memoryproblems

[quote name='Jaiar' timestamp='1323059374' post='2863080'] When are you going to defend NPO? Sorry, I had to say it. Congrats on the treaty. [/quote] You should have like, waited 15 minutes to say that

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1323065824' post='2863425'] Alright, I got 4 PMs asking why I'm anti-TPF and/or angry. Time to step back. (1) I am not anti-TPF, TPF have been good and loyal allies to NPO, which is why I said it must suck to get the reception they got from some people on their own side. (2) I am anti-treaty messes, and that is why I said that someone always gets screwed, because it's true. It's true whether it's TPF or Europa or Æsir or GATO, and whenever I make that comment, it is a commentary on the bad foreign policy practice of signing treaties that pull any alliance in opposite directions. Treaties are political tools, not friendship rings; no matter how many treaties you sign based on friendship, when the rubber hits the road, politics kicks in. (3) When some idiot like Daeryon implies I'm missing out by not being in a coalition with TPF when I was [i]just [/i]in the worst coalition in recent memory with TPF (DH-NPO war), I [i]do [/i]Hulk-out, and that [b][i]was [/i][/b]a crappy, crappy coalition whose strategy I'll be hearing peacemode jokes about for years, so eat dirt, Daeryon. At the end of the day, as I've already said, The Avengers have a passable reason for war, and as long as they can keep themselves from committing the abuses so intrinsic to the allies they're going to inevitably tap in, then I'm perfectly fine with it. [/quote] I don't think any of us were happy with it, but I don't think its appropriate to really assign blame anywhere in that fiasco. If you try your hardest and make the best decision you can with the information you have, then you have nothing to apologize for even if it all went south. You can say that your sorry for not thinking about this or that, but at the end of the day, you can't put information that you don't know to use. To put it oddly in a fashion that pretty much goes against the other saying, you can't make lemonade if you don't have lemons.

So let it be written, so let it be done. I hope FAN is as good as I remember them being.

[center][img]http://i1116.photobucket.com/albums/k577/cntpf/tpf-tpc.png[/img] [size=6]The "It Feels Like Hell In Here" Accords[/size][/center] Building upon the bonds of a strong friendship, The Peoples Community and The Phoenix Federation(hereafter referred to as the "signatories") have come together for the following agreement. 1. Signatories agree to share any information that is pertinent to the safety or interests of the other. 2. Signatories agree not to commit acts of hostility against the other, including but not limited to military attacks and espionage. 3. In the event that one signatory is attacked, the other is encouraged to come to their assistance militarily, financially, or diplomatically, however they are in no way obligated. 4. Should a signatory wish to wage a war of aggression, they may request the assistance of the other signatory, although the other signatory is in no way obligated to provide assistance. 5. In the event that either signatory violates article 1 or 2 of this agreement, it shall be immediately considered null and void. 6. Should either signatory wish to terminate this agreement, they may do so following providing notice in private to the other signatory 72 hours in advance. [u][b]Signed for The People's Community[/b][/u] [i]The Assembly[/i] [u][b]Signed for The Phoenix Federation[/b][/u] Judge X, [i]Evil Overlord[/i] Daeryon, [i]Evil Underlord[/i] Admir, [i]Phoenix Magistrate[/i] memoryproblems, [i]Phoenix Magistrate[/i] igotsacane, [i]Phoenix Magistrate[/i] JBone, [i]Ember[/i] grahamkeatley, [i]Ember[/i] TL;DR: Optional Defense, Optional Aggression.

inb4 people being mad. We're all looking for big things to come from this. o/ UE o/ TPF

Good luck Paragon. Its nice to see them let you get in on a war.

Here I was under the impression that Christmas wasn't for another 22 days. I really couldn't have asked for more.

Wait, what? Oh wow.

[quote name='Canik' timestamp='1322889239' post='2859911'] Yeah, speaking of things no one cares about. Hi Memoryproblems! Glad we're not allied to TPF anymore. Menotah, have fun. I know we will. [/quote] The pleasure is truly ours.

An alliance nobody cares about attacking an alliance nobody's ever heard about. Sometimes war just isn't very interesting at all.

Secret treaties are no fair. congrats.

[quote name='MrHavok' timestamp='1322794981' post='2858849'] Well I figured I would stop reading at the first sign of stupidity in this thread and your post was the first I got to However it doesn't make my point any less true [/quote] Actually, it kind of does. Had you read the thread rather then just reading what suits your desires, you would have seen that it has been discussed. Then again, if you've got doubts in TPF and the fashion in which we honor our treaties, perhaps thats a concern you should take up with your government, since our two alliances hold a treaty as well.

[quote name='Krashnaia' timestamp='1322785160' post='2858653'] Congratz to both alliances o/ USN o/ RIA BTW, a MDP doesn't means that if party A is attacked, party B must inmediatley declare on their agressors. It means that if party A is attacked [u]AND[/u] he requests party B to counter, party B must comply. Notice the fact that, since no one at NpO complaints about RIA, NpO is likely to NOT have asked RIA to enter the conflict, yet. Of course, do not let facts stop your trolling. The OWF would be a very boring place if you do so. [/quote] Actually, it depends on the way the treaty was written. I believe that was the conclusion of the 6m war when NSO asked their allies to stay out and SF cried foul saying "no, you can't do that!". Some treaties use the words "as requested", others say that they have to defend them and make no mention on if its requested or not. I haven't read this treaty or the RIA-NpO treaty enough to know how they are written, but thought I'd point out the obvious flaw in your logic before I forget about it.

