Lord Levistus Posted June 19, 2011 Report Share Posted June 19, 2011 Now this is more like it. This is what i was looking for 12 pages ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
askani the rotund Posted June 19, 2011 Report Share Posted June 19, 2011 I always preferred "Ours is the Fury" but,You northerners have your own ways. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyperion321 Posted June 19, 2011 Report Share Posted June 19, 2011 (edited) [quote name='welshgazza1992' timestamp='1308526473' post='2735096'] We held a treaty with Polar, they were attacked. Anybody who honestly expected RoK not to go war, was plain stupid... not that that is an issue for this thread, though. [/quote] It's not that they expected you [i]not[/i] to go to war, it's just that common convention within CN is that bloc mates and the collective interests of said blocs are generally what comes first and foremost (to a degree) in a signatory's foreign policy. Quite frankly, that is just how it is. Bloc signatories generally give up political maneuverability in exchange for greater security and a longer political and military reach via concentration of power through like-minded alliances. The fact that RoK's policies and desires deviated from the rest of SF...well...nobody can really fault you for that. People change. I think the real hurt just came from how it was handled in that the deviation and the effects of said split of interests was so sudden and resulted in the same bloc fighting on two sides. It's not that you or anyone else was wrong for disagreeing/splitting on the issues surrounding the start of the war, it's just that the severe breakdown of communication witihn what is generally supposed to be a solid, single political identity caused a metric $%&@-ton of headaches. Edited June 19, 2011 by Hyperion321 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Levistus Posted June 19, 2011 Report Share Posted June 19, 2011 [quote name='Delta1212' timestamp='1308526801' post='2735107'] You're right, I was a !@#$@#$ idiot for trusting you to stick by us no matter what. [/quote] Where were your considerations for THEIR treaties? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delta1212 Posted June 19, 2011 Report Share Posted June 19, 2011 [quote name='Lord Levistus' timestamp='1308527000' post='2735112'] Where were your considerations for THEIR treaties? [/quote] Um, I fought on both sides of the war for their treaties, but thanks for asking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Apocalypse Posted June 19, 2011 Report Share Posted June 19, 2011 [quote name='Lord Levistus' timestamp='1308527000' post='2735112'] Where were your considerations for THEIR treaties? [/quote] Contained in their DoW against SLCB in defense of RoK I'd imagine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graphix Posted June 19, 2011 Report Share Posted June 19, 2011 [quote name='Proximo' timestamp='1308526368' post='2735094'] Congrats on the bloc guys! [/quote] Why thank you! Is that what this little ol' thread is about? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Levistus Posted June 19, 2011 Report Share Posted June 19, 2011 [quote name='Delta1212' timestamp='1308527186' post='2735116'] Um, I fought on both sides of the war for their treaties, but thanks for asking. [/quote] [quote name='Johnny Apocalypse' timestamp='1308527242' post='2735118'] Contained in their DoW against SLCB in defense of RoK I'd imagine. [/quote] Sure, after Polar was attacked, which triggered the RoK treaty. VE attacked Polar, did they do it without discussing this with their SF partners and their various treaty partners? Did Delta sign off on it through SF and just expect RoK to ignore it? That's the considerations i speak of. Sure, you came in afterwards and fought on both sides, but to blast them for a breach of trust is asinine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delta1212 Posted June 19, 2011 Report Share Posted June 19, 2011 [quote name='Lord Levistus' timestamp='1308527539' post='2735124'] Sure, after Polar was attacked, which triggered the RoK treaty. VE attacked Polar, did they do it without discussing this with their SF partners and their various treaty partners? Did Delta sign off on it through SF and just expect RoK to ignore it? That's the considerations i speak of. Sure, you came in afterwards and fought on both sides, but to blast them for a breach of trust is asinine. [/quote] [I]Rok[/I] signed off on it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haven for Peace Posted June 19, 2011 Report Share Posted June 19, 2011 Huh, DT and NoR are Viking alliances? Nice. <3 DT, especially their TiTaN. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emperor Whimsical Posted June 19, 2011 Report Share Posted June 19, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Lord Levistus' timestamp='1308527539' post='2735124'] Sure, after Polar was attacked, which triggered the RoK treaty. VE attacked Polar, did they do it without discussing this with their SF partners and their various treaty partners? Did Delta sign off on it through SF and just expect RoK to ignore it? That's the considerations i speak of. Sure, you came in afterwards and fought on both sides, but to blast them for a breach of trust is asinine. [/quote] Hoo himself admits that Taut's chat with VE meant that Rok was with SF and PB during last war. Hence our surprise when they attacked how they did. Edited June 19, 2011 by Emperor Whimsical Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Ilyani Posted June 19, 2011 Report Share Posted June 19, 2011 Funny how this thread became about the internal workings of SF. Everyone should just stay on topic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delta1212 Posted June 19, 2011 Report Share Posted June 19, 2011 [quote name='Emperor Whimsical' timestamp='1308527754' post='2735127'] Hoo himself admits that Rampag3's chat with VE meant that Rok was with SF and PB during last war. Hence our surprise when they attacked how they did. [/quote] It was Tautology. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leigon Posted June 19, 2011 Report Share Posted June 19, 2011 [quote name='Delta1212' timestamp='1308527649' post='2735125'] [I]Rok[/I] signed off on it. [/quote] I've been wondering if people don't know this or if they are just purposefully trying to ignore it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emperor Whimsical Posted June 19, 2011 Report Share Posted June 19, 2011 [quote name='Delta1212' timestamp='1308527807' post='2735130'] It was Tautology. [/quote] Ah I thought their HoFA signed off. My mistake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delta1212 Posted June 19, 2011 Report Share Posted June 19, 2011 [quote name='Emperor Whimsical' timestamp='1308527921' post='2735135'] Ah I thought their HoFA signed off. My mistake. [/quote] That was an SF convo. Taut is the one that talked to Impero. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crymson Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 [quote name='Lord Levistus' timestamp='1308527539' post='2735124'] Sure, after Polar was attacked, which triggered the RoK treaty. VE attacked Polar, did they do it without discussing this with their SF partners and their various treaty partners? Did Delta sign off on it through SF and just expect RoK to ignore it? That's the considerations i speak of. Sure, you came in afterwards and fought on both sides, but to blast them for a breach of trust is asinine. [/quote] I was about to note to you that you're entirely incorrect, but it appears that others have already done so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rampage3 Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 Delta told a funny! The truth is that SF committed to go in on an oA (for an AA that no longer exists) and then tried to blame US for splitting the bloc when their greater responsibility was to us. PERIOD. You had already decided that your loyalties would lie elsewhere and that the only way for us to "be loyal to the bloc" was to let Polar rot. Prior to this WE followed SF on every errand it ever ran including some things that were, to be honest, rather stupid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vol Navy Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 I can't blame RoK for having a change of heart after the VE story quickly sprang so many leaks. Fact is VE/Xiph/Lennox set up RoK's ally. If the respect was truly there diplomacy would have prevailed but there was a rush order in to roll some Orders. Now they landed on their feet with a pretty good bloc of alliances and are still tied into the ruling structure. Pretty good FA moves on their part. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delta1212 Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 [quote name='Rampage3' timestamp='1308528283' post='2735139'] Delta told a funny! The truth is that SF committed to go in on an oA (for an AA that no longer exists) and then tried to blame US for splitting the bloc when their greater responsibility was to us. PERIOD. You had already decided that your loyalties would lie elsewhere and that the only way for us to "be loyal to the bloc" was to let Polar rot. Prior to this WE followed SF on every errand it ever ran including some things that were, to be honest, rather stupid. [/quote] You're lying and I'm too disgusted with you to continue talking about it. I'll see you in hell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balder Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 (edited) Edit: I actually love Delta's response so much more than mine. Please just read his again for emphasis. Edited June 20, 2011 by Balder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Stupid Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 (edited) This makes me sick. It sucks to see SF and ex-SF fighting. I can't blame anyone though, I probably would have done the same thing in Taut's shoes. Edited June 20, 2011 by Joe Stupid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sniper Joe Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 Oh, this is good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Levistus Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Delta1212' timestamp='1308527649' post='2735125'] [I]Rok[/I] signed off on it. [/quote] O.o [quote name='Leigon' timestamp='1308527890' post='2735134'] I've been wondering if people don't know this or if they are just purposefully trying to ignore it. [/quote] Well, I don't recall seeing that before, although it's likely just a symptom of too much CN dramaz rattling around in my head from these past several years. After a while it all seems to run together at times. [quote name='Crymson' timestamp='1308528156' post='2735137'] I was about to note to you that you're entirely incorrect... [/quote] Meh, happens to everyone occasionally. Edited June 20, 2011 by Lord Levistus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 [quote name='Delta1212' timestamp='1308528541' post='2735143'] You're lying and I'm too disgusted with you to continue talking about it. I'll see you in hell. [/quote] Great response to his claims. A+++ 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.