Hadrian

[quote name='Haflinger' timestamp='1306501532' post='2718964'] All you need now is for someone to send Hadrian 6M in aid [/quote] Brilliant idea! [i]"Roll up! Roll up! Free war with NSO!"[/i] Would help with the bill payments too, extending my nation's livelihood just that day or so longer.

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1306505732' post='2718987'] A Ramirus follower.[/quote] Not really. I don't agree with nor support most of Ramirus' previous actions, but he certainly had the right idea in mind when he began chopping down Gramlin treaties. Sadly, he didn't take it far enough. Case in point: Harmlins Accords.

[quote name='Varianz' timestamp='1306503375' post='2718972'] Did not read. [s]Probably [/s Definitely]a bad idea if Hadrian is involved. Can someone peace out one of his defensive slots now so I can get in on the fun?[/quote] I have a FOK raider and Charlie boy taking up my other two slots. Needless to say, I've been ignoring their peace offers. [quote name='Johnny Apocalypse' timestamp='1306504010' post='2718977'] People might've taken this more seriously if you weren't such a joke.[/quote] Whether they take it seriously or not is a 'meh' case. The whole objective of this thing is to plant that idea in their heads and cultivate a detachment culture to move away from treaties. If people want to take it seriously, good for them, if they want to laugh at it, fine by me. [quote name='ChairmanHal' timestamp='1306504038' post='2718978'] Treaties are like handguns. They allow you to sleep better at night...if you own one. The more you own, however, the more immobilized you become. Still, no one wants to be the first to drop theirs. Even those that claim that they "don't need them" have understandings with those who do that if they need protection, they'll show up to provide protection. This bucket of ice water in your face is provided for your awakening. You are alone in this world and people who are alone are like thistle seed--taken along by the wind and under constant threat of being crushed. Get right with life and good luck.[/quote] Being slaves to treaties is not good for the lifespan of this world. If people can't actually trust each other enough that they can expel their treaties, safe in the knowledge that their true allies will cover for them, then what's the point of having a treaty in the first place, when the foundations on which it is based are in fact, false? Of course I'm alone in this world, and in the wake of recent events, I wouldn't have it any other way; I'm no martyr but there's no chance in hell I'm going to ruin the nations/political careers of my friends in regards to my own freedom run. Those few friends, acquaintances and supporters I do have, I wish them the very best of luck in their endeavours. I will do what I came here to do, and then I will, as you so carefully put it, get right with life. Good luck to you too. [quote name='Chief Savage Man' timestamp='1306504336' post='2718981'] And here I was hoping somebody had made a Garrus Vakarian-themed alliance. But no, it's a Hadrian thread. [i]Another one.[/i][/quote] Why on Bob would you hope somebody had done such a thing? Plenty more to come old Chiefey.

[quote name='Hereno' timestamp='1306495114' post='2718936'] I really hope that this isn't that big thing you kept talking about, because if so, I'm sorely disappointed. [OOC]Also, the style in which you wrote the quoted part reminds me of NS WA resolutions.[OOC][/quote] Come now Hereno, this is nothing compared to what I've got cooking on other stoves. (OOC: Yep, that's where the inspiration comes from.) [quote name='Cobalt' timestamp='1306500073' post='2718959'] This is really dumb. Stop attention whoring[/quote] A. I'm not an attention whore. B. You're the one who comes in and replies to my announcements, which are there purely because I wish to make them, sometimes with a purpose, sometimes without, it's not like I expect people to respond. But whaddya know, they do anyway. [quote name='King Louis the II' timestamp='1306500639' post='2718961'] ^^^^^^^^ This... You read my mind pal...[/quote] B applies to you too, so keep that mouth schtum my friend.

[quote name='Laslo Kenez' timestamp='1306494469' post='2718932'] Just because you can press the Start New Topic button doesn't mean you should.[/quote] Just because you can say something here doesn't mean you should.

I wasn't aware that CGU and SF had been defeated and/or disintegrated.