[quote name='pezstar' timestamp='1322793527' post='2858829'] PZI is so 2009. [/quote] EZI is back in fashion? Sweet.

[quote name='MrHavok' timestamp='1322793407' post='2858827'] Says the guy not defending their allies in STA but hey why let being hypocritical get in the way of sucking up to people [/quote] [OOC]what a fine example of reading the first few posts of a thread and then commenting.[/ooc] Its been covered, and saying things like that go along ways to make you look like an idiot. If thats what you were aiming for, good job, well done.

[quote name='Sniper Joe' timestamp='1322782909' post='2858608'] Why would you sign a treaty with Legacy when they turn tail and run to the other side as soon as things start getting ugly? [/quote] You could ask the allies of Sparta or MHA the same thing.

Should have named this the "Sorry polar, we're not coming out today Accords"

[quote name='flak attack' timestamp='1322768550' post='2858384'] Yeah, I think this dialogue has put rolling WAPA on the top of MK's post war priorities. [/quote] They may be taken care of before that.

Unfunny jokes like this are exactly why I'm disappointed to see your alliance on the same team as me.

With RIA getting most of the attention lately, most people have forgotten that USN also has a MDoAP with NpO that they haven't yet come in to honor. Well now they've got two allies to defend. Good luck to all sides.

This has potential. But why use fancy words like antagonizing, why not just have Being a Dick 101.

[quote name='King Louis the II' timestamp='1322708780' post='2857520'] But for TPF to not backup STA is fine? when your treaty was canceled? [/quote] Why is it that your debating tactics so closely resemble a game of three card monte? "I don't like your criticism of X, so I'm going to criticize you of the same thing, which de facto recognizing that it is bad, while failing to tell you why your original criticism was wrong." Not to mention that the situations aren't at all comparable. [quote name='Gibsonator21' timestamp='1322709600' post='2857535'] The only point it would serve is to expand the war; we all know as soon as RIA jumps in, they will get hit the next day [possibly the same day] by [more than likely] several large/well-connected alliances. I'm not privy to what RIA and Polar have talked about, but I assume they agree that it's better to wait and see how the war plays out rather than play into the enemies hand. At least for now. [/quote] Is that SF's official stance on this war? Let those who have already entered to defend polar try to wear down IRON and then "see how things are going"? I had heard rumors of such, but when you put it like that, it somehow sounds even more slimy. [quote name='Locke' timestamp='1322709616' post='2857536'] http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Random_Insanity_Alliance#Treaties http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Treaties_of_the_Random_Insanity_Alliance#Treaties http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Non-military_treaty_partners_of_the_Random_Insanity_Alliance#List_of_non-military_treaty_partners Are you dense, or just blind? [/quote] My mistake, as people have been repeatedly been referring to it as a NAP, that was where I had looked. The irony of you calling anybody dense is not lost on me.

[quote name='Gibsonator21' timestamp='1322706083' post='2857472'] What could RIA actually do to TOP? Go read Delta's post. [/quote] Excuses are an awful lot like ass holes. TOP has enough of a distribution in NS that RIA could do something. Might not be alot, but something nonetheless. The point of entering a war is to do what you can and to take as much heat as you can off your allies. You enter because thats what you signed your name to. If thats all this is about, perhaps RIA should look at taking a page out of the book of TFD and NATO and how they acted during the PB-NpO war. In that war, MHA attacked TFD. TFD held a dual membership treaty with NATO, and MHA had what I believe was treaty of amnity with MHA. NATO canceled the treaty of amity with MHA, honored the waiting period, and proceeded to, if I remember correctly, provide assistance to TFD in non-military ways. If you've got a NAP with somebody who attacks your direct MDoAP partner, I'd think perhaps you ought to look at why you've got a NAP with them. I can't think of many NAPs that read along the lines of saying that you can't cancel it, wait the waiting period and then attack them for something they did prior to the NAP being canceled. Most NAPS aren't written to that effect, so I imagine that would be an option on the table for RIA if they really wanted an option to live up to their agreements. I'm not saying that RIA should do that, I understand it's a stretch, however if they are serious about backing up the people who they have made a serious pledge to (as a MDoAP is), it is an option on the table. Then again, it is rather convenient for RIA to hide behind the NAP, and who knows, perhaps RIA doesn't take treaties seriously enough to only sign MDoAPs with alliances for whom they are willing to go the extra mile.

[quote name='Woref' timestamp='1322706016' post='2857471'] We actually have pretty high activity levels... that's like the one thing we do well [/quote] The [u]only[/u] thing? Pity that activity doesn't translate into being proficient at war. I've got no doubt in STA's ability to rip you to shreds, you deserve nothing less.

[quote name='Bob Ilyani' timestamp='1322705693' post='2857464'] RIA has a friendship treaty/NAP with IRON. They don't have anything with TOP though. [/quote] And strangely, its a treaty that doesn't even make its way onto the RIA wiki. Some friendship that must be, but a NAP none-the-less, and is absolutely no reason not to attack TOP.