Jump to content

Vol Navy

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,164

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Vol Navy

  1. Duckroll DoW

    in TE OWF Archive

    Posted · Edited by Vol Navy

    [quote name='dogbite' timestamp='1294208530' post='2564126']
    not sure what path you speack of but im at war with LE not THP. I would more likey join you then war with you. But i do like a good fight.
    [/quote]


    Well Duckroll, your protectorate, attacked us while we were in a war where we already updeclared. I can't imagine G6 didn't know what was going down, especially since your other ally in RE hit DF, who is also at war in the same front.

    This is now a SE style curbstomp due to idiotic treaties being introduced and super cheapshots by RE and DR tonight.

  7. Stalemate

    in World Affairs (IC)

    Posted

    [quote name='Haflinger' timestamp='1293741807' post='2558528']
    You're in Umbrella, which is a Pandora's Box alliance. So I will correct you, as this is a common error among your fellow blocmates.

    There isn't "both sides." There's one side, and there are fragmented alliances who are independent from it. We do not constitute a side. If you want there to be an opposing side, then you need to find it in people who are interested in creating sides.

    (That would be your lot.)
    [/quote]


    Zoonx3's post clearly shows the level of interest in that happening.

  8. Stalemate

    in World Affairs (IC)

    Posted

    [quote name='Zoomzoomzoom' timestamp='1293730620' post='2558363']

    Also, In regards to the OP, I'm not sure if he realizes, but it was his own alliance govt that put the most effort in attempting to save their foreign policy by halting this war. That included, groveling at FARK's feet at every turn in an attempt to bridge the growing gaps between PB and SF and denying back up to Poison Clan and iFOK should it escalate by them entering.
    [/quote]


    Wow....can't imagine why there is so much treaty web strangulation at this point...

  10. A Sad GOONS Announcement

    in Alliance Announcements (IC)

    Posted

    [quote name='Some-Guy' timestamp='1293655264' post='2557577']
    No one talked to TOP about the very silly Echelon terms before putting our name (my name, in fact) to it and presenting it as our front's considered peace terms.
    [/quote]


    This is from Xiph in that thread when it was claimed that TOP wasn't informed. I'm pretty much neutral in all this and was pointing out what I'm pretty sure was a strong reason for GOD's dislike of TOP from someone who didn't seem to know.

    [quote name='Xiphosis' timestamp='1243754311' post='1573905']
    Some clarification - GOD made a point of talking to the entirety of our front before we ever said a word to Echelon. Our talks with TOP consisted of lectures on the evils of reps and an absolute refusal to accept that others on the front wouldn't accept white peace. If they wanted to get petulant and leave when they weren't even really engaged anymore, so be it.
    [/quote]

  13. A Sad GOONS Announcement

    in Alliance Announcements (IC)

    Posted

    [quote name='hizzy' timestamp='1293647641' post='2557476']
    You mean when GOD & co. put together a bunch of retarded surrender terms for Echelon without even asking TOP for input? It's almost as if... GOD was expecting them to just go along with their agenda, no questions asked. But... that's so unlike them.... I'm absolutely [i]shocked[/i].
    [/quote]


    Actually Xiph says he spoke with TOP and every alliance on that front before speaking to Echelon at all. But that all he got was a lecture from Crymson about evil reps.

    I think GOD was also pretty mad about the no nukes deal which left GOD to face the nukes that weren't used on TOP.

  14. Assisting in wars

    in World Affairs (IC)

    Posted

    [quote name='Ashoka the Great' timestamp='1293573614' post='2556534']
    I judge treaties by what they actually say and how people act on them.

    I know, I know....it's a minority position.
    [/quote]


    Hats off to you Zog, you are entirely consistant in your viewpoint, which I share with you. This new trend of trying to spin that anyone who starts a war makes everyone who would potentially enter to defend them aggressors is mind boggling.

  19. Charge of the FEAR brigade

    in Alliance Announcements (IC)

    Posted

    [quote name='Locke' timestamp='1292994447' post='2549255']
    If NPO wouldn't come to Invicta's aid in a war, I'd be very disappointed.
    [/quote]


    Why? We've been assured that anyone coming in on this side is doing so by oA rather than MD because NEW was the initial aggressors.

