|
NATO
Jun 1, 2007 4:46:03 GMT -5
Post by deyreepher on Jun 1, 2007 4:46:03 GMT -5
"So yes, I want to play in the NCT, but no I don't want to play for Team USA for personal reasons and the ones I've just mentioned in this post" That's an interesting point. I think somewhere in the forum it's stated that you must play for your nation. Sure the rule can come in in gray area(double nationality)., but here it's not. Let me go over this again. If you are going to bash NATO for having members who have no connections with the country in question, then you should be bashing Longhorn and Team Australia. Though, to Longhorn's credit he did withdraw from the team after it was pointed out that he basically has no connections to Australia other than the players know and trust him. I would have had no problems with him playing for Team Australia, a team that needed players. Your statement(in my view) cross the red line. With such statement, every player can play in every team. I have no opinion on your reason(assume that you have very good reasons), however I think you are violating the rule. That's the same thing if I would create a team Europe because I don't want to play in french team. Or south hemisphere because I don't want to play in such a country. Well all these word to say, it's probably better in your case from do not participate to the NC(because you don't want to play for USA) rather using trick like NATO. That's fine, that's you, but it's not me. Polydeukes had his reason for not playing with Team Germany, I won't go into them, but he did say he would play on my team. Rokkit did not want to play with Team UK, which is now the Commonwealth, he had his reasons so to bring these two players into my fold I got a little creative. I only merely followed precedent in trying to get a few more players in my roster, in that I took the lead that the Commonwealth team did. The NATO roster only really has 10 active players on it, all from the US, minus Polydeukes and Rokkit. The main point to merge several countries is to get a team, not to reject a team for personnal reason, or to make poor other teams. Well, how many countries are allowed to merge together to form a team if they have the minimum amount of players to form a team? With longhorn, Team Australia had the bare minimum as did Team Canada. Team UK had enough to field a team as well. Yet all 3 banded together to form the Commonwealth. I'm not going to complain about it, but I will point out the hypocrisy. We add 2 players not from the US, follow the Commonwealth's precedent in forming a regional/cultural bloc for the NCT and we are the one to catch flak, not them. In my view NATO team violate the concept of nation's cup in at least two point: - You must play for team USA because it's your nation. or you cannot come in the NC. - The aim of merge team is allowed to get a decent roster, not to make poor roster from others nation or for personnal reasons. and so is not eligible to come in the NC because contrary to the spirit of NC. No offense deyreepher, just my point. chris. This is a valid point. However, there were 2 Teams representing the US when I came up with NATO. I thought it would have been redundant to have a 3rd. I mean, would being the Confederate States of America have made things more palatable? The Confederate States did recieve much help from the Europeans. Now you possibly can't have a problem with a country having more than 1 team representing them as the French have fielded 2 teams. I certainly don't have a problem with it, but I'll point out they fielded 2 teams and there were 2 American teams when I registered NATO. Ok, so I came up with a decent roster, it was my polite way of saying, no thanks, I don't want to play with a team that doesn't have any sort of organization whatsoever. We have no contact info, no strategy, no practice games, and nobody knows what events are being assigned to who. So, I've retorted. I think I made valid points and they definitely followed precedents to where there were no objections. I'm sorry, if I'm a competitive person. It is a tournament, I want to win it, therefore I will field the best possible team I can. I think people overlook the fact that the for fun games where you mix with other people are your standard fare of Random/Shuffle teamers. Why those don't count as games where you mix with others and play with new people is beyond me. As competitive as those games are, tournaments are that much more so. Maybe that's the problem with the ladder community, the majority just aren't competitive enough. I mean, how hungry are you to win? I know the French clans are and the RUS clan is, who are among the clans whom I have an immense amount of respect for. Individual players among the other clans, I acknowledge their prowress, I'm not the best player, but I feel that they are hampered by dead weight and could be even more competitive if they would streamline their clans and follow the example of the French and RUS clans. But granted, this is the Nation's Cup. If you look at the French teams, you'll see that one fields a far stronger team than the other. Coincidence? I don't really think so. So what's the problem here?
