Jump to content

Rogue Senators and the Sanction War


Recommended Posts

Well, folks, is it any surprise that MK and their ilk have thrown any and all standards of reciprocal decency to the side now that they face a losing war?

 

Of course it isn't.

 

However, let this stand on the record, that Doomhouse and their allies are now utilizing a sanction campaign to conduct their war.

 

Just today, I received this message:

 

To: HeroofTime55    From: o ya baby    Date: 2/25/2013 9:19:33 PM

Subject: Sanctions!

 

Message: Trade and Foreign Aid sanctions have been setup against your nation by o ya baby of the Maroon team. You will no longer be allowed to trade or send/receive foreign aid while you are a member of the Maroon team while these sanctions are active and all non-secret trades with the Maroon team have been canceled.

 

And a further look would reveal who put in the request:

 

New XGA(HeroofTime55) o ya baby (o ya baby) 2/25/2013 Trade & Aid EvU's rogue pony

 

Oh, poor little Leggy, you silly pony.

 

You see, Everfree Union attacked our MADP partners in RnR.  As a member of RIA, even if you disregard the widely stated policy of "an attack on one is an attack on all," I am well within my rights to defend our MADP partner.

 

But not in the eyes of EvU or the rogue senator formerly of MK.

 

RIA did not release me as a rogue because, shocker, I'm not.  I know for a fact that EvU contacted our gov and our gov basically laughed at them when they demanded reps.

The response, apparently, is to discard any sense of decency and to kick off a sanction war.

 

If only this was an isolated case of weaponizing the senate this war.

 

I especially can't wait for all your rogue AA's to start getting sanctioned.  Our coalition has enough decency to not sanction those legitimate members of legitimate AA's, but my have a lot of your guys jumped to a wide variety of one man AA's and assorted micros, even some outright false-flag operations from a few of you, pretending to be PoW's or "trading partners" of various acronyms.  It makes it pretty ballsy of you to start a sanctioning campaign under those circumstances, doesn't it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 175
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Yes now I am convinced. Argent should have sided with DH&co instead, any side that would do something this awesome is deserving of our devotion- I'm so sorry everyone.

Edited by iamthey
Link to post
Share on other sites

Except, by your own admission:

 

Also, I smacked EvU of my own initiative.

 

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?/topic/115520-a-declaration-from-evu/?p=3101261

 

Also, why hasn't anyone else from RIA declared then?  Why won't they declare it an official war?

Edited by TailsK
Link to post
Share on other sites

EvU does not recognize hostilities with RIA as a whole. You have attacked us with no formal declaration of war and have been dealt with as such. Take the consequences of your roguery with some grace.

 

It's not under your jurisdiction to declare whether or not I am a member of RIA.  And in fact, RIA has already laughed at your request to expel me.  At least, I presume they did, because they haven't really said anything except a few chuckles and "Yeah, legatus asked us for reps lol."

 

So no, by every standard in CN and then some, you are incorrect.

 

But please keep demanding that I pay you piles of tech as "reps."  Christ, you are proving to be more delusional than magicninja.

Link to post
Share on other sites

HoT you hate EvU. We get it already. If you need to write how terrible they are every waking minute why not start a blog about it rather than to continue to fill the OWF with this nonsense.

 
This isn't about EvU, this is about your coalition choosing to use sanctions as a weapon of war.

 

 

This post is hidden because you have chosen to ignore posts by TailsK.

 
This was the best decision I ever made.

Edited by HeroofTime55
Link to post
Share on other sites

Except, by your own admission:

 

Also, I smacked EvU of my own initiative.

 

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?/topic/115520-a-declaration-from-evu/?p=3101261

 

Also, why hasn't anyone else from RIA declared then?  Why won't they declare it an official war?

 

It seems there is something wrong with your feed HoT. Just trying to help out :3.

Edited by iamthey
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, folks, is it any surprise that MK and their ilk have thrown any and all standards of reciprocal decency to the side now that they face a losing war?

 

Of course it isn't.

 

However, let this stand on the record, that Doomhouse and their allies are now utilizing a sanction campaign to conduct their war.

 

Just today, I received this message:

 

 

And a further look would reveal who put in the request:

 

 

Oh, poor little Leggy, you silly pony.

 

You see, Everfree Union attacked our MADP partners in RnR.  As a member of RIA, even if you disregard the widely stated policy of "an attack on one is an attack on all," I am well within my rights to defend our MADP partner.

 

But not in the eyes of EvU or the rogue senator formerly of MK.

 

RIA did not release me as a rogue because, shocker, I'm not.  I know for a fact that EvU contacted our gov and our gov basically laughed at them when they demanded reps.

The response, apparently, is to discard any sense of decency and to kick off a sanction war.

 

If only this was an isolated case of weaponizing the senate this war.

 

I especially can't wait for all your rogue AA's to start getting sanctioned.  Our coalition has enough decency to not sanction those legitimate members of legitimate AA's, but my have a lot of your guys jumped to a wide variety of one man AA's and assorted micros, even some outright false-flag operations from a few of you, pretending to be PoW's or "trading partners" of various acronyms.  It makes it pretty ballsy of you to start a sanctioning campaign under those circumstances, doesn't it?

 

As a member of RIA and consequently as a member of SF you should know that SF isn't a MADP bloc.

Regarding the other stuff I can't say that I'm surprised, in fact I'm surprised that it didn't happened sooner. 

Edited by D34th
Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems there is something wrong with your feed HoT. Just trying to help out :3.

 

Do I really need to state the coalition policy again?  

 

We don't post a new thread every time we're at war with another individual alliance.  This is a coalition war and I am defending RIA's MADP partner.  

 

Was I particularly thrilled that I got to hit EvU in particular?  Damn right I was.  But just because I take enjoyment in who my target is does not mean it is an illegal war or that I am a rogue.

In particular, RIA has refused the request to consider me a rogue.  Which is to say, I am under their protection.  Which is to say, the actions of Legatus and o ya baby are, in fact, the rogue actions.

 

I wonder if Legatus told o ya baby that I am still a member of RIA?  Or did that bit get left out?

Link to post
Share on other sites

As a member of RIA and consequently as a member of SF you should know that SF isn't a MADP bloc.

Regarding the other stuff I can't say that I'm surprised, in fact I'm surprised that it didn't happened sooner. 

 

Actually it is a MADP.

 

The SuperFriends Pact

I. Preamble
The undersigned alliances hereby reaffirm their faith in the fundamental rights, dignity, and sovereignty of the signatories and enter into this Mutual Aggression and Defense Pact to fortify, strengthen, and promote the ties of peace and friendship. 

 

But while we are looking at the treaty, let's look at a few other lines:

 

VI. War
A. An attack on one signatory is considered an attack on the entire membership of the bloc.

 

...Huh, will you look at that.  When EvU hit our Ampersandian allies, they hit us by definition!

My war with EvU is 100% justified and legal, and that's why our gov told little Leggy to shove off when he came demanding reps.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll not waste my fingers to explain why you're wrong, so yeah, keep thinking it is a MADP. 

 

Well it says it is, so it is.

There are conditions for the MA being obligatory, being a bloc treaty, but since the event can arise where the A becomes obligatory, it is thus an MADP.

 

Regardless, we are only discussing the defensive bits of the treaty anyway, so lets not argue about a single letter, yeah?  It's somewhat irrelevant to the issue at hand.

Link to post
Share on other sites

...Because they are all asleep right now?

 

Don't make me regret taking you off ignore.

 

I'm serious.  The other thread has been going for days and you were making the same argument.  Why hasn't someone from RIA clarified the issue?

Link to post
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...