Imperial Assault Alliance Announcement

[pezstar]

[quote name='Mathias' timestamp='1311259977' post='2760521']
It's most certainly not private the Polaris never cared about IAA, to put it bluntly.

[/quote]

There have been quite a few things posted in this thread that I've nodded in agreement with. This, however, just plain isn't true. I've had enough conversations with NpO in my time to feel confident in saying that they most definitely did care. I haven't spoken to them since this cancellation, so I can't speak with any confidence as to how they're feeling right now, but as far as never caring about IAA, you just plain wrong.

[Mergerberger II]

[quote name='Mathias' timestamp='1311259977' post='2760521']
It's most certainly not private the Polaris never cared about IAA, to put it bluntly.

Congratulations on overcoming Chimaera's wishes. This is the Senate's first triumph in... actually this is its first triumph ever.
[/quote]

I guarantee you nothing is further from the truth. Polaris and IAA cared for one another. We went to war for one another. Polaris cared for IAA and to say anything to the contrary is, quite simply, wrong.

[Mathias]

When we asked NpO to not attack our other ally Athens we were told that your principles and tech raiding were more important than our opinions, in so many words. Yes, you did end up backing down, but it doesn't take a political insider to know that it was more because of MK than IAA. Then in Bi-Polar you green lighted an attack on their C&G allies after putting yourself and IAA in a precarious position through your reckless aggressive war. And of course there's the Legion treaty you told none of your allies about. IAA was just another one of your Blue Cadets you didn't have to worry about, because there was no question they'd always be there for you; and that's exactly how you treated them.

And out of curiosity, when has NpO gone to war for IAA?

[Schattenmann]

[quote name='Mathias' timestamp='1311277113' post='2760645']
IAA was just another one of your Blue Cadets you didn't have to worry about, because there was no question they'd always be there for you; and that's exactly how you treated them.[/quote]
It takes two to tango. IAA's robotic worldview [size="1"](and sloppy foreign policy)[/size] has always assured that no matter who their allies are, they're bound to get stuck holding other people's bills.

[quote name='Mathias' timestamp='1311277113' post='2760645']
And out of curiosity, when has NpO gone to war for IAA?
[/quote]
When have any of IAA's allies [i]really[/i] gone to war for IAA?

Edited July 21, 2011 by Schattenmann

[Mathias]

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1311277490' post='2760649']
It takes two to tango. IAA's robotic worldview [size="1"](and sloppy foreign policy)[/size] has always assured that no matter who their allies are, they're bound to get stuck holding other people's bills.
[/quote]

I never said IAA was without faults (notice I'm not in IAA anymore), but the IAA-NpO relationship was completely one sided.

[Schattenmann]

[quote name='Mathias' timestamp='1311277703' post='2760650']
I never said IAA was without faults (notice I'm not in IAA anymore), but the IAA-NpO relationship was completely one sided.
[/quote]
[i]And? [/i]So now that IAA figured it out after a million years NpO is the bad guy? IAA are big boys, they signed the treaty, they kept it this long. We have a saying in Schloss Eggenberg: Everybody's looking for something; some of them want to use you, some of them want to get used by you; some of them want to abuse you, some of them want to be abused.

Edited July 21, 2011 by Schattenmann

[Mathias]

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1311277957' post='2760653']
[i]And? [/i]So now that IAA figured it out after a million years NpO is the bad guy? IAA are big boys, they signed the treaty, they kept it this long. We have a saying in Schloss Eggenberg: Everybody's looking for something; some of them want to use you, some of them want to get used by you; some of them want to abuse you, some of them want to be abused.
[/quote]

I don't see how IAA having a worse reaction time than GATO changes the fact that NpO was a !@#$ ally. But agree to disagree I guess.

[Schattenmann]

[quote name='Mathias' timestamp='1311278418' post='2760654']
I don't see how IAA having a worse reaction time than GATO changes the fact that NpO was a !@#$ ally. But agree to disagree I guess.
[/quote]
I'm just sick to death of ebil Order syndrome. They are (both) sidelined peripheral AAs with no real bearing on anything. Focusing on them is stupid, like these dumbass TOP "the sword is over your heads" comments ooooOOOooOOOooohhhh no duh, it's the only head they can hold a sword over. Or GATO's for that matter; IAA is the alliance that signed treaties with three competing interests, not Polaris.

