The Predictable Unpredictable Treaty Name [Insert Here]

[shahenshah]

[quote name='AirMe' timestamp='1355146397' post='3062378']
Stop using logic! Didn't you know we are war mongering cowards that will sell out our allies at even a hint of trouble?!?! We are basically the Coalition of Cowards 2.0!
[/quote]
I'd just like to clarify people jumped into the fight the next day, should have been same day, but yea. Point being, you're comparing apple and oranges, different situation, different context & no relation.

Edited December 10, 2012 by shahenshah

[Devilyn Caster]

[quote name='Prodigal Moon' timestamp='1355124735' post='3062350']
Hm, so C&G's external treaties only [i]look [/i]like a mess because those of us on the outside take every legal defense obligation literally. But you all know that ultimately they don't mean jack !@#$, because you're going to do whatever you need to do to maintain self preservation. Great plan, but I think people are starting to catch on!
[/quote]

I appreciate the concern for our continued well being, and you make some great points about self-preservation. Every alliance practices self preservation. The idea that everyone outside of CnG takes a legal defense treaty obligation literally though is the biggest delusion I've seen here in years. You are attacking CnG over a situation that you have no inside knowledge on, that you are twisting to your own purposes, and honestly your argument is !@#$ because you are holding the rest of Bob to this lofty achievement where everyone honors treaties. It just doesn't happen.

With regards to your comments about our tangled FA, I personally believe that we can overcome those obstacles. Treaties don't always line up in coalition warfare, I know it's shocking, but that does not make the relationship invalid. Dialogue between the two alliances can save any relationship, even when you are on opposite sides in a war. It's also amusing to me to see all the butthurt about CnG not doing what you guys wanted us to do, and I could sit here trying to explain myself all day, but in the end you're just going to twist my words and say something about how CnG is evil and that we're no good lying oathbreakers.

Once again, congratulations to IRON and INT. Regardless of what the rest of the world thinks, I am really glad to see this treaty go through.

[AirMe]

[quote name='shahenshah' timestamp='1355152199' post='3062385']
I'd just like to clarify people jumped into the fight the next day, should have been same day, but yea. Point being, you're comparing apple and oranges, different situation, different context & no relation.
[/quote]

That was actually my point. With a heavy dose of sarcasm.


[quote name='D34th' timestamp='1355151088' post='3062384']
I'm talking about post like these:



And if you go through your posts you'll find more.

And since you completely avoided what I said about CnG in the post you quoted I supposed you agree with me.
[/quote]

It would only be ad hominen attacks if I were attempting to discredit you. I am not attempting to discredit you, I just don't like your work. Never have I said or implied "D34th is this so his argument is invalid."

As for the C&G mantra, once you take politics into account it gets a lot more complicated. Especially when you look at the dynamics that are contained within the bloc right now. When C&G formed, it was formed as a big FU to the One Vision and the Toilet Bowl (aka Q aka Continuum), all alliances where in that bloc to essentially get rolled because we were sick of the rumors and sick of seeing our allies get picked off one by one (See: CMEA, BAPS and to some extent the political anglings of RoK and MA). Then Karma came along and we were still pretty unified. After that, I left did my own thing and the political make up of the bloc changed. It went from the underdog with few treaty ties to a player with many different political ties.

Long story short, the mantra is still there and we abide by it when every humanly possible. Things are not always as simple as people would like them to be (see: You) and anyone who has been leadership of any alliance understands this.

Edited December 10, 2012 by AirMe

[Prodigal Moon]

[quote name='leongsh' timestamp='1355141566' post='3062367']
Just goes to show that you do not understand that CnG is an MADP bloc and what that means.

All alliances that sign treaties with CnG members are aware that CnG will put its own members first. Very simply because the CnG MADP treaty reigns supreme and overrides all other treaties each CnG member has. Any alliance that signs with a CnG member alliance which is not aware that CnG members will consider their future collectively first, has either a) not done their homework or b) chosen to ignore it.

As an MADP bloc, CnG comes to a common conclusion of what it needs to do for the sake of CnG to meet its goals as well as for its continued survival and viability, irrespective of whether it is on the winning or not. Of course, when it comes to war, CnG fights to win. We're not masochists who fight wars to lose. Fundamentally, CnG member alliances make decisions that take into account the whole bloc. We are practical and not dogmatic in our approach and decisions. Once CnG makes a decision, we are ready to live with the consequences of it. We deal with our direct allies in a positive constructive manner. Any direct ally that tries to game the treaty links to put CnG in a spot will only find themselves to blame when we decide not to back their adventure/shenanigans.
[/quote]
I'm not claiming any of this isn't true. But when you say that the bloc comes first, in practice that's typically going to mean that the bloc decides which external allies (out of many) to assist and which external allies to ignore (or, hell, declare war on). Which is your prerogative of course. I'm just amazed that alliances are still willing to sign an MDP that only means they might get a bit of consideration when the bloc decides how best to keep itself alive.

