Ardus Posted February 8, 2009 Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 Who would be attacking TGE? They are pretty much a lifeless alliance. They don't do anything but plot on each other and no one outside of TGE is dumb enough to get dragged into supporting one faction over the others. They spend all their energy fighting with each other so they don't have time to start fights with anyone on the outside. Do most people want to be allied to that? No. But, it does come with the benefit of TGE not getting itself attacked because they don't have any real contact nor interest on what goes on outside TGE. And ya know I have been a TGE supporter for a very very long time. Despite the complete mess they have become if someone were to attack them I might just get involved treaty or not for old times sake. And yeah I guess that is a threat. I'll admit, I don't know who would be attacking TGE, if anybody. I'm pretty much dealing in hypotheticals with Tom in our debate on who would win in a fight: Bigfoot or the Swamp Thing. In retrospect, we've gotten off topic and I'll end the debate. FOK found it prudent to make this announcement and I wish 'em luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tygaland Posted February 8, 2009 Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 It is pleasing to see an alliance stick by their allies in times of need. Well done FOK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hobbies0310 Posted February 8, 2009 Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 It is pleasing to see an alliance stick by their allies in times of need. Well done FOK. Its sad that this is not expected all the time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earogema Posted February 8, 2009 Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 For? I think I know what you're saying, but you're wrong. SNOW is a neutral treaty. STA was a member while fighting on the opposite side of most of SNOW, for example.If TGE or any SNOW member were to attack another SNOW member (which they wouldn't), they would be expelled from the treaty. What happened to the individual trades would be up to those holding them. -Bama To be honest, I don't think they would care if they were expelled from a trade treaty. Call me crazy, I know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hormones74 Posted February 8, 2009 Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 Will Fok be acquiring any new bicycles in the near future from the Germans? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hawkenstein Posted February 8, 2009 Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 Honorable as always FOK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voodoo Nova Posted February 8, 2009 Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 You Dutch are always hardcore when it comes to being friends and allies... /me gives FOK a friendship cookie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deruvian Posted February 8, 2009 Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 props to FOK for sticking to their friends o/ Honour o/ FOK TGE is lucky to have friends like FOK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phoenix Rising Posted February 8, 2009 Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 To be honest, I don't think they would care if they were expelled from a trade treaty.Call me crazy, I know. I'm fairly certain that your line of thought isn't relevant at all. No one in SNOW is going to attack anyone else in SNOW. New thread derail please. Also, I suppose it's nice to see allies backing each other up. That's about all I have to say on that matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeTheFirst Posted February 8, 2009 Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 (edited) Then they caved to GATO though they don't like to admit that little bit. I lolled. GATO was about to surrender, you even voted on it, until NPO stepped in and saved you the embarrassment. Edited February 8, 2009 by MikeTheFirst Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tygaland Posted February 8, 2009 Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 Its sad that this is not expected all the time Yes, it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Groucho Marx Posted February 8, 2009 Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 (edited) TBB was the one that gave them said notice before the announcement. Nice try though. :lol: Not according to TGE High Gov't I've been good friends with for over a year. Edited February 8, 2009 by Emperor Marx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earogema Posted February 8, 2009 Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 (edited) I'm fairly certain that your line of thought isn't relevant at all. No one in SNOW is going to attack anyone else in SNOW.New thread derail please. Also, I suppose it's nice to see allies backing each other up. That's about all I have to say on that matter. It has to do with the thread. I'm saying that TGE will be attacked regardless of SNOW, because let's face it, nobody will drop trades with those that leave SNOW, and the NAP clause will mean little. Hell, I was trading with the NPO when I was on the red sphere. Edited February 8, 2009 by MegaAros Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Srqt Posted February 8, 2009 Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 Will the Random Insanity Alliance be defending them, KingSrqt?Perhaps when that happens I'll buy you a drink and if you win, I'll buy the bar. Seeing as though they are MDoAPd to two different superfriends alliances I would say yes. Well anyway, I expect all these tough, mostly non-government members of alliances offering their alliances in defense of FOK and TGE to send me 3 million each if in the case that this war truly does break out, I find them either on the side lines or on fighting for the baddies. B) What about the tough government members that have a track record of not being afraid to blow their nations to hell? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phoenix Rising Posted February 8, 2009 Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 It has to do with the thread. I'm saying that TGE will be attacked regardless of SNOW, because let's face it, nobody will drop trades with those that leave SNOW, and the NAP clause will mean little. Hell, I was trading with the NPO when I was on the red sphere. While I can, perhaps, understand your thoughts on the effect of someone being removed from SNOW ... I fear that is unlikely to occur in any case. Tin foil hats are so out of style, MegaAros. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Litler Posted February 8, 2009 Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 all lulz aside, I'm quite sad this announcement was needed.I was hoping it was clear that we would put our infra at risk for a MDP partner. @ Tom Litter: please stop, you're making a fool out of your self. I'd be a fool not to speak out and I'm not sure if you genuinely misspelled my name or intentionally put "Litter" instead of Litler. The First Great War is the most glaring example of this. It is also the least relevant. This is ancient history and things have changed drastically since those times. You also mistake silence for apathy. Every group on the face of Bob has a tremendous interest in current affairs and most alliances have strong opinions on who is the more righteous of the groups, opinions that may not necessarily be accurately reflected by existing treaties (you said yourself they're worthless). We find ourselves in a situation where the excessive number of treaties invites the same sort of opinion-driven side taking chaos that very few to no treaties would invite. Most common member nations are the grassroots of alliances tend to be apathetic exhibiting "drone-like" behavior. Those who do not drive themselves are destined to be driven. In all other instances the group perceived to be the attacker lost: in GWI the NPO was rebuffed after attacking LUE; Outdated. in GWII the Initiative managed to portray LUE as the attackers and so prevailed in large part due to that fact; The word for today, kids, is "portray". Portrayal is just what it means, nothing more. This leads me to your next example... in GWIII the Initiative again benefited from being able to paint Vincent Xander's plotting as an offensive action; Indeed. We're talking about portrayal. It doesn't make a difference who declares war first; what matters is who prepared war war and perpetrated it. A defensive action can be preemptive and still be just as ill-prepared. Genmay hit BotS and the Unjust Path was broken. There is no better casus belli than defense against foreign aggression, be it pronounced or covert. This war comes closest to being relevant to your argument but you would be lying if you said that the other side wasn't out to get this "Unjust Path" just as much as the Unjust Path thirsted for their blood. Although, other factors effect it too. For example, propaganda, opportunism, and intimidation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Bad Posted February 8, 2009 Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 Normally, I enjoy your saber-rattling. You're among the best at it. That said, it loses some impact when the group you are saying you'd defend unilaterally out of friendship is the one your alliance just cancelled an actual treaty with for supposedly not maintaining that friendship. I would not out friendship, as I have no idea who TGE even is anymore. But if someone were to try and take advantage of their chaotic weakness and to take them out then you can damn well bet I will do far more then rattle a saber. TGE was once an alliance I liked a great deal. Maybe with FoKs help they can survive and restore some of what they once were. Perhaps it would be better if they returned as FoKs protectorate so they could flood them with advisors and try and fix things. I don't know but, I do know that I have made my intent here very clear. If someone wishes to test me they are more than welcome to take a whack at TGE. We have fought beside FoK before and I think we would enjoy doing so again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thaone Posted February 8, 2009 Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 Then they caved to GATO though they don't like to admit that little bit. We got killed against GATO, at that moment in time they were bigger and had stronger nations and we already were at war with two other alliances. I wasn't here back then, but as a whole FOK must be happy TOP protected us against that, I see no shame in such admitting that fact. Especially if you take into account we went in to defend the losing side, TPF was by the way part of. B) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Litler Posted February 8, 2009 Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 If TGE or any SNOW member were to attack another SNOW member (which they wouldn't), they would be expelled from the treaty. What happened to the individual trades would be up to those holding them.-Bama So you're saying that SNOW means... nothing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desperado Posted February 8, 2009 Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 Not according to TGE High Gov't I've been good friends with for over a year. I was in the room for it. It went well. You obviously don't have the correct info. Might wanna double check next time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magicninja Posted February 8, 2009 Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 I lolled. GATO was about to surrender, you even voted on it, until NPO stepped in and saved you the embarrassment. The only vote I remember was to go to war. Sure there was talk about what TOP may or may not do but GATO was gonna take the blow if they had to. In the end GATO accomplished what it set out to do which was get you out of the war. GATO 1 FOK 0 in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hobbies0310 Posted February 8, 2009 Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 So you're saying that SNOW means... nothing? what dont u understand? Its a Economic treaty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ardus Posted February 8, 2009 Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 I'd be a fool not to speak out and I'm not sure if you genuinely misspelled my name or intentionally put "Litter" instead of Litler.It is also the least relevant. This is ancient history and things have changed drastically since those times. Most common member nations are the grassroots of alliances tend to be apathetic exhibiting "drone-like" behavior. Those who do not drive themselves are destined to be driven. Outdated. The word for today, kids, is "portray". Portrayal is just what it means, nothing more. This leads me to your next example... Indeed. We're talking about portrayal. It doesn't make a difference who declares war first; what matters is who prepared war war and perpetrated it. A defensive action can be preemptive and still be just as ill-prepared. This war comes closest to being relevant to your argument but you would be lying if you said that the other side wasn't out to get this "Unjust Path" just as much as the Unjust Path thirsted for their blood. Although, other factors effect it too. For example, propaganda, opportunism, and intimidation. I'd love to keep showing you where you're wrong, but I said I'd end this debate, so I'll end this debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earogema Posted February 8, 2009 Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 While I can, perhaps, understand your thoughts on the effect of someone being removed from SNOW ... I fear that is unlikely to occur in any case. Tin foil hats are so out of style, MegaAros. Alright man. Whatever you say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Litler Posted February 8, 2009 Report Share Posted February 8, 2009 what dont u understand? Its a Economic treaty What would be different if it was canceled? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts