Placentica Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 Two top dogs duking it out, whoever wins could potentially define politics in the game for some time after this. Anyone who doesn't give a !@#$ is an idiot or inactive. This. Why do we even play if not to nerdgasm over stuff like this? Hello! If you don't like this post please go here: https://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?app=core&module=usercp&tab=core&area=ignoredusers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 Planning how to deal with.a huge bloc there is no sin in that . Of course that wouldn't justify an attack. I definately agree with that. Let me ask you this. In real life what do you expect the respective government in countries where you are living in to do when they learnt of plans by terrorist organisation to strike them and cause massive damage . Ie the 911 attack in US?. I supossed they should just sit and do nothing. Let the terrorist strike when they are ready. Because any preventive action to prevent the terrorist attack including effort to hunt the terrorist mastermind is unacceptable and deemed aggressive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Placentica Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 EoS carried out reactionary measures. They didn't attack because they held some sort of contempt for TAC -- it was purely in response to them plotting against EoS and the rest of TC. Therefore it's very much a non aggressive move. And yet here we sit, EoS attacking TAC. And UPN oA chaining in. Sorry, but I don't like pre-emption reason. "Oh they WERE going to attack us though!!!11!!!11!!". It's not defensive to pre-empt someone. It's purely aggressive. We attack people we don't like, that's fine. Just own it like a man and admit that EoS bit off more than it can chew and now needs UPN/VoC to clean up it's mess. You all should've just attacked together. I've seen alliances, similar to how you are trying to spin this, play the defensive card over and over again, when you are just blatant aggressors. It's not a big deal, but that's what it is. Hello! If you don't like this post please go here: https://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?app=core&module=usercp&tab=core&area=ignoredusers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 Show me the log that says EOS bite more than it can chew and need Voc and UPN to clean its mess Oh quick contact your spies in our private chain. I am sure the log is somewhere . I can't find it at that the moment. Shit how could I forgot where I saved those logs. Sorry me bad. Really amusing a pure simple defensive and preventive measure can be spin into being aggresive. Wow you guys are really the best spin doctors in the entire universe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shellhound Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 (edited) [12:17] <%Carter0912> underlordgc [12:17] <%Carter0912> Can we beat your DoW too [12:17] <%Carter0912> [12:18] <underlordgc> what [12:18] <underlordgc> ? [12:18] <Ghost> UPN nations declared on TAC ones. [12:18] <%Carter0912> ^ [12:18] <%SeryozhaNikanor> FUUUUUUUUUUUCK [12:18] <Ghost> Carter's pretty much asking are you guys DoWing. [12:18] <Ghost> Or no? [12:18] <underlordgc> well [12:18] <%Carter0912> P much [12:18] <underlordgc> TSG guys attacked EoS tand switched to TAC [12:19] <underlordgc> so who knows [12:19] <%Carter0912> Ok so yes [12:19] <Ghost> Interesting response. I bet UPN does at least, or will they back peddle and let EoS stand by itself. Who knows. I'd be willing to put money on it though. Edited October 25, 2014 by Shellhound 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayayay Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 (edited) [12:17] <%Carter0912> underlordgc [12:17] <%Carter0912> Can we beat your DoW too [12:17] <%Carter0912> [12:18] <underlordgc> what [12:18] <underlordgc> ? [12:18] <Ghost> UPN nations declared on TAC ones. [12:18] <%Carter0912> ^ [12:18] <%SeryozhaNikanor> FUUUUUUUUUUUCK [12:18] <Ghost> Carter's pretty much asking are you guys DoWing. [12:18] <Ghost> Or no? [12:18] <underlordgc> well [12:18] <%Carter0912> P much [12:18] <underlordgc> TSG guys attacked EoS tand switched to TAC [12:19] <underlordgc> so who knows [12:19] <%Carter0912> Ok so yes [12:19] <Ghost> Interesting response. I bet UPN does, but will VoC? lol k [13:31:09] <underlordgc> kicked [13:31:15] <underlordgc> do0 wjhat you want to them [13:31:59] <underlordgc> * do what Something, something propaganda Edited October 25, 2014 by underlordgc Orbis Wars | CSI: UPN | B I G O O F | PW Expert Has Nerve To Tell You How To Run Your Own Goddamn Alliance | Occupy Wall Street | Sheepy Sings TheNG - My favorite part is when Steve suggests DEIC might have done something remotely successful, then gets massively shit on for proposing such a stupid idea. On 1/4/2016 at 6:37 PM, Sheepy said: This was !@#$ing gold. 10/10 possibly my favorite post on these forums yet. Sheepy said: I'm retarded, you win Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shellhound Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 (edited) lol k [13:31:09] <underlordgc> kicked [13:31:15] <underlordgc> do0 wjhat you want to them [13:31:59] <underlordgc> * do what Kicking people for declaring before they were supposed to is a good move, if they can't follow basic orders they should be kicked out. Edited October 25, 2014 by Shellhound Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenages Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 (edited) I'm pretty sure when Placentica says UPN is coming in to clean up it's mess he's referring to the fact that 2 UPN nations have declared war on TAC. Meaning either UPN is coming into the conflict in support of EoS, or these nations are going rogue. And look dude I've been !@#$ting on TAC as much as anyone. But it's simply laughable to pretend that the spin doctors are the ones trying to claim EoS is the aggressor. The spin doctors are you and the others claiming they aren't. EoS launched the first attacks, and started a war with TAC. They are the aggressors. Period. Any war you start is an aggressive war. That's not a bad thing necessarily. Just own it. What makes y'all look bad is the sad and pathetic verbal gymnastics you're engaging in to try and avoid that label. EDIT: Correction, it was 1 UPN member and 1 applicant who attacked, and they've since been moved to applicant and kicked respectively. So, for now, rogues. Edited October 25, 2014 by Tenages Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shellhound Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 And Jesus Christ quit being !