crazy canuck Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 [quote name='Roi Loup' timestamp='1303406122' post='2695647'] *aherm* might i step in and say we had no treaty obligations with top but obligations with mk? do people ever stop talking about this !@#$? [/quote] Roi, please invest in some reading comprehension classes. The topic at hand is the treaty NpO has with Legion. You know, the one that says, in part, "Should either of the signatory alliances be attacked by another power, the other is required to come to its assistance with its full strength and resources." Now be a good lad and convince the NpO to take their treaty obligations more seriously please. You know, in the same way TOP takes its obligations seriously. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Impero Romano Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Ryan Greenberg' timestamp='1303367459' post='2695359'] No we didn't [/quote] For the record: After two weeks of normal/full on war (pre flop), a deal was made between us to end further offensive wars and close down the front all but officially (post flop) so that you could be in a better position to open a front on TOP. The wars were expired on their normal due date and fought until so the drop off didn't seem dramatic, plus there were still some decs here and there to counter people who ignored the no redeclare, however pretty much everyone noticed it after a week or so anyway. I was under the impression that whole situation was common knowledge at this point. Edited April 21, 2011 by Il Impero Romano Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roi Loup Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 (edited) [quote name='crazy canuck' timestamp='1303406664' post='2695651'] Roi, please invest in some reading comprehension classes. The topic at hand is the treaty NpO has with Legion. You know, the one that says, in part, "Should either of the signatory alliances be attacked by another power, the other is required to come to its assistance with its full strength and resources." Now be a good lad and convince the NpO to take their treaty obligations more seriously please. You know, in the same way TOP takes its obligations seriously. [/quote] the one that clashes with [quote]5. The New Polar Order may not engage in wars related to their own conflict or the DH-NPO conflict.[/quote] or [quote]Article VI – External Treaties In the event that a conflict arises from an external treaty or agreement, this treaty shall remain resolute. These conflicts will be resolved on a case-by-case basis between the signatories of this treaty. The respective parties are not obliged to offer assistance should either signatory alliance become involved in a conflict via other treaties with other alliances or blocs. Either signatory alliance may offer assistance in such an event but any assistance would be voluntary. [/quote] unlike top we actually fought a real war a month ago. give it some time and im sure we will see each other soon. Edited April 21, 2011 by Roi Loup Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Greenberg Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 [quote name='Il Impero Romano' timestamp='1303406944' post='2695653'] For the record: After two weeks of normal/full on war (pre flop), a deal was made between us to end further offensive wars and close down the front all but officially (post flop) so that you could be in a better position to open a front on TOP. The wars were expired on their normal due date and fought until so the drop off didn't seem dramatic, plus there were still some decs here and there to counter people who ignored the no redeclare, however pretty much everyone noticed it after a week or so anyway. I was under the impression that whole situation was common knowledge at this point. [/quote] I'm probably just forgetting the dates of my wars with VE, GOD, and anyone else on the front. I obviously fought more wars with you since there are barely any TOP nations in my range. To TOP: Polar can't join in this war because it's against their terms. They're not stupid either. They just got out of a war and going against a fresh alliance like TOP wouldn't end in victory. I am sure Legion and Polar have an understanding on the situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janax Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 [quote name='Roi Loup' timestamp='1303406994' post='2695654'] unlike top we actually fought a real war a month ago. give it some time and im sure we will see each other soon. [/quote] I would wager money on that. Don't think it will just be TOP though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazy canuck Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 (edited) Ok, so NpO has found yet another way to weasle out of an obligation. Congratulations. Turns out Never say Never doesn't mean you will "fight till forever". Edited April 21, 2011 by crazy canuck Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Greenberg Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 (edited) [quote name='crazy canuck' timestamp='1303407475' post='2695665'] Ok, so NpO has found yet another way to weasle out of an obligation. Congratulations. [/quote] Because breaking terms would definitly be a beneficial thing to do. Your insults don't matter to NpO. Edited April 21, 2011 by Ryan Greenberg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazy canuck Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 [quote name='Ryan Greenberg' timestamp='1303408308' post='2695675'] Because breaking terms would definitly be a beneficial thing to do. Your insults don't matter to NpO. [/quote] Then maybe you folks should stop teasing us with this Never say Never stuff when we know you are hoping it really is never. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roi Loup Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 [quote name='crazy canuck' timestamp='1303408538' post='2695678'] Then maybe you folks should stop teasing us with this Never say Never stuff when we know you are hoping it really is never. [/quote] but its so fun Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Rahl Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 [quote name='crazy canuck' timestamp='1303407475' post='2695665'] Turns out Never say Never doesn't mean you will "fight till forever". [/quote] It was never intended to mean that, it was intended to mean "never honor a treaty," duh. I get that NpO is under terms, but coming here and saying stuff like that makes you look foolish. Par for the course, I guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmansfield68 Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 [quote name='Roi Loup' timestamp='1303406994' post='2695654'] the one that clashes with or unlike top we actually fought a real war a month ago. give it some time and im sure we will see each other soon. [/quote] NpO, my dear bretheren... Don't let them bait you. Treaty Obligations vs. Current Terms = [b]Current Terms[/b] Well played. With honor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ardus Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 [quote name='crazy canuck' timestamp='1303407475' post='2695665'] Ok, so NpO has found yet another way to weasle out of an obligation. Congratulations. [/quote] Polaris has plenty good cause to stay out of this fight and did not "find" it. Neutrality was, justifiably, demanded of them and they agreed. Sticking to that agreement is not a basis for criticism or mockery. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush Sykes Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 [quote name='crazy canuck' timestamp='1303407475' post='2695665'] Ok, so NpO has found yet another way to weasle out of an obligation. Congratulations. Turns out Never say Never doesn't mean you will "fight till forever". [/quote] This was a pretty dumb thing to say. That is all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Ardus' timestamp='1303445246' post='2696240'] Polaris has plenty good cause to stay out of this fight and did not "find" it. Neutrality was, justifiably, demanded of them and they agreed. Sticking to that agreement is not a basis for criticism or mockery. [/quote] Slap that junior partner. This isn’t like attacking their alliance for no reason using "their allies are in they should be in" as an argument, this is serious. Nobody on your side but MK gets to call out a hated enemy as cowardly and if they do you give them a very public slap in the face. Sweet treaty you two share. Taking sides with your allies hated enemy against your ally because of a comment made by your ally is a bold move and shows us all whos boss. Edited April 22, 2011 by Alterego Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varianz Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 (edited) [quote name='crazy canuck' timestamp='1303406664' post='2695651'] Roi, please invest in some reading comprehension classes. The topic at hand is the treaty NpO has with Legion. You know, the one that says, in part, "Should either of the signatory alliances be attacked by another power, the other is required to come to its assistance with its full strength and resources." Now be a good lad and convince the NpO to take their treaty obligations more seriously please. You know, in the same way TOP takes its obligations seriously. [/quote] Oh for the love of Admin you can't be serious. At least Doomhouse had the balls to straight up attack Pacifica. [quote name='crazy canuck' timestamp='1303329331' post='2694811'] That is an excellent point. The interaction allowed us to realize what had actually occured, showed us the skill and honour of those we fought against, [b]the honour of those who stood with us[/b] and the perfidious nature of those who crossed us. [/quote] Also lol'ing at the bolded part. TOP's shown [i]such[/i] gratitude to alliances like the NSO who fought alongside you the entire war, and suffered plenty for it . Or alliances like Legion, or TOOL, who also stood by you. Or NATO. Yeah. TOP's really showing some gratitude. Edited April 22, 2011 by Varianz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greatmagnus Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 Still waiting on that surrender that was supposed to be right around the corner guys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vladimir Stukov II Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 [quote name='Varianz' timestamp='1303462919' post='2696411'] Oh for the love of Admin you can't be serious. At least Doomhouse had the balls to straight up attack Pacifica. [/quote] Yea, because TOP would never have the balls to straight up attack an alliance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denial Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 [quote name='Alterego' timestamp='1303456988' post='2696382'] Slap that junior partner. This isn’t like attacking their alliance for no reason using "their allies are in they should be in" as an argument, this is serious. Nobody on your side but MK gets to call out a hated enemy as cowardly and if they do you give them a very public slap in the face. Sweet treaty you two share. Taking sides with your allies hated enemy against your ally because of a comment made by your ally is a bold move and shows us all whos boss. [/quote] another nail in the MK/TOP coffin imo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Savage Man Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 [quote name='Varianz' timestamp='1303462919' post='2696411'] Oh for the love of Admin you can't be serious. At least Doomhouse had the balls to straight up attack Pacifica. [/quote] Reminder that the Doomhouse attack was inspired by the TOP attack. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timberland Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 [quote name='Vladimir Stukov II' timestamp='1303480314' post='2696519'] Yea, because TOP would never have the balls to straight up attack an alliance. [/quote] or a whole bloc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoffron X Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 [quote name='Johnny Apocalypse' timestamp='1303325920' post='2694777'] Daimos; I know it's an alien concept to NPO to talk to alliances which have pounded the crap out of you but other alliances are capable of dialogue with their old opponents. It just so happens that when MK and TOP actually started talking they realised they got on with one another despite the vicious war they fought. [/quote] The last time we had a dialogue with MK they created Karma. It's safe to say we're never going to trust them again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monster Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 They didn't, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoffron X Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 [quote name='Antoine Roquentin' timestamp='1303486775' post='2696619'] They didn't, though. [/quote] You know what I mean. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crymson Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Varianz' timestamp='1303462919' post='2696411'] Also lol'ing at the bolded part. TOP's shown [i]such[/i] gratitude to alliances like the NSO who fought alongside you the entire war, and suffered plenty for it . Or alliances like Legion, or TOOL, who also stood by you. Or NATO. Yeah. TOP's really showing some gratitude. [/quote] We've seen this argument numerous times, and it's just as empty now as it was the first time it was made. How much changes in a year? A lot. In the 12 months after the end of GW3, the WUT collapsed, some of its alliances were sentenced to eternal war or disbanded, and the Continuum was formed. A year after that, the Continuum had collapsed and Karma was underway. A year after [b]that[/b], the BPW was just ending. And now we're in the midst of another war, and yet again the MDP web has realigned. So give it a rest. Also, it's worth noting that we'd never have become involved in that war if not for IRON's MDP with NSO. Did you know that? [quote name='Geoffron X' timestamp='1303486151' post='2696601'] The last time we had a dialogue with MK they created Karma. It's safe to say we're never going to trust them again. [/quote] Yet though the NPO spat on and screwed over numerous allies by even beginning Karma, you and yours seem to believe that it's unfair for you to be no longer trusted by many ex-allies for that decision and others like it; you point to the fact that years have passed, and you castigate those who still allow memory of it to affect their perception of the NPO of today. Why the double standard? Edited April 22, 2011 by Crymson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varianz Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 [quote name='Vladimir Stukov II' timestamp='1303480314' post='2696519'] Yea, because TOP would never have the balls to straight up attack an alliance. [/quote] A good point. TOP's done it before, so just do it again and get it out of your systems so we can all move on. Admin knows you'd rape Polar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.