RIA Treaty Cancellation

[Aurion]

I was referring to Goldie's post specifically, but yeah. I'm disappointed it went down like this as well.

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1302290943' post='2687012']
~snip
[/quote]

As Impero noted, he was replying directly to James' statement that VE neglected RIA with a counterexample.

Edited April 8, 2011 by Aurion

[Schattenmann]

[quote name='Bob Janova' timestamp='1302289031' post='2686990']
It is disappointing to be cancelled on for something which boils down to 'we don't like your bloc', particularly considering our long history of backing up SF even without being in the bloc or particularly aligned to its interests.
[/quote][quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1302289387' post='2686994']
Bob, let's get real: VE applied to SF twice (or at least once depending on who's telling the story) and had treaties with at least 3 of the members of SF (GOD, RIA, RoK and maybe I missed more). RIA on the other hand has no interest in being in PB, and PB's imperialist ambitions are a far cry from SF's laid back role in the world. The two situations are not anywhere near comparable, and as I said to kriek if VE didn't like being stuck to SF's hip, they were just as able to clean up their FP and cancel their treaties as RIA is.
[/quote]


[quote name='Bob Janova' timestamp='1302291676' post='2687019']
I'm fairly sure this isn't true, though I'll cede to more senior VEers on that one.

The rest of your post was pure rhetoric ('rawr imperialism boo VE') and not really worth addressing.
[/quote]
Bob, you've really let me down, I thought a man with a mind capable of discussing [i]this event [/i]rather than me had finally arrived.

Imperialism is a term with a specific meaning, it is a word, it defines PB's formation, ambitions, and actions from being created by a bunch of people that did not need any more security or connections, to wars of election to subdue all possible opposition. IT is an aggressive bloc formed in absence of a threat. If you disagree, argue it like a man instead of borrowing Impero's "derp propaganda" card.
VE applied, as I said, twice (or at least once) to SF. Everyone knows that they applied at least once because it was during this process that Smooth uttered his famous "VE never disbanded" crap, making VE a laughing stock at Fark with an echo that has lasted 2 years. The second occasion is argued as either VE applying, or GOD(?) inviting them and VE declining it. Whichever it is, VE has been in play for SF twice. Your opinion of my word choices has no bearing on [u]history.[/u]
The "rest of my post" directly wrecks your analogy so I can see why you would not want to reply to it.

Edited April 8, 2011 by Schattenmann

[The Trail]

[quote name='kriekfreak' timestamp='1302287386' post='2686977']
That's because you were not involved in any planning on our side. And they have not just made mistakes in this war, they made a couple of them just before it. But I'm not here to kick RIA in the ground.
[/quote]

And everyone saw the FOK nations at the start of the war attack non NpO nations (lol@checkingAAbeforeattacking)
But I'm not here to kick FOK into the ground.

[Sweeeeet Ronny D]

Damn, dont you people have jobs? how can you argue back and forth on forums all day long?

anyways, what up RIA, lets ODP this!

[Panic King]

[quote name='William Bonney' timestamp='1302247032' post='2686633']
What a shame. Well at least they didn't DoW you because they don't like you.
[/quote]
Wins the thread

[Bob Janova]

It's really not the thread, but to humour you briefly: No, PB is not 'imperialistic'. PB has started one war (this one), and that was because of one of our members being spied on. You can bring the NPO front into the discussion but that really doesn't have much to do with PB, as the ties that connect those alliances predate PB and something similar could easily have happened without PB. I'm not sure where you get SF's 'laid back' attitude either since RoK and/or GOD have been primary drivers behind several real or close wars since Karma.

PB is a power political entity, for sure. I guess you can conflate that with 'imperialistic' if you try really hard. We aren't trying to form an empire or overarching hegemony that everyone has to live under, though, and that's what imperialism is. (There aren't many times in history when anyone really has been imperialist. I guess the Orders with their joint structures of Continuum-One Vision-BLEU could be argued to be one.)

Now, if you want to have a big discussion about the evils of PB, we should probably take it elsewhere. The only relevance it has here is that apparently RIA bought into some of the nonsense that anti-PB people have been saying recently.

(I'm going to leave the joining-SF thing alone because someone more informed can field that.)

[Hereno]

There is much more to be said for the people who develop and grow, even if that growth happens to be apart, than there is for people who spew the same old garbage year after year for the sake of consistency. Some people admire those who stick to their guns no matter what, but an even greater test of character is whether you're willing to accept new events and change yourselves accordingly. Don't let the b4$74&#s get you down, guys. Best of luck to the both parties on your slightly divergent paths.

[Johnny Apocalypse]

Hot damn! It's like a horrible trainwreck in here. Somebody put the kettle on and make some tea or something, it sounds like you all need to calm down for a second.

Treaty cancellations are never fun, good luck to you both.

[Panic King]

[quote name='Max Power' timestamp='1302271892' post='2686774']
Umbrella is a really hot woman. GOONS is her little cousin with ADHD and who is almost but not quite as hot. RIA is a fat chick. VE used to have a live-in relationship with RIA but then moved in with Umbrella and GOONS instead, while a bunch of Dutchmen and snake charmers came over every so often for parties. Problem is that even though you tell Umbrella and GOONS you love them, they were in a kinky three-way relationship with MK.

And that is apparently what this thread is about.
[/quote]
And this clears this thread up once and for all...thanks for this posting

[Schattenmann]

[quote name='Bob Janova' timestamp='1302293333' post='2687033']
ok
[/quote]
Good, wasn't difficult was it? I did indeed forget about Rok's attrocious $6m War and GOD's perenial desire to be Hellraiser.
We're almost done. . .
[quote name='Bob Janova' timestamp='1302289031' post='2686990']
It is disappointing to be cancelled on for something which boils down to 'we don't like your bloc', particularly considering our long history of backing up SF even without being in the bloc or particularly aligned to its interests.
[/quote]
VE applied to SF at least once and had treaties with at least 3 of the members of SF (GOD, RIA, RoK).
RIA on the other hand has no interest in being in PB, nor apparently in PB's wars of election. The two situations are not anywhere near comparable, and as I said to kriek if VE didn't like being stuck to SF's hip, they were just as able to clean up their FP and cancel their treaties as RIA is.

You say?

Edited April 8, 2011 by Schattenmann

[Ardus]

I'm saddened to see this happen and equally saddened by the reasoning. But the decision's made.

Best of luck to both parties moving forward.

[Vol Navy]

[quote name='Bob Janova' timestamp='1302293333' post='2687033']
It's really not the thread, but to humour you briefly: No, PB is not 'imperialistic'. PB has started one war (this one), and that was because of one of our members being spied on. You can bring the NPO front into the discussion but that really doesn't have much to do with PB, as the ties that connect those alliances predate PB and something similar could easily have happened without PB. I'm not sure where you get SF's 'laid back' attitude either since RoK and/or GOD have been primary drivers behind several real or close wars since Karma.

PB is a power political entity, for sure. I guess you can conflate that with 'imperialistic' if you try really hard. We aren't trying to form an empire or overarching hegemony that everyone has to live under, though, and that's what imperialism is. (There aren't many times in history when anyone really has been imperialist. I guess the Orders with their joint structures of Continuum-One Vision-BLEU could be argued to be one.)

Now, if you want to have a big discussion about the evils of PB, we should probably take it elsewhere. The only relevance it has here is that apparently RIA bought into some of the nonsense that anti-PB people have been saying recently.

(I'm going to leave the joining-SF thing alone because someone more informed can field that.)
[/quote]


Wow....

So PB doesn't really have anything to do with the NPO front....outside of the fact that 2 members of PB are behind the initial assault and now VE and FOK are fighting against people on that front too. It's also been stated many times that your NpO war is part of the NPO front by top gov from PB members.

And yes, I am sure that RIA just didn't see anything for themselves based on your actions. Just bought into all this anti-PB propaganda and rage quit on you without a word.

Once again, chickens come home to roost. Frankly it's a bold move by RIA and one that likely places them in no small amount of danger given the general "if you aren't with us you're against us stance" that comes from PB/DH so often.

[Bob Janova]

[quote]and as I said to kriek if VE didn't like being stuck to SF's hip, they were just as able to clean up their FP and cancel their treaties as RIA is.[/quote]
We don't 'clean up' treaties that are a bit inconvenient, because we value our allies, not their connections. That can get us into problems but I'd rather have it that way than doing everything based on political objectives.

Edit: Vol Navy, you're heading in the Alterego direction of strawmanning and reaching ridiculous distances, but I'll give you a shot. First, read what you actually quoted – the connections behind the alliances that hit NPO are older than PB. The alliances currently in PB would almost certainly have been on the same side anyway, and in a coalition you help your coalition partners win the war. Yes, we're legally supporting them through PB since it's there, but I'm sure there would have been a way to help them without it. Just look at Karma and how alliances worked together despite not being in the same bloc.

[quote]given the general "if you aren't with us you're against us stance" that comes from PB/DH so often[/quote]
You mean, the one you just made up now? That's not PB's policy and never has been.

Edited April 8, 2011 by Bob Janova

[Spaniard United]

You are only as good as the company you keep.

I applaud this move and the cajones it took to make it.

[Penkala]

[quote name='Bill Wallace' timestamp='1302273179' post='2686794']
What "show" are you talking about? I see Penkala trolling as usual (remember that's what he does, no matter what alliance he's in) and I also see Impero and Goldie disagreeing with RIA's decision to cancel, but have been respectful. Your anti-VE spin is awful. Where's Schatt? He does a pretty good job with the anti-VE hyperbole. Schatt my man, where are you?
[/quote]

I'm being quite serious.

RIA made a terrible decision, and I don't consider them friends of the Entente anymore. It's really that simply.

My opinion and mine alone, obviously. But, yeah.

[quote]The tone of certain people is pretty bad yeah. What penkala said is horrible[/quote]

I have a special interest in this case and am especially disappointed in RIA's actions.

[quote]Bitter?

You make VE so much more likable, Penkala.[/quote]

Yeah, I'm kind of bitter to see a decision like this come from an alliance I was the DMoFA of just a year ago, and to see a bloc that I called my home for years continue to make decisions that I find extremely questionable.

[quote]honorable. [/quote]

Take your 'honor' and shove it. There's nothing 'honorable' about what RIA is doing, it's just politics.

[quote]You know there are ways to control that... [/quote]

Not really. I'll speak my mind as much as I like, so long as I'm reasonable about it. Impero doesn't have a problem with that. If he did, I wouldn't be here anymore.

Edited April 8, 2011 by Penkala

[chefjoe]

[quote name='Penkala' timestamp='1302298029' post='2687080']
I'm being quite serious.

[b]RIA made a terrible decision[/b], and [b]I don't consider them friends[/b] of the Entente anymore. It's really that simply.

My opinion and mine alone, obviously. But, yeah.



I have a special interest in this case and am [b]especially disappointed in RIA's actions.[/b]



[b]Yeah, I'm kind of bitter[/b]
[/quote]


Pure gold.


Anything garnering this reaction from Penkala has my total and unequivocal support.

o/ RIA

Edited April 8, 2011 by chefjoe

[The Trail]

[quote name='chefjoe' timestamp='1302299023' post='2687086']
Pure gold.


Anything garnering this reaction from Penkala has my total and unequivocal support.

o/ RIA
[/quote]

I am so glad IRON signed a treaty with RIA

[AnCapistan]

[quote name='Il Impero Romano' timestamp='1302290535' post='2687009']
I'm always mad, literally.
[/quote]

When I'm feeling blue, I find solace in eating frozen burritos.

[Taget]

Based on the Cliff Note's version of the thread I've scanned I can only comment that it is disssapointing to see fat girls refusing to be part of world domination.

[foxfire99]

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1302292322' post='2687026']
Bob, you've really let me down, I thought a man with a mind capable of discussing [i]this event [/i]rather than me had finally arrived.

Imperialism is a term with a specific meaning, it is a word, it defines PB's formation, ambitions, and actions from being created by a bunch of people that did not need any more security or connections, to wars of election to subdue all possible opposition. IT is an aggressive bloc formed in absence of a threat. If you disagree, argue it like a man instead of borrowing Impero's "derp propaganda" card.
[b]VE[/b] applied, as I said, twice (or at least once) to SF. Everyone knows that they applied at least once because it was during this process that Smooth uttered his famous "[b]VE[/b] never disbanded" crap, making [b]VE[/b] a laughing stock at Fark with an echo that has lasted 2 years. The second occasion is argued as either [b]VE[/b] applying, or GOD(?) inviting them and [b]VE[/b] declining it. Whichever it is, [b]VE[/b] has been in play for SF twice. Your opinion of my word choices has no bearing on [u]history.[/u]
The "rest of my post" directly wrecks your analogy so I can see why you would not want to reply to it.
[/quote]

You don't seem that interested in discussing the event (RIA cancelling on VE) either. You wouldn't be here if this were any other alliance. This is just another excuse for you to sling mud at the Entente and hope something sticks. [/scolding]

Anyway, this is disappointing, but I suppose if you felt you had to do it then it's good that you did. Hopefully we'll still stay on pretty much the same side. Just promise you won't join that anime block

(Edit: The "Lucky Star Accords" )

Edited April 8, 2011 by foxfire99

[Haflinger]

[quote name='Prodigal Moon' timestamp='1302291671' post='2687018']
As Schatt has outlined in this very thread, VE's FA has been incoherent. Protect CB but join PB. Attack an ally's ally - which was almost inevitable. Try to be an unofficial member of SF and real member of PB. These are major potential conflicts. Either VE couldn't pick a side (tough when you stand for nothing) or is absolutely oblivious.
[/quote]
The funny thing about VE is that they do actually stand for things, but you're right about the incoherence. Their problem is that they stand for too many things, and they get confused.

[Xiphosis]

/shrugs.

Stuff happens. I know why you did this, and I respect the reasoning. I hope you both mend the relationship in the future.

[Schattenmann]

Xiphosis is a man that understands what a treaty means.

[Emperor Whimsical]

Edited.

Edited April 9, 2011 by Emperor Whimsical

[WarriorConcept]

Here's to hopefully reconnecting in the near future.