Heading down for a midnight snack... and I can guess what kind

[Balkan Banania]

Thank you, I am sure that you will enjoy yourself. 

[Garion]

Next time you should make your tough decisions before the nukes start flying.

Ignorant post is ignorant.

[IYIyTh]

I didnt actually state I just took this quote from andyt2K at its word...

 

 

 

I read that as R&R not fighting on NPOs side, meaning they wont join in this coalition. Seems like a crossed wire or 2... at my age though, I am allowed to have certain difficulty in stringing together meanings of various posts. If I read that wrong, hey, I am not one to not admit when I am wrong.

 

 

Oh boy it only took two pages for you to be completely for them "doing the right thing," to changing your mind.

 

Who's surprised!?

[Commander shepard]

Keep tryin' to spin it, though. I see you have yet to improve since EQ on your terribad Conspiracy Theories. :Goodjob:

 

I don't recall ever posting about conspiracy theories during EQ so you will have to remind me what they're, I suppose you could call the GATO thing a conspiracy but well that turned out to be somewhat true.

But with that being said they did help destroy upper tiers quite effectively.

I'm sensing a lot of negativity from you over a misunderstanding. 

[King Louis the II]

Sparta's king, everyone, replying to a post slathered with sarcasm. Confirming what we all knew; Sparta has extremely low qualifications for upper gov't. Hell, they'll even rent a spot out to their opposition if they need to!

The ammount of butthurt that you have been showing In all threads related to this war make me sad... We are sending a truck carrying 2 tons of lydocaine and 1 ton of aspirin to your country.

[King Louis the II]

 
I don't recall ever posting about conspiracy theories during EQ so you will have to remind me what they're, I suppose you could call the GATO thing a conspiracy but well that turned out to be somewhat true.
But with that being said they did help destroy upper tiers quite effectively.
I'm sensing a lot of negativity from you over a misunderstanding. 

You see Neo, thats how a smart response looks like.

[Neo Uruk]

Oh boy it only took two pages for you to be completely for them "doing the right thing," to changing your mind.
 
Who's surprised!?

I'm all for making fun of Rush, but at least do it right and don't look like a teapot. 
 

The ammount of butthurt that you have been showing In all threads related to this war make me sad... We are sending a truck carrying 2 tons of lydocaine and 1 ton of aspirin to your country.

I don't think you know what any of the nouns you used mean.

[Rush Sykes]

Oh boy it only took two pages for you to be completely for them "doing the right thing," to changing your mind.

 

Who's surprised!?

 

What did I change my mind on? God you are daft. I think TIO and NATO did the right thing (really the only thing they could do based on their own past rhetoric).. what I was wrong about apparently , looks to be whether R&R would defend them or be on the other side.. or both sides. I know reading is hard for you. So you are welcome for the help.

[EgoFreaky]

*useless ranting*

Did you hit your head or something?

1. We only have one ally on the other side so far
2. We don't hate NPO, we have had friendly relations with them for years now.
3. We're not defending NPO.
4. We're not even fighting yet so how are we a meatshield?
5. Yes there are alliances we dislike on the NSO side of the war, we also have alliances we dislike on the other side, must admit kinda good to see them bash each others heads in.

Would we rather not have our bloc fight our former bloc? Obviously, but life is all about disappointments and so far the ones we've had are rather limited.

[DeathAdder]

I don't recall ever posting about conspiracy theories during EQ so you will have to remind me what they're, I suppose you could call the GATO thing a conspiracy but well that turned out to be somewhat true.

But with that being said they did help destroy upper tiers quite effectively.

I'm sensing a lot of negativity from you over a misunderstanding. 

 

Quite right. Reading page 5 & 6 on a real computer instead of my Android showed a few messages my tablet apparently didn't want to show for some reason (Or just scrolled past accidentally), which put both the comment you replied to and made in better context/sarcasm. My apologies on the misunderstanding.

Edited November 6, 2013 by DeathAdder

[the rebel]

Did you hit your head or something?

1. We only have one ally on the other side so far
2. We don't hate NPO, we have had friendly relations with them for years now.
3. We're not defending NPO.
4. We're not even fighting yet so how are we a meatshield?
5. Yes there are alliances we dislike on the NSO side of the war, we also have alliances we dislike on the other side, must admit kinda good to see them bash each others heads in.

Would we rather not have our bloc fight our former bloc? Obviously, but life is all about disappointments and so far the ones we've had are rather limited.

 

Yes, we banged our heads together when you stumbled into the topic:

 

1) You had two allies already in (look where you're going next time you walk in)

2) Never said you did (that bang must of hurt your head more than mine)

3) You're in a bloc and MDAP one at that, so you fight together. You may of not declared war for one reason or other but the bloc has still come in defense of NPO. (you starting to feel dizzy after the knock to the head?)

4) Intentions, see above (concussion may be setting in, since you're rehashing arguments)

5) Never said that either (Phone a doctor immediately I think you got concussion)

 

It gets boring rehashing the same comments, peace.

[Dre4mwe4ver]

We werent dragged in to defend anyone we hated. We defended GOONS and MK, INT and ODN defended MK and Umb... GATO hated nearly everyone on the other side. So, no, we did not.

