MA Treaty Cancellation

[crushtania]

Very true. Some alliance treaty vaults are at breaking point. There's no reason why alliances have to subscribe to the notion that a "Treaty = Friendship." It's a declaration of one obviously. But friends can stay friends without the fanfare too. Canceling treaties shouldn't be as much as a rebuff as they seem; if alliances drift apart mutually, so be it.

[Denial]

If anything, I really can't imagine MA being incompetent and giving away "lines are being drawn" signals, so much ahead of time.

One could argue MA's cancellation on Mushroom Kingdom was exactly that. I am not going to comment on whether such a move was "incompetent" but it could easily be interpreted as an early selection of sides in a war that everyone with their head not in the sand saw coming.

[Doitzel]

One could argue MA's cancellation on Mushroom Kingdom was exactly that. I am not going to comment on whether such a move was "incompetent" but it could easily be interpreted as an early selection of sides in a war that everyone with their head not in the sand saw coming.

What nonsense. WUT will never break up.

[jerdge]

MHA acknowledges war is imminent ITT

tl;dr:

jerdge: 'A' certainly doesn't prove nor suggests that 'B' is going to happen.

hizzy: you're acknowledging that 'B' is going to happen.

The fact that I comment on the possibility is almost proof that I don't know of any war coming, in fact. Moreover, if I had information about a coming war I would shut up, so that the enemy can't see us coming at them.

At the MHA we know very well that all warfare is based on deception. When able to attack, we seem unable; when using our forces, we seem inactive; when we are near, we make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we make him believe we are near.

We hold out baits to entice the enemy. We feign disorder.

Then we open interstellar bypasses.

[Doitzel]

The fact that I comment on the possibility is almost proof that I don't know of any war coming, in fact. Moreover, if I had information about a coming war I would shut up, so that the enemy can't see us coming at them.

At the MHA we know very well that all warfare is based on deception. When able to attack, we seem unable; when using our forces, we seem inactive; when we are near, we make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we make him believe we are near.

tl;dr:

jerdge: I'm full of crap. Nothing I say has any validity.

Have you ever considered ODN, jerdge?

[jerdge]

One could argue MA's cancellation on Mushroom Kingdom was exactly that. I am not going to comment on whether such a move was "incompetent" but it could easily be interpreted as an early selection of sides in a war that everyone with their head not in the sand saw coming.

We canceled with the NpO (in a general treaty clean-up) a few weeks/days/dontremember before the "War of the Coalition". We weren't doing it because we knew of anything, just the relationship hadn't developed as expected when signing the treaty. (If anybody thinks that I am lying on this, they certainly don't know me well.)

tl;dr:

jerdge: I'm full of crap. Nothing I say has any validity.

Have you ever considered ODN, jerdge?

Thanks for the insult (unbecoming of you), and no.

[Edit:typo]

Edited March 30, 2009 by jerdge

[Denial]

We canceled with the NpO (in a general treaty clean-up) a few weeks/days/dontremember before the "War of the Coalition". We weren't doing it because we knew of anything, just the relationship hadn't developed as expected when signing the treaty. (If anybody thinks that I am lying on, this they certainly don't know me well.)

Oh, please. I have done this dance more than most. You cannot persuade me that a prominent, well-established alliance such as MHA was entirely ignorant of the political landscape just weeks before the noCB War. Even the least-connected rulers were able to correctly predict many of the developments that led to the canncellation of the Ordinance of Order and the related global war. As for lies and deception, they are the cornerstones of Cyberverse politics. Always have been. The problem plaguing this community is that far too many people are ready and willing to lap up whatever they are told in Alliance Announcements without making their own judgements.

[Mongrel]

lines being drawn, so the superfriends have not ties to the NPO anymore?

can we expect more cancellations?

I replied earlier saying how two allies have parted ways, to elaborate, Rangarok and Pacifica are MDP Partners.

[Doitzel]

Thanks for the insult (unbecoming of you), and no.

You've repaid it to my and Revanche's intelligence tenfold with the first portion of your post, I assure you. Of course, you could just be lying because, "...[you] know very well that all warfare is based on deception*."

*See: lies.

[jerdge]

You cannot persuade me that a prominent, well-established alliance such as MHA was entirely ignorant of the political landscape just weeks before the noCB War.

Revanche, I respect and esteem you and I thus think you can understand the difference between cancelling a treaty to "choose a side", and cancelling that same treaty for other reasons; not accepting to be dictated your own agenda by the "political landcape" (or anyway what crap is going to maybe/likely happen).

