fallin

Congrats April! You've always been one of the more pleasant people I've met in CN. Glad to hear that you're doing so well.

I'm glad that we've been dealing with the competition from Pacifica fairly well. My props to our economic team.

I'm just a passerby but this dude really reminds me of emily. [color="#FF8C00"]fallin waves at MK. [/color] Now you know how we felt. >.>

How would you divide your senate votes between the candidates of the numerous spheres? Would you vote Aqua above Orange?

[quote name='shilo' date='06 April 2010 - 09:35 PM' timestamp='1270589720' post='2250730'] Well then, as you are the treaty partner of gRAMlins left, I will assume you and your government support gRAMlins until I see an announcement saying otherwise, fair deal? [/quote] I'm more inclined to hold a neutral stance but I can see where you're coming from. You'll keep your assumptions, I'll keep mine. My triumvirate, in their time and grace when they do say something, will prove either one of us wrong. Deal.

[quote name='shilo' date='06 April 2010 - 09:21 PM' timestamp='1270588843' post='2250714'] There isn't much to argue about here actually. There haven't been a lot of things in the history of CN that have been equally much despised as the actions of your best friends and allies gRAMlins. Now if you want to set a sign, make a public one that says you will no longer enable them to do what they are doing as they are no longer protected by you regardless of their actions. Cause that is what you are still doing right now, you are protecting them against any kind of interference while they are trying to fight a perpetual war hoping to enforce unconditional surrender on two alliances. [/quote] I note that my government hasn't made any public statement on our stance regarding the Gramlins affair. I think it would be presumptous to assume MHA policy falls one way or another before we've actually said anything.

[quote name='AirMe' date='06 April 2010 - 05:35 PM' timestamp='1270575309' post='2250487'] Point me to a statement that I made that said I would attack anyone who gets in the Gremlins way. I will pay you 250 tech if you can find such a post from me here in this thread. Let me lay it out for you: I WANT GREMLINS TO BE ATTACKED! Ram has ruined that alliance and he held peace up for 5 days before they were left on the battlefield. In no way do I support or condone his actions. And I fully think that any of IRON and DAWN's allies who come to help them should not be countered. Go ahead Alterego, twist those words to fit your agenda. Because I cannot be more clear of where I stand on this issue. [/quote] Airme, some posters in this thread from both sides of the conflict such as yourself,shahenshah and VladimirStukov make valid points about the nature and effect of the Gramlins conflict on IRON. I think the points raised up by my opponents in this thread have some measure of truth in them and it would be wise for our governments to actively consider their points of view. On the other end of the spectrum, we also have people like Alterego and RebelVirginia who are less interested in bringing points across than to paint MK, MHA and other related alliances as "enablers of evil","tyrants" and "the new Hegemony". Their political agenda in doing so is so obvious that they don't even pretend to have a coherent argument or proof to their allegations anymore. To speak to such people with rational and logic would be in the words from another world,"playing a violin to a water buffalo". I've given up trying to argue with such gentlemen and you'd be wise to follow suit.

Congrats Skippeh!

[quote name='Vladimir Stukov II' date='05 April 2010 - 04:02 PM' timestamp='1270483341' post='2249188'] Yes, because IRON is certainly in shape to take on an alliance with the best top tier in the game currently. I guess it won't hurt IRON to have all their nations held below a certain NS level. [/quote] That may be so, but its far from "destroying" IRON as has been claimed. This IRON vs Gramlins war isn't stacked up against IRON the way the old curbstomps were. Most definitely not a scenario where the winning side had upwards of 3-4 times the total NS of the losing side. I don't personally expect IRON to be stomped by Gramlins.

[quote name='Alterego' date='05 April 2010 - 03:48 PM' timestamp='1270482483' post='2249168'] Your side is denying IRON any assistance with the threat of force and enabling Gramlins keep this going for as long as they like. [/quote] Firstly, Gramlins fought with us. They lost infra for us. It would be an absolute form of disrespect to the nations of the said alliance for us to attack them. We might not agree with them politically, but Admin help us if we ever attack the people that came to our defense in our time of need. Alterego, I can understand that you have your opinion and I have mine. However, some opinions are more supportable by truth and fact than others. The truth is, Gramlins, given their current stats isn't going to "destroy" IRON. Without any form of allied back-up, I question the overall wisdom of Gramlins continuing to engage in war with IRON. At current moment, IRON has a score of 16.21 while Gramlins has a score of 14.18 (Statistics cited from today's ASR. Much love to Gopher). Considering IRON has 4 times as many nations as Gramlins, I'd wager that Gramlins will be hurt more than IRON in this extended campaign. The truth is, MHA government has already spoken to our allies about their actions and ultimately, it is within the internal jurisdiction and sovereignty of Gramlins bout whether they'd like to continue the war or not. The Gramlins are our brothers. They are not our puppets. And with that, I hope you can see it from my point of view.

[quote name='Alterego' date='05 April 2010 - 03:42 PM' timestamp='1270482121' post='2249160'] They can still try and with everyone on their side ready to defend them it just means no peace for an already devastated IRON for as long as Gramlins have the backing of their friends in this. [/quote] I hope you realize Gramlins only has one military treaty left. We've already left the war.

[quote name='Alterego' date='05 April 2010 - 03:17 PM' timestamp='1270480622' post='2249125'] You cant appease mad men and tyrannical monsters. [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neville_Chamberlain#Aftermath_and_reception"]"OOC"[/url] [/quote] Would you like to highlight the line of logic between MHA speaking to our allies in private and appeasement?

This peace stuff. Terrible thing to have. I hear its turning into an epidemic. On a more serious note though, all the best for the future both of you.

[quote name='Alterego' date='05 April 2010 - 03:00 PM' timestamp='1270479603' post='2249104'] Congratulations, Im sure it did the trick [img]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_8adFNycaanI/SwQnjM7UTII/AAAAAAAABOw/CXwKuAt7wTY/s1600/chamberlain.jpeg[/img] [/quote] Pardon my ignorance, but could you clarify what you're trying to imply with the picture above?

[quote name='Alterego' date='05 April 2010 - 02:54 PM' timestamp='1270479245' post='2249097'] Just becsude they are cliches doesnt mean they do not reflect the truth of this situation. Dismissing them as nothing but cliches is the arguement of an "enabler of evil"(c) [/quote] You still haven't responded to my point about MHA taking our concerns with our Gramlin brothers in private.