[quote name='Turin' timestamp='1306490062' post='2718928'] Hey psst, Hadrian....ChefJoe gave you the card. Ironchef was simply pointing and laughing. And here I was thinking you had already hit rock bottom....Guess i've been proven wrong [/quote] Oh, snap! I blame Chefjoe and ironchef for having similar names. Damn you to Hell.

Allow me to present to you the fruits of an idea that has long been cooking on some random stove in some random corner of my rather unrandom mind. First, a little pre-amble, if you will. For what seems like millenia, the alliances of our world have operated on pathetic pieces of paper, allowing them to dictate to us our exterior actions, and even the format of some internal policies. I refer of course, to the abominations that are treaties. Many, if not all of you, will at this point denounce my speech as nothing more than the ramblings of a 'rogue'. I'm asking you to, for the sake of the future of this world, put aside your label on me for the entire five or ten minutes it might take you to hear me out, and to look at the bigger picture. Imagine a world without treaties. Where wars were not defined by these MDoAPs, these ODPs and MDPs. Where your allegiance was not defined by the strength of a simple piece of paper, on which some mandatory or compulsory agreement was written. Where you could freely defend whoever you wished to do so, without the conflict of chaining and non-chaining treaties, without the potential of pissing off one party and pleasing another. Imagine a world where allies were actually [i]allies[/i], defined by a real, palpable relationship with one another, not by a treaty. Many will say that treaties are made and defined by the relationship, not the other way around. I disagree. If this were the case, there would be no need for PIATs or ODPs or ToAs or any other similarly-leveled treaty. Perhaps there is no need for them. Perhaps people are simply indulging in treaty nostalgia, making a treaty for the hell of it, for the accomplishment of it. Never-the-less, it's safe to say that our planet and by extension, our politics, are dominated by the mechanics of what is known as the treaty web. The prodigal forerunners of this machine, the New Pacific Order, ensured that the future structure of politics would be decided by this web. I imagine that, at the time, treaties looked like a damn sexy idea. Order, definition, practicable, functional purpose. Who the hell wouldn't want a treaty? They had a function and they served it well- still do, in some cases. But if anyone thought to look deeper past the veil, at the machination that was slowly being constructed, I imagine there would have been an outcry, albeit one which hardly anyone would have paid attention to, being too engrossed in the growing politics and the treaties that supported it. Now, you may ask at this point, "yeah, okay, sure...so what? what's the point of this? why the hell are you wasting my time with this nonsense?" The point of all this, is to generate an idea in your minds. An idea, remember, is like a virus, as Vox Populi proved to a great extent and as Pacifica learned so painfully in her final days of imperial glory. This particular virus has one job and one job only: to tell you that the treaty web is no longer functional, being long past its sell-by date. And it is, isn't it? You smart folks at the back there- you saw the havoc wreaked by the nature of Ragnarok's treaties last war, did you not? The relationships that subsequently soured, the harm done? This is just one piece of evidence in support of why every piece of treaty paper should be thrown into a fireplace, and a general movement away from the treaty web created. Agreed, we've seen certain alliances move away and isolate themselves of the treaty machine in the past, but never has this been complete, nor permanent. But I've spent too long on this pre-amble, and now I move to my main piece of this announcement. Allow me to present to you... [center][img]http://s628.photobucket.com/albums/uu8/AlexanderTheGreat2009/TPD.png[/img] [quote][u][b]Article One[/b][/u] ACKNOWLEDGING the functionality, utility and services that treaties and the treaty web have done for us, we take stock of the history of treaties and all their workings, how they have influenced the rich history of our glorious planet. [u][b]Article Two[/b][/u] NOTING that a complete, instantaneous move away from treaties and the treaty web itself at this point in time is not feasible, and that many alliances and individuals may not see the theory as entirely necessary or even damaging to present and future poltical prospects. [u][b]Article Three[/b][/u] PROPOSING therefore, that the changes be implemented over time, given sufficient notification and political manoeuvering, both internally and externally, whilst continually outlining and formatting prospects and proposals for further devolution and detraction of treaties. [u][b]Article Four[/b][/u] INFORMED by this document, further special attention can be given to blocs and spheres of political influence and/or allegiance, supported by additional doctrines or similar proposals if necessary. [u][b]Article Five[/b][/u] SUPPORTED by the difficulty and harm brought by standard treaties to inter-political relationships and their continuing involvement and influence in macro and micro wars, this document is brought into being by the Archangel Hadrian, on this day of our Lord, the Twenty-Seventh of May, Two-Thousand and Eleven.[/quote] [left] I personally believe that this moment has been a long time coming. Too long have we stuck by the traditional, authoritarian safety of treaties. Too long have we allowed our relationships to be defined by these [i]pieces of paper[/i]. It's time to make some serious changes, folks. [/left][/center]