Besides, this discussion is about MA/UPN/NPO, and my example has IMHO exhausted the reason to be discussed. [/off]

(Also hai Doitz: your urgence to counter every and any thing your adversaries say - no matter its content - is "probably" hurting your cause... I can't complain for that by the way, thus please continue! )

[Edit:slip]

Edited March 30, 2009 by jerdge

[Blacky]

This already? Well atleast I'm ready to punch the spit out of somebody's mouth this time 'round.

Good Luck to all the involved parties.

[Bob Janova]

Interesting. I expected cancellations across that line but I didn't expect MA to be the first one. Your NPO treaty was one of the very first, I believe, and they took you under their protection when you were small and insignificant.

We weren't doing it because we knew of anything, just the relationship hadn't developed as expected when signing the treaty.

I'm going to assume ignorance not deceit, but the MHA certainly would have known about the major issues between Continuum alliances and Polaris, and the fact that we were pushing NPO to drop their ties for some time. And if there is a war coming soon, MHA will know about that too (since either NPO or IRON would have to be involved).

[Haflinger]

sad but necessary et cetera :3

must feel weird, usually its NPO that cancels on people

You ought to check your history. Specifically, NPO-Legion, GWI.

About the rumors of war, please everybody don't be silly: when a war is approaching we indeed see treaty cancellations, but not weeks or months before (I am here making wild assumptions on the timing of the imaginary next war, by the way).

Actually, that's what happened last summer. Most of the cancellations were in June and July, and the war began in August.

jerdge: I'm full of crap. Nothing I say has any validity.

Nice to see you haven't changed at all since when I first noticed this post. Still loads of class.

[uaciaut]

The future isn't really that expected as some of you seem to think.

Last time i checked you weren't able to see the future either, just speculate as much as everyone else. so yeah.

We canceled with the NpO (in a general treaty clean-up) a few weeks/days/dontremember before the "War of the Coalition". We weren't doing it because we knew of anything, just the relationship hadn't developed as expected when signing the treaty. (If anybody thinks that I am lying on this, they certainly don't know me well.)

This is where i agree like 99% with Revanche. See in times of standstill pretty much no one gives a !@#$ about how active communication lines between allied alliances are. As long as there is NO threat a treaty cannot have any negative consequences.

As soon as things start moving into a certain direction - whichever it may be - treaties are re-evaluated and people do a "real relations" - "real intentions" substraction with the result showing what happens.

[Denial]

Revanche, I respect and esteem you and I thus think you can understand the difference between cancelling a treaty to "choose a side", and cancelling that same treaty for other reasons; not accepting to be dictated your own agenda by the "political landcape" (or anyway what crap is going to maybe/likely happen).

Besides, this discussion is about MA/UPN/NPO, and my example has IMHO exhausted the reason to be discussed. [/off]

(Also hai Doitz: your urgence to counter every and any thing your adversaries say - no matter its content - is "probably" hurting your cause... I can't complain for that by the way, thus please continue! )

[Edit:slip]

It is possible - albeit, about as likely as Gonzoczar returning to us upon a lightning bolt and leading OFS to glory - that MHA chose to cancel their agreement with Polaris for reasons other than strategic concerns or choosing a side, and the timing was entirely coincidental, sure. However, when your argument is wholly reliant upon the claim that MHA was entirely unaware of what Polaris was facing in the coming days, weeks, and so on, it only strengthens my belief that MHA was fully aware of what was on the horizon and was preparing itself for it.

[WorkingClassRuler]

lol how is this about MHA?

Anyway, it's sad when friends drift apart. While there is a lot of cynicism about treaties in Planet Bob there is always a degree of real relations behind them, so for a treaty to be cancelled is indeed unfortunate for those alliances. I wish them all the best.

[Blacky]

Nice to see you haven't changed at all since when I first Still loads of class.

Fancy you being the type to attempt to pull off a character attack on Doitzel of all people. Also it's ineffective. Nobody is going to think any less or any more of Doitzel based on what he's said or done in the past.

Also atleast he's not riding on anybody elses coattails. He's got atleast that much class.

Edited March 30, 2009 by Blacky

[jerdge]

Last time i checked you weren't able to see the future either, just speculate as much as everyone else. so yeah.

You're correct.

However, when your argument is wholly reliant upon the claim that MHA was entirely unaware of what Polaris was facing in the coming days, weeks, and so on...

