Jump to content

Imperial Assault Alliance Announcement


Recommended Posts

[quote name='Ardus' timestamp='1311015293' post='2758571']
Oh wow, this is pretty significant. I remember how highly Chimera spoke of Polaris and the IAA-NpO treaty back during the Weeaboo War, so I can't help but wonder what the reasons were.
[/quote]

In a democratic alliance like IAA you need more than an emperor to speak highly of the treaty to keep it. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 220
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

It is a minor note and changes nothing, but for the record Polar did the canceling here. The IAA came to Polaris and advised us that they had decided to "downgrade" our treaty to an ODP. Our now former treaty held no such facility. I consider unilaterally deciding to change the terms of a treaty to be a violation of it, and therefore advised the IAA that they could consider it cancelled.

This is unfortunate as I always held that the IAA to their word and believed we had a good past (and future) of cooperation. Despite that, Polaris sticks to their word, upholds their treaties, and expects the same from their allies. I don't know why the sudden change, but it does disappoint me greatly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='RandomInterrupt' timestamp='1311017518' post='2758588']
It is a minor note and changes nothing, but for the record Polar did the canceling here. The IAA came to Polaris and advised us that they had decided to "downgrade" our treaty to an ODP. Our now former treaty held no such facility. I consider unilaterally deciding to change the terms of a treaty to be a violation of it, and therefore advised the IAA that they could consider it cancelled.

This is unfortunate as I always held that the IAA to their word and believed we had a good past (and future) of cooperation. Despite that, Polaris sticks to their word, upholds their treaties, and expects the same from their allies. I don't know why the sudden change, but it does disappoint me greatly.
[/quote]

With that logic, upgrading a treaty is a violation too as you are unilaterally changing the terms (Just in the opposite direction).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm saddened and disappointed in see IAA go but I honestly wish the best for them.

[quote name='Krunk the Great' timestamp='1311017668' post='2758589']
With that logic, upgrading a treaty is a violation too as you are unilaterally changing the terms (Just in the opposite direction).
[/quote]

When you upgrade a treaty you just consider the previous one canceled and sign a new one, I though that was common knowledge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='D34th' timestamp='1311017882' post='2758593']
I'm saddened and disappointed in see IAA go but I honestly wish the best for them.



When you upgrade a treaty you just consider the previous one canceled and sign a new one, I though that was common knowledge.
[/quote]

When you downgrade a treaty you just consider the previous one canceled and sign a new one, I thought that was common knowledge.

Downgrade, Upgrade, either way you are changing the terms of the treaty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='RandomInterrupt' timestamp='1311017518' post='2758588']
It is a minor note and changes nothing, but for the record Polar did the canceling here. The IAA came to Polaris and advised us that they had decided to "downgrade" our treaty to an ODP. Our now former treaty held no such facility. I consider unilaterally deciding to change the terms of a treaty to be a violation of it, and therefore advised the IAA that they could consider it cancelled.

This is unfortunate as I always held that the IAA to their word and believed we had a good past (and future) of cooperation. Despite that, Polaris sticks to their word, upholds their treaties, and expects the same from their allies. I don't know why the sudden change, but it does disappoint me greatly.
[/quote]
You could just have stated that you no longer wanted a treaty with them if it wasn't at a MDP level.

I don't quite get the shot at IAA: they canceled, yes, because they feel the relationship isn't what they want to pursue in the future. They aren't abandoning you in a war here. I might be reading too much into it and could just be a !@#$ feeling from losing a close ally though.

Edited by Penlugue Solaris
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Penlugue Solaris' timestamp='1311019028' post='2758612']
You could just have stated that you no longer wanted a treaty with them if it wasn't at a MDP level.

I don't quite get the shot at IAA: they canceled, yes, because they feel the relationship isn't what they want to pursue in the future. They aren't abandoning you in a war here. I might be reading too much into it and could just be a !@#$ feeling from losing a close ally though.
[/quote]
It was not intended as a shot at anyone. This announcement states that the IAA cancelled their treaty with Polaris for an un-named reason. As I said in my post, it is a minor point that changes nothing, but I am a fan of having the truth presented. Polar cancelled the Polar-IAA treaty after the IAA decided to unilaterally change it. (That means they changed it without input or permission from us, Krunk.)

I have no real issue with the IAA and wish them the best, but I feel it is important that everyone understand what really happened here so we can discuss this with the proper facts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm.

IAA cancels on a classy note, but seeks a ODP to replace original treaty with. NpO Declines. Now NpO states it canceled said treaty. Five Days Pass. NpO sends a few decent posters out in attempt to spin. No face was saved.

Nothing seems to have changed in my absence.


I'm also curious why it matters who canceled on who? Best wishes NpO and to our allies in IAA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='RandomInterrupt' timestamp='1311019380' post='2758614']
It was not intended as a shot at anyone. This announcement states that the IAA cancelled their treaty with Polaris for an un-named reason. As I said in my post, it is a minor point that changes nothing, but I am a fan of having the truth presented. Polar cancelled the Polar-IAA treaty after the IAA decided to unilaterally change it. (That means they changed it without input or permission from us, Krunk.)

I have no real issue with the IAA and wish them the best, but I feel it is important that everyone understand what really happened here so we can discuss this with the proper facts.
[/quote]
We did not mean to insult you, or NpO, or misrepresent the truth. The way we figured it, since we had downgraded and you did not want it, that meant the treaty to be cancelled, but since we were the ones to want the change it meant we were the ones to really cancel it.

It doesnt really matter, and IAA wishes the best to NpO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Greg23' timestamp='1311020087' post='2758621']
We did not mean to insult you, or NpO, or misrepresent the truth. The way we figured it, since we had downgraded and you did not want it, that meant the treaty to be cancelled, but since we were the ones to want the change it meant we were the ones to really cancel it.