|
|
|
NATO
Jun 1, 2007 5:09:07 GMT -5
Post by deyreepher on Jun 1, 2007 5:09:07 GMT -5
Dey are you slowed? You took a clan and entered them in nation cup. My roster for team World: GOD Roster Do you not see the problem here? This is not CCC and you just made it CCC. Maybe you can screw up Knupp's tournament too. With the whole premise being playing with other people not in your clan. If I was a real ass, I would have entered Team UN. As it is, there were only 2 players that were interested in playing with the team I had setup who weren't American. As I've said in other posts, if you're going to rag on NATO, I think you should be making an equal argument against the Commonwealth. In fact, I could be making a far stronger argument that NATO has a stronger place in the NCT than the Commonwealth does. The Commonwealth is comprised of nations that share a cultural heritage or were victims of imperialism during the UK's hey day. It mainly benefits 3rd world victims of British imperialism in that citizens of those Commonwealth countries have it a bit better than others in immigrating to the UK. NATO, on the other hand, is a viable regional bloc that protects the interests of its member nations. Though it's debatable as to whether NATO is really a relevant organization in today's day and age, the Russians would say otherwise. Just give it a few years when they add Cyberwarfare to their area of responsibilities. The Russian DDOS attacks on Estonia will definitely put it on NATO's agenda. It's not the CCC, but it is a competitive event. Why would I dilute the strength of the strongest possible team I could field? It's fairly pointless. As I said earlier, I was not the first to field multiple teams from the same area, you can look at the two French teams, you will see that one is definitely stronger than the other. That is probably not a coincidence and it gave the idea to break off from Team America. However, what would the ladder community have me say? "You suck, you're noobs," it's along the lines of thought that I had going at the time. I've been as polite as I can be on the topic, but it just happens to be that I can field a team with synergy and knows what is expected. My question to the ladder community is..."How competitive is too competitive?" Do I have to fall in line with everybody else and accept that the ladder is only for fun? Is it wrong to want to win in an event that will eventually be as prestigious as the CCC for the ladder? I would like to think yes, but the impressions I am getting is no. If these tournaments aren't supposed to be competitive, than what is the point in hosting them? As I recall, Levi put up alot of tournaments on the weekends when he was the newly appointed Head TD. They were marginally successful, but probably not as much as he'd have liked them to have been. So that just leaves the CCC, the COTs, and now the NCT. If these tournaments aren't supposed to be competitive, than what is the point in hosting them?
|
|
|
NATO
Jun 1, 2007 5:27:12 GMT -5
Post by holocanthe on Jun 1, 2007 5:27:12 GMT -5
So LKT's nation (if i change name ;D ) can play Nation's cup
|
|
|
NATO
Jun 1, 2007 5:37:37 GMT -5
Post by deyreepher on Jun 1, 2007 5:37:37 GMT -5
Once again it seems there are some tense in here I'll try to set up my point of view clearly and quietly. As first statement, i'll say i have a lot of sympathy to Ray. They are great players, team workers, and usually nice people. As i already said, while i had a sucking connection, the only c4p games i played were Ray vs, cuz they were the only c4p players patient enough to handle my connec. As it seems "ray bashing" is a sentence oftenly used to counter other forum posters, take this as a "ray praising" comment. By this way, i hope my post will have a greater impact than other before. Yes, even though he didn't say it, we do have some aholes in our clan. I'll go so far as to point them out, Speaker, Metallian, and to a certain extent, theWiz. We don't condone their actions, it is who they are and for some of our members, it is a pain in the ass to try to repair public relations for any misdoings they have done. You'll see us defending them alot, because that's what a group does, it backs and defends their own. If you haven't noticed, those 3 have toned down their abrasiveness on the ladder, but the bad feelings towards them and towards RaY as a whole still remains. Unfortunate, but that's what I found after my half year hiatus. The Nation cup has been well welcomed on french ladder. There's been a big rush about setting teams, then setting the planning and the trainings. It has been such a good period, full of excitement and freshness. We've been lucky enough to be able to set 2 full teams, of players interested to