Forum
A place to discuss topics/games with other webDiplomacy players.
Page 142 of 1419
FirstPreviousNextLast
jpchewy01 (100 D)
24 Sep 08 UTC
real strategists wanted
please join my game, real strategists wanted, take all the time you wa
it was cut off after that
0 replies
Open
DingleberryJones (4469 D(B))
23 Sep 08 UTC
New Winner Take All game for newbies - 40 point bet
http://www.phpdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=5807

Game titled Dangle My Cherry
2 replies
Open
MickFlanagen (100 D)
23 Sep 08 UTC
looking for a player
http://www.phpdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=5811
Points-per-supply-center
24 hours/phase: Normal pace
0 replies
Open
Zarathustra (3672 D)
23 Sep 08 UTC
Question on Winnings for Points Per Supply Center
There is a point of contention between another player and I that I am seeking to resolve. He says that when winning a PPSC game (18+ SC) you only get the 18 SC amount of points. I claim that you get the proportion of points equal to the number of centers claimed. Who is right?
2 replies
Open
hermanobrown (925 D)
23 Sep 08 UTC
No turn on weekend
I create a game to play just only during the week. I suggest that everybody finallize theirs orders quicly during the week and let weekend for rest
0 replies
Open
david707 (100 D)
23 Sep 08 UTC
Join "The war of the everest"
5 points to join (mainly for new players)
36 hour turns
points per supply centre
have fun!
1 reply
Open
Masterker (100 D)
23 Sep 08 UTC
New game
Have set up a game called war of the everest please join will start in 36 hours from when this is sent out.
1 reply
Open
EdiBirsan (1469 D(B))
23 Sep 08 UTC
EOG: New Game Three Way draw G17 F7 T10
I took this game over in the Winter of 1901 when Germany had not moved for two complete seasons. The French had an army in Belgium the English a fleet in Holland,
Russia had 7 with Norway,Sweden, Rumania and had built a fleet in the north coast,
Italy had screwed up his orders and had not gotten any builds while Austria and Turkey were intermingled diplomatically and about to make a change in direction.
My goal in the game was to see if I could make something of this wild situation and at the same time learn something about the site.
In 02 I was able to talk the English out of Holland as he started on his game long war with England with his buddy in Italy continuing in the Jihad. Then Russia and Turkey made amends and turned on Austria.
At this point I was trying to decide which way to go when I received a letter from the Russians telling me 'I want to move my tanks to Prussia and Silesia to get them into action." This blew my mind and decided for me that I would have to stay with France and concentrate on the Russians. I wrote to the Russians that this would mean war. That move I went to Sweden and Silesia as a precaution and Russia went to Prussia 'as a mistake'. My orders worked. From there it was a tactical battle and race against time against the Russians with them losing in the north and in the center.
Then with the Russians down to 5 and Germany at 10 or so he dropped. How rude.
The next 3 centers were rather easy and I was able to get an army in Armenia to really shake up the Turks. The Turks previous position was that either he or I were going to die in the game, and as I was allied with the French who was having a hard time with the Italians and the English, I had a choice of going for a very easy win that was not worth it or trying to make a point on how to end games in a somewhat social manner.
So I convinced the Turks to take a three draw with France and I. Then the weirdness happened. England agreed to be out of the draw. Then the weirdness happened when Italy with two units *Portugal and Venice, declared that he was against the draw because he wanted "my one point". Anti social behavior could not be rewarded, so the game was delayed a game year and I had to eliminate both England and ITaly so that there were only three of us.
One of the things this points out is the unfortunate situation in which under these house rules it appears that you cannot have a draw that does not include all survivors.
This translates out as a Kill Policy for most small countries since you cannot end a game without their vote. This may have been the intention in the original rules but those rules were written with a face to face game and social limits in mind, not the endless play that postal or email allows. So unfortunately England had to die along with Italy who was being just a kid looking at the scoring system herein.
Along the way in the game, Austria got knocked down to one center and I was content to leave him in the game at that (before the Kill nature of the ending a game became apparent) but then he dropped and was replaced by another player for reasons unknown and wound up dead in a squeeze play between Turkey and Germany.