It doesnt really matter, and IAA wishes the best to NpO.
[/quote]

You downgraded a treaty with a partner without even informing them of your intent or to see if they would be okay with it?

Now I'm not polar's biggest fan, but I can still point out that's a clear lack of class and respect if that is what occurred.

Edited by WarriorConcept
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='WarriorConcept' timestamp='1311020508' post='2758625']
You downgraded a treaty with a partner without even informing them of your intent or to see if they would be okay with it?

Now I'm not polar's biggest fan, but I can still point out that's a clear lack of class and respect if that is what occurred.
[/quote]
You shut your trap, WarriorConcept, Polaris is unpopular so clearly IAA are golden and totally freakin awesome for deciding a MDoAP was suddenly an ODP and then spinning what really happened in a race to the OWF. [i]Duh.[/i]

Edited by Schattenmann
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='TimLee' timestamp='1311019793' post='2758618']
Hmmm.

IAA cancels on a classy note, but seeks a ODP to replace original treaty with. NpO Declines. Now NpO states it canceled said treaty. Five Days Pass. NpO sends a few decent posters out in attempt to spin. No face was saved.

Nothing seems to have changed in my absence.


I'm also curious why it matters who canceled on who? Best wishes NpO and to our allies in IAA.
[/quote]IAA did not cancel our treaty and offer a new one as recompense, they just took it upon themselves to inform our government that they had to decided to downgrade it. We took minor issue with this attempt at one-sided dictation in a relationship which was supposed to be between equal partners, and informed them we would feel more comfortable cancelling on them outright. They understood, we wished them luck, and both parties part equitably.

At least, apparently, until we tried to correct a minor error in the cancellation thread and faced hostility in return. A rather sad end to a relationship I had long valued.

Edited by Fallen Fool
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='RandomInterrupt' timestamp='1311017518' post='2758588']
It is a minor note and changes nothing, but for the record Polar did the canceling here. The IAA came to Polaris and advised us that they had decided to "downgrade" our treaty to an ODP. Our now former treaty held no such facility. I consider unilaterally deciding to change the terms of a treaty to be a violation of it, and therefore advised the IAA that they could consider it cancelled.

This is unfortunate as I always held that the IAA to their word and believed we had a good past (and future) of cooperation. Despite that, Polaris sticks to their word, upholds their treaties, and expects the same from their allies. I don't know why the sudden change, but it does disappoint me greatly.
[/quote]

I was going to stay quiet about this, however it seems Polaris's idiocy makes itself noted again.

GATO has been long been IAA's allies and we know how they are. Meaning they are a close group of friends you can count on during any rough times and will always rise to the occasion to help an ally in need. If IAA came to us and told us they were going to downgrade our treaty to a ODP or just MDP level, we for sure wouldn't kick them to the curb. We respect IAA's decision in what they do and keep our friendship going no matter what level a silly treaty is.

However, in this case, IAA wanted to downgrade with Polaris and likely for very logical reasons, yet wanted to remain your friend. Polaris didn't want to keep the treaty because it was not MD level? Really? How extremely foolish of you. How even dare you say IAA doesn't respect Polaris or the treaty when the last war they [i]burned[/i] for your idiocy of starting another global conflict. You are saying that IAA is not good enough for Polaris because they don't want to follow your every single one of your actions played out in the Political Landscape. This only means you want IAA to be a meatshield and when IAA says no, you toss them aside and look elsewhere. If this is how you see your friends, then shame on you for you are one terrible friend to have. Friends are people who will stand by each other no matter the arising conflict at hand whether it be internal or external. It would seem that you cannot handle one friend's disagreement and that's a real shame because you lost some great friends in IAA.

It would seem that there is a reason for every war leading up to thus far to why it leads to Polaris getting rolled. These things that you make clear with this post is to why the OWF considers you to be the scum of Planet Bob. So keeping on rolling along Polaris, and when one day you find yourself without friends, then you will truly be put in agony.

o/ IAA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='WarriorConcept' timestamp='1311020508' post='2758625']
You downgraded a treaty with a partner without even informing them of your intent or to see if they would be okay with it?

Now I'm not polar's biggest fan, but I can still point out that's a clear lack of class and respect if that is what occurred.
[/quote]
We approached Polaris and informed them that IAA was currently in discussions over our future with Polaris and that a downgrade of the current treaty was on the table. Polaris agreed to wait while we decided. After days of discussion and a vote, IAA deemed that a downgrade would be in the best interests. When Polaris was approached with our decision, they declined to have a downgrade and instead asked for the treaty to be cancelled and dropped altogether. So to answer your question, Polaris was anything but ill-informed on the matter.

Edited by MitchellBade
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Greg23' timestamp='1311020087' post='2758621']
We did not mean to insult you, or NpO, or misrepresent the truth. The way we figured it, since we had downgraded and you did not want it, that meant the treaty to be cancelled, but since we were the ones to want the change it meant we were the ones to really cancel it.

It doesnt really matter, and IAA wishes the best to NpO.
[/quote]
I'm sure it was just a mix-up. No big deal. I really do wish the best for the IAA in the future.

[quote name='WarriorConcept' timestamp='1311020508' post='2758625']
You downgraded a treaty with a partner without even informing them of your intent or to see if they would be okay with it?
[/quote]
They informed us that they were considering voting on a downgrade. We advised them that our treaty did not allow a downgrade and we were not interested in mutually agreeing to one. Later they came to us and informed us that they had downgraded our treaty, and we advised them at that we would there cancel.

In the IAA's defense, they did keep us informed as they moved through the process. They just didn't seem to understand that it was a one-sided process that had no valid basis based on the treaty. They kept us updated on their actions, but did not want our input on them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...