Declaration From The Independent Republic of Orange Nations

[Schattenmann]

So your argument is that because TLR in your opinion didn't chose the optimal strategy to defend NG it's ok to just attack whoever is defending your ally?

 

I think we need to dial it back and go to the authority on this sensitive issue:

TIO - Let's be frank. I dont like you. You dont like me. The dislike began when we (Athens) hit an ODP partner of yours 4 wars ago (while holding an ODP with you). While I do understand that, I think that you guys now are starting to realize why no alliance should allow treaty ties on the other side of a war to handcuff their actions in a war. If you are not realizing that now, then there truly is no hope for you. Still, oddly enough, I look down your list of members, and I see several people I count as friends. So it makes the alliance-alliance dislike, quite uncomfortable.

Edited November 17, 2013 by Schattenmann

[Mogar]

o/ War against Rush

I'm liking that sig, mr shepard.

 

Republic of Opportunist Nations. Never change, RON.

It's funny that when we called them this in GW3 until Karma, your alliance defended them to the death that they were anything but.

 

Really???

Have fun guys.

My thoughts exactly, have fun finding targets IRON.

[Pingu]

This is really only about our hatred for Fallout. Elder scrolls is better.
You're all reading way too much into this.

Perhaps we are attributing more care to your strategic decisions than actually takes place. But mostly what we're reading are the effects of your decision, rather than the cause. Anyone previously inclined to treat you as a trustworthy or thoughtful ally must surely be reconsidering.

[Rush Sykes]

This is really only about our hatred for Fallout. Elder scrolls is better.

You're all reading way too much into this.

 

Or possibly some of you are failing to see that big huge forest because the pesky trees are in the way.

[Aegon Targaryen]

Good luck IRON.

[Holy Empire of Halin]

"The C&G-MHA War was a conflict between the Global Alliance and Treaty Organization and the Orange Defense Network, members of the Complaints & Grievances Union, and their allies Hooligans and the Prolific Empire against the Mostly Harmless Alliance. The former declared upon the Mostly Harmless Alliance as a preemptive strike against their possible entry into the Fark-NPO War."
 
Take it up with Rogal Dorn.  I don't have to sell reality.
 
 
E: That's clever though.  Of course MHA wasn't in the middle of defending Sparta--that's the whole point of your pre-empt, you schmuck.

In Os faux moral stage (this past couple of years) pre-empting your MDP ally bloc mate to insure that they won't get help is a good thing, because he was an accessory to the fact. But when it happens to his end oh no it's bad. I think that's called hypocrisy, I might be wrong but that's how I see it. Edited November 17, 2013 by Holy Empire of Halin

[The Corrupt Teacher]

There's a lot of things that happen in CN that VE wouldn't do in a hundred years. One of them is cherry pick an alliance that isn't actually attacking my ally. We clearly feel differently about this, but as far as I'm concerned, I'm sitting right here with my alliance having taken about a million NS out of NG, and we're uncountered.

 

My position is that the only honorable move any alliance defending NG would be to hit an alliance that is hitting NG hard. I would have rather seen VE or Umb get countered by TLR, or even MW/UPN by virtue of what we've been doing to NG. Hitting DoD takes absolutely no heat off of NG, defends absolutely zero of their nations, and brings NG no closer to the relief they desperately need. You can't call what TLR is doing "defense", so you have to call it something else.

 

If it makes you feel any better I'd have love to declared on you guys and stated so on our forums because VE gets down on it's knees to win so often it's disgusting. IRON followed suit as well so whatever lets do this. 

[King Wally]

More blood for the blood gods I see!

 

Carry on.

[Morthos]

We do defend our allies. Why do you think we're at war now?

 

Also, no one in range :(

In all honesty, im surprised you guys arent just hitting NG at this point. Great job guys, way to be an amazing ally.

[Mogar]

In Os faux moral stage (this past couple of years) pre-empting your MDP ally bloc mate to insure that they won't get help is a good thing, because he was an accessory to the fact. But when it happens to his end oh no it's bad. I think that's called hypocrisy, I might be wrong but that's how I see it.

faux moral outrage has been the storyline for most people for the past few years, I don't get why we cant all be grown ups and admit why we do what we do.

[WarriorConcept]

If it makes you feel any better I'd have love to declared on you guys and stated so on our forums because VE gets down on it's knees to win so often it's disgusting. IRON followed suit as well so whatever lets do this. 

 

Yes that's exactly what VE does, just look at the last few wars for instance.

[Gingervites]

If it makes you feel any better I'd have love to declared on you guys and stated so on our forums because VE gets down on it's knees to win so often it's disgusting. IRON followed suit as well so whatever lets do this. 

Right, that's why VE was burned to the ground last war. Because They definitely were on the winning side.

[OsRavan]

In Os faux moral stage (this past couple of years) pre-empting your MDP ally bloc mate to insure that they won't get help is a good thing, because he was an accessory to the fact. But when it happens to his end oh no it's bad. I think that's called hypocrisy, I might be wrong but that's how I see it.