@Devilyn Caster: Fair point about others being just as guilty, although I think some have managed it a bit better than C&G has. But the "butthurt" is not just about any personal preference of what C&G does, because obviously that isn't going to matter. It's about trying in vain to maintain some standards and accountability in this world.

[Garion]

[quote name='magicninja' timestamp='1355144294' post='3062373']
Nah by all means if you feel the need to retaliate go for it. We're right here. I'm just saying we have no need to gun for anyone over on your side of the street anymore.[/quote]

I can't predict what will happen during next war. Perhaps it will so, perhaps not. I wouldn't mind another opponent, tho.

[quote name='magicninja' timestamp='1355144294' post='3062373']
It's also not naivety it's just the way it is. I'm sure by the tone of your posts you absolutely want us lined up across from you when the time comes...that's fine like I said...but why should we make it easy? That's no fun.
[/quote]

GATO is not a priority for us, you're way down the list. I wouldn't mind see you making up your mind on your FA route, sure, and I think you could use a little spanking after the stunts you pulled through last year... But you're definitely low on my personal hitlist A few of your current representatives did an excellent job at fixing your previous administrations' mistakes.

[Hereno]

[quote name='leongsh' timestamp='1355141566' post='3062367']Any direct ally that tries to game the treaty links to put CnG in a spot will only find themselves to blame when we decide not to back their adventure/shenanigans.
[/quote]

This is what you actually believe happened.

[quote name='AirMe' timestamp='1355146397' post='3062378']
Stop using logic! Didn't you know we are war mongering cowards that will sell out our allies at even a hint of trouble?!?! We are basically the Coalition of Cowards 2.0!
[/quote]

Interesting choices of words in this post, given the political climate and the screenshots we've all seen.

[Ogaden]

AirMe I wish you would stop being a fig leaf for TLR's many divergences from the "old C&G" founding principles.

Yes you were not there for C&G's change in direction from scrappy underdog to backstabbing realpolitikier, nor were you in power when TLR moved clearly into the "bully" column under Rush's administration, but you have power now, for the love of god, use your power, make some changes. It doesn't have to be this way.

[leongsh]

[quote name='Ogaden' timestamp='1355171648' post='3062447']
AirMe I wish you would stop being a fig leaf for TLR's many divergences from the "old C&G" founding principles.[/quote]

The "old CnG" founding principles have not really changed. It is an MADP bloc. It is not just a suicide bloc but also a survival bloc. The purpose of the bloc is first and foremost, to survive, and if in dire straits, to go down together as a suicide bloc. Whichever mode it operates depends on the threats against it. CnG fights against those who threaten it. You want to question my CnG credentials on this?

[quote name='Ogaden' timestamp='1355171648' post='3062447']
Yes you were not there for C&G's change in direction from scrappy underdog to backstabbing realpolitikier, nor were you in power when TLR moved clearly into the "bully" column under Rush's administration, but you have power now, for the love of god, use your power, make some changes. It doesn't have to be this way.[/quote]

CnG is scrappy irrespective of whether we are underdogs or not. You can call us "backstabbing realpolitikier" mainly because you have not really done much to really engage us except where we see PR blitzes before wars. CnG are mainly pragmatic. We will do what we need to do to secure CnG, especially if there are threats to break us or split us.

TLR became a "bully" during Rush's administration? Stop playing the victim. Trying to instigate or rile us will only get a fierce and rabid response. Rush is fiercely and rabidly protective of TLR and CnG. He will do what it takes to protect and steer TLR and CnG to safer grounds. If you expect TLR to suffer fools gladly, you're sorely mistaken. If you think now that AirMe being one of the triums of TLR will change that, again you're sorely mistaken. Enough on questioning TLR and CnG here. If you want to discuss this further, come to the TLR forums.

This is a thread about the ODP treaty between IRON and INT. So, let's congratulate both IRON and INT and move on.

[Ogaden]

[quote name='leongsh' timestamp='1355174087' post='3062450']
The "old CnG" founding principles have not really changed. It is an MADP bloc. It is not just a suicide bloc but also a survival bloc. The purpose of the bloc is first and foremost, to survive, and if in dire straits, to go down together as a suicide bloc. Whichever mode it operates depends on the threats against it. CnG fights against those who threaten it. You want to question my CnG credentials on this?
[/quote]This was once true, it is now PR. C&G's purpose for at least the last year has been "Roll SF forever". Whether C&G is actually a suicide bloc remains to be proven in fire and blood, as ours was.

