Wyrmon Posted January 25, 2013 Report Share Posted January 25, 2013 No, but attack TLR and activate NG treaty counts. There is a fine line between stupidity and bravery. Bringing in the gayroller is way over that line. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salsabeast1 Posted January 25, 2013 Report Share Posted January 25, 2013 I'm afraid they can't edit these ones out. I would never edit out defending an MDoAP ally. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush Sykes Posted January 25, 2013 Report Share Posted January 25, 2013 No, but attack TLR and activate NG treaty counts. What a shock! I expect you to say that I was right! :rolleyes: That was an attempt for nothing, what I said is based in the inner talks of CnG and how they are unhappy with DH and wants to cancel the treaties with them now they might lose. I can assure you that nobody in TLR wants to cancel on GOONS or MK. So whatever your internal hearings are, they are wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berbers Posted January 25, 2013 Report Share Posted January 25, 2013 The reason he doesn't want us playing strategy is his side is losing badly at it. The numbers may indeed catch up to us in the long run but it has been fun watching the flip flopping and squirming from a side who thought they were going to have an easy curbstonp. I don't really know anyone who thought this was would be an easy war, mostly the exact opposite of that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jgoods45 Posted January 25, 2013 Report Share Posted January 25, 2013 No, but attack TLR and activate NG treaty counts. What a shock! I expect you to say that I was right! :rolleyes: That was an attempt for nothing, what I said is based in the inner talks of CnG and how they are unhappy with DH and wants to cancel the treaties with them now they might lose. Our treaties with MK and GOONS will be in place long after this war is over. I don't know where you're getting your information from man. :/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D34th Posted January 25, 2013 Report Share Posted January 25, 2013 Our treaties with MK and GOONS will be in place long after this war is over. I don't know where you're getting your information from man. :/ I can assure you that nobody in TLR wants to cancel on GOONS or MK. So whatever your internal hearings are, they are wrong. That's why I said that in my opinion TLR is the only alliance that would not change sides, but I saw logs of all the others CnG alliances talking about cut the ties with DH and get closer to NPO. INT is the most clear case of an alliance that isn't happy with their current FA situation and you and them can deny that all they want, but I have various leaders of alliances who are in contact with them telling me the same thing. There is a fine line between stupidity and bravery. Bringing in the gayroller is way over that line. In the eyes of a cowards all the brave moves will looks like stupidity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cataduanes Posted January 25, 2013 Report Share Posted January 25, 2013 That's why I said that in my opinion TLR is the only alliance that would not change sides, but I saw logs of all the others CnG alliances talking about cut the ties with DH and get closer to NPO. INT is the most clear case of an alliance that isn't happy with their current FA situation and you and them can deny that all they want, but I have various leaders of alliances who are in contact with them telling me the same thing. In the eyes of a cowards all the brave moves will looks like stupidity. I think it more a case of some individuals being dissatisfied not necessarily whole alliances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pingu Posted January 25, 2013 Report Share Posted January 25, 2013 That's why I said that in my opinion TLR is the only alliance that would not change sides, but I saw logs of all the others CnG alliances talking about cut the ties with DH and get closer to NPO. INT is the most clear case of an alliance that isn't happy with their current FA situation and you and them can deny that all they want, but I have various leaders of alliances who are in contact with them telling me the same thing. Sorry, I thought you were confident we would all change sides in the blink of an eye if "allowed to" - not having discussions about possible expansions of FA portfolios. If you had any credibility left, your hyperbole would surely kill it stone dead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AirMe Posted January 25, 2013 Report Share Posted January 25, 2013 You don't need to wonder, you'll see none. Unlike majority of alliances around here, those alliances have balls. This has given me the biggest laugh of the day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AirMe Posted January 25, 2013 Report Share Posted January 25, 2013 There is a fine line between stupidity and bravery. Bringing in the gayroller is way over that line. Especially considering it was against, from what I understand, Q leaderships orders. It takes a damn fine set of alliances to disobey orders and throw their entire coalition under the bus and fracture coalition unity. Not to mention making a ton of enemies that are going to be trouble for them in the future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crownguard Posted January 25, 2013 Report Share Posted January 25, 2013 I think it more a case of some individuals being dissatisfied not necessarily whole alliances. Some members