In general:

'cancelling a treaty' not because of 'possible war' =/= 'cancelling a treaty' not knowing of 'possible war'

My point is simply that there's not a necessary relationship between treaties being cancelled and war, even if a war between the two cancelling parties (or their friends) is forseen by many. I just brought an example that I know of, to support a point that is anyway valid in an by itself: you're free to disregard my example but please try to consider the idea it conveys, rather than lose focus in favour of your version of that particular piece of history.

My invite is just to not lose your faith in a peaceful future, simple as that. Call me ingenuous and idealist, I don't care.

To state the "theorem" above, by the way, I don't need, I wouldn't be able to and I wouldn't have the information to infer that the MHA government at the time wasn't "aware of what was on the horizon". I simply don't know (IIRC our "defcon level" wasn't changed in those days, but honestly I may be wrong).

Now, I am afraid that many won't be able to believe me. This wouldn't be horrible in itself but it makes me sad that people choose not to believe me just because I am allied with the "evil NPO" and thus "evidently" I can't be correct or honest (or anything else of good). I hope that at least some will keep their minds open, though.

(This "MHA derailment" has gone far enough and I will try to abstain from being involved in discussing this old stuff. It was just an example, after all.)

[Valtamdraugr]

Good luck to KaitlinK and MA.

Paths diverge and friends part ways, such is life.

[hizzy]

For the record, jerdge, that was a joke.... but I see it's spawned a huge discussion now, so my bad Planet Bob, I'll refrain from making fun of anyone for a while.

Like, 4 minutes.

[Chinatownbus]

I'd win more if I bet that I'd be right, correct?

you were wrong.

[Captain Flinders]

If anything, I really can't imagine MA being incompetent and giving away "lines are being drawn" signals, so much ahead of time.

It has happened multiple times before. No reason it couldn't/shouldn't happen again.

Edited March 30, 2009 by Captain Flinders

[Master-Debater]

About the rumors of war, please everybody don't be silly: when a war is approaching we indeed see treaty cancellations, but not weeks or months before (I am here making wild assumptions on the timing of the imaginary next war, by the way).

If anything, I really can't imagine MA being incompetent and giving away "lines are being drawn" signals, so much ahead of time.

Moreover, while some treaty cancellations can mean that the treaty web is maybe being shaped in two new blocks, war isn't the necessary outcome of the mere existence of two blocks.

Given the amount of nukes globally available today, and the damage that could be inflicted to the planet in case of a big war, we could very well see months of cold war and diplomatic maneuvers without any real open conflict.

1. When war approaches and everyone knows its coming people will try to make moves first to be in a better position. While I do not believe MA is making such a move they are chosing sides by canceling these treaties.

2. They may not have realized it but they have done just that. Probably not their goal with this but yes, that is infact what it has done. The signals have been there for ages, now they are starting to become visble to those who may not have been seeing the signals.

3. When in the history of CN have there been two defined blocs not connected that havent ended up in war?

4. Were seeing those maneuvers already. All signs point to a summer conflict and were already seeing people positioning and getting ready for it. The "cold war" as you put it really has been going on for a while. Things are not as perfect as many try to say it is. Anyone who has been in CN long enough can see what is coming and can read the signs coming from all corners of CN.

[Felix von Agnu]

I don't think anyone in their right mind is going to deny a war coming, or even sides forming. It's starting to be obvious where lines are being drawn. I think the suspense is coming from who is going to kick it off for what reason.

[Denial]

Now, I am afraid that many won't be able to believe me. This wouldn't be horrible in itself but it makes me sad that people choose not to believe me just because I am allied with the "evil NPO" and thus "evidently" I can't be correct or honest (or anything else of good). I hope that at least some will keep their minds open, though.

(This "MHA derailment" has gone far enough and I will try to abstain from being involved in discussing this old stuff. It was just an example, after all.)

I will not comment on the first section of your post, as even if I am correct about the reasons behind MHA's cancellation on Polaris - and I firmly believe I am - I highly doubt it would ever be admitted in public. Subsequently, this debate is a waste of time. I will, however, note that it is both disappointing and amusing that you claim I am only questioning your honesty because of some inherent and nonsensical opposition to Pacifica and your alliance's allegiance to them. Pacifica has nothing to do with this, but now that you have brought them into the fray, I will mention that you should probably avoid using a debate tactic that they themselves only use as a last resort.

My invite is just to not lose your faith in a peaceful future, simple as that. Call me ingenuous and idealist, I don't care.

I have no faith in a peaceful feature, and I am rather comfortable with that. I would much rather a world of dynamic conflict than nauseating peace. As for what I would call you, I would change that to disingenuous and naive. At least in regards to the issues we have discussed.