@#$ about it, a pre-empt is an aggressive action to take out a threat before it becomes to big of a threat. I don't mind pre-empts and think they're a valid move, but don't be a little !@#$ about it ffs. http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=97693 Read that, that's how you pre-empt somebody. Grow a pair and own up to what this is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hereno Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 Two top dogs duking it out, whoever wins could potentially define politics in the game for some time after this. Anyone who doesn't give a !@#$ is an idiot or inactive. the key words there being "potentially" and "some time after this" not that you addressed the main point of my post but who ever does? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shellhound Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 If the game lasts for years like (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) then what happens now won't be extremely relevant 5 years down the road, it's relevant now though and for the foreseeable future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Placentica Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 (edited) I'm pretty sure when Placentica says UPN is coming in to clean up it's mess he's referring to the fact that 2 UPN nations have declared war on TAC. Meaning either UPN is coming into the conflict in support of EoS, or these nations are going rogue. And look dude I've been !@#$ting on TAC as much as anyone. But it's simply laughable to pretend that the spin doctors are the ones trying to claim EoS is the aggressor. The spin doctors are you and the others claiming they aren't. EoS launched the first attacks, and started a war with TAC. They are the aggressors. Period. Any war you start is an aggressive war. That's not a bad thing necessarily. Just own it. What makes y'all look bad is the sad and pathetic verbal gymnastics you're engaging in to try and avoid that label. EDIT: Correction, it was 1 UPN member and 1 applicant who attacked, and they've since been moved to applicant and kicked respectively. So, for now, rogues. This. It's not a big deal, just own it boys. Aurum Lumens was a UPN member too when he attacked TAC and just reapplied after he was booted, lol. I'm put a lot of money on him rejoining UPN at some point in the future pre/post-war. Edited October 25, 2014 by Placentica Hello! If you don't like this post please go here: https://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?app=core&module=usercp&tab=core&area=ignoredusers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Memph Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 Planning how to deal with.a huge bloc there is no sin in that . Of course that wouldn't justify an attack. I definately agree with that. Let me ask you this. In real life what do you expect the respective government in countries where you are living in to do when they learnt of plans by terrorist organisation to strike them and cause massive damage . Ie the 911 attack in US?. I supossed they should just sit and do nothing. Let the terrorist strike when they are ready. Because any preventive action to prevent the terrorist attack including effort to hunt the terrorist mastermind is unacceptable and deemed aggressive. What TAC was doing is probably similar to what the USA/USSR/Russia/China and really any rival powers do which is plan how to deal with the potential threat their rivals pose. And BTW I'm sure in many cases they have intel of their rivals making such plans. In your terrorist example, the terrorist group is likely planning to attack someone that isn't a threat to them, especially since they usually target civilians. TAC saw PPC as a threat so it's different. There's also a difference between discussing hypothetical scenarios 2 months ago and something more concrete and recent, like if you were to get leaked info 1-2 days before declaring that Pubstomper told his membership to stockpile resources and begin military build up because they're going to go to war with EoS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George W. Bush Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 Hey guise what's going on here? You're no longer protecting the II? We have still teamed with II and TAC (and others) to rival The Covenants. This is getting complex. #FA_Problems Big problems for TSG. Really, not kidding. If Casey and Cyradis are King and Queen does that mean they're married? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kappa Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 meh... aggressor or defender, tomato or tomato, peaceful control is what is desired. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saru Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 (edited) And look dude I've been !@#$ting on TAC as much as anyone. But it's simply laughable to pretend that the spin doctors are the ones trying to claim EoS is the aggressor. The spin doctors are you and the others claiming they aren't. EoS launched the first attacks, and started a war with TAC. They are the aggressors. Period. Any war you start is an aggressive war. That's not a bad thing necessarily. Just own it. What makes y'all look bad is the sad and pathetic verbal gymnastics you're engaging in to try and avoid that label. The amount of ignorance in this post is unreal -- it's laughable that you are talking in such objective terms, when in reality each situation should be judged on a case by case basis. You are totally ignoring the fact that EoS were responding to a very tangible threat. Perhaps you should consider reading about pre-emptive strikes in the context of the law, and then you would learn that it is very much possible to be a defendant whilst being the first to strike. "Any war you start is an aggressive war." -- That's the key. Empire of Spades DID NOT start this particular war, because not only was there very valid justification for doing so, but there was no malice towards TAC before this and it was a purely a reactive measure. A reaction to TAC's actions, which were very much malicious and aggressive. And Jesus Christ quit being !