Petrovich4
-
Posts
597 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by Petrovich4
-
-
That's one way to look at it
Ok, thank you.
-
where can I get a degree in E-Law ?
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue Northwest
Washington, DC 20006,
United States of Imaginaria,
Planet Bob
-
Many people here appear to be thick in regards to if/when NpO come in based on treaties.
If you think an alliance needs a piece of paper to get into a conflict then you are wrong. If NpO feels/thinks that they want to enter (on either side) then they can do what they want (prior to treaty activation) because it is their sovereign right to break sh-ite if necessary.
Was it smart that the CoC didn't declare war on RoK to expand the conflict so soon? YES.
Will it change/influence NpO's strategic placement in which side to support? NO.
Can NpO declare war now if they want to? YES.
Vanguard DoW on a couple alliance during the Karma war (i.e. GGA). Vanguard did not engage any GGA nations. Vanguard simply used a piece of paper to bring in someone else to meet GGA to give the impression of 'correct technicalities'. If this war is going to be fought with 'correct technicalities' then I hope you all burn each other and the treaty web on your way down
Happy, long New War Year
-
Based on
1. All the counter DoW
2. Reading Aubject matter 1 of the OP (again)
I therefore conclude that Gramlins can not/will not (based on this announcement) come in on TPF/IRON and any/all of IRON's allies side (multiple degrees of separation) for this war on any front.
The only way Grams will now come in on this war now is if TPF/IRON and her side DoW on one of Gramlins allies on Athens/RoK's side.
Please correct me if I'm wrong...but essentially TPF/IRON's side do not have the military support of Grams.
-
It is understandable, but unfortunately you showed your hand too early.
-
Simple announcement with monumental implications.
Well done
-
Your comments had nothing to do with my post and everything to do with the ideas of my king.
Perhaps I misinterrupted your post? I inferred that you were poking at TPF's allies with this line 'So, if the allies of TPF share a common cause with TPF for war, they should probably be fighting alongside TPF' by saying they should have countered already. If I inferred wrong, then my apologise.
-
I was under the impression the primary goal of an ally is to fight alongside you for a common cause in war. So, if the allies of TPF share a common cause with TPF for war, they should probably be fighting alongside TPF. But apparently you believe that your allies only exist for your benefit.
You sir, fail in strategy and PR 101.
The longer the wait for the counter attack, the greater the chance of the attacking side f-ing up (MASH thread) increases, thereby tilting the PR war towards the defenders. There is a reason TOP moves at TOP speed - for others to make mistakes first
As for strategy and fronts, if you can't see it, then you will soon enough.
-
I did not make the claims of spying in my op nor did I claim any concrete proof of them providing information to our enemy.
And yet your members and allies assert that MASH provided evidence to the enemy as though it is common, concrete knowledge.
M*A*S*H has first hand knowledge of a direct threat against Athens. They were unwilling to help or defend us against this threat. Nor even tell us about it. After I attempted diplomatically to resolve this we could not. This alone is reason enough to cancel our treatyAthens declared an offensive war. They didn't want to activate the oP. They sure would have honoured the 'D' part if your alliance knew anything about them. Your coalition is trying to spin spying as an offensive action - the first in CN. Then your coalition members goad the opposite side to counter attack...um I mean attack along with TPF, um no, wait, I mean counter attack... wait. I got confused.
After witnessing the Gov of M*A*S*H in both planning rooms (not being informed) , no room to solve this matter diplomatically , being told by then that this was a glorified tech raid , no willingness to defend us , shown full logs kept of our planning room even after they said they would not help us it was decided prudent to cancel without the 72 hour timer.You need to read the logs that MASH posted. It nukes your assertions. Many people are still waiting for a rebuttal to those logs that verify MASH's stance.
If M*A*S*H wants to fight on another side let not our "piece of paper" keep them from doing all they want.Whether they do or not is totally up to them. By the way you and others have conducted yourself, I can tell you this: they won't be fighting for you.
-
The CB is justified and if I were in Athens shoes I would have rolled asap as well.
The only issue I have is the way Athens has conducted themselves in the MASH thread - other then that, TPF should be rolled due to this CB (outlined in the OP and in previous posts).
GL C&G
-
I'm more surprised by NATO and FAN at this point. NATO's down 2-1 to Athens, and FAN will need to win the next two days for the 2-2 tie, and hope they win on total score. Both of them have incredible stamina by themselves, but don't deliver the *bang* you're looking for when they're paired up.
You caught us in the middle of something. Unfortunately, we won't be banging until the New Year.
-
you know we are having this discussion in every single war i can remember.
The fight about which side is the defensive and which side is traditional!
Honestly i can see both sides of the argument. On the one hand Athens started this war so clearly they are offensive. But on the other hand if TPF's allies counter declare they will also be on defending themselve.
Frankly that is why i dislike MDPs, because e-lawyering and nitpicking becomes necessary when those treaties are involved with an MADP things are clear, if your ally goes to war you go as well
I see both sides of the argument, I think many people do.
However, just as the ADI incident was poor in the way they rashly and incompetently approached their situation with RoK, Athens rashly and incompetently (imo and many others) linked MASH with revealing OPSEC secrets. Thus far, we have MASH's defensive case being presented, verified and believed while the prosecution has gone silent. If you're going to drag MASH through the dirt you better have evidence cuz I won't shut up about it until there is a rebuttal and/or an apology - regardless of who I like or who I want to see emerge victorious*.
