[greatplacetolive]

NPO wins the argument if they get to decide what all the words in the peace treaty mean, without discussion or neutral interpretation. Who gave them that power? Themselves. Whatever.

The more important point is that it was NEVER about the peace terms. There were many within FAN, when we were discussing accepting terms from NPO 3 months ago, who swore that NPO would never let us rebuild, that they would attack us before the terms expired. How right they were.

I don't have the exact quote, because the thread was deleted, but Slayer said something along the lines of FAN could have amounted to something if we had learned to talk first and shoot second. Well, mpol announced just that policy on these forums. What follows? NPO and their cronies shooting first on the flimsiest of excuses, as predicted. Becoming that which they hate.

This isn't about anyone violating the terms. That could have been dealt with.

And people are figuring it out for themselves now.

[Andrew Ryan]

Can I ask who are you?

[bill n ted]

Yes; totally worthy of yet another topic in alliance politics

I disagree with you on all accounts. FAN deserve what they get; NPO didnt force FAN nations to violate peace terms.

This post has been edited by bill n ted: 18 December 2007 - 08:07 PM

[greatplacetolive]

Andrew Ryan, on Dec 18 2007, 09:04 PM, said:

Can I ask who are you?

FAN Congress.

[Shodemofi]

Andrew Ryan, on Dec 18 2007, 08:04 PM, said:

Can I ask who are you?

I by no means support the OP, but I don't see what his lack of notoriety has to do with anything.

[Andrew Ryan]

greatplace2live, on Dec 18 2007, 06:06 PM, said:

FAN Congress.

It would be nice to post that somewhere in either your Sig. or the actual post, because if don't people could think that your some crazy noob and we wouldn't want that.

[greatplacetolive]

Andrew Ryan, on Dec 18 2007, 09:08 PM, said:

It would be nice to post that somewhere in either your Sig. or the actual post, because if don't people could think that your some crazy noob and we wouldn't want that.

Good point, thank you.

[Andrew Ryan]

greatplace2live, on Dec 18 2007, 06:10 PM, said:

Good point, thank you.

Thats why I'm here.

[Soviet Sindorin]

greatplace2live, on Dec 18 2007, 09:04 PM, said:

NPO wins the argument if they get to decide what all the words in the peace treaty mean, without discussion or neutral interpretation. Who gave them that power? Themselves. Whatever.

The more important point is that it was NEVER about the peace terms. There were many within FAN, when we were discussing accepting terms from NPO 3 months ago, who swore that NPO would never let us rebuild, that they would attack us before the terms expired. How right they were.

I don't have the exact quote, because the thread was deleted, but Slayer said something along the lines of FAN could have amounted to something if we had learned to talk first and shoot second. Well, mpol announced just that policy on these forums. What follows? NPO and their cronies shooting first on the flimsiest of excuses, as predicted. Becoming that which they hate.

This isn't about anyone violating the terms. That could have been dealt with.

And people are figuring it out for themselves now.

You're absolutely right. It could have been dealt with. And it is. You signed a Treaty, and there was a clear, definite violation. However you want to skew, explain or reason the infractions, you commited a breach of the treaty, persuant to the terms regarding Factories, and Military Additions to your nations. Your nations exceeded the troop strengths above 20% and not only that, you have the audacity in attempting to say that the NPO was going to attack you regardless?

No. PErhaps you should have told your members to follow the treaty and you would not be in this mess. I don't like Pacifica more then the next person in your circle of friends. But they have a clear and moral casus belli. Whining won't solve anything. Accept your lot and good game.

[Bilrow]

Wow, how emo FAN has gotten.

[maestro7]

greatplace2live, on Dec 18 2007, 09:04 PM, said:

NPO wins the argument if they get to decide what all the words in the peace treaty mean, without discussion or neutral interpretation. Who gave them that power? Themselves. Whatever.

The more important point is that it was NEVER about the peace terms. There were many within FAN, when we were discussing accepting terms from NPO 3 months ago, who swore that NPO would never let us rebuild, that they would attack us before the terms expired. How right they were.

I don't have the exact quote, because the thread was deleted, but Slayer said something along the lines of FAN could have amounted to something if we had learned to talk first and shoot second. Well, mpol announced just that policy on these forums. What follows? NPO and their cronies shooting first on the flimsiest of excuses, as predicted. Becoming that which they hate.

This isn't about anyone violating the terms. That could have been dealt with.

And people are figuring it out for themselves now.

If FAN did, in fact, formally accept peace terms from NPO, then the presumption is that FAN's leadership (whether or not that includes you) fully and completely understood the ramifications of such a peace. That means if there was some confusion over one or more terms, that would have been settled at term reception.

Unless you can give evidence to the contrary, I don't think NPO is in the business of throwing arbitrary terms around simply for the sake of doing so. If they were, they wouldn't be taken seriously.