play together and to defend the France vs other countries. The most interesting part of this is the fact that players from different clans or clanless are mixed together and have to set fitting strats and teamworks in limited time. In my opinion, this should increase the level of all french clans by mixing points of views and game strats, and should also lead to stronger links between players that wouldn't have known each others well. I believe Mansurji knows and appreciates the difficulties in fielding a team for an event as ambitious as the NCT. Sure, you can slap a team together, but what does that lead to if you don't do any preparation to make sure that the team does its best to maximize its strengths. You can't tell me it's fun to go up with a half-assed team that only assembled its team for an event against a team that has been training for a month for said event. You'd best have a team that is really experienced in order to pull it off. Otherwise, things could get ugly as the more experienced players just start talking trash to the lesser experienced members of the team. It promotes animosity between players instead of stronger links. The whole point of the NC is here : mixing players from different clans under a flag within limited time, then send em all into a big fight, with the flag being here nations. What NATO organisation is doing is exactly the opposite, an old school scheme : taking players from different nations and set them in a clan formation, players that knows each others well for playing everyday together. If we want this kind of thing, then we set a clan competition, that we could call, like, say, CCC. I mean, we're here to play France vs Russia, or UK vs US games, then to know which country will be able to taunt his opponents for months. If you guys want to play a France vs Ray, or a Germany vs Ray, we will be pleased to play exhibition match at any time. But don't bring clans where it shouldn't be, into a nation cup. Because this is all about NATIONS! Keep this in my mind, look at what NATO is, then tell me if you do truly think NATO fit into a nations cup. I understand this sentiment. In fact, I didn't think about fielding NATO until I saw the 2 French teams and Team America + Team USA. In conjunction with the Commonwealth gobbling up Team Australia, and later on Team Canada, I don't see why a cultural bloc isn't allowed. The Commonwealth is not a nation, these are individual countries that share some aspect of history/culture, most have the British Queen as their head of state, but other than that, is that so different from NATO that they escape scrutiny? I think it's straight up hypocrisy. NATO has a flag. I've seen it flown in Belgium and in Afghanistan, don't tell me it's not a real organization of nations coming together to work towards a common goal. The perverse effect of NATO being a conglomerate of many nations is to steal players that were already involved in their countries. As i said, we had very few time to prepare this NC, teams leaders get involved to set a planning running correctly, and this should be respected. I'm thinking to the UK and USA teams particulary. Setting a whole new team 2 days before the competition and using other nations players seems to me like an awesome lack of respect to all the captains that tried to set up something correct. All this to say the whole point of NC in my opinion is mixing players from different clans into one team fighting for their country, all together despite their difference. It's not much about winning, but about having epic games of nation's champions fighting, and this is a great idea. Please guys don't f*ck up this by wanting to play it with people you play everyday with, and by laughing at the "nation" idea. Who is messing with the NCT and making a joke out of it? I am serious when I say I have serious issues with playing for a country I don't believe in. Let me go into my personal history so that you understand. I'm an ethnic Korean, whose parents met in Germany. My father was a US serviceman (and still is 30 years later) and my mother was a nurse and a German citizen, both are ethnic Koreans. My father's side of the family has ties to North Korea in that we have family members on the other side of the border. I was in the military and saw the hole Iraq fiasco go down the crapper, even before it started. I went to Afghanistan twice, and though I feel we were let down there by the US govt in its commitment to Afghanistan, I don't regret our reasons for going there. However, I do have a gripe with the US government for its abuse of the military in Iraq. Though we're an immigrant family in the US, in two generations we've managed to serve a combined 88 years of military service among the family