[quote name='leongsh' timestamp='1355174087' post='3062450']
CnG is scrappy irrespective of whether we are underdogs or not. You can call us "backstabbing realpolitikier" mainly because you have not really done much to really engage us except where we see PR blitzes before wars. CnG are mainly pragmatic. We will do what we need to do to secure CnG, especially if there are threats to break us or split us.
[/quote]C&G has not been scrappy in a very long time, and I haven't seen much pragmatism yet.

[quote name='leongsh' timestamp='1355174087' post='3062450']
TLR became a "bully" during Rush's administration? Stop playing the victim. Trying to instigate or rile us will only get a fierce and rabid response. Rush is fiercely and rabidly protective of TLR and CnG. He will do what it takes to protect and steer TLR and CnG to safer grounds. If you expect TLR to suffer fools gladly, you're sorely mistaken. If you think now that AirMe being one of the triums of TLR will change that, again you're sorely mistaken. Enough on questioning TLR and CnG here. If you want to discuss this further, come to the TLR forums.
[/quote]I see you're one of his fans. I hope your sad faction of TLR utterly fail and you ragequit the alliance you profess to love so greatly when you don't get your way.

[AmbroseIV]

Congrats on the treaty


[quote name='magicninja' timestamp='1355010669' post='3061952']
Hey we disliked SF more than we liked good reasons back then. I think that ship has sailed. Now without any particular hate for any alliance or group of alliances well we may as well turn a new leaf and approach the next conflict logically...
[/quote]

"[i]Look how fair and moderate we are now that we can't afford mistakes! Look Mum! Mum! You're not looking! Mum! Why aren't you looking! I'm being good, Mum! Look! I can use logic now! Mum![/i] "


[quote name='magicninja' timestamp='1355144294' post='3062373']
It's also not naivety it's just the way it is. I'm sure by the tone of your posts you absolutely want us lined up across from you when the time comes...that's fine like I said...but why should we make it easy? That's no fun.
[/quote]

I think we get along with most people in GATO; I've heard GATO membership had a lot of positive things to say about us after the last war and the reverse holds true as well... so it'd be civil, but that's about it — nicer to get at someone you dislike.

[Ayatollah Bromeini]

Really, guys?


Hardly anyone truly knows the situation behind some of the events being talked about here, and I'm not just throwing that at one side specifically. Then again, ignorance has never stopped the peanut gallery before, so by all means...


[quote][color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]That's exactly why Trotsky is not welcome on our boards anymore. What a coincidence [/font][/color] [/quote]

Edited December 10, 2012 by Ayatollah Bromeini

[Taget]

What? After all those weeks of campaigning you didn't let Jgoods post the announcement?!?!!? Bunch of meanies. The whole lot of you all!

But congratulations anyway to both IRON and Int on building a solid start in their relationship through this ODP.

Edited December 10, 2012 by Taget

[magicninja]

[quote name='AmbroseIV' timestamp='1355179552' post='3062457']
nicer to get at someone you dislike.
[/quote]

That's pretty much what I was saying. Glad we can agree. Right now that is pretty much no one for us but if anyone has a score to settle. We're here. Just declare. It's simple when you look at it from that standpoint. So moving forward....since we have no real beef with anyone anymore...we will have to look at the cause for war when we make our decision. If someone is being aggressive for the sake of it...we're likely not to be on board...if there is a good reason...hey we're in. I just don;t think that there will be a huge consideration paid to who is on what side...a small consideration maybe but most of our decision will be based on who hit who and why. If that makes people uncomfortable.....good.

[berbers]

[quote name='magicninja' timestamp='1355182923' post='3062463']


That's pretty much what I was saying. Glad we can agree. Right now that is pretty much no one for us but if anyone has a score to settle. We're here. Just declare. It's simple when you look at it from that standpoint. So moving forward....since we have no real beef with anyone anymore...we will have to look at the cause for war when we make our decision. If someone is being aggressive for the sake of it...we're likely not to be on board...if there is a good reason...hey we're in. I just don;t think that there will be a huge consideration paid to who is on what side...a small consideration maybe but most of our decision will be based on who hit who and why. If that makes people uncomfortable.....good.
[/quote]

What was it exactly that SF did to you that was so bad you ignored a terrible CB just to take a shot at them?

[OctoberBrigade]

[quote name='Ayatollah Bromeini' timestamp='1355179602' post='3062458']
Really, guys?


Hardly anyone truly knows the situation behind some of the events being talked about here, and I'm not just throwing that at one side specifically. Then again, ignorance has never stopped the peanut gallery before, so by all means...





[/quote]

While I do agree with you, the nature of CN politics is one of the major reasons that the Peanut Gallery exists. There are no press conferences to get a feel for where an alliance is heading and declarations of intent are few and far between. As a result there are some players who vomit crack pot conspiracy theories and some who analyze what the alliance in question has done recently to make judgements based on their actions.

