Jump to content

We have a 2319


Recommended Posts

Two of our members attacked SWF on 4/11 . Now our charter says "if a raid goes bad you forfeit your right to be defended, or you must deal with the consequences."

If SWF had come to us, sent a PM, or anything we'd have said alright there yours have at it. Or had some other talk about restitution. That was not that case. I went to be proactive, and mentioned to him about our attacks, with theirs in kind, and what we could do to stop it.

He responded with well stop this with reps for your initial attacks. That I shouldn't be surprised they attacked in return. I told him if he came to us before attacking our other members that could have been a viable option. Then I said we can have peace for all nations involved with reps to the two nations attacked, and our nations that were attacked, then we can have peace. That offer was thrown back at me without any new offer.

Though we understand that every AA has the right to defend their members from a raid as they see fit, we have no qualms with that. So SWF should have no qualms with or decision to attack them as an alliance on the while, just as they attacked our members in return.

We here by declare war on SWF


http://static.fjcdn.com/pictures/We_f822d2_366710.jpg

Edited by BringMeTheHorizon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 299
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Congratulations on picking on a communist retirement home.  So brave.

 

size has never been a factor for us- nor if an alliance is 'active' or 'not active', but when our members are getting nuked, we will defend our own

Edited by Lord Hitchcock
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought that was CPCN?


CPCN is actually really active, and since we share common friends in them, I have asked CPCN to host peace talks on their forums with SWF, and Monsters Inc. hopefully SWF takes this opportunity to discuss peace with us rather than demanding reps from us after attacking members who had no part of the raid.

I requested this after CPCN saw our DoW and responded on our embassy about helping achieve peace between us two.

As I said, if they attacked the original members then asked for reps; or just asked for reps without attacking other members of Monsters Inc we'd not be in this situation.

I hope SWF comes to CPCNs forums to discuss peace with a moderator that we both trust, and like. Should be easier to come to an understanding.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems like a hastily worded OP.

 

We graduated from Monsters University, all the 'paper work' associated with warring seems boring, it's much more fun on the battle field 

Edited by Lord Hitchcock
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Battering our point of view into them" it's educational. They should be greatful. :awesome: --- in fact I'm sure they will be...

 

/my version of diplomacy

Edited by Kingneptune
Link to comment
Share on other sites

size has never been a factor for us- nor if an alliance is 'active' or 'not active', but when our members are getting nuked, we will defend our own

Maybe your members should pick better raiding targets, then. Edited by Neo Uruk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now our charter says "if a raid goes bad you forfeit your right to be defended, or you must deal with the consequences."

They raided, SWF responded. Why aren't the raiders facing the consequences of having to pay for the damages your other Nations have taken due to their acts or is that part of your charter to be ignored?

Edited by Cress
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Congratulations and best of luck to our allies.

 

Also:

 

They raided, SWF responded. Why aren't the raiders facing the consequences of having to pay for the damages your other Nations have taken due to their acts or is that part of your charter to be ignored?

 

I think that was already made pretty clear. They were fine with reps and/or counterattacks for the offenders, but SWF insisted on escalating with counters against the alliance as a whole. Their choice but surely the consequences are predictable as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Congratulations and best of luck to our allies.

 

Also:

 

 

I think that was already made pretty clear. They were fine with reps and/or counterattacks for the offenders, but SWF insisted on escalating with counters against the alliance as a whole. Their choice but surely the consequences are predictable as well.

Had they not raided SWF then there would have been no counter. Which then brings it back to being a consequence of the initial raiding. Through having a loose leash on their raiding policy this has ended up with Monster Inc defending their raiders actions, which in their charter it says they won't. I mean whenever GOONS have backed up their raiders they have come in for a whole ton of abuse for it.

Edited by Cress
Link to comment
Share on other sites

tiresome raiders and their tiresome whining. Suck it up.

 

As I said on our forums, this is the best thing could possibly happen for Deffy, he's got more money than god and hasn't been bothered to even rebuy infra since the NPO war. Tearing a new one for you guys for a few months might perk him up a bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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


×
×
  • Create New...