that immigrated, so don't say we haven't done our part. So, when I say it's disappointing what's been done by our government, I mean it. Again, the bullying of N.Korea by the US is another point of contention for me. As a Russian/Korean history language specialist, I find the current policy towards N.Korea as horrific. So, I'm going to do what we didn't do in Iraq. Play this out under a multi-national flag that has a decent enough record that I feel I can morally play under. What's the problem with that? The NCT is a competitive event and I found a workaround solution to be able to participate under a framework that I find acceptable. To be honest, I had totally forgotten about the Nation's Cup as I've been in the process of a move. It was brought to my attention a few days ago that the Nation's Cup was soon and was sort of dismayed that the majority of my clan had no intentions of playing. Knowing they are Civ junkies and there would be no ladder games for them during the Nation's Cup, I managed to convince them to play. Again, what is wrong with that? I provided them a framework under which they felt they would participate in. Does it truly make a difference that we're not playing with the rest of the Americans? If so, then where is the outrage over the two French clans? If not, then what is the problem? Is it the two non-Americans that we made accommodations for? I'll repeat again, that the other teams made decisions that I based my actions on. There was at least a day or two for ladder members to voice their opinions on the examples I cited in this and other posts, when none ensued, I registered Team NATO and damn near immediately I hear complaints. How am I supposed to interpret this? Is there a double standard going on? I feel my argument is water tight based on the examples have cited. [/quote]
|
|
Juni
Worker
Posts: 137
|
NATO
Jun 1, 2007 5:58:08 GMT -5
Post by Juni on Jun 1, 2007 5:58:08 GMT -5
Your personal opinion about what a tournament team should be doesn't matter here dayreepher. You have only two options : accept this tournament like it is and respect its rules and what it has been created for, or just don't play it.
If this team is allowed to play, NC will be a complete nonsense. Many players would be really disappointed (including me) for one guy being happy because he is not able to play with other players than his clanmates. Telle me it's just a bad dream, I'm gonna wake up.
As Mansurji said before, I have much respect and friendship for RaY players, and I seriously expected better from you, guys.
|
|
|
NATO
Jun 1, 2007 5:58:21 GMT -5
Post by deyreepher on Jun 1, 2007 5:58:21 GMT -5
By the way Mansurji, I did not intend to slight you with that post. I am just responding to the points you made and am stating my case. I think you make some valid points, but I also feel that we are being unfairly treated by the community at large (not by the TDs).
|
|
|
NATO
Jun 1, 2007 6:00:45 GMT -5
Post by deyreepher on Jun 1, 2007 6:00:45 GMT -5
Your personal opinion about what a tournament team should be doesn't matter here dayreepher. You have only two options : accept this tournament like it is and respect its rules and what it has been created for, or just don't play it. If this team is allowed to play, NC will be a complete nonsense. Many players would be really disappointed (including me) for one guy being happy because he is not able to play with other players than his clanmates. Telle me it's just a bad dream, I'm gonna wake up. As Mansurji said before, I have much respect for all RaY players, and I seriously expected better from you, guys. That's fine, if I'm forced to play with Team USA, I expect the two French teams to be merged. I also expect the Commonwealth team to be broken up into its component parts. Team UK, Team Canada, and Team Australia. All I ask for is fair treatment. If we have to, we can even shed Rokkit and Poly, then there is no damn reason for contention among the ladder community. With such a small roster, we'll have to skip events, any problems with that?
|
|
|
NATO
Jun 1, 2007 6:04:33 GMT -5
Post by IanDC on Jun 1, 2007 6:04:33 GMT -5
I don't see how you can't grasp the difference between a number of small teams/countries merging to make a team that can compete or a country that has so many players it can make 2 teams and a political grouping like NATO that covers a random collection of countries many of whom already have teams.
I also don't quite get that your unwilling to play for America but are willing to play as NATO an organization whose cornerstone is the USA who you aren't willing to play for. Your only claim to being in NATO in the first place is by virtue of being American so if your renouncing America I don't see the logic of NATO.
