IRON Announcement

[MitchellBade]

Why would you want to exchange valentines with us anyways? You just dropped NPO because you claimed they supported us more than they supported you.

 

Actually, IRON dropped NPO for putting the protection of CnG over the needs and wants of the overall eQ coalition in which they were a part of, nothing to do with support.  Did you even bother to read the OP?

[Johnny Apocalypse]

Still the first to burn the coattails which you're so fond of riding on I see.  Don't ever change IRON.

[Leet Guy]

Treaty cancellations are always sad to see. 

 

No they aren't.

[RevolutionaryRebel]

Actually, IRON dropped NPO for putting the protection of CnG over the needs and wants of the overall eQ coalition in which they were a part of, nothing to do with support.  Did you even bother to read the OP?

'Needs'? Unless there were several Alliances that really desperately needed to hit GATO and ODN before the war ended... Oh, yeah. Don't tell me the orange sphere rivalries were part of the equation. IRON doesn't like orange babies?

[rsoxbronco1]

If you want to use metallurgy to make a point, you probably don't want to compare iron to steel and call iron the brittle one. You also probably don't want to use copper as your "weak" choice. Something like aluminum would work much better there.

 

/the more you know!

You strike me as the kind of person who enjoys a nice peach.

[Ardus]

Bold move Cotton; let's see how it plays.

 

 

Thinking about it, TOP and NPO are meant to each other, may be a three way treaty with MK? The bloc name would be "Egoista".

 

I'll take lead on this.  Rsox, Farrin--clubhouse in 30 minutes.  Bring condoms and Random Access Memories.

[rsoxbronco1]

Bold move Cotton; let's see how it plays.

 

 

I'll take lead on this.  Rsox, Farrin--clubhouse in 30 minutes.  Bring condoms and Random Access Memories.

But who will bring the terrible political opinions and poor grammar?

[Neo Uruk]

Actually, IRON dropped NPO for putting the protection of CnG over the needs and wants of the overall eQ coalition in which they were a part of, nothing to do with support.  Did you even bother to read the OP?

Yes, the need of CnG to surrender before EQ fell flat on its face.

[Ardus]

But who will bring the terrible political opinions and poor grammar?

i can double as neo in a pinch

[Chaoshawk]

Oogity-boogity.  Let me guess: You're in The Coven. 

 

Unconditional surrender.

So, you're saying that they want to take a page out of GRE's playbook? Perhaps, we should let IRON speak for themselves.

[AirMe]

Actually, IRON dropped NPO for putting the protection of CnG over the needs and wants of the overall eQ coalition in which they were a part of, nothing to do with support.  Did you even bother to read the OP?

 

I read the OP.

 

How dare they at least consider the needs of their other allies that were not in their coalition. There were times where I lobbied for NPO's needs to MK and they didn't turn around and drop us at the end of the war. I probably did that more than NPO lobbied for us or NG.

 

What exactly were the needs and wants of the overall coalition? I am not even sure you guys can answer that.  

[AirMe]

Yes, the need of CnG to surrender before EQ fell flat on its face.

 

I can say, unequivocally that C&G hadn't even talked about surrendering to anyone....except to our undying love of Pingu.

[MitchellBade]

I read the OP.

 

How dare they at least consider the needs of their other allies that were not in their coalition. There were times where I lobbied for NPO's needs to MK and they didn't turn around and drop us at the end of the war. I probably did that more than NPO lobbied for us or NG.

 

What exactly were the needs and wants of the overall coalition? I am not even sure you guys can answer that.  

 

Oh I don't know, something along the lines of further beating up parties in the "competence" coalition, of which many parties in the eQ coalition had a vested interest in doing?  That seems like the obvious elephant in the room.

Edited May 23, 2013 by MitchellBade

[D34th]

But who will bring the terrible political opinions and poor grammar?

 

Are you inviting me? 

[AirMe]

Oh I don't know, something along the lines of further beating up parties in the "competence" coalition, of which many parties in the eQ coalition had a vested interest in doing?  That seems like the obvious elephant in the room.

 

So beating on someone just because you could?  Wasn't that a charge that was levied against us at the beginning of the conflict?

No one forced anyone to accept peace. You guys could have said no...but you didn't.

Edited May 23, 2013 by AirMe

[The Warrior]

i can double as neo in a pinch

You wouldn't really want to do that now, would you?

 

 

 

So, you're saying that they want to take a page out of GRE's playbook? Perhaps, we should let IRON speak for themselves.

That was sarcasm.

[Ardus]

You wouldn't really want to do that now, would you?

I don't really want to be in TOP gov't, but hell if they didn't drag me here kicking and screaming.

 

I does what needs doing.

[Hereno]

...it means you should seriously re-evaluate your opinion, to finish your first thought.

 

On your second thought, likewise. I'm not sure what your problem is with us, but it appears we won't be exchanging valentines any time soon. Oh well.

 

Do I know you?

[Neo Uruk]

Do I know you?