Yeah, man. I love me some good old fashioned DH, and I absolutely despise the likes of Pacifica and TIO.

[Phil Coulson]

This will be the second time I've been involved in a suicide charge into sparta - defending an ally from coalition warfare
 
Must be some karma to work out.

/me points
That is Sparta! Hopefully they haven't gotten more competent since the last time you hit them.

I bet losing all that NS to MQ looks like a really great decision now, eh?

Let's be serious, after the first couple rounds, all MQ did was roll over and die. Not that much of a loss. Edited November 7, 2013 by Monroe

[WarriorSoul]

Yes, we banged our heads together when you stumbled into the topic:

 

1) You had two allies already in (look where you're going next time you walk in)

2) Never said you did (that bang must of hurt your head more than mine)

3) You're in a bloc and MDAP one at that, so you fight together. You may of not declared war for one reason or other but the bloc has still come in defense of NPO. (you starting to feel dizzy after the knock to the head?)

4) Intentions, see above (concussion may be setting in, since you're rehashing arguments)

5) Never said that either (Phone a doctor immediately I think you got concussion)

 

It gets boring rehashing the same comments, peace.

 

Spends a few months in R&R, has our entire foreign policy figured out.

 

This is a pathetic attempt on your part to thrust yourself back into the limelight after fading into absolute nothingness for a while - so good job, you've gotten the attention, but look like a fool doing it.

 

First and foremost, we are in constant contact with the two allies we have on the "other side." They're all very understanding of the position we're in - just proving that we pick 'em right. You wouldn't know or believe that, of course, because you're ignorant and would much rather view things from your distorted point of view rather than take a second to understand the situation our bloc is in.

 

To your point about us being meatshields: what an absolute joke. NATO and TIO chose to defend NPO. That's a move that they could have avoided had they really wanted to, given R&R's treaties to various alliances within Beer-O-Sphere as well as Valhalla. Their defense of NPO is a testament to their loyalty as well as their bravery, because the odds are significantly stacked against anyone coming in their defense. So R&R will choose to defend her allies when the needs arises. We're not doing this for NPO, who we admittedly like. We're doing this to enable our allies in NATO and TIO to do what they do best - act as good and faithful treaty partners. I'm sorry if the concept of "loyalty to a fault" escapes you - I realize it's pretty complex.

 

It clearly states in the bloc treaty that signatories have the ability to abstain from a conflict with the consent from the other two. Is reading that complex for you, too? Note that in the DoW, it states that TIO and NATO have declared war, not The Usual Suspects as a whole.

 

Get off your high horse and get ready to go counter AI or something. God knows you're just wasting your time here.

[the rebel]

Spends a few months in R&R, has our entire foreign policy figured out.

 

Entire policy? Don't be stupid, I only know what I'm told and when I made the prediction on the alliance forums on the concerns prior to the bloc signing I was categorically assured by someone above you that they wouldn't be on the side in the coming war that had a large visible target growing on their back and that the other signataries were in mutral agreement so wouldn't happen since bloc treaty takes priority.

 

So don't get your knickers in a twist when it happened and I say I called it.

 

This is a pathetic attempt on your part to thrust yourself back into the limelight after fading into absolute nothingness for a while - so good job, you've gotten the attention, but look like a fool doing it.

 

I don't seek "limelight" all I had expected to do was one comment, is it my fault people have chosen to rehash the same argument over one comment?

 

If I'm a fool then its pretty foolish to have three RnR government members over two days coming in rehashing the argument on my original comment, why so defensive over an apparent foolish comment or do you wish to share some of the imaginary "limelight".

 

To your point about us being meatshields: what an absolute joke. NATO and TIO chose to defend NPO. That's a move that they could have avoided had they really wanted to, given R&R's treaties to various alliances within Beer-O-Sphere as well as Valhalla. Their defense of NPO is a testament to their loyalty as well as their bravery, because the odds are significantly stacked against anyone coming in their defense. So R&R will choose to defend her allies when the needs arises. We're not doing this for NPO, who we admittedly like. We're doing this to enable our allies in NATO and TIO to do what they do best - act as good and faithful treaty partners. I'm sorry if the concept of "loyalty to a fault" escapes you - I realize it's pretty complex.

 

I haven't once belittled NATO or TIO for defending their ally, but more power to you, even if it is "pathetic" arguing against things I said that are only in your head.

 

It clearly states in the bloc treaty that signatories have the ability to abstain from a conflict with the consent from the other two. Is reading that complex for you, too? Note that in the DoW, it states that TIO and NATO have declared war, not The Usual Suspects as a whole.

 

"The treaty web being what it is, decisions to enter global conflicts can often seem difficult at first glance. This war is no exception, but careful consideration of our treaty commitments leads the Usual Suspects (Us) to a conclusion we cannot escape."

 

I know reading "escapes you - I realize it's pretty complex."

 

Get off your high horse and get ready to go counter AI or something. God knows you're just wasting your time here.

 

I kind of enjoy the high horse, its not as high as yours though.