[quote name='LittleRena' timestamp='1306480830' post='2718904'] Impression of relevence maybe? [/quote] Whether I'm relevant or not is irrelevant in my eyes, I'm just doing what I wanna do. [quote name='ironchef' timestamp='1306482052' post='2718907'] I didnt know I was a member of any club with you. [/quote] Here's the thing: in order for one to be a member of any club or society, they must have that honour bestowed upon them by someone who is already a member of that club or society. Henceforth, you being the one that gave me that kool IdiotKlub membership card... [quote name='Muddog' timestamp='1306482522' post='2718908'] Hadrian you old rascal, what have you gotten yourself into now? It seems you've picked up a few individuals who don't particularly like your style, but I wish you well... May the Syndicate serve you well.[/quote] Muddog, I have delivered myself into the deep end of the hot spring, and as a result I am now bursting with vitality, flavour and freedom. The entire entourage of politicians of Bob might not like my style, I'm not sure I could care less though. Thank you old friend.

Oh, snap.

Syrian super-howitzers will be firing on those coordinates shortly. Thank you for your time.

[quote name='nippy' timestamp='1306354693' post='2718191'] Heh. As much negative forum PR as you've gained, and you haven't been nuked yet? I must say, I'm amazed.[/quote] And so you should be. [quote name='BloodFury' timestamp='1306354987' post='2718194'] Hadrian, you remind me of Kevanovia with these past events. So if you want to quit the game, do it with a little more dignity and delete like Kevanovia did. You aren't helping yourself here. Especially if you want to continue to play in the future.[/quote] I don't wanna quit. And at least I never $%&@ed up [i]my[/i] intelligence ops. I will continue to remain until those impressive (OOC: mods) find a reason to banish me. [quote name='KainIIIC' timestamp='1306355140' post='2718195'] If only Worst Poster Ever had been done today instead of two months ago..[/quote] I still would have lost. [quote name='chefjoe' timestamp='1306355611' post='2718202'] [img]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_0G2S7qtcxOA/TN4XBDkKyPI/AAAAAAAAAWo/jt4X3jXK5Jc/s1600/idiot.gif[/img] The citizens of Buckwheats have voted on this promotion in status and wish to congratulate you on the honor [/quote] I'm so proud to be a member of this club with you, ironchef. [quote name='Mogar' timestamp='1306362554' post='2718250'] you make me look like Oprah's husband in the amount of attention you seem to require.[/quote] It's not a requirement. I just say things and all the pieces fall into place. [quote name='WalkerNinja' timestamp='1306370538' post='2718300'] Hey, c'mon! Let's give this guy a chance! Okay, serious question. What is your stance on the imminent destruction of the Blue Colony?[/quote] Doesn't really matter either way. They'll keep coming back, each time at a faster pace than the last. [quote name='Axolotlia' timestamp='1306384736' post='2718394'] You have to put things into perspective. Crushing for him would probably be around 3 mill and 50 tech. Also as far as being an alliance, you may be an alliance in the technical sense of the word, but that doesn't withhold the right for other alliances to refuse to recognize you as a legitimate alliance.[/quote] Crushing for me would be...no, I can't think of anything that would be crushing, it would just take a long while to pay off. Well, again, I never said anyone had to recognise me. This is me doing what I want...if you can't deal with that, take your lego bricks elsewhere. [quote name='Methrage' timestamp='1306386430' post='2718399'] Good luck with the alliance.[/quote] Thank you Methrage.