They're speaking on people's intelligence without actually finding out what they're capable of, as well as commenting on people's overall mindset without ever knowing them.

 

But if you saw IRON's "task force" in BiPolar, this is still an upgrade.

 

 

I can say, unequivocally that C&G hadn't even talked about surrendering to anyone....except to our undying love of Pingu.

The war wrapping up so soon was a surprise to me. I was getting ready to give up aid so others could have it where needed.

 

Oh I don't know, something along the lines of further beating up parties in the "competence" coalition, of which many parties in the eQ coalition had a vested interest in doing?  That seems like the obvious elephant in the room.

Considering the target of NPO's allies was Umbrella, unless IRON wanted CnG dead, NPO working out a deal for peace that left CnG dented but not broken isn't harmful to the overall coalition goals. Unless, of course, everyone is willing to admit to using DR to advancing their goals since they could never get the political capital themselves.

[Brehon]

IRON, AI and NPO agreed to these points for the war to start:

Umbrella would take significant damage to reduce their power
Umbrella would be taken from its "untouchable" position
There would be no reps.
Damage would be kept at a lower level for MK and potentially GOONS for our joint ally in NG.
NG would support whoever was hit (either side)

Unfortunately to achieve the main goal, tough calls had to be made. Every ounce of damage to the Umbrella coalition required equal damage to Ai. Yes I was done with that. Some have forgotten that. I don't fault you. I don't fault IRON for moving on, in fact I called it very early on. For every other alliance that used that war to push a different agenda and now try to act all butt hurt; you are cowards and weak. But for IRON, nothing was done wrong here and I wish them the best. They have different goal posts now, may they achieve them.

For the EQ war, lets go over some simple details. At the end of it, NE and I talked and he said he trusted my judgement. The extended war on Umbrella failed because those other agenda groups couldn't hit CnG more, couldn't hit NG more, couldn't hit MK or GOONS more, couldn't hit TOP more all dove out quick. Save me your rhetoric. In fact it is 100% accurate to say those that wanted more on TOP, CnG or MK/GOONS got shafted. So, go make your own war and wear the big boy pants... or just shut up. And this is why micro's & the treaty web fails. You can't war on your own so you have to ride someone else then get all upset when YOUR needs aren't met.

If you want YOUR needs met, then handle your business better. /cheers spreadsheet warriors.

Those of you saying this was my war. You are correct in parts. Aspects of this war were planned and executed by a small circle of people of which I was a part of.

Umbrella was the target. Umbrella took the physical damage. Umbrella took the political/image damage. That is win. If it wasn't for you... do something about it. And now you know why you weren't at the big boy table or channel.

[Prodigal Moon]

How hard is it to have a set of allies that can be counted to be on the same side of a global war?

 

How unreasonable is it to expect that your ally will only act in the best interests of your side of the war, which they are "leading," by the way?

 

Edit: directed to no one specific.

Edited May 23, 2013 by Prodigal Moon

[Neo Uruk]

How hard is it to have a set of allies that can be counted to be on the same side of a global war?

 

How unreasonable is it to expect that your ally will only act in the best interests of your side of the war, which they are "leading," by the way?

 

Edit: directed to no one specific.

In this world, very.

 

Well that party only became leader when everyone else was proven inept.

 

Edit: and are you really gonna act like this isn't you trying to fire off some shots?

Edited May 23, 2013 by Neo Uruk

[Branimir]

It is unfortunate to have allies on various sides of conflicts, but not unheard of in this interconnected world. It would be preferable to have all on one side, but sometimes that just can not happen. I find no evil in it. I find no wrong in it.

 

NPO acted in the best interest of its coalition, Brehons post just above explaining some critical points overlooked by some post war spinners.

 

Edit: Directed at Prodigal Moon. Yes, I actually address the people I direct my comments to, rather then being silly.

Edited May 23, 2013 by Branimir

[Rush Sykes]

Oh I don't know, something along the lines of further beating up parties in the "competence" coalition, of which many parties in the eQ coalition had a vested interest in doing?  That seems like the obvious elephant in the room.

 

Irony is fun. IRON is literally mad at NPO for doing to EQ.... exactly what IRON did to our coalition in the last war. And... they do not even see it. It was IRON who pushed, damn near demanded for that war to end. Now they stand before us... crying that NPO demanded this war to end, despite the fact that others in the coalition had not yet fulfilled their goals. Yep, it makes tons of sense. 

Edited May 23, 2013 by Rush Sykes

[D34th]

That's why you don't sign treaties with everyone, keep a straight FA policy and you wont need to worry about your allies in the other side of war because all your allies will be fighting side by side with you. Now if you want to sign treaties with everyone, don't push and/or plan for a war that you know will harm your allies, but if you really want the war, then doesn't complain about others attacking your allies in the other side of a war that you started, because big boys don't complain about their own mistakes, they just take the responsibility for their actions.  

Edited May 23, 2013 by D34th