 1

 

os9LcJK.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Prefonteen said:

Those logs would do a fabulous job convincing me that you genuinely havent tried to frick tS over.

 

If they are indeed incriminating.

? looking forward to share friend.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Prefonteen said:

Those logs would do a fabulous job convincing me that you genuinely havent tried to frick tS over.

 

If they are indeed incriminating.

Or if they existed.

If they show you, though, feel free to share. I've pretty consistently said (in fact, I first said it about a lie before they even came up with this one, and they came up with nothing that time too) that if TKR did say anything like that, they'd have a problem with CoS as well, since they'd also have lied to me. Seems a pretty good way to unseat the horrible TKR would-be hegemony that totally isn't fictional would be to just release the totally-not-fabricated CB for this war, but alas.

Slaughter the shits of the world. They poison the air you breathe.

 

~ William S. Burroughs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't be bothered to read everything here, and many of you know I avoid the OWF, but I did noticed this...

On 10/4/2019 at 2:09 PM, Roquentin said:

At the same time, tS feigned some interest in hitting KETOG which changed into rolling BK when Kayser disappeared.

Since when can t$ actually hitting KETOG be rephrased as t$ merely feigning interest in hitting KETOG?

That's some Olympic-level verbal gymnastics right there. I want to see those Chinese Olympians' birth certificates verifying their age. 

Edited by Flame of the Flawed
double post
  • Like 5

a.k.a. Chaunce

 

Chaunce - Today at 9:55 PM
with the watermelons there isn't much space left
I still have a lot of room to improve
 
Manthrax Has Venomous Bite! - Today at 9:57 PM
Hee hee. Room indeed.
 
Sabriel - Today at 10:01 PM
I feel like, if the other AAs knew how we act, they'd feel a deep sense of shame in knowing that they consistently get beat by us.
when we talk about how many vegetables we can fit in Chaunce's ass.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Prefonteen said:

Those logs would do a fabulous job convincing me that you genuinely havent tried to frick tS over.

 

If they are indeed incriminating.

Here:

SpacemanThrax06/17/2019
I think we should pre-empt NPO/t$

Adrienne06/17/2019
Not yet, BK man bad,
Suppress BK, then swing and die under the Jackboot of Pacifica and the Wallet of t$

  • Haha 4
  • Downvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Here:

SpacemanThrax06/17/2019
I think we should pre-empt NPO/t$

Adrienne06/17/2019
Not yet, BK man bad,
Suppress BK, then swing and die under the Jackboot of Pacifica and the Wallet of t$

Straight up I'm not ruling out your gov using that as a "legit" log later.

Slaughter the shits of the world. They poison the air you breathe.

 

~ William S. Burroughs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Shadowthrone said:

This is indeed true. I just don't see the need in posting it here and burning the person. Those logs played a huge role in convincing us of the necessity for hitting TKR at that start of all of this. 

Your cop-out was "this war." Thanks for playing. 

So even my attempts to speak clearly will be spun? Neat.

  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 1

BrOQBND.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Spaceman Thrax said:

So what else is new. Cheating anime nazis, you say? Great stuff, great stuff. Stay classy, IQ sphere. Missed you!

It’s ok because AK is on their side.

They’re now more worried about Baseball nerf.

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, George (James T Kirk) said:

 

Ok Ill bite here,

 

We looked into this to the best of our ability. So while a government member had cheated the circumstances are completely different than the nova incident your referring to    

 

1. In the nova incident there was the beliefe that they were cheating for a long period of time, where the AK incident indicated to a sole incident 

2. The Nova incident included multiple gov members where the AK incident was one sole gov member

3. With the nova incident, the "damage had been done" with millions of resources sold and cities bought. Where in the AK incident the money had not been spent and was recovered by Alex 

 

So while im not condoning cheating, there is no evidence to prove AK gov remaining had any idea this was being exploited. Therefore action really was not needed, BK does not condone cheating by anyone, allies or not 

Aside from the fact that's it's known AKs leader learned of the ability to do this a day before said line gov member started it.

And that's from someone else in your Coalition saying they told them. ?

I, do not buy it. Not with the big heads they have.

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.