Lackistan Posted April 24, 2009 Report Share Posted April 24, 2009 Well, if IRON agreed to waive the NAP (which seems utterly bizarre to me), then have a good fight, and I am glad I was wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damon Sriv Posted April 24, 2009 Report Share Posted April 24, 2009 Well, if IRON agreed to waive the NAP (which seems utterly bizarre to me), then have a good fight, and I am glad I was wrong. It seems that the Gremlins have done things the right way. Both parties have to agree to a treaty for it to go into effect.. so if both parties are willing to disolve it instantly.. it seems well within their right to do so. IRON doesnt seem to be !@#$%*ing about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ertyy Posted April 24, 2009 Report Share Posted April 24, 2009 I'm not arguing against it. I agree with your actions. All I'm saying is your !@#$ stinks as much as the rest of ours does, and there's no reason to pretend otherwise. No. Actually, I am pretty sure our !@#$ doesn't stink as much as yours does. I don't really have enough experience with other alliances' feces to make the comparison with other people, but I am confident in my position on your count. At any rate, we'll be keeping the codex for the time being. You people have been giving us hell for it since its creation. It isn't exactly a huge turn of events that you are !@#$%*ing about it now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zangmonkey Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 (edited) No offence intended, but I'm a little confused by all the Gramlins saying they had to do this/it's a shame they're doing this. Unless I'm misreading; you guys were not bound by any treaties to get involved in this war, you chose to. Best of luck to IRON in this engagement I'd like to revisit this post. We entered by choice as part of an MDoAP treaty; doing so required the dissolution of a ToA. Though I am neither able nor required to explain our government's complete rationale for this decision I'll give you my understanding in a nutshell. We knew that IRON would honorably uphold their obligations regardless of whether or not they agreed with the CB. In the current war, IRON's entrance would inevitably pit them in conflict with our other allies. IRON acknowledges that they are drawn by treaty into this conflict and they understand that Gremlins are among a few alliances truly capable of withstanding the force of their upper tier. Gremlins has both