* the nukes will emerge victorious as FAN and NPO take #1 and #2 in the alliance ranks LOL B)
-
slots full
-
You are certainly free to believe that its ridiculous for Athens to make the circumstantial case against M*A*S*H. Who am I to tell you not to. What you cannot do, however, is MAKE the truth be the truth you want to believe. The truth, such as it is, will probably never be known, but the fact is, the info leaked, and our MDoAP partner was in their war planning channel, following being in ours. You have chosen a version to believe, so believe it. But do not pretend, even for a moment, that you KNOW your side to be true. Because nobody does. People have to make hard decisions, we made ours.
The info leaked BEFORE they joined the war channel. I respect your stance on this issue (and thank you for arguing about this admirably
) but 1.1+1.1 does not equal 2 in this case. The circumstantial evidence is due to a failure on your leaders' parts to understand MASH (re OPSEC) and realise that Athens and co's argument of whether this is a defensive or offensive war has either confused and/or frustrated everyone connected and not connected to you. This thread has unfortunately bolstered your current and near future enemies position. That is the truth.As for our allies....to a man, they all know we would die for them. I have been in several alliances in my time on CN. No alliance is more loyal to her allies than Athens. We have proven it over and over again, and most of them have proven it back to us.I would rather have a dedicated, smart ally rather then a dedicated, kamikaze ally.
GL in your war Rush
-
So, in short, you're having everyone wasting his time because your opposition doesn't do what you want? Well, boohoo! This thread and those like it are what damages braincells, not people waiting a few days before giving you what you want.
This. Some parts of the OP came off as whining (Sorry Archon, it did). Personally, when they roll tonight, it'll be brilliant cuz tomorrow is NYE and not as many ppl will be rolling tmrw nite for a quad attack.
You have ex Hegemeny alliances and now all of Citadel vs SF+C&G and FB later on.
Everyone's always complaining about a reset. Well, this war will see over 3/4 of the alliances lose the majority of their strength. Remember GW1, because top ranks belong to Cit.
GL ladies
-
M*A*S*H may well be completely innocent of leaking the info that tipped off TPF.
Based on what has been posted here, and the lack of any type of rebuttal to back up Athens assertions, they are innocent.
But a couple of things need to be gotten straight here, #1 is that they would not have to leak the info directly to TPF to be the source of the leak.What you fail to understand is how MASH works as an alliance. Their OPSEC is most definitely better then Athens (re:logs) and if Athens actually knew MASH they would know that they are FAN-lite (it’s a compliment MASHers
) in terms of OPSEC.#2 a presence in the enemy coalition channel, following the presence in our milcom channel, at the very least, is a poor display of judgment that allows a reasonable circumstantial case to be made.It would be circumstantial evidence if it wasn’t for the fact that the time stamps indicate that MASH was in #grudge after hostilities broke out.
When it comes to the cancellation of the treaty, circumstance is more than enough to dictate the action.So is logic and communication which would negate and enlighten Athens on the circumstance (i.e. time stamps, knowing MASH, etc)
Some will believe, some will not. We cannot say for sure that they did, or that they didnt.And yet you and others are saying it as if it is fact.
They, also, cannot say FOR SURE, that they didnt. Because, and I know this may come as a shock to many of you, but sometimes, people lie...and sometimes, people make honest mistakes, either scenario could lead to the leaking of that information. However, in war time, you surround yourself with those you know to trust.Because, and I know this may come to a shock to many of you, but sometimes, when you are allied to another entity there is friendship involved where communication is key, especially one accusing the other friend…and sometimes, people in Athens allow emotion to circumvent logic and dictate a screw up that a noob would be embarrassed to find themselves in. However, in war time, you have now pushed an ally to the other camp and continue to surround yourself with lower then expected numbers.
Seeing an MDP partner in an enemy coalition planning channel, drives a dagger into that trust.Reading the OP and misinformed responses drives a dagger into my mind and common sense.
Tension runs high right now, and EVERYONE, and I mean EVERYONE, is leading with emotion instead of sensibility.No. Any leader can ‘lead’ with emotion. A Great Lader knows when to use and balance the two forces.
Athens, either post evidence or at the very least apologise to M*A*S*H for jumping to conclusions.
-
I remember - I smiled.
-
Just want to say Ilove that Jack. I wasn't aware that Stumpy's ego could be boosted even further, but hot damn it is and what u made is brilliant
-
I enjoyed the OP.
I love Stumpy's pic
-
I am Bob. He is BobJanova.
I eat my tongue, BobJanova is correct on the wording of the treaty being what matters.
My bad!!
I'm with Bobby J on this one.
Please tell me there is not a random dude called Bobby J on these forums - I mean u BobJanova!!!!
ANyways, continue with the nuclear launches. And treaty word play. And peace talks. While peace may talk, guns bark and missiles roar - they are much louder
-
Spying is an aggressive action etc, aggressive actions, even attempted are still aggressive in nature.
I've been here for a very long time and this is the first time spying has been labelled as aggressive to 'downplay' the counter DoW from an opposing side. Clever.
I'm with Bob on this one. You guys launched an aggressive - and legitmate - war due to the incompetence of TPF. I like u guys and kudos for using this little gem to make the odds favour you
Bad job ADI. You approached this wrong, even if you feel you're right
-
-
If there is a large scale war, make into a survivor based on who will lose most (like WAE island a while back).
Or run two different survivor competitions at the same time? WAE island with the warring alliances and also Survivor too.
Everyone is pleased - especially us
-
bump!
IRON Declaration of War
in Alliance Announcements (IC)
Posted
They have very smart people. I'm quite sure they'll figure it out (if they haven't already
)