in INT may get annoyed with how things go (as we do with anything...we're a democracy. We argue about politics on our OWN forums thanks), but I assure you: we'll take competence and class in friends over this cluster@##$ attacking us any day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush Sykes Posted January 25, 2013 Report Share Posted January 25, 2013 I don't really know anyone who thought this was would be an easy war, mostly the exact opposite of that. well, I know you can consider them to be "nobody",... lord knows most of us do... but Rotavele, Tom Riddle and Mogar all seem to think its a slam dunk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeathAdder Posted January 25, 2013 Report Share Posted January 25, 2013 I don't feel either side can claim a victory yet. Probably not for a while, either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comrade Craig Posted January 25, 2013 Report Share Posted January 25, 2013 (edited) I'm sure GATO, INT and ODN would have chose to switch sides in a blink of an eye if allowed.At various times, you've asserted INT's cowardice and a willingness to throw allies under the bus to save itself. When confronted by the fact that it willingly jumped to Umbrella's defense despite the enormous coalition it would face, you fall back on a secondary assertion that they are just a bunch of DH puppets. Then, you invent a hypothetical "switch-sides" scenario, and claim that INT would have flipped sides "in the blink of an eye" to oppose DH.Do you even think about what you say?I refer you to this illustration once more:Keep trying, buddy. People would take you more seriously if you made even a token attempt at a consistency in your arguments.-Craig Edited January 25, 2013 by Comrade Craig Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dajobo Posted January 25, 2013 Report Share Posted January 25, 2013 (edited) Keep trying AirMe. We didn't declare on TLR, TLR declared on us. Here's the line that matters from our treaty with Sparta... ARTICLE III. Mutual Defense An act of war upon one signatory is considered an act of war on the other and will be met with military actions While a great many alliances out there sign a treaty with wording like that very very few of them actually mean it. I don't play this game of treaties only count if it's convenient and I can't help it if other people don't listen to me. If being honest from day one is a flaw then I'm happy to be flawed. If reading what I sign in a treaty and only signing it if I mean it is a flaw, I'm ok with that as well. At the end of all this there will be movements all over the place on the treaty web, we all know that. Yeah some people don't like honesty, I can live with it. At the same time I'm quite sure there's plenty of people out there who would like to be tied to someone who won't sell them down the river out of convenience and to be frank they are the ones who matter to me. If there's one message I need to get through to you it's this, I mean what I say and I say what I mean. Edited January 25, 2013 by Dajobo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush Sykes Posted January 25, 2013 Report Share Posted January 25, 2013 Keep trying AirMe. We didn't declare on TLR, TLR declared on us. Here's the line that matters from our treaty with Sparta... While a great many alliances out there sign a treaty with wording like that very very few of them actually mean it. I don't play this game of treaties only count if it's convenient and I can't help it if other people don't listen to me. If being honest from day one is a flaw then I'm happy to be flawed. If reading what I sign in a treaty and only signing it if I mean it is a flaw, I'm ok with that as well. At the end of all this there will be movements all over the place on the treaty web, we all know that. Yeah some people don't like honesty, I can live with it. At the same time I'm quite sure there's plenty of people out there who would like to be tied to someone who won't sell them down the river out of convenience and to be frank they are the ones who matter to me. If there's one message I need to get through to to it's this, I mean what I say and I say what I mean. Keep spinning brah, nobody is buying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AirMe Posted January 25, 2013 Report Share Posted January 25, 2013 (edited) Keep trying AirMe. We didn't declare on TLR, TLR declared on us. Here's the line that matters from our treaty with Sparta... While a great many alliances out there sign a treaty with wording like that very very few of them actually mean it. I don't play this game of treaties only count if it's convenient and I can't help it if other people don't listen to me. If being honest from day one is a flaw then I'm happy to be flawed. If reading what I sign in a treaty and only signing it if I mean it is a flaw, I'm ok with that as well. At the end of all this there will be movements all over the place on the treaty web, we all know that. Yeah some people don't like honesty, I can live with it. At the same time I'm quite sure there's plenty of people out there who would like to be tied to someone who won't sell them down the river out of convenience and to be frank they are the ones who matter to me. If there's one message I need to get through to to it's this, I mean what I say and I say what I mean. No, I read and proof read our DoW. We declared war on Sparta. You may be their treaty partner but sometime sacrifices need to be made for the greater good of the coalition. You decided the coalition wasn't worth a damn and attacked anyways. You guys seem to have Aegis level coordination on your side. And having been part of that.....monstrosity.....I pity you. Edited January 25, 2013 by AirMe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supercoolyellow Posted January 25, 2013 Report Share Posted January 25, 2013 Keep spinning brah, nobody is buying. What are we supposed to be not buying? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mandellav Posted January 25, 2013 Report Share Posted January 25, 2013 Keep trying AirMe. We didn't declare on TLR, TLR declared on us. Here's the line that matters from our treaty with Sparta... While a great many alliances out there sign a treaty with wording like that very very few of them actually mean it. I don't play this game of treaties only count if it's convenient and I can't help it if other people don't listen to me. If being honest from day one is a flaw then I'm happy to be flawed. If reading what I sign in a treaty and only signing it if I mean it is a flaw, I'm ok with that as well. At the end of all this there will be movements all over the place on the treaty web, we all know that. Yeah some people don't like honesty, I can live with it. At the same time I'm quite sure there's plenty of people out there who would like to be tied to someone who won't sell them down the river out of convenience and to be frank they are the ones who matter to me. If there's one message I need to get through to you it's this, I mean what I say and I say what I mean. You know Dajobo, I think TLR and NpO are in agreement that an attack on an ally means that the alliance in question is required to come to that ally's defense. But TLR and its allies all agree that it is our joint responsibility to provide for the *best* defense of each other using strategy rather than going off half cocked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pezstar Posted January 25, 2013 Report Share Posted January 25, 2013 No, I read and proof read our DoW. We declared war on Sparta. You may be their treaty partner but sometime sacrifices need to be made for the greater good of the coalition. You decided the coalition wasn't worth a damn and attacked anyways. You guys seem to have Aegis level coordination on your side. And having been part of that.....monstrosity.....I pity you. This is Polaris. It has always been, and always will be, about their treaties. It's their greatest strength and their greatest weakness. If anyone thought they would forsake their allies for the good of people who, not so long ago, were trashing them to anyone who would listen, they haven't been paying attention for the last 6 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush Sykes Posted January 25, 2013 Report Share Posted January 25, 2013 What are we supposed to be not buying? That 22 alliances ,vastly covering what would amount to 3 , and in some cases 4 oA's to get to their target, can stand before the world and tell us who we declared on. In a war fought over alliance sovereignty (supposedly) no less. You can do alot of things on Planet Bob, you can war who you want, when you want, but when you make that choice, there are repercussions that go along with it. What you cannot do though, is tell another alliance who they declared war on. The moment you struck at us, it was, to us, and to our allies (100% of them were in unanimous agreement)... a Declaration of War against us. No half-cocked... hair-brained nonsense "we the undersigned" will change any of that. Don't get me wrong, Im personally glad you stepped on the hornets nest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush Sykes Posted January 25, 2013 Report Share Posted January 25, 2013 This is Polaris. It has always been, and always will be, about their treaties. It's their greatest strength and their greatest weakness. If anyone thought they would forsake their allies for the good of people who, not so long ago, were trashing them to anyone who would listen, they haven't been paying attention for the last 6 years. Nobody is questioning Polar's defense of her allies. We are just calling it what it is. It is a DoW on us. They can do alot of things, they may even win the war in the long run, but they cannot make it that we declared war on them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pezstar Posted January 26, 2013 Report Share Posted January 26, 2013 Nobody is questioning Polar's defense of her allies. We are just calling it what it is. It is a DoW on us. They can do alot of things, they may even win the war in the long run, but they cannot make it that we declared war on them. Of course they declared on you. No one actually buys that you declared on them. In war, often we tell ourselves someone else is the aggressor, or use that propaganda line. No one believes it though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush Sykes Posted January 26, 2013 Report Share Posted January 26, 2013 Of course they declared on you. No one actually buys that you declared on them. In war, often we tell ourselves someone else is the aggressor, or use that propaganda line. No one believes it though. Its not realistic to say nobody buys that we declared on them. Apparently the "special 22" all really believe it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starfox101 Posted January 26, 2013 Report Share Posted January 26, 2013 Good night TLR. Couldn't have happened to a better group. 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.