How's that for an end of game statement?
10 replies
Open
Blackheath Wanderer (0 DX)
17 Sep 08 UTC
Iraq: A legal war. Discuss
Under the terms of the ceasefire at the end of the first Gulf War, the Iraqi regime was given 12 months to prove that it had disarmed itself of WMD.

12 years later it had not and therefore the recommencement of the ground assault was perfectly valid as Iraq was in breach of the UN brokered ceasefire resolution.

Thoughts?
Page 1 of 3
FirstPreviousNextLast
 
DukeAtreides (100 D)
17 Sep 08 UTC
They never found any WMD. You didn't notice how the reasons for the war slowly changed from WMD to ousting a repressive dictator?
Darwyn (1601 D)
17 Sep 08 UTC
The war is illegal.

The US claims legality of the use of force in Iraq from UN resolution 1441.

Aside from a few other nuances which I will not delve into, UN resolution 1441 does not authorize the use of "all necessary means"--the only language recognized as authorizing force. The U.S. and U.K. tried to get this phrase into the resolution, but other Security Council members rejected it. The replacement language, "serious consequences," is not, and was not intended to be, synonymous.

Furthermore, the US has argued that UN resolution 678, which authorized the use of force to expel Iraq from Kuwait, grants them the legality...however UN resolution 687 explicitly terminated this authorization by outlining that it was contingent on Iraq's compliance with UN resolution 686.

The Iraq war is illegal by ANY measure. Period.
DingleberryJones (4469 D(B))
17 Sep 08 UTC
duke, just because no wmd's were found doesnt mean that it wasnt legal, that Iraq was in compliance. I.m not going to claim it was, just want to refute your logic.
Darwyn (1601 D)
17 Sep 08 UTC
"just because no wmd's were found doesnt mean that it wasnt legal"

that's true...but it does mean they lied. The Niger forgeries and the Downing Street memo are all the supporting proof you need there.

Lying to start a war. Next to genocide, Is this not the most heinous crime to ever befall humankind?
DukeAtreides (100 D)
17 Sep 08 UTC
The idea is that the administration had to go into Iraq on a pretext. Definitely says a lot about the legality of the whole thing.
McCain (100 D)
17 Sep 08 UTC
I'm pretty sure every war is sold along with a pack of lies to support it.
TheGhostmaker (1545 D)
17 Sep 08 UTC
The Iraq war was based on a lie, and poorly thought-out. Blair and Bush wanted to do it for the sake of getting a "Falklands" and finishing his father's job respectively.
Darwyn (1601 D)
17 Sep 08 UTC
I agree McCain! But was that an attempt to rationalize war itself?
DingleberryJones (4469 D(B))
17 Sep 08 UTC
Again Duke, just because no WMD's were found doesn't mean they lied. It (by itself) doesn't mean they didn't believe it. If we are going to discuss LEGALITIES we should at least not come to conclusions that any first year law student can poke holes in.
DukeAtreides (100 D)
17 Sep 08 UTC
The Downing Street memo begs to differ.
DingleberryJones (4469 D(B))
17 Sep 08 UTC
And for a dictator who was trying to develop nuclear weapons until the Israelis stepped in and who frequently used chemical weapons against Iranians and his own citizens, he was given the opposite of leeway
Maniac (184 D(B))
17 Sep 08 UTC
It seems to me that we are somewhat missing the point and it is this; something is either legal or illegal based on written laws which everyone abides by and everyone agrees who the arbtrator on any disputes should be. Therefore it is upto the judge in this case the Un to decide on the legalites or otherwise. They have not done so (unless i'm missing something) and presumably won't as their powers stem from the US and UK keeping order on the ground. Therefore we have a new definition of legal - something is legal if you are big enough to tell the judge what the law is! I hope that clears it up
Warrior (675 D)
17 Sep 08 UTC
If you are in your hose and suddenly someone drops a bomb and start an invasion, you really think that you will find logic or relevant any UN resolution? The only fact you can assume is that you have never attacked anybody, so the whole invasion is unfair. You are justifying death and murderer by a stupid resolution, but can you imagine your situation if you have lost your family and one leg during the attack?
It’s surprising how easy could it be to talk about punish some countries. Don’t you realize that there are real persons who die, no matter how stupid the resolution could be?
There is no legacy to kill people, so please don’t reproduce the fucking lies used to justify that.
DukeAtreides (100 D)
17 Sep 08 UTC
So a murder is legal until the judge tries the perpetrator and finds him guilty?
DingleberryJones (4469 D(B))
17 Sep 08 UTC
No Maniac I dont think thats the point. We can have an interesting debate on the legalities as per international law and or conventions. We arent expecting convictions.
Warrior (675 D)
17 Sep 08 UTC
Maniac: is the same as persons: if you rob an apple you go to jail, but if you are a big "narco" nobody will touch you.
DingleberryJones (4469 D(B))
17 Sep 08 UTC
Warrior... so there are no just wars??
Maniac (184 D(B))
17 Sep 08 UTC
Sent from: DukeAtreides (24 ) Sent: 07:17 PM
So a murder is legal until the judge tries the perpetrator and finds him guilty?