|
|
|
NATO
Jun 1, 2007 6:13:29 GMT -5
Post by deyreepher on Jun 1, 2007 6:13:29 GMT -5
I don't see how you can't grasp the difference between a number of small teams/countries merging to make a team that can compete or a country that has so many players it can make 2 teams and a political grouping like NATO that covers a random collection of countries many of whom already have teams. I also don't quite get that your unwilling to play for America but are willing to play as NATO an organization whose cornerstone is the USA who you aren't willing to play for. Your only claim to being in NATO in the first place is by virtue of being American so if your renouncing America I don't see the logic of NATO. As this argument is starting to get old and we've obviously pissed off a lot of the ladder community, as captain, I'm disbanding this team. However, I have registered another team that should be less objectionable and should be far more acceptable to the community. We are making concessions to the point where we cannot successfully compete in this event, but we will make the attempt anyhow.
|
|
|
NATO
Jun 1, 2007 6:22:50 GMT -5
Post by deyreepher on Jun 1, 2007 6:22:50 GMT -5
I don't see how you can't grasp the difference between a number of small teams/countries merging to make a team that can compete or a country that has so many players it can make 2 teams and a political grouping like NATO that covers a random collection of countries many of whom already have teams. I also don't quite get that your unwilling to play for America but are willing to play as NATO an organization whose cornerstone is the USA who you aren't willing to play for. Your only claim to being in NATO in the first place is by virtue of being American so if your renouncing America I don't see the logic of NATO. Good, I'm glad we're in agreement, now since NATO is no longer a team, go ahead and direct your energies to breaking up the Commonwealth team into its constituent teams. There's enough for 3 teams there, 4 if you want to make them the bare minimum, have at it. There's a reason why there's alot of animosity towards the US government in the world today, you can be a firm supporter of the US government and still realize that its out there. Like I said, there's a dichotomy in that worldview as people still view the American people favourably. Sure, I like about half of the population, the other half consists of people who hold views opposed to mine and are unwilling to compromise and are just running the country into the ground. Life is like that, the dichotomy of life.
|
|
|
NATO
Jun 1, 2007 7:17:57 GMT -5
Post by venceslas on Jun 1, 2007 7:17:57 GMT -5
There is two french team because we have enough players to make two team. you can make two usa team if you want.
I'm unsure how old you are in the civ world, but under civ3 they had also several french team at nation's cup. So we feel the right to make two teams, and nobody has said anything, so I assume it's right.
Another point is that both french team are not just a MDR team and a LKT team. We merged players from every clan.
I agree with your posts in many points. I disagree only on the point that I raised in my previous post.
chris.
|
|
|
NATO
Jun 1, 2007 7:33:37 GMT -5
Post by tamijo on Jun 1, 2007 7:33:37 GMT -5
Initiative in it self is great, but you might have expected this. Some countries are to big others too small for this, especialy with the huge amount off events.
Would be more fun to ask for any team off 6-8 players NO 2 CLAN-MEMBERS ALLOWED. That would make up some fun teams
tournament directors, listen to this: It is very competiative people that play in this ladder ! Have to keep that in mind no matter what event you make. They will allways try to tweak the rules into something they can win, so allways make rules VERY clear.
The opposite is infact the case here, rules couldent be more unclear.
|
|
|
NATO
Jun 1, 2007 8:32:42 GMT -5
Post by deyreepher on Jun 1, 2007 8:32:42 GMT -5
There is two french team because we have enough players to make two team. you can make two usa team if you want. I'm unsure how old you are in the civ world, but under civ3 they had also several french team at nation's cup. So we feel the right to make two teams, and nobody has said anything, so I assume it's right. Another point is that both french team are not just a MDR team and a LKT team. We merged players from every clan. I agree with your posts in many points. I disagree only on the point that I raised in my previous post. chris. Well then, there should be no objections to to the CSA Team. I would ask other players to sign up, but it's a bit late, it looks like the teams are set, I don't want to poach players from other teams, and I think there may be some friction between Metallian and some of the other top American players. One would hope they would work through it, but he has done a lot of smack talking during the CCCs. I know he only does it to cloud the other players' judgements, but I think some people have taken it too personally. So, it looks like light sparring for CSA this NCT, but maybe we can get a better one in the next NCT. There's also a difference between the French ladder players and the American ones...it seems that the bad blood that has formed between the Americans is a barrier we have to overcome. In fact, I'd say it's a huge gulf. If you haven't noticed, alot of players have really big egos. It's not very conducive to teamwork, when everyone is strutting their feathers. It would take alot more than a month to get a good team going, plus we'd have to rebuild trust and respect. Also, trying to not marginalize the players that need some practice and brushing up on the basics of Civ, such as developing uber micro and pro level strategies....sometimes, it's best to cut your losses.