[Ayatollah Bromeini]

[quote name='OctoberBrigade' timestamp='1355187202' post='3062485']
While I do agree with you, the nature of CN politics is one of the major reasons that the Peanut Gallery exists. There are no press conferences to get a feel for where an alliance is heading and declarations of intent are few and far between. As a result there are some players who vomit crack pot conspiracy theories and some who analyze what the alliance in question has done recently to make judgements based on their actions.
[/quote]

Indeed. That's perfectly fair.

[salsabeast1]

[quote name='berbers' timestamp='1355186375' post='3062483']
What was it exactly that SF did to you that was so bad you ignored a terrible CB just to take a shot at them?
[/quote]

You know, when MK has a grudge, it becomes CnG's grudge. It's natural for the alpha and the leach.

[AmbroseIV]

[quote name='berbers' timestamp='1355186375' post='3062483']
What was it exactly that SF did to you that was so bad you ignored a terrible CB just to take a shot at them?
[/quote]

We were a "threat" — I spoke to Lanore about this during the last war:

[indent=1]"Xiph hates MK, by extension he hates all of their allies. If he wants to roll MK he plans on rolling their allies by extension, which means he was planning a strike on CnG by extension. That makes him my natural enemy, as his intent would have all my allies around me burned into the ground. So of course since the end of the MHA war I did everything possible to ensure SF gets rolled this war, the effects of my actions specifically I don't entirely know."[/indent]

[indent=1]"Bambi I won't consider SF to no longer be a threat till your entire sphere either breaks up and realigns or your NS and stats are broken to the point of total irrelevance. Previously defeated powers drifted and found new spheres or new opportunities. Your cluster of hate for my entire sphere of influence has stuck together."[/indent]

They didn't like us because they wanted someone to attack and we (apparently) had the audacity to be unhappy with that and try to do things that would benefit our security 'n make life hard for them. We didn't like them because after doing everything side-by-side in SuperGrievances [i]they[/i] spent 18 months rallying a coalition to try 'n destroy us. It's a matter of perception — they started talking about a boogeyman and everyone started seeing a boogeyman.


MHA were attacked during the Grudge War because someone said "lol, wanna hit MHA?" and no-one objected — they justified it by fabricating a story that MHA would hit NG. While not terrible, the backlash was bad enough that they asked MHA to rewrite history and "admit" to the fabricated version of events in the initial peace talks.


It's opportunism — as Craig said earlier, they go out and make their own fun... nothing bad needs to have happened, but to say is to help massage public opinion and gather support.


[b]Edit:[/b] [insert on topic speculation about IRON and INT here]

Edited December 11, 2012 by AmbroseIV

[Ogaden]

We broke away from DoomHouse after the pre-empt on NPO, but the DT/CSN fiasco meant both the power spheres in the world at the time were anti-SF.
Being anti-SF was the politically expedient path, since both the Mjolnir alliances and Non Grata hated SF, so alliances who didn't have a grudge against SF quickly developed one.

It was relatively easy for us to be isolated, and we were mostly destroyed in the Grudge War.

We did nothing to C&G, but that is largely irrelevant since many in C&G just take the view of "what's good for MK is good for me"

Edited December 11, 2012 by Ogaden

[Saniiro Matsudaira]

When you relate one group with the other, you cause the association. Let that be known when one causes the dislike of one's self.

Apologies from moving way from the topic, congrats to my allies and friends in INT and IRON, respectfully.

[D34th]

This whole CnG discussion and something that I saw somewhere inspired me to do it:

[img]http://i46.tinypic.com/5my0zn.gif[/img]

[hobbies0310]

[quote name='D34th' timestamp='1355195164' post='3062514']
This whole CnG discussion and something that I saw somewhere inspired me to do it:

[img]http://i46.tinypic.com/5my0zn.gif[/img]
[/quote]
Thats so beautiful hahahahaha.

Edited December 11, 2012 by hobbies0310

[Ayatollah Bromeini]

[quote name='D34th' timestamp='1355195164' post='3062514']
This whole CnG discussion and something that I saw somewhere inspired me to do it:

[img]http://i46.tinypic.com/5my0zn.gif[/img]
[/quote]


This is unironically glorious.

[King Wally]

[quote name='D34th' timestamp='1355195164' post='3062514']
This whole CnG discussion and something that I saw somewhere inspired me to do it:

[img]http://i46.tinypic.com/5my0zn.gif[/img]
[/quote]

I always get a smile when I see your art d34th... keep it up buddy

[smurthwaite]

I won't lie and say I read 9 pages of speculation about SF et. al. What I will say is congratulations to IRON, who is friend of my friend. I fought Int in the Dave war, and I swear they represent all that is good about the war system in CN. They had a great attitude and never once was there anger, hostility, nor trolling between the two AAs. Much respect for their style and their ferocity. I think IRON has benefited with the signing of this treaty.

o/INTERNATIONAL
o/IRON