IAA held the treaty as long as IAA wanted to, it's not Polar's fault they held it for 5 minutes or 5 years, regardless of how good or bad of an ally Polaris was to IAA. Hammering NpO over it is just a waste of breath in my opinion.

Edited July 21, 2011 by Schattenmann

[Greg23]

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1311278740' post='2760658']
I'm just sick to death of ebil Order syndrome. They are (both) sidelined peripheral AAs with no real bearing on anything. Focusing on them is stupid, like these dumbass TOP "the sword is over your heads" comments ooooOOOooOOOooohhhh no duh, it's the only head they can hold a sword over. Or GATO's for that matter; IAA is the alliance that signed treaties with three competing interests, not Polaris.

IAA held the treaty as long as IAA wanted to, it's not Polar's fault they held it for 5 minutes or 5 years, regardless of how good or bad of an ally Polaris was to IAA. Hammering NpO over it is just a waste of breath in my opinion.
[/quote]
No one in IAA has been hammering NpO. We felt the downgrade was necessary, NpO did not want that and instead opted for cancellation, end of story. I dont see what you have against IAA or why you feel the need to bash us in this thread.

[Mergerberger II]

[quote name='Greg23' timestamp='1311281583' post='2760676']
No one in IAA has been hammering NpO. We felt the downgrade was necessary, NpO did not want that and instead opted for cancellation, end of story. I dont see what you have against IAA or why you feel the need to bash us in this thread.
[/quote]

I agree with this fine fellow. The only issues that have arisen from this thread are from people who are not IAA or NpO, but instead want to criticize one of the parties. This was a mutual separation and I will reiterate one more time that Polaris wishes the best for IAA in the future, and I thank IAA for their well-wishing for us. Please, let us put this issue to bed, where it belongs.

[Schattenmann]

[quote name='Greg23' timestamp='1311281583' post='2760676']
No one in IAA has been hammering NpO. We felt the downgrade was necessary, NpO did not want that and instead opted for cancellation, end of story. I dont see what you have against IAA or why you feel the need to bash us in this thread.
[/quote]
Feel free to point me to a post by me that says IAA has been hammering Polaris. Or be quiet.

And grow up, disagreeing with your politics doesn't mean I am bashing you or that I have something against you. Seriously, how old are you that "IAA made a mess by treatying disparate parties" is "bashing"? If I decide to bash you or have some kind of thing against you, you will really know it, ask anyone.

Edited July 21, 2011 by Schattenmann

[Lord Boris]

Don't worry, NpO. At least you still have Legion...

yeah, okay. You're boned. On the bright side, I hear GOD may have just experienced some clearing up of things in their treaty roster

[New Frontier]

[quote name='Greg23' timestamp='1311270855' post='2760597']
Hmmm? Im confused, are we all suppose to kill each other? Then rebel and coup Chim? There is actually no problem, at all, in IAA.
[/quote]
It was a reference to something Chim said about what would happen if he was impeached.

[MitchellBade]

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1311284992' post='2760710']
If I decide to bash you or have some kind of thing against you, you will really know it, ask anyone.
[/quote]

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1311277490' post='2760649']
It takes two to tango. IAA's robotic worldview [b](and sloppy foreign policy)[/b] has always assured that no matter who their allies are, they're bound to get stuck holding other people's bills.
[/quote]

Sounds like a bash to me. And I'm 4 and a half to answer your age-related question. And before you stake that your comment is hardly a bash, let us review the word 'bash' itself. Appealing to the Urban Dictionary, 'bash' is a verb meaning 'to insult something'. So what was insulting within your statement? Well particularly since I considering myself a member of IAA, I feel slighted at the 'sloppy foreign policy' remark, along with the 'robotic worldview' which of course if you knew me, you would know that I hate bots. Also, judging from the number of posts in which you continue to criticize IAA's foreign policy approach, I believe that this is sufficient evidence to say you in fact do have something against IAA on the matter. Because let's face it, if you truly held nothing against IAA, then why would you waste your time and everyone else here with your quibbling if you indeed do not really care?

EDIT: forgot obligatory o/ IAA and NpO and Hawky of NpO is still not funny

Edited July 21, 2011 by MitchellBade

[Greg23]

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1311284992' post='2760710']
Feel free to point me to a post by me that says IAA has been hammering Polaris. Or be quiet.