 

 

haha yes wiki's are the most useful sources.  Try reading the thread next time schatt and w hailin.  ::snorts::.  YOu also clearly dont understand the concept of a MADP pact, where you are bound by treaty to support people's offensive actions

 

But then again you dont actually care about that war, its just a nice way to try and cover up what irons doing by attacking odn ::slow cap::

[Mogar]

Yes that's exactly what VE does, just look at the last few wars for instance.

you throwing away 75% of your NS and All In Attacks for the past 2 wars allegedly were designed to throw your alliance under the bus after a few weeks, or something like that.

[pd73bassman]

Yes that's exactly what VE does, just look at the last few wars for instance.

 I was thinking the exact thing

[Kevlar]

If one were to measure success by the amount of tears formed, I would say this has been a very successful endeavor.

[rabonnobar]

Brilliant political move, IRON.

[Schattenmann]

haha yes wiki's are the most useful sources.  Try reading the thread next time schatt and w hailin.  ::snorts::.  YOu also clearly dont understand the concept of a MADP pact, where you are bound by treaty to support people's offensive actions

 

But then again you dont actually care about that war, its just a nice way to try and cover up what irons doing by attacking odn ::slow cap::

 

Oh, snort, snort, Os.  You got caught with your pants around your ankles.  It's OK, it's what I do, you're not the first, you're most assuredly not the last.  Here's your belt, now pull those trousers up and vacate the premises, you never had a chance.

[Vladomir Pooten]

Bout time I get to fight along side IRON.

[OsRavan]

haha.  You can tell schatt just went and read the thread and realized he was wrong.  How? cause he countered with vague general insults as opposed to any hard proof.

[King Louis the II]

In Os faux moral stage (this past couple of years) pre-empting your MDP ally bloc mate to insure that they won't get help is a good thing, because he was an accessory to the fact. But when it happens to his end oh no it's bad. I think that's called hypocrisy, I might be wrong but that's how I see it.

You are right. I cant understand why NG ismad at Iron, but Hearing moral outrage from ODN makes me wanna vomit. Well, I cant imagine anything but hypocrisy coming from Osravan.

Bytbeway, long time no see my good friend...

[ChairmanHal]

TIL you can get whine from an orange.

Edited November 17, 2013 by ChairmanHal

[ccabal86]

To war!

[Goldie]

I'm equally confident that if ten people declared war on a VE ally. And that ally requested you you to hit a specific target.. you would.  Wouldnt you Goldie?  I'm sure some strategic consideration went into who was hit.  But if DoD wanted to avoid that they could have done so by not declaring war on TLR's treaty partner.

 

You are uncountered and dealing tons of damage to NG you say?  Then I say even bigger for shame on IRON.  That they would oA off *your* treaty to fight side by side with you, while you dealt apparently tons of uncoutnered damage to their other mdp partner.

 

 

Here are some facts goldie... dont spin them but tell me if you think any of them are wrong.

 

Fact:  TLR entered this war via an MDP with their treaty partners.  The person they hit had declared war on their allies.

Fact: TLR has two mutual allies with iron.

Fact: TLR entered this war via an mdp with irons allies. i.e defending irons allies.

Fact:  IRON oA'd on an oA in order to hit TLR.

Fact: IRON did this oA with the alliance currently hurting their allies.

 

 

These are facts.

 

Now would VE do any of those things goldie?  I doubt it.  You can say 'a lot of things happen that ve wouldnt do in a hundred years.'  But thats my point.  Right thinking alliances.. such as yours... do not do what IRON just did.

For the first part, I'd say probably. We like wars, we don't mind going in with poor odds, and we take defending our allies very seriously. Those are all facts, but there are a lot of facts out there that show that what TLR is doing isn't helping NG whatsoever. If they said "NG asked us to take heat off of NoR", I would have said nothing on the subject.

 

I do empathize with the position IRON is in on an objective level. They find themselves having the feeling to do one thing, but face pressure internally and externally to do the other. Then when they do the other thing, they face pressure internally and externally to do the first thing. The central issue IRON is having is that they did not learn from the mistakes many alliances, including yours and mine, have made regarding having divided loyalties come wartime. We tried to protect GOD in TOP-Polar more than GOD wanted to protect itself, and we paid for it with a draining of our political capital. IRON finds itself in a situation where a decision they made has cost them their political capital, so people see an open season on trashing them.

 

I'd agree with you that VE wouldn't do what IRON did, because we've been in their place before, where we saw allies prepared to hit our ally. We chose to sacrifice ourselves to protect that ally, but people certainly didn't call what we did a good move then, nor would the result of the next two wars confirm that sacrificing your own political capital for the sake of your allies is a "good" move by many alliance's calculations.

[Llanowar Elf]

No, you oA on much smaller alliances that are defending your ally while you refuse to. Major difference right there buddy.

While yes, we do like ODN, I have to LOL at this comment.

 

ODN declared on a much smaller alliance (CCC) this war after we defended a Small ally (invicta) from GATO. The shoe just gets tossed around :P