Sigrun Vapneir Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 What: War Who: The Sovereign Order When: Now Why: Sanction against Monsters Inc nation Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Franz Ferdinand Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 I await Non Grata's response to this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unknown Smurf Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 (edited) You forgot where. :v: Welcome. I await Non Grata's response to this. I thought getting involved in affairs that have no concern to them was DKs M.O. not NGs. Edited May 26, 2015 by Unknown Smurf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Franz Ferdinand Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 You forgot where. :v: Welcome. I thought getting involved in affairs that have no concern to them was DKs M.O. not NGs. Non Grata protect Confederatio Aesir unless I am very much mistaken? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unknown Smurf Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 Non Grata protect Confederatio Aesir unless I am very much mistaken? ..I thought they were protected by AI? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Franz Ferdinand Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 ..I thought they were protected by AI? You are incorrect, I have found the announcement dated April 23rd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malkavian Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 Who's gonna win? That's the question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smurthwaite Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 Who's gonna win? That's the question. Better question: Who cares? More contrived drama. Screams of Unknown Smurf. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sigrun Vapneir Posted May 26, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 (edited) Non Grata protect Confederatio Aesir unless I am very much mistaken? We have a simple protectorate with NG, as we had with our previous protectors. They provide us shelter from raiders. They dont set our FA and they are not responsible for it. (Historical note, CA has had 4 protectors, after running for about a year without one initially. We have twice gone to war for our protectors. We have twice asked a protector to facilitate a negotiation with a belligerent. We have never, ever, asked a protector to enter a war for us.) We are not anyone's farm team, pawn, or foil. We are not now and have never been particularly interested in dragging big league players onto our minor league field. And I could have sworn you already knew all that Franz, what are you up to? <Edit to remove redundancy and improve accuracy to expected levels> Edited May 27, 2015 by Sigrun Vapneir Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malkavian Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 Better question: Who cares? More contrived drama. Screams of Unknown Smurf. Well, I suppose their allies particularly care, Smurthwaite. I mean, these guys may happen to have important friends. I reckon that their foes might care, as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isolatar Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 You forgot where. :v: Welcome. I thought getting involved in affairs that have no concern to them was DKs M.O. not NGs. And how! How are you going to attack them? Give us your guide! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unknown Smurf Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 And how! How are you going to attack them? Give us your guide! It's easily. Just do some [url=http://www.cybernations.net/declarewar_form.asp?Nation_ID=537801&bynation=537801]clickity[/url], clickity click and pew pew pew. But how isn't one of the Ws. It's who what where when why. Is that not a common thing people are taught? I've like founded my life on it :psyduck: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PuliSher Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 Even though I'm not wearing the uniform I should war is war :smug: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord bagel Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 I like this DoW. Brief, concise, and to the point. godspeed to yourselves and may you both have fun Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stewie Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 Have fun everyone.BRB, raiding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibsonator21 Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 I thought this was an announcement from the chestnut accords lol... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Hitchcock Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 Welcome to the party Sigrun! there's cold beer in the fridge Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ceres Soveign Posted May 27, 2015 Report Share Posted May 27, 2015 Drinking dulls your senses. Welcome to the fray, CA! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duderonomy Posted May 27, 2015 Report Share Posted May 27, 2015 Our stuff is declaring war on other people's stuff. This hasn't happened to me since I was ten. :v: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sephiroth Posted May 27, 2015 Report Share Posted May 27, 2015 o/ CAGood luck and enjoy the war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walshington Posted May 27, 2015 Report Share Posted May 27, 2015 Can we expect a declaration from CA every time someone uses sanctions as an act of war? I haven't seen the policy in action, so I assume it is new and will be enacted forever and forthwith? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Spanier Posted May 27, 2015 Report Share Posted May 27, 2015 Can we expect a declaration from CA every time someone uses sanctions as an act of war? I haven't seen the policy in action, so I assume it is new and will be enacted forever and forthwith? CA has an unspecified level of treaty with MI, so I guess it could be a form of oA? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dre4mwe4ver Posted May 27, 2015 Report Share Posted May 27, 2015 CA has an unspecified level of treaty with MI, so I guess it could be a form of oA?An aggressive oA masked as a reactive action? Wouldn't be the worst we've seen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sigrun Vapneir Posted May 27, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 27, 2015 Can we expect a declaration from CA every time someone uses sanctions as an act of war? I haven't seen the policy in action, so I assume it is new and will be enacted forever and forthwith? It's really not new at all, but I understand why you perceive it that way. It's really always been a good CB that someone misused a sanction in this way. It's just relatively rare for someone who is actually in a position to do something about it, to care. Large alliances often courtesy sanction anyone another large alliance wants sanctioned, and they all benefit from this state of affairs, so typically it's just shrugged off. I've been saying for some time that this is a bad trend and in this case I believe I have an air tight case to enforce it myself, at least insofar as I am able to. I was on purple at the time, and this was my ally. You may well buy a proposition that I would never agree with - that the senator can use the sanction in any way he pleases and no one should necessarily care. For the sake of argument, say that is true. It's still an act of war against me personally - prohibiting me from trading with my ally, who is NOT a rogue, who is not on a path to deletion, who is in fact a legitimate member of a legitimate alliance involved in a legitimate war. It's my contention that when he laid that sanction he gave at bare minimum everyone who was on purple at that time a legitimate CB. I have been told many times that may be true, but none of those people care, so he's fine. Well in this case one of those people was me. I do care. And I have the wherewithal to do something about it. Would you really deny me the right to stand up for what I believe in here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dre4mwe4ver Posted May 27, 2015 Report Share Posted May 27, 2015 Would you really deny me the right to stand up for what I believe in here? When you only act when the situation is convenient and ignore the same infractions when inconevenent, is it really "standing up for what you believe in" or is it declaring a belief to use as an excuse? 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.