What reason would Lazarus have to take you at your word? What safety and security would they gain from trusting a group that has harmed them so?
Advertisement
by Syberis » Wed Jan 23, 2019 6:40 am
Zaolat wrote:WHO THE F*** IS SYBERIS
by Consular » Wed Jan 23, 2019 7:54 am
by Pierconium » Wed Jan 23, 2019 10:16 am
Consular wrote:Pierconium wrote:As I have no small say in the policy direction of the NPO and I have never attacked Lazarus, why would we be ‘seeking to attack Lazarus’ now?
While I actually do believe you, eventually you'll want to step down again, and someone else will take over again and do bad things again. It's like clockwork.
by Bhang Bhang Duc » Wed Jan 23, 2019 10:29 am
Pierconium wrote:Consular wrote:While I actually do believe you, eventually you'll want to step down again, and someone else will take over again and do bad things again. It's like clockwork.
Maybe this time I will decide to stick around long enough to see the sea change I thought I had started last time around take better root.
I do not blame Lazarus for being weary at all in general terms, but as I am at present in position to influence NPO policy it is difficult for me to accept the idea that we must be currently seeking to attack Lazarus in some way (outside of the fact that they have declared war on the NPO and continue to support calls for our destruction of course).
Pierconium wrote:I see Funk as an opportunistic manipulator that utilises the means available to him to reach his goals. In other words, a nation after my own heart.
RiderSyl wrote:If an enchantress made it so one raid could bring about world peace, Unibot would ask raiders to just sign a petition instead.
Sedgistan wrote:The SC has just has a spate of really shitty ones recently from Northumbria, his Watermelon fanboy…..
by Pierconium » Wed Jan 23, 2019 10:30 am
Bhang Bhang Duc wrote:Pierconium wrote:Maybe this time I will decide to stick around long enough to see the sea change I thought I had started last time around take better root.
I do not blame Lazarus for being weary at all in general terms, but as I am at present in position to influence NPO policy it is difficult for me to accept the idea that we must be currently seeking to attack Lazarus in some way (outside of the fact that they have declared war on the NPO and continue to support calls for our destruction of course).
You go away for 18 months and on your return you find some things never change. Hi Ivan.
by Myrth » Wed Jan 23, 2019 12:49 pm
New Rogernomics wrote:
Ultimately, how far the war progresses is up to how it escalates. Right now at the very least the New Pacific Order and Lazarus are in a cold war, as while we are at war with them, it hasn't taken the form of us attempting to raid/invade the NPO directly. We haven't escalated action to more than allowing our citizens of their own accord to participate in operations against the New Pacific Order, and that activity hasn't been directed by the Lazarene government.
by Lord Dominator » Wed Jan 23, 2019 4:39 pm
Myrth wrote:The NPO is, was, and always shall be the Pacific
by Aclion » Wed Jan 23, 2019 4:42 pm
by The Gilded Star » Wed Jan 23, 2019 5:27 pm
by Lord Dominator » Wed Jan 23, 2019 5:34 pm
The Gilded Star wrote:Lord Dominator wrote:Unless you're playing with some 1984-esque stuff over there, the NPO can not have always been The Pacific given the defined start date some number of months after NS started
#PedantsUnite!
The Order was one with the Pacific. The Order had always been one with the Pacific.
by Pierconium » Wed Jan 23, 2019 5:38 pm
Lord Dominator wrote:The Gilded Star wrote:
The Order was one with the Pacific. The Order had always been one with the Pacific.
Technically a true statement, given that the NPO has never existed as not ruling The Pacific. The problem is simply that Myrth wrote it in such a way that it implies that The Pacific has never been ruled by anyone not of the NPO.
by Lord Dominator » Wed Jan 23, 2019 5:41 pm
Pierconium wrote:Lord Dominator wrote:Technically a true statement, given that the NPO has never existed as not ruling The Pacific. The problem is simply that Myrth wrote it in such a way that it implies that The Pacific has never been ruled by anyone not of the NPO.
Considering how many of the nations that served as Delegate prior to August 2003 ended up in the NPO it isn’t too far from the truth.
Also, I have often held the moniker Big Brother in the Pacific so the newspeak isn’t too off base.
by The Gilded Star » Wed Jan 23, 2019 5:41 pm
Lord Dominator wrote:Technically a true statement, given that the NPO has never existed as not ruling The Pacific. The problem is simply that Myrth wrote it in such a way that it implies that The Pacific has never been ruled by anyone not of the NPO.
by Lord Dominator » Wed Jan 23, 2019 5:45 pm
The Gilded Star wrote:Lord Dominator wrote:Technically a true statement, given that the NPO has never existed as not ruling The Pacific. The problem is simply that Myrth wrote it in such a way that it implies that The Pacific has never been ruled by anyone not of the NPO.
Crap you're right, I should have flipped the names around.
by New Rogernomics » Wed Jan 23, 2019 6:45 pm
Yeah, though Myrth isn't getting that given the war, if there was a regime change in The Pacific under the premise of war, it would be a positive consequence. You don't even need to be at war with a region to respond positively to regime change either, you just need to not like their govt structure or their flag or what not.
by Pierconium » Thu Jan 24, 2019 1:39 am
New Rogernomics wrote:Yeah, though Myrth isn't getting that given the war, if there was a regime change in The Pacific under the premise of war, it would be a positive consequence. You don't even need to be at war with a region to respond positively to regime change either, you just need to not like their govt structure or their flag or what not.Lord Dominator wrote:Unless you're playing with some 1984-esque stuff over there, the NPO can not have always been The Pacific given the defined start date some number of months after NS started
#PedantsUnite!
That said, never ending pages of arguments on minor semantic points seems to be the common trait of the Gameplay forum threads. So Myrth should probably carry on, so that we are in the running some day for longest gameplay thread.
by Wycliffe » Thu Jan 24, 2019 5:48 am
Pierconium wrote:New Rogernomics wrote:Yeah, though Myrth isn't getting that given the war, if there was a regime change in The Pacific under the premise of war, it would be a positive consequence. You don't even need to be at war with a region to respond positively to regime change either, you just need to not like their govt structure or their flag or what not.
That said, never ending pages of arguments on minor semantic points seems to be the common trait of the Gameplay forum threads. So Myrth should probably carry on, so that we are in the running some day for longest gameplay thread.
I always find this sort of hypocrisy amusing. I understand that Lazarus is upset with the NPO because of our past interference with your region. But, there is this phrase about two wrongs that comes to mind when I see the calls from others to see our region couped or otherwise thrown into chaos. First, the population of the Pacific generally supports the NPO and has for an extended period of time. Second, the NPO is recognised by most regions as the legitimate government of the Pacific. So the premise with which you fight this supposed war is simply that we took your toys and now you want to take ours in return.
In order for the cycle to actually stop the realisation that this sort of tit for tat produces nothing but harm must be arrived at mutually.
by New Rogernomics » Thu Jan 24, 2019 6:40 am
Pierconium wrote:New Rogernomics wrote:Yeah, though Myrth isn't getting that given the war, if there was a regime change in The Pacific under the premise of war, it would be a positive consequence. You don't even need to be at war with a region to respond positively to regime change either, you just need to not like their govt structure or their flag or what not.
That said, never ending pages of arguments on minor semantic points seems to be the common trait of the Gameplay forum threads. So Myrth should probably carry on, so that we are in the running some day for longest gameplay thread.
I always find this sort of hypocrisy amusing. I understand that Lazarus is upset with the NPO because of our past interference with your region. But, there is this phrase about two wrongs that comes to mind when I see the calls from others to see our region couped or otherwise thrown into chaos. First, the population of the Pacific generally supports the NPO and has for an extended period of time. Second, the NPO is recognised by most regions as the legitimate government of the Pacific. So the premise with which you fight this supposed war is simply that we took your toys and now you want to take ours in return.
In order for the cycle to actually stop the realisation that this sort of tit for tat produces nothing but harm must be arrived at mutually.
by Pierconium » Fri Jan 25, 2019 12:44 am
by New Rogernomics » Fri Jan 25, 2019 3:33 am
How you wish to hypnotize your national or regional population is your choice, and isn't my problem. I prefer doing work to this pointless gameplay chat though. Enjoy the thread till next NPO triggering issue.Pierconium wrote:However you wish to rationalise your hypocrisy is, of course, your choice.
by Pierconium » Fri Jan 25, 2019 3:52 am
New Rogernomics wrote:How you wish to hypnotize your national or regional population is your choice, and isn't my problem. I prefer doing work to this pointless gameplay chat though. Enjoy the thread till next NPO triggering issue.Pierconium wrote:However you wish to rationalise your hypocrisy is, of course, your choice.
by Cormactopia Prime » Fri Jan 25, 2019 9:43 am
Pierconium wrote:However you wish to rationalise your hypocrisy is, of course, your choice.
by Pierconium » Fri Jan 25, 2019 9:46 am
Cormactopia Prime wrote:Pierconium wrote:However you wish to rationalise your hypocrisy is, of course, your choice.
Was it hypocrisy when the Allies oversaw regime change following WWII?
The NPO has attacked Lazarus multiple times. By your logic, no matter how many times the NPO attacks other regions, it is always hypocritical and never justified for other regions to declare war against the NPO. Funny how that works. I didn't realize you had become such a pacifist that you now believe there is never any justification for war. Or is it only war against the NPO that is never justified?
by Cormactopia Prime » Fri Jan 25, 2019 9:49 am
Pierconium wrote:Cormactopia Prime wrote:Was it hypocrisy when the Allies oversaw regime change following WWII?
The NPO has attacked Lazarus multiple times. By your logic, no matter how many times the NPO attacks other regions, it is always hypocritical and never justified for other regions to declare war against the NPO. Funny how that works. I didn't realize you had become such a pacifist that you now believe there is never any justification for war. Or is it only war against the NPO that is never justified?
Thank you for once again comparing me with Nazis. Seems to be a running pattern. I didn’t bother to even read the rest of your tripe.
by Myrth » Fri Jan 25, 2019 11:24 am
New Rogernomics wrote:Yeah, though Myrth isn't getting that given the war, if there was a regime change in The Pacific under the premise of war, it would be a positive consequence. You don't even need to be at war with a region to respond positively to regime change either, you just need to not like their govt structure or their flag or what not.
That said, never ending pages of arguments on minor semantic points seems to be the common trait of the Gameplay forum threads. So Myrth should probably carry on, so that we are in the running some day for longest gameplay thread.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Todd McCloud
Advertisement