In Spades Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 I abstain from saying anything possitive about the whole thing, just based on my belief that treaties should NEVER be cancelled unless on most dire circumstances. Lack of communication simply states that somebody didn't try hard enough to keep the common ground both groups found with each other long ago going. The only excuse for that is laziness. After puting my points on the admin area, I saw why it was done in the responses thereafter. It's just not my personal belief that this was the right way to go about it by up and cancelling something that people worked really hard to obtain. /shutting up about it now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shahenshah Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 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. Trudat. Indeed, the sides seems to be taking some sort of shape, still tho, there are too many lines that are interconnecting the sides. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Flinders Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 It's just not my personal belief that this was the right way to go about it by up and cancelling something that people worked really hard to obtain. Better it gets put to sleep now than called into question when the bullets start to fly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VIdiot the Great Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 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. Uh, isn't this thread a cancellation of a treaty with NPO? As such, I would think it has something to do with them. Or maybe I missed your point. Regards, VI Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreddieMercury Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 you were wrong. The fat lady hasn't sung yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ejayrazz Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 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. Not everyone is all about strategic planning, or if so, you're completely over analyzing the situation. Sometimes friends lose contact with another and thus, friendship deteriorates. I wouldn't say they hate each other, look at Moo's response within the theread, in fact, he understands the situation and pretty much said it himself; sometimes when you lose contact with one another, it is best to move forward. MDPs are about friendship in my opinion, becoming allies merely for strength will eventually lead you to your demise, such as The League. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattski133 Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 o/ Getting the ball rolling! One can only hope. Best of luck to MA and all parties involved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vyper Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 We all wish you the best... o/ MA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
In Spades Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 I just read all the conspiracy theorists out there. This is awesome. We're also Declaring on Valhalla at update tonight citing a CB of "a war on drugs". an IRC log showing the NPO is really controlled by crab people, and are in the process of getting some plutonium 235. Anything to keep this going. Better it gets put to sleep now than called into question when the bullets start to fly. We aren't citing war, nor was it any part of the decision-making process. But, it would be really cool if we did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xiphosis Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 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. As someone that's been a friend of MA since... well, practically their first week, I will admit confusion whenever I see comments like this. MA had a fair number of allies before the NPO treaty got signed - I'm fairly sure CSN, GOD, and TTK were all treatied to them, at least. I know CSN's had their back since like, day one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Corrupt Teacher Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 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. So thats why you joined C&G its all clear now oh yeah back on topic MA canceling on NPO expected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Telchar Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 I can respect that. Good luck to everyone involved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayvon Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 I abstain from saying anything possitive about the whole thing, just based on my belief that treaties should NEVER be cancelled unless on most dire circumstances. Lack of communication simply states that somebody didn't try hard enough to keep the common ground both groups found with each other long ago going. The only excuse for that is laziness.After puting my points on the admin area, I saw why it was done in the responses thereafter. It's just not my personal belief that this was the right way to go about it by up and cancelling something that people worked really hard to obtain. /shutting up about it now. New governments, new people, new opinions, new feelings, new truths. Just because 'A' signed with 'B' yesterday, doesn't mean that 2 mths or 2 years down the road the new 'A' and new 'B' are going to be just as compatible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baden-Württemberg Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 3. When in the history of CN have there been two defined blocs not connected that havent ended up in war? Back to the classroom, buddy. All important blocs are somehow connected to each other. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Srqt Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 Back to the classroom, buddy.All important blocs are somehow connected to each other. I believe his point was that it hasn't always been that way and he feels that the recent political trends are going back towards the days where every important bloc was not connected and we had a clear bi-polar political climate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dejarue Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 As someone that's been a friend of MA since... well, practically their first week, I will admit confusion whenever I see comments like this. MA had a fair number of allies before the NPO treaty got signed - I'm fairly sure CSN, GOD, and TTK were all treatied to them, at least. I know CSN's had their back since like, day one. This man speaks words of truth. In fact, most of maroon had their back well before they made any connections to NPO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electron Sponge Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 an IRC log showing the NPO is really controlled by crab people I think you are confused. They said that they "had", not that they "were". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Janova Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 As someone that's been a friend of MA since... well, practically their first week, I will admit confusion whenever I see comments like this. MA had a fair number of allies before the NPO treaty got signed - I'm fairly sure CSN, GOD, and TTK were all treatied to them, at least. I know CSN's had their back since like, day one. Well I guess this is where I look ignorant Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
In Spades Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 New governments, new people, new opinions, new feelings, new truths. Just because 'A' signed with 'B' yesterday, doesn't mean that 2 mths or 2 years down the road the new 'A' and new 'B' are going to be just as compatible. Yes, our government has changed since we signed with the NPO, moreso due to the coup four-months later and Kait definately has the right to cancel (though, I would like to point out that our upper-echelon is about the same as it was seven months ago opinion-wise minus the subtraction of mila and the addition of Mamaduck). However, you don't pick who your friends are; just how long the friendship lasts and how long you still respect them. I don't believe any treaty partner deserves to hear "Oh, by the way; we changed government. We aren't your friends anymore because it's too inconvenient to honor inherited agreements. Go find another sandbox to play in." That being said, that's just me. Lack of activity is a miserable citation. New opinions may have played a role to a point, but it hasn't been evident to me even in the most secret confines of our government. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proxian Empire Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 A very good decision on MA's part. I applaud you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Flinders Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 We aren't citing war, nor was it any part of the decision-making process. I didn't say it was. But hey, if you want to close your eyes, stick your fingers in your ears, and yell at the top of your lungs to drown out the world around you, go right ahead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buds The Man Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 Come senators, congressmenPlease heed the call Don't stand in the doorway Don't block up the hall For he that gets hurt Will be he who has stalled There's a battle outside And it is ragin' It'll soon shake your windows And rattle your walls For the times they are a-changin'. I was always curious as to whether there were legitimate friendships backing either of these treaties. It appears as if I have been given an answer. In my experiance with Kait she doesnt sign treaties based on political conveniance she bases them upon friendships and true feelings, basically it takes more than just a political motivation to sign a treaty with her. If you doubt that take some time to talk to her. If she no longer feels that the ties are strong enough she will cancel as she is not one to have a treaty for a treaties sake. As someone that's been a friend of MA since... well, practically their first week, I will admit confusion whenever I see comments like this. MA had a fair number of allies before the NPO treaty got signed - I'm fairly sure CSN, GOD, and TTK were all treatied to them, at least. I know CSN's had their back since like, day one. "QFT" Unofficially since day one for TTK but it was made official shortly there after. Kait had always been a good friend to TTK going back to her days as a diplomat to TTK from USN. Sup Xi come out from under that rock would ya. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayvon Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 However, you don't pick who your friends are; just how long the friendship lasts and how long you still respect them. I don't believe any treaty partner deserves to hear "Oh, by the way; we changed government. We aren't your friends anymore because it's too inconvenient to honor inherited agreements. Go find another sandbox to play in." Maybe you don't pick your friends - but everyone else does. The respect is earned along the way. Wether or not they deserve to hear it, is irrelevant. However, you (referring to government who has an explicit responsibility to their alliance) don't want to be left standing beside someone whom you no longer feel you should be just because you didn't want to tell them things have changed over the months. Regardless of love and respect for that 'friend', the ultimate responsibility of any Government, is to their own people. Hard decisions have to be made. It's commendable to make the decision ahead of time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brinoceros Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 Interesting. Good luck MA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The AUT Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 (edited) Judging by some of the comments made, it seems that a certain group of alliances are supporting this move and stating reasons why this happened beyond what is said in the OP. I don't know not many good poker faces on CN I can tell you that much. Good luck, Kait. Edited March 30, 2009 by The AUT 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.