[quote name='Rebel Virginia' timestamp='1306348189' post='2718152'] [color="#0000ff"]I'm quite enjoying this actually. Granted in a few weeks you'll have become boring, as you'll doubtless still be singing the same song. Still, I'll savor the moments until then.[/color][/quote] Oh, is that so? Glad you're enjoying it then. We'll see about that. [quote name='Dochartaigh' timestamp='1306348961' post='2718158'] An alliance by any real definition requires 2 people at the minimum. A single person will never constitute a group or a community since a group or a community is a plurality. You also cannot interact with any other people in your "alliance" due simply to the fact that you do not have anyone else in your "alliance". So, anyone who even remotely believes that the TAS is an alliance of any sort is retarded.[/quote] Now I never said all the members were on the AA... [quote name='the rebel' timestamp='1306349768' post='2718167'] Unless he has multiple personality disorder then you only need one person Anyways he seems to be an attention whore, i think what would make him cry is if everyone ignores him and the crap he posts [/quote] Nope, no attention whoring to be found here matey. I just announce what I want to, it's you folks who come in and spout off the attention. [quote name='Krunk the Great' timestamp='1306350146' post='2718172'] You mean he isn't already crying enough? [/quote] He means I wasn't crying in the first place. [quote name='SirWilliam' timestamp='1306350887' post='2718175'] He's going places, I can tell already.[/quote] Oh hell yes. I'm going to take a holiday in every nation-state on Bob. (Could. Not. Resist.) [quote name='Bill Wallace' timestamp='1306351668' post='2718179'] Between the Damsky wannabe and the talk of "strategic victory", this all reminds me of an old joke - What did the peanut say to the acorn? What does it matter? They're both nuts.[/quote] Except I don't want to be Damsky and it's NSO who think they won strategically. Kinda wants to make me facepalm, that response. [quote name='Hiro Nakara' timestamp='1306353083' post='2718184'] Dear Hadrian, learn to spell Existence correctly. For someone who claims others are dense, you go out of your way to prove your thickness every time you post. [/quote] Dear Naked Man, Here in Syria, we spell that word in that manner because we do as we !@#$@#$ well please. If you cannot handle our unorthodox, uber, alternative spellings, please eject yourself from office and go running off a cliff. Faithfully, Hadrian [quote name='Mason' timestamp='1306354420' post='2718189'] Hadrian, my friend, you've fallen so far. [/quote] No Mason...I'm rising so high above.

[quote name='ironchef' timestamp='1306346365' post='2718136'] Well you know what they say...... [img]http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2076/2184475916_a08683c6a4.jpg[/img] [/quote] Made me chuckle. [quote name='youwish959' timestamp='1306346393' post='2718137'] Look more like parameters than guidance lines, as every other legitimate alliance seems to meet the parameters.[/quote] I'll say it one more time, they're not parameters. (OOC: They really aren't parameters. When he made the game, Admin had no clear way of defining what an alliance would be, so he made [i]guidance lines[/i] in order to nudge people in the right direction as to what form an alliance generally took. If they were parameters, it means every alliance affiliation absolutely [i]has[/i] to resemble those principles, and yet, they don't. Do you see the difference between the two? I hope to Admin you do.)

[quote name='Rayvon' timestamp='1306346171' post='2718132'] Well - everyone already knows this of me ... Get off Goldie's wagon .. In order to lose, you have to fail at your objective. If our objective was to come out of the wars with the better stats, then sure we would have lost .. However, in no case was this the case.[/quote] "Your objective" is pretty much irrelevant here. Statistically, you lost. Politically, you lost. As far as the wider world is concerned, you lost. It's all written as much, even on the (OOC:wiki). Of course, you will continue to believe that you won, "strategically", so I see little point in debating the matter further.