Edited November 7, 2013 by the rebel

[Sir Humphrey]

"The treaty web being what it is, decisions to enter global conflicts can often seem difficult at first glance. This war is no exception, but careful consideration of our treaty commitments leads the Usual Suspects (Us) to a conclusion we cannot escape."

A conclusion was reached within Us for NATO and TIO to declare war. It's not that hard.

[the rebel]

A conclusion was reached within Us for NATO and TIO to declare war. It's not that hard.

 

*cough* MDAP *cough* but I know that is just details and different meanings.

 

Please stop giving me "limelight" since an allied MoFA of yours is getting jealous about it.

[Sir Humphrey]

the rebel, on 07 Nov 2013 - 13:27, said:
*cough* MDAP *cough* but I know that is just details and different meanings.

Please stop giving me "limelight" since an allied MoFA of yours is getting jealous about it.

And Garion already pointed out to you the clause that says: "Once a decision is reached, a signatory may refrain from participating in a defensive or offensive conflict only with the consent of all other signatories."

A MDAP is simply the conventional term applied to bloc treaty based on the clauses. It's not intended to limit the flexibility of the participants. And we didn't even declare war under the treaty anyway. Edited November 7, 2013 by Sir Humphrey

[Rush Sykes]

Yeah, man. I love me some good old fashioned DH, and I absolutely despise the likes of Pacifica and TIO.

 

You are an ally, so I will go easy on this one. You joined an MADP.. of your own free will.. that held no less than 5 ties to DH.. that you found yourself on their side, was not us (or anyone else) dragging you. You walked in the door with your eyes wide open. 

 

Also, the insinuation was that C&G(not GATO) was "dragged into defending people they dont like"... with 3 of the 4 members holding 5 ties to DH, it is very clear that WE (C&G) were not defending someone we didnt like. 

Edited November 7, 2013 by Rush Sykes

[andyt2k]

@Rush - Obviously a whole bloc isn't going to get dragged to somewhere no one likes, I clearly meant the individual members

 

@Rebel - Go read the bloc charter, we have various provisions allowing one or two of the members to fight someone and not the other member(s)

 

Also MADP means someone has to attack or defend, when requested, we haven't requested it, so RnR aren't obligated

 

You see when someone has MD treaties and they get attacked, not everyone is automatically drawn in

 

Knowledge, it's a powerful thing

[Dochartaigh]

@Rush - Obviously a whole bloc isn't going to get dragged to somewhere no one likes, I clearly meant the individual members

 

@Rebel - Go read the bloc charter, we have various provisions allowing one or two of the members to fight someone and not the other member(s)

 

Also MADP means someone has to attack or defend, when requested, we haven't requested it, so RnR aren't obligated

 

You see when someone has MD treaties and they get attacked, not everyone is automatically drawn in

 

Knowledge, it's a powerful thing

 

So, if R&R are not obligated, this is an optional treaty of sorts? Now, I can understand that y'all want to call it a MADP but in reality, the reading of the treaty makes it an MDoAP bloc. To be fair, I get the confustion. CnG was called a MADP but have yet to ever ride out as one as a MADP should. I think people like the idea of MADPs until it actually has to be used, then it is like, "Wait, I have to go aggressive with you...NVM." 

 

But again, the wording within the treaty allows for members to not have to go aggressive, thus turning it into an MDoAP instead of a MADP.

[andyt2k]

Don't think we called it MADP or MDoAP, we called it US

 

Treaties work via how obligated a person is to help "IF ASKED"

 

So

 

ODP or oDoAP - Not obligated, but can defend or attack with, if asked

 

MDP, MADP, - Obligated if asked

 

MDoAP - Obligated to defend if asked, but optional to attack if asked

 

Again, RnR wasn't asked so none of these things come up, it's REALLY not that difficult to understand

[Prodigal Moon]

Despite Garion's advanced rhetoric skills, I think the inescapable point that people are highlighting is that everyone had ample time to see this conflict coming, and yet your bloc still couldn't forge a unified enough FP to figure out which side it (as a whole) is on. That's your prerogative, of course, but it destroys your credibility as a self-sufficient power cluster. You might as well not even have a bloc if you can't convince people that you'll be acting as one.

[Garion]

Despite Garion's advanced rhetoric skills, I think the inescapable point that people are highlighting is that everyone had ample time to see this conflict coming, and yet your bloc still couldn't forge a unified enough FP to figure out which side it (as a whole) is on. That's your prerogative, of course, but it destroys your credibility as a self-sufficient power cluster. You might as well not even have a bloc if you can't convince people that you'll be acting as one.

We are on our own side. Is it really that hard to understand? Please explain me why we should have decided to join one of the two current "sides", sides that really do not exist in reality, as I'm sure you already know. Edited November 7, 2013 by Garion

[Prodigal Moon]

We are on our own side. Is it really that hard to understand? Please explain me why we should have decided to join one of the two current "sides", sides that really do not exist in reality, as I'm sure you already know.

 

Actually I'm saying I wish you would be on your own side - in this conflict and in future ones - and not let external treaties pull you in different directions. Getting pulled as a whole bloc in just one direction would be a little bit better, but still, when you have as much NS as Us does, you don't even need individual external treaties.