[Corinan]

greatplace2live, on Dec 18 2007, 09:04 PM, said:

NPO wins the argument if they get to decide what all the words in the peace treaty mean, without discussion or neutral interpretation. Who gave them that power? Themselves. Whatever.

The more important point is that it was NEVER about the peace terms. There were many within FAN, when we were discussing accepting terms from NPO 3 months ago, who swore that NPO would never let us rebuild, that they would attack us before the terms expired. How right they were.

I don't have the exact quote, because the thread was deleted, but Slayer said something along the lines of FAN could have amounted to something if we had learned to talk first and shoot second. Well, mpol announced just that policy on these forums. What follows? NPO and their cronies shooting first on the flimsiest of excuses, as predicted. Becoming that which they hate.

This isn't about anyone violating the terms. That could have been dealt with.

And people are figuring it out for themselves now.

Here's the TL;DR:

BAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW.

[Slayer99]

greatplace2live, on Dec 18 2007, 09:04 PM, said:

NPO wins the argument if they get to decide what all the words in the peace treaty mean, without discussion or neutral interpretation. Who gave them that power? Themselves. Whatever.

The more important point is that it was NEVER about the peace terms. There were many within FAN, when we were discussing accepting terms from NPO 3 months ago, who swore that NPO would never let us rebuild, that they would attack us before the terms expired. How right they were.

I don't have the exact quote, because the thread was deleted, but Slayer said something along the lines of FAN could have amounted to something if we had learned to talk first and shoot second. Well, mpol announced just that policy on these forums. What follows? NPO and their cronies shooting first on the flimsiest of excuses, as predicted. Becoming that which they hate.

This isn't about anyone violating the terms. That could have been dealt with.

And people are figuring it out for themselves now.

I also seem to recall MPol saying all treaties when the ToS was up would be secret treaties. That's very diplomatic. FAN should have been monitoring their own and self-reporting violations to the NPO. If NPO is as evil as you claim, FAN's ToS violations gave them a valid reason to attack. And now FAN comes on these forums and whines about how the evil baby-eaters of the NPO DoW'd on flimsy terms violations.

The point is that FAN for all it's organization and military power, is totally inept when it comes to diplomacy. It's not just a war game, ya know.

[MaGneT]

I'm not here to give any opinion about the conflict, cause I can really care less how the war started. I just want to know a couple facts to quench my curiosity


1) (Even though I'm sure they were,) Was FAN notified about these violations, or did NPO just attack straight away? (It doesn't violate anything if NPO just attacked out of nowhere, however, as some people think)
2) Anarchy rate?



@OP: I agree with you that there were, er, more merciful ways of handling this, but FAN was never all that diplomatic. I hate to call it karma, because I like FAN (and NPO equally), but it's biting you in the $@!. No offense.

[President Kent]

greatplace2live, on Dec 19 2007, 01:04 PM, said:

This isn't about anyone violating the terms. That could have been dealt with.

And people are figuring it out for themselves now.

Quoted for great truth.

Andrew Ryan, on Dec 19 2007, 01:04 PM, said:

Can I ask who are you?

Oh come on, is that really relevant? Saying that is worse than complaining about someone's grammar or spelling when they have something important to say. Besides, I think his signature clearly states he is a Proud FAN member, and a member of the FAN Congress.

bill n ted, on Dec 19 2007, 01:05 PM, said:

Yes; totally worthy of yet another topic in alliance politics

I agree. These events are fairly significant and what the OP stated was extremely correct. So yes, I'd say it was worth another topic.

[President Kent]

Slayer99, on Dec 19 2007, 01:42 PM, said:

The point is that FAN for all it's organization and military power, is totally inept when it comes to diplomacy. It's not just a war game, ya know.

If I'm not mistaken, I thought it was you guys who declared war before diplomacy. Funny about that.

[Slayer99]

President Kent, on Dec 18 2007, 09:58 PM, said:

If I'm not mistaken, I thought it was you guys who declared war before diplomacy. Funny about that.

It's FAN's responsibility to abide by the ToS, not NPO's job to harp on them.

[Andrew Ryan]

President Kent, on Dec 18 2007, 06:55 PM, said:

Oh, come on, is that really relevant? Saying that is worse than complaining about someone's grammar or spelling when they have something important to say. Besides, I think his signature clearly states he is a Proud FAN member, and a member of the FAN Congress.

Sorry for you to show up late and act like you know whats going on but to inform you I informed the OP that it would be benifical for him (the OP) to state what he does in FAN, so people don't think that he is just some noob.

so go ahead at take a look at post #6 and on from there that should explain it.

[greatplacetolive]

President Kent, on Dec 18 2007, 09:55 PM, said:

Quoted for great truth.


Oh come on, is that really relevant? Saying that is worse than complaining about someone's grammar or spelling when they have something important to say. Besides, I think his signature clearly states he is a Proud FAN member, and a member of the FAN Congress.

Thank you for your support. To be fair, I added that to my sig after the subsequent posts.

[Kenadian_2006]

I want my 30 seconds back.