    NPO could just choose not to activate the optional part of their treaty and I am sure you'd see MK/PB/CNG in that thread just hailing away like they did PC/iFOK.

    The cost (year long reps, months of nukes) is extra high for NPO to enter into any war, let alone what those aligned against them have already declared to be an aggressive action by anyone coming in on NEW's side.

  20. Charge of the FEAR brigade

    in Alliance Announcements (IC)

    Posted

    [quote name='Locke' timestamp='1292993610' post='2549228']
    Tiny chance? Those are all some strong bonds. And that's not why PC and iFOK bowed out; it was because they didn't want to fight friends, rather than wanting to fight an enemy.
    [/quote]


    PC let some formerly very close friends die in a fire to not have to fight those shiny new friends.

    That's why some of the old TPF parts of PC have joined NEW or at least quit PC.

    Everyone knows there are plans for a rerolling of the Orders. That couldn't be jeopardized by this stuff so PC/iFOK took their marching orders to let NEW burn.

    Some people will BAAAAWWW and deny this but the rest of the world knows it's true.

  21. Joint Poison Clan - iFOK Announcement

    in Alliance Announcements (IC)

    Posted

    [quote name='PhysicsJunky' timestamp='1292883589' post='2547078']
    The argument that Dark Fist's treaties became invalid the moment they started disbanding as opposed to at the end of their cancellation clause is petty e-lawyering and short of universally recognized, and there is even some loose historical precedent supporting the cancellation clause side. Both sides could have decided to recognize the other at each step as an aggressor but decided to limit the war and re-affirm an alliance's ability to disbanded in peace while under protection rather than escalating this into a world conflict. The end result is that NEW is facing the other side of an action they themselves were perfectly willing to engage in when they were the superior party (I'm actually fairly sure they outnumbered their raid targets by far more than the numbers they're facing now). People are going to wail and gnash about anything that's done in this game but the pretense of there being some great injustice can be dropped for the sake of the reading public's time. Life came full circle.

    @Locke: I was just expanding on your sentiment, not criticizing it.
    [/quote]

    That treaty became non-existant when this was annouced by SCM.

    [quote]Hello

    On this day we are announcing our prompt disbandment[/quote]

  22. Joint Poison Clan - iFOK Announcement

    in Alliance Announcements (IC)

    Posted

    [quote name='PhysicsJunky' timestamp='1292878750' post='2546971']
    It's also not as if Fark never had a defense pact with Dark Fist dating back over a year.
    [/quote]


    There was no longer a DF when this attack happened. There was no more treaty. This is Fark riding into battle for a friend, treaty be damned. Good for them. Great stance. Too bad alliances with actual treaties and friendships with NEW won't follow them and defend NEW from Fark's aggression.

  23. Joint Poison Clan - iFOK Announcement

    in Alliance Announcements (IC)

    Posted

    [quote name='Merrie Melodies' timestamp='1292877569' post='2546950']

    First off I am not one of the PC are cowards crowd, they took the best course available. What bothers me the most in this whole affair is the idea put forth in the OP that when an alliance attacks another alliance it is then attacking every alliance the alliance they attack has a treaty with. The whole notion is insane. If I were to attack (just an example) NPO it doesn't mean I have attacked NSO at the same time, the first war is aggressive but the second one is defensive.

    [/quote]


    Been saying this for pages now. It would have only been oA if NEW was asking PC and iFOK to hit the remnants of DF.

  25. Joint Poison Clan - iFOK Announcement

    in Alliance Announcements (IC)

    Posted

    [quote name='Ardus' timestamp='1292876608' post='2546925']
    What I find most comical is people yelling "NEW WAS YOUR FRIENDS YOU SHOULD HAVE DEFENDED THEM" at iFOK and PC while also yelling "NEW WAS JUSTIFIED AND FARK HAS NO RIGHT TO DEFEND ITS FRIENDS". Not everybody's making the leap, but enough to raise an eyebrow.
    [/quote]


    Where is anyone saying Fark has no right to defend it's friends? Only thing is, when you attack someone without treaty ties or any other reason than "frends" then it's an aggressive attack.

×
×
  • Create New...