Absolutely - innocent until proven guilty - the bedrock of our (UK) legal system!
Warrior (675 D)
17 Sep 08 UTC
Dingleberry: of course there are no just wars. Usually the persons who die during war are not the ones who decided the war. And the persons who decide a war do not die; they just send a lot of poor people to war with lies. So, you think you are fighting “for the glory of god” but you are really killing people “for the profit of a corporation”.
DukeAtreides (100 D)
17 Sep 08 UTC
Maniac, I'm not talking about the innocence or guilt of the perpetrator, I'm talking about the legality of the act.
Darwyn (1601 D)
17 Sep 08 UTC
Well said Warrior! I defer once again to this quote:

Göring: Why, of course, the people don't want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship.

Gilbert: There is one difference. In a democracy, the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars.

Göring: Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.

Does anyone else see the similarities between the acts and aftermath of the Reichstag fire and 9-11?
McCain (100 D)
17 Sep 08 UTC
War is a part of human nature, it is inevitable. The only thing to do in the face of this fact is make sure your country comes out on top.
McCain (100 D)
17 Sep 08 UTC
And sometimes, yes, the common people do want war.
Darwyn (1601 D)
17 Sep 08 UTC
"sometimes, yes, the common people do want war"

Only those who have been suckered by lies...which is exactly the point. Hell, you implied it yourself: "every war is sold along with a pack of lies to support it"

And even aside from the gullible ones, anyone wanting war is surely not the one fighting it. It's always other people's children, fathers, mothers, sisters, brothers that do the fighting.

I suppose now is a good time to cite this:

War is a Racket
By General Smedley D. Butler - 1933
http://www.wanttoknow.info/warisaracket
Darwyn (1601 D)
17 Sep 08 UTC
"War is just a racket. There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket."
Darwyn (1601 D)
17 Sep 08 UTC
"I helped make Mexico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefits of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. In China I helped to see to it that Standard Oil went its way unmolested."
Darwyn (1601 D)
17 Sep 08 UTC
Stop me when you've had enough...