|
|
|
NATO
Jun 1, 2007 8:41:32 GMT -5
Post by deyreepher on Jun 1, 2007 8:41:32 GMT -5
Initiative in it self is great, but you might have expected this. Some countries are to big others too small for this, especialy with the huge amount off events. Would be more fun to ask for any team off 6-8 players NO 2 CLAN-MEMBERS ALLOWED. That would make up some fun teams tournament directors, listen to this: It is very competiative people that play in this ladder ! Have to keep that in mind no matter what event you make. They will allways try to tweak the rules into something they can win, so allways make rules VERY clear. The opposite is infact the case here, rules couldent be more unclear. To be honest, I did not expect this. I have not really been a victim of RaY bashing, which is what most of this was. Usually it is directed towards the more prominent members of RaY, such as Metallian, Speaker, Knupp, Gogf, Mookie, theWiz. I've heard talk about it, but that's my first real experience with it. As I've said, I provided ample precedences that were followed through for this NCT by other teams, before I proceeded with NATO. I'm assuming that you're saying that no clan that participates in the CCC should be able to just cut and paste their roster into the NCT. Unfortunately, you'd be disappointing the RUS clan, their line-up is exactly the same as what they had for the last CCC. They are a nation/ethnic based clan/team. A very good one, in my opinion. They haven't been very prominent, but I've been watching them for the past 3 CCCs and they are a solid clan that has interesting strategies, synergy, and they will be a contender to win the CCC if they already haven't trained themselves up to that point. So, perhaps I should take some of the blame for Team USA not being in tip top shape, however, the month of May was one where I had finished school and was in the process of a big move and I was extremely busy. That mistake won't be made again for the next NCT as I'll hopefully be able to attract some top notch American talent into Team CSA. And on the part about the rules. I'll repeat this again. I followed the PRECEDENCES of other teams for THIS NCT. There is not one action that I did before any other team did first. Let's get that straight. I will emphasize it over and over again.
|
|
|
NATO
Jun 1, 2007 8:45:28 GMT -5
Post by eyesofnight3 on Jun 1, 2007 8:45:28 GMT -5
Wow Dey, I think it's a good thing you're not playing for the US. While you're at it, I think you should probably go be a citizen of North Korea as you seem to have more agreement with them. I know if I were playing on the US team (and this was a real nations cup that wasn't run as a "let's make sure everyone has fun" feel good bullnuts tournament) then I sure as hell wouldn't want someone like you on the USA team. I don't care if you served in the military, lots of people have. Hell, even John Kerry "served" in the military. You can disagree with the government, I am certainly no fan of Bush and I think he's a very weak president, but when you start sympathizing with a country like N. Korea because you have ties there then you are a threat to national security. You're supposed to have loyalty to the US and only to the US as a US citizen. If you don't believe in this country, fine, get the hell out.
|
|
|
NATO
Jun 1, 2007 9:04:53 GMT -5
Post by popsursocks on Jun 1, 2007 9:04:53 GMT -5
Honestly Dey your weak arguments are just that- weak. We all know the EU was formed because of a short roster. We all know Longhorn joined Australia due to the same reason (and because he says Oi Oi Oi often enough to be mistaken for a Aussie) and we all know why and with what purpose you set this team up. Its lame, it ruins the spirit of this entire competition. Oh you have some arguments that make me think your probably a mediocre lawyer in real life, but the bottom line is this whole thing stinks of selfishness and a total lack of respect for the people organizing this event. I thought you were better than this but it appears I am wrong
|
|
|
NATO
Jun 1, 2007 9:12:29 GMT -5
Post by TheClash on Jun 1, 2007 9:12:29 GMT -5
Wow Dey, I think it's a good thing you're not playing for the US. While you're at it, I think you should probably go be a citizen of North Korea as you seem to have more agreement with them. I know if I were playing on the US team (and this was a real nations cup that wasn't run as a "let's make sure everyone has fun" feel good bullnuts tournament) then I sure as hell wouldn't want someone like you on the USA team. I don't care if you served in the military, lots of people have. Hell, even John Kerry "served" in the military. You can disagree with the government, I am certainly no fan of Bush and I think he's a very weak president, but when you start sympathizing with a country like N. Korea because you have ties there then you are a threat to national security. You're supposed to have loyalty to the US and only to the US as a US citizen. If you don't believe in this country, fine, get the hell out. This is realy Yes this ladder needs a cleaning. Get EON out.
|
|
|
NATO
Jun 1, 2007 9:43:41 GMT -5
Post by Polydeukes on Jun 1, 2007 9:43:41 GMT -5
Gj all you whiners ill play for team Uganda. wait not enough ppl Seriously LAME !!! Commonwealth allowed but NATO banned really funny ( DD dont jump out of the bush dont wanna hear any lame explanations we are the mother...) Either you follow the rules or not. 1.Ban Commonwealth (GB has more than enough players for the NC they just dont get along prolly NATOs fault) 2. Not more than 1 team per Nation ( either Franco Teams Merge or they are banned easy) 3. Nations cant merge no matter how small they are Whats the point of a nations cup if countries merge haha you guys make me laugh hard. Rules only for the others not for us of coz no matter which lame arguments you have to pull out of the hat . P.s. Reality check all you whining b!tches. GG
|
|
|
NATO
Jun 1, 2007 9:45:17 GMT -5
Post by deyreepher on Jun 1, 2007 9:45:17 GMT -5
Wow Dey, I think it's a good thing you're not playing for the US. While you're at it, I think you should probably go be a citizen of North Korea as you seem to have more agreement with them. I know if I were playing on the US team (and this was a real nations cup that wasn't run as a "let's make sure everyone has fun" feel good bullnuts tournament) then I sure as hell wouldn't want someone like you on the USA team. I don't care if you served in the military, lots of people have. Hell, even John Kerry "served" in the military. You can disagree with the government, I am certainly no fan of Bush and I think he's a very weak president, but when you start sympathizing with a country like N. Korea because you have ties there then you are a threat to national security. You're supposed to have loyalty to the US and only to the US as a US citizen. If you don't believe in this country, fine, get the hell out. I believe you have this view towards North Korea, because you don't know the historical context of how the North Korea/US relations have worked out up to this point. My specialty being that region, I know better. So, let me give you a brief rundown on why the US has poor relations with North Korea. It goes back a bit further than the Korean War, before the end of WWII, Korea was an occupied country that appealed to the US for assistance in maintaining its sovereignty when Woodrow Wilson gave his "Fourteen Points Speech" right before the close of WWI. Unfortunately, for Korea and the Phillipines it was all talk, no problems, the Koreans can deal with their own problems. So the country did what any country under occupation did. A good deal of the country collaborated with the Japanese while there were those that fought a guerrilla war campaign, not unlike the Free French did during WWII. Unfortunately, the power backing the guerrillas were Communist. Fast forward to the end of WWII. Nuke dropped on Japan, Koreans, non-aggressors in the whole conflict were divided up, which seemed ass backwards to the Koreans. It would be the equivalent of dividing France up by the victors instead of dividing up Germany. So you have two superpowers power brokering at the dawn of the Cold War in Korea. Again, unfortunately for the Koreans, instead of having their own say, both halves of the countries were administered by the occupying powers with the nascent populist political group that had emerged during the interim period being labelled pro-Communist by the South and pro-imperialist by the North ending up in there being no moderate party in the country as it was wiped out by both sides for not falling to either extreme. The North had all the guerrilla fighters as top government officials, while the South relied on government officials who had previously collaborated with the Japanese Occupation government. Which of the two evils is the better choice? In either case both countries went their seperate ways for the next forty years, saber rattling and threatening each other with a few skirmishes here and there. However, after the much publicized natural disasters in the North in the 90s occurred, a move to true democracy in South Korea (S.Korea had been a totalitarian military dictatorship up until the 90s), and practically free access to the US economic market (I believe S.Koreans should be more greatful for this, the older generation is, but the younger generation, not so much), things were a changing. In addition, warming relations with China and Russia rendered the whole Cold War strategy in Asia moot. It's more profitable and effective to trade with totalitarian nations and export culture than to try to export the ass end of a cruise missile. Unfortunately, this mindset did not apply to certain countries, such as N.Korea and Cuba. So, with South Korea enjoying the fruits of true democracy and a booming economy, the time seemed right for re-unification. It had a model to steer towards a smooth path towards re-unification, the German model. The 1998 Asian financial crisis was a hiccup in the plans, but things still went forward in the form of linking up economic infrastructure such as hooking up power grids and transportation lines and most importantly, tourism. So, while things were slowly, but surely moving towards federation, the US steps in and starts making threats for the sake of US domestic political posturing. Do I have a problem with the US and my ethnic homeland, yes, you're damn right. It was on the path to linking up with a democracy and becoming a participant in good standing with the rest of the world. Instead, the door was being slammed shut when the two parties that had the most to lose were in the process of trying to fix the situation themselvse. You'll see the blowback effects of this policy in a few decades when the Koreans find themselves aligning themselves in the Chinese sphere of influence. Instead of being a positive influence in correcting a gross mistake that a nation did to itself, the US only tried to dig the dagger even deeper in splitting the two nations apart. So yes, I feel bad for the North Koreans, who are my people. The only thing that makes them different from South Koreans is about fifty years of history and a closed border. So, you can take your Patriotism (A Fallacy of Irrelevance (a deductive fallacy of soundness with a falsehood in the major premiss) in the Emotional Appeals family) and go troll another forum and community.
|
|
|
NATO
Jun 1, 2007 10:01:14 GMT -5
Post by deyreepher on Jun 1, 2007 10:01:14 GMT -5
Honestly Dey your weak arguments are just that- weak. We all know the EU was formed because of a short roster. We all know Longhorn joined Australia due to the same reason (and because he says Oi Oi Oi often enough to be mistaken for a Aussie) and we all know why and with what purpose you set this team up. Its lame, it ruins the spirit of this entire competition. Oh you have some arguments that make me think your probably a mediocre lawyer in real life, but the bottom line is this whole thing stinks of selfishness and a total lack of respect for the people organizing this event. I thought you were better than this but it appears I am wrong Pick my argument apart, I left it out there for you in multiple posts. And it's the British Commonwealth that was formed by the former Team UK, not the EU. The EU would have had more teeth in representing a team than the British Commonwealth which is practically an insignificant organization (though there are plenty who think that NATO is as well, in modern political thought). So, team NATO really only had 10 active players that would actually participate, the others were only added on the off chance that they showed up for the weekend, not realizing they would not be able to get a game without participating in the NCT. Without the non-Americans, we would have had a roster of 8 which is less than a third of the member cap allowed for the NCT. Even with 10 players, it is more or less impossible to successfully compete in all the events, you would need a minimum of 12 to go the whole 3 days. You're right, I wanted to have a chance at playing on a team that would stand a chance at winning the NCT. Is that a crime? Is it really? Unfortunately, for your argument that it's just RaY + Poly, you then have to contend with the RUS team, which is the RUS clan, roster for roster. I don't have a problem with them entering a successful CCC team into the NCT, the admins don't, so why should you? Help me to understand the situation. To me, it sounds like you there is another source to your animosity towards NATO. If I were truly selfish, I would have continued on with the NATO team, but I had to cut Poly and Rokkit loose. So in the name of fairness and balance, why don't you try to get back the Canada and Australia teams for the NCT? It was out of respect for the organizers of the NCT that I did not pursue the NATO team any further. Again, I've cut out the non-Americans from our roster and re-formed our team. What exactly are your objections now?
|
|