Jump to content

Imperial Announcement from the New Pacific Order


Farrin Xies

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 168
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

OMG lol a NAP? What is this, 2006 :P

 

 

somebody had to say it

 

Those were my thoughts as well  :laugh:

 

Tough I think we (TOP) had some kind of agreement with NpO along the lines of an NAP, and that genuinely benefitted relations. I think you can only have an NAP after a serious conflict in order to better relations. NAPs serve no purpose otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NPOFlag.png

Notice of Cancellation

This world is one noted for its many relationships changes. Over the years, alliances shift their allegiances; friends can become enemies, and enemies can become friends. Relationships are fluid, changing just as alliances themselves change.

It is therefore all the more notable when a relationship remains steady throughout such upheavals. For almost seven years the New Pacific Order and the Independent Republic of Orange Nations have maintained the Cordiality Accords; a treaty of Civility, Non-Aggression, Intelligence Sharing and Optional Assistance in Foreign Conflicts. During these seven years, our relationship has had many ups and downs, but both parties have always stood as friends, never opposing each other on the battlefield. For both the Order and the Republic, it is a relationship without equal in its historic significance and resilience.

It is therefore with immense regret and no small amount of debate that we had to deliver the notice of this treatys cancellation earlier this evening. Per Article IV, Section 2, this treaty shall be void in 3 days.

For seven years, the Order and the Republic never stood on opposite ends of the battlefield; however, this changed when IRON decided to enter, via a treaty of optional aggression, on an aggressive war upon our sphere and specifically upon our ally in TLR. Whilst we can appreciate the reasons that led IRON to this decision and hold them no ill-will for deciding to pick the side on which they have the most allies, we can also no longer in good faith maintain a stance of non-aggression with them when they are in the middle of beating down our ally. To do so would be a disservice to the bonds of allegiance between NPO and TLR, as well as our duty to our allies in the wider coalition.

We can also no longer in good faith maintain a policy of intelligence sharing with the Republic when IRON without sharing this information with the Order has actively been involved in the planning and execution of a coalition whose end goal (even if by unfortunate necessity rather than desire) can only succeed by inflicting widespread destruction on the New Pacific Order and its allied sphere. We can no longer maintain a policy of intelligence sharing when, in return, the New Pacific Order is forced to take a leading role in a coalition that has to plan a defense against IRONs attack a defense that by unfortunate necessity will mean damages for the Republic. To do so would be a great disservice to our duties to all of our allies in our coalition.

Whilst we greatly appreciate the many conflicts of interest and hard decisions that IRON has had to make over the past few months, hard decisions can only be called so because they have a price. In this situation, the price has been one of the worlds most long-standing and cherished relationships.

Despite our disappointment, and despite the necessity of this war forcing us on opposite sides, the Order bears no grudge against the Republic for its decisions. We will continue to regard them as a friendly alliance, and commit ourselves to maintaining the atmosphere of civility that was enshrined in this treaty. It is our sincere hope that, whatever path they have managed to gain access to through these decisions, they will come to find the benefits to be worth the price.

Farrin Xies,
Emperor of the New Pacific Order
The Lone Star Emperor

Red,
Imperial Regent of the New Pacific Order

 

 

I knew that getting to know NPO after Karma was the right choice.  This is classy and a good thing to see.  And yes, even now people still plot to take you down.  They'll never top the first time it happened though.  <3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lol yeah the damage that could do.

 

Not all damages can be measured in terms of infrastructure, or tech. Holding on to the notion that pixels matter is what keeps you from understanding why this was necessary.

 

To our friends in IRON, all the very best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, please, if this war had gone off the way NG wanted, TPF was already pledged to go with the optional Fark treaty over all the NG-side mutuals you have (unless you all were lying to CoJ).
I've refrained from commenting on TPF gov posts like this so far because I respect TPF, but with a post like that you guys have got to the point where I'm not going to sit around and let you pretend that TPF are the flag-waiving patriots you're acting like over there.

You wound me, sir.

But actually, it wasn't until the day before we entered that we decided to be on the NPO side. I have no interest in pretending to being flag-waving patriots, perception means very little to me, but I still can't pretend like this is anything more or less then IRON deserves. When you act like a fool, there are consequences, and IRON has been very foolish lately.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Honored" implies a whole lot more than reality: shoulder-shrugging blind obedience.  And as such, I cordially invite them to stop acting like it's anything more than that and/or as if being slaves to slow-paced, lazy, schizophrenic FP makes them better than IRON.

 

Schatt, you couldn't be further from the truth, it's mind-boggling how wrong you are really.  This wasn't about obedience, it was about making the right decision based on changing variables.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually there was Intel sharing clauses with this treaty as stated in the OP.


Nobody takes intel clauses seriously. They share information with who they want to share information with and withhold it from whomever they don't. I seriously don't know why that clause even exists let alone makes it into every single treaty ever written.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the worst possible thing you could have said. Just lol

I don't care that a NAP was cancelled?

 

The MDoAP was cancelled a long time ago, I don't see what this changes between our alliances, unless NPO is planning to attack us, which I doubt is their intention

Link to comment
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...