@#$ about it, a pre-empt is an aggressive action to take out a threat before it becomes to big of a threat. I don't mind pre-empts and think they're a valid move, but don't be a little !@#$ about it ffs. http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=97693 Read that, that's how you pre-empt somebody. Grow a pair and own up to what this is. You are operating on an assumption that our FA is based primarily on seeking out power, and doing whatever we can to move towards that goal. But that simply was not the case... The semantics of this particular situation are of little meaning to us. But it's odd seeing several of you trying to lump in every single pre-empt into the same bracket, as if other variables don't exist. Context is key. Edited October 26, 2014 by Saru Second in Command of UPN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Placentica Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 meh... aggressor or defender, tomato or tomato, peaceful control is what is desired. The bolded part is my feelings as well, that's why I'm not sure why you guys are trying to act like EoS weren't the aggressors. Hello! If you don't like this post please go here: https://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?app=core&module=usercp&tab=core&area=ignoredusers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solomon Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 Empire of Spades DID NOT start this particular war, because not only was there very valid justification for doing so, but there was no malice towards TAC before this and it was a purely a reactionary measure. A reaction to TAC's actions, which were very much malicious and aggressive. That's a poor attempt at spin. You sound as if you've been forced into a corner where you have to defend a line you don't really believe in. btw, "reactionary" means "conservative". The word you're looking for is "reactive". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saru Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 (edited) That's a poor attempt at spin. You sound as if you've been forced into a corner where you have to defend a line you don't really believe in. btw, "reactionary" means "conservative". The word you're looking for is "reactive". In what way is it wrong? Had TAC not plotted against them, this war wouldn't be happening. Generally people criticising without mentioning the specifics of what is wrong with the argument, aren't making any points of substance. In regards to your claim about me defending a position I was forced into, what purpose does that serve? I think we all know that the forums are of very little practical use. PS: Post corrected. Thanks. Edited October 26, 2014 by Saru Second in Command of UPN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seryozha Nikanor Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 In what way is it wrong? Had TAC not plotted against them, this war wouldn't be happening. Generally people criticising without mentioning the specifics of what is wrong with the argument, aren't making any points of substance. In regards to your claim about me defending a position I was forced into, what purpose does that serve? I think we all know that the forums are of very little practical use. PS: Post corrected. Thanks. In what way did we plot against them? We recognized you as a potential threat. Thats it. We've gone through this already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saru Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 In what way did we plot against them? We recognized you as a potential threat. Thats it. We've gone through this already. I have very good reason to believe that you were set on going through with it, and weren't merely just discussing your options. Although that's neither here or there given that I am not going to divulge this information publicly. There have already been enough logs leaked that make TAC look bad. Second in Command of UPN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 (edited) In what way did we plot against them? We recognized you as a potential threat. Thats it. We've gone through this already. After getting those leak logs, ( doesnt matter how long ago it was,and also grandmother stories that came along with it), what do you expect EOS to do? Say thank you and give you warm hug? Well judging from the spin doctors comment, i reakon the only reaction that EOS is entitled to is to give a warm hug to TAC for their plotting and schemings. Everything other than that, is aggresive. Edited October 26, 2014 by vincentsum8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shellhound Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 In what way is it wrong? Had TAC not plotted against them, this war wouldn't be happening. Generally people criticising without mentioning the specifics of what is wrong with the argument, aren't making any points of substance. In regards to your claim about me defending a position I was forced into, what purpose does that serve? I think we all know that the forums are of very little practical use. PS: Post corrected. Thanks. actually this war wouldn't have happened had eos not attacked them. Eos attacked first tac responded to the attacks. I've been talking to TAC for about 2 weeks on the subject, they've been prepping for a defensive war and had been planning that eos would attack them. Since we're log dumping I'll so that when I get home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saru Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 actually this war wouldn't have happened had eos not attacked them. It's highly probable that it would of, albeit slightly later, and with TAC having the extra advantage of striking first. Second in Command of UPN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hereno Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 actually this war wouldn't have happened had eos not attacked them. Eos attacked first tac responded to the attacks. I've been talking to TAC for about 2 weeks on the subject, they've been prepping for a defensive war and had been planning that eos would attack them. Since we're log dumping I'll so that when I get home. they had already talked to both guardian and sk before i was approached on the subject Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts