Starcraftmazter

This kind of reasoning is certainly the opposite of what was applied last war. I would imagine democracy means the alliance chooses it's treaties, not whether it honours them or not. Your system is rather peculiar - I wonder if anyone else has a similar one.

Are you implying that your allies are in fact not going to help you? Haven't you heard, NSO didn't make that doctrine for itself - but for others to use

Why is everyone instantly assuming TPF's treaty partners abandoned them. Were that the case, doesn't anyone think TPF would have something to say about it?

How is this an announcement, when what is being announced is already known by all?

I can see this treaty being canceled soon.

Do it Wicked you big...uhh cat. Haven't made one.

I would assume that anyone who doesn't even know the proper acronym of an alliance has absolutely no hope of understanding it's business and should not get involved in it

Didn't we almost decide to DoW GATO or something to that extent for being the first to abandon the agreement to not accept any surrender terms? Something to that extent... As I recall the treaty was canceled to show our disapproval. Anyway, Jack - if you're ever in my range, I'm going to nuke you. Of course I would need to compete with a lot of other people for slots...but I'm more active than them so there. Additionally, I lol @ AirMe for provoking this.

Who the hell is TDF.

Anything less than a DoW is a waste of space.

I support because because they're black. Thank you.

Superfriends' satellite alliance leader reporting for duty.

The I'm bored, lets blow !@#$ up war.

This poll is a lie - the NAAC Is not back.

You missed the "I don't care" option.

Yo, I'm late to the party on account of being away, but congrats - I love this song. Oh and I suppose the alliances are pretty cool too

I can assure you it has absolutely nothing to do with any political events. Come on Wicked, bring it on

At last, no more PIATs! PS. I've been away for 4 days and what is this?!?!

Actually we have said many times that we do not consider OOC grievances like that a valid CB. Who's trying to provoke war now?

I am personally not very mad. It is extremely difficult to make me mad, as I am a very nice person

I don't believe anyone made the claim that they could. I don't see how that relates to the fact that NSO made a demand, a threat and an ultimatum.

So if we come in and demand reps and an apology from STA and give them an ultimatum, threatening to escalate the situation if they don't do anything. That could be cool with you?

Wait wait wait, so let me get this straight, we are not idiots for assuming this could result in war? It was a legitimate concern?

Here is a log of the time that Corinan began his discussion with me. At that time very little was said, only the demands for reparations and an apology I believe. I got messaged by the STA MoFA, who said amongst other things the following: I apologise in advance to STA if they did not wish this log to be made public, however I only posted the relevant section, and if Moldavi did not blatantly deny what is so obvious, this would not have been necessary. In addition, in my discussions with other STA and NpO officials, war was mentioned multiple times, and at no point did they say that this situation does not involve the threat of war - even though they've had many opportunities to do so. So I will say this Moldavi, if your own allies believed this situation could result in war, then why are you calling us idiots for thinking that as well? Are STA idiots? Are NpO idiots? Ball's in your court, champ.

If you want to turn this into a matter of opinion (which I am not against), then I will ask what makes yours any better than others. Double standards much? We believe there was sufficient evidence to warrant an announcement. As no new evidence or theories have come to light to suggest otherwise, yes we do*.