And grow up, disagreeing with your politics doesn't mean I am bashing you or that I have something against you. Seriously, how old are you that "IAA made a mess by treatying disparate parties" is "bashing"? If I decide to bash you or have some kind of thing against you, you will really know it, ask anyone.
[/quote]
I never said you were bashing me, I said you were insulting my AA. Also my age doesnt matter at all, because I dont really care about your opinion of my alliance. I do care about the fact that throughout this thread you have done nothing other than insult IAA and attempt to cause problems.

[Fallen Fool]

[quote name='Mathias' timestamp='1311277113' post='2760645']IAA was just another one of your Blue Cadets you didn't have to worry about, because there was no question they'd always be there for you; and that's exactly how you treated them.[/quote]Not really. Every time single time we've gone to war against the odds since the SPW I've expected our allies to bail and every single time they've defied my expectations. I always considered it proof of the high caliber of our allies and I always found it pretty endearing.

[quote]And out of curiosity, when has NpO gone to war for IAA?[/quote]If IAA had ever asked Polar to go to war for them, Polar would have.

[Schattenmann]

[quote name='MitchellBade' timestamp='1311288753' post='2760734']
Sounds like a bash to me. And I'm 4 and a half to answer your age-related question. And before you stake that your comment is hardly a bash, let us review the word 'bash' itself. Appealing to the Urban Dictionary, 'bash' is a verb meaning 'to insult something'. So what was insulting within your statement? Well particularly since I considering myself a member of IAA, I feel slighted at the 'sloppy foreign policy' remark, along with the 'robotic worldview' which of course if you knew me, you would know that I hate bots. Also, judging from the number of posts in which you continue to criticize IAA's foreign policy approach, I believe that this is sufficient evidence to say you in fact do have something against IAA on the matter. Because let's face it, if you truly held nothing against IAA, then why would you waste your time and everyone else here with your quibbling if you indeed do not really care?

EDIT: forgot obligatory o/ IAA and NpO and Hawky of NpO is still not funny
[/quote]
MD+ level treaties with Polaris and GATO is the definition of sloppy. IAA has a sloppy foreign policy which has plagued it for years. If IAA doesn't like hearing that, they know where to look to fix it.

I have an issue with the Pax Pacifica treaty model. It's old, it's dumb, and everyone knows it does not work unless your goal is to bring everything to a grinding halt. Yet here everyone is--IAA, Europa, NoR, etc etc--still doing it 4 years later. I get nasty when I talk about it, but rest assured, it's not an IAA thing.

[quote name='Greg23' timestamp='1311289300' post='2760744']
I never said you were bashing me, I said you were insulting my AA. Also my age doesnt matter at all, because I dont really care about your opinion of my alliance. I do care about the fact that throughout this thread you have done nothing other than insult IAA and attempt to cause problems.
[/quote]
As expected.
[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1311284992' post='2760710']
Feel free to point me to a post by me that says IAA has been hammering Polaris. [b] Or be quiet.[/b][/quote]

Edited July 22, 2011 by Schattenmann

[Xiphosis]

My best to Chimaera and Polaris.

[quote name='Bill Wallace' timestamp='1311037212' post='2758865']
Both IAA and NpO have repeatedly wished each other the best and yet the sharks appear on schedule thinking they smell blood. You guys should save the angst for something that really matters.
[/quote]

You expect too much of much too little.

[TheListener]

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1311277490' post='2760649']
When have any of IAA's allies [i]really[/i] gone to war for IAA?
[/quote]

Never, because we're smart enough to not get ourselves into sticky situations every other week like a lot of alliances do. When we do our diplomats seem to shine and bring us out of whatever situation we've gotten ourselves into.

[Schattenmann]

[quote name='TheListener' timestamp='1311310175' post='2761033']
Never, because we're smart enough to not get ourselves into sticky situations every other week like a lot of alliances do. When we do our diplomats seem to shine and bring us out of whatever situation we've gotten ourselves into.
[/quote]
Thank you for helping me make my point.

[Fallen Fool]

[quote name='Heft' timestamp='1311027750' post='2758738']Terrifying.[/quote]Just saw this and yeah pretty stupid mistake. For the record, I meant abominable.