"t least 21,000 new millionaires and billionaires were made in the United States during the World War...How many of these war millionaires shouldered a rifle? How many of them dug a trench? How many of them knew what it meant to go hungry in a rat-infested dug-out? How many of them spent sleepless, frightened nights, ducking shells and shrapnel and machine gun bullets? How many of them were wounded or killed in battle?"
Darwyn (1601 D)
17 Sep 08 UTC
"The normal profits of a business concern in the United States are 6, 8, 10, and sometimes 12%. But war-time profits – ah! that is another matter – 20, 60, 100, 300, and even 1,800% – the sky is the limit."
Darwyn (1601 D)
17 Sep 08 UTC
"Take our friends the du Ponts, the powder people – didn't one of them testify before a Senate committee recently that their powder won the war? Or saved the world for democracy? How did they do in the war? Well, the average earnings of the du Ponts for the period 1910 to 1914 were $6,000,000 a year. It wasn't much, but the du Ponts managed to get along on it. Now let's look at their average yearly profit during the war years, 1914 to 1918. Fifty-eight million dollars a year profit we find! Nearly ten times that of normal times, and the profits of normal times were pretty good. An increase in profits of more than 950 per cent."
McCain (100 D)
17 Sep 08 UTC
quite a few, actually. George HW Bush, for example. If you don't want any more war, help spread democracy, like you said, the common people rarely want war(in some places, like Croatia, they do) so by democratizing you reduce the risk.

Page 1 of 3
FirstPreviousNextLast
 

78 replies
ninja_trout (119 D)
23 Sep 08 UTC
New Game, get it while its hot!
New game called Lets get it on! Bet is only 25 and 20 hour/phase. All welcome!!!
0 replies
Open
Sicarius (673 D)
18 Sep 08 UTC
Capitalism
being very anti-capitalist, I can't see why anyone could think thats it's a good system. why do you think it is
127 replies
Open
Pareno (108 D)
22 Sep 08 UTC
TOTAL GLOBAL SOCIO-ECONOMIC COLLAPSE
Whoa.

Yup, that’s what the Secretary of the Treasury of the United States of America said we were ONE day away from on Friday, 19SEP08.

<B><I>That would be a bad thing, M-kay?</I></B>

Comments? Causes?

IMHO, the main cause is the $10 trillion national debt of the United States of America. What do you think?
12 replies
Open
EdiBirsan (1469 D(B))
22 Sep 08 UTC
DRAW REQUEST game A3 Germany-France-Turkey
The game is requested to be a draw G 17/F7/T 10
Please await the posting by the other two and then do what ever it is that is needed.
6 replies
Open
WhiteSammy (132 D)
22 Sep 08 UTC
CONGRATULATIONS!!!!!!!
jugglingbeast,

YOU'RE THE 8521st AND NEWEST PERSON TO BECOME A MEMBER ON PHPDIPLOMACY.NET

YOU WIN GAMES FULL OF LYING, BACKSTABBING, AND SELF-CENTERED EGOTISTICAL LOONIES WHO WANT TO USE YOU TO FURTHER THEIR DIPLOMACY CAREER.
0 replies
Open
Sicarius (673 D)
19 Sep 08 UTC
essay on agriculture and the leisure time of primitive culture
now that I think of it, I challenge someone to find evidence that 'primitives' DONT have more leisure time than us. It's a pretty widly accepted fact, so where your proof?

anyway this essay is for um... doc or something
41 replies
Open
Spell of Wheels (4896 D)
22 Sep 08 UTC
Rules Question Re: Movement
SETUP: 2 armies of a nations surround an empty SC (or any empty space) and one of those 2 armies is adjacent to an army of a different nation who can also enter the empty territory , such as Russia has armies in GAL and BOH-- Austria has an army in BUD. VIE is open.
The assumption is that BUD will move to VIE. Can GAL attack BUD and move BOH to VIE unimpeded? Or is a support move required? The question is asked because a 3rd nation wants BUD to be attacked in the event that BUD does not go to VIE. Thanks in advance.
4 replies
Open
Polar Bear (1038 D)
20 Sep 08 UTC
The leagues - what a disappointment
If anyone wants to join the leagues I will be dropping out of Group F after this game and you can take my place. The league is a pile of shite. Everyone is trying so hard to win, it's like the thing is some kind of e-peen. Like you're going to go and tell your wife or your friends at work that you won some virtual text based competition and they're gonna go "Gee Bobby, you finally did something with your life, way to go!"

Get a life guys, it's 5 points at stake.

We're only a few turns in and not a single person has kept their word or offered any kind of help. When I offer help it's treated as some kind of trick or trap. If I ask for information I am treated like Satan. Everyone is super paranoid. All of the above I can handle; what I won't tolerate though is people being RUDE.

Here's a typical interaction:

Me: "Hey would you like support into <territory>.....?"

Other Player: "Screw you if you think you're going to trick me into leaving you a opening. Your evil plan is obvious... do you think I am stupid? You can go to hell!"

Me: "If I attack <territory> and you attack <territory> then we both help each other. Can you confirm that you will do this?"

Other player: "Just you do you think you are to make such demands! You have no right! Do you think I am stupid? I don't have to do ANYTHING you say. Go to hell!"

I come onto the internet for fun and I play Diplomacy for the social contact. Yes it's also about winning and losing but the league seems to have extinguished anything pleasant or social about the game.

I don't really have the personal time to devote to the Diplomacy anyway, but when I come to the PC and find a inbox full of hate, it makes me question my priorities.

So, if you want to spend your virtual online time with a bunch of arrogant, over-competitive, paranoid, hateful, duplicitous scumbags, join the leagues.

Or maybe it's just my league and the others are different.
55 replies
Open
Genghis Bonaparte the Great (126 D)
20 Sep 08 UTC
Please draw this game
please draw this:
http://phpdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=5416

france will comply
2 replies
Open
texasdeluxe (516 D(B))
22 Sep 08 UTC
Anyone want to take over Germany before we start
Pre game still and Germany is CD! http://phpdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=5760
0 replies
Open
Ivo_ivanov (7545 D)
21 Sep 08 UTC
DRAW REQUEST for "PRAGUE"
Hello Kestas,

please, can you draw the game http://phpdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=5083.

The other players will confim shortly.
5 replies
Open
sean (3490 D(B))
21 Sep 08 UTC
League Links
Ok, so thats bad news about the PB vs maple leaf squabble but apart from that we are all happy right? i know its bad form to display private chats and all but i would like a easy link to see how we are all going in our leagues.
here is group A
http://phpdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=5660
8 replies
Open
Sicarius (673 D)
22 Sep 08 UTC
speed game
anyone interested in starting a speed game, now
1 reply
Open
DukeAtreides (100 D)
20 Sep 08 UTC
Opening chat records post-game
Is there a particular reason that after a game has ended the chat records aren't opened to the general public? I think it would give an interesting context to the map.
11 replies
Open
CirclMastr (227 D)
21 Sep 08 UTC
Draw Request for LUELinks II
Please draw this game: http://phpdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=5328

The other players will confirm, and I am England confirming for myself. Thanks.
3 replies
Open
MarekP (12864 D)
21 Sep 08 UTC
Draw Request - "Blindfold"
Kestas, please, draw the game ID=5123 (Blindfold) as soon as all other players (England and Turkey) express their agreement. Thank you!
1 reply
Open
Sicarius (673 D)
21 Sep 08 UTC
Denver/Boulder
does anyone here, live... well here I guess
2 replies
Open
Ursa (1617 D)
21 Sep 08 UTC
I said, don't!!
I did not start this game but we're still looking for four players. If you're up for the challenge, please join 'Don't push the red button *push*' at http://phpdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=5769

Bet = 25, not too high, not too low. Everyone welcome!
0 replies
Open
Tucobenedicto (100 D)
17 Sep 08 UTC
College Process
Any seniors on phpDip? How's the process treating you guys?
87 replies
Open
bc2000 (990 D)
21 Sep 08 UTC
Improvement?
Dear Kestas
I noticed you have paginated the Games tabs, but now I have a little issue while searching for something or someone there.

Before I used the Find tool of the browser, but that works only on the current page.

I know is a minimal topic, but I had no problem with the previous 1-page tabs and just was wondering if this change really is useful and what the majority of users prefers.

Thanks.
1 reply
Open
ldrut (674 D)
20 Sep 08 UTC
No CDs Allowed - 101 Pts to join, 36 hours
So can I please have a game with fewer than 5 CD's and where everyone at least finishes 1901?
4 replies
Open
Page 142 of 1419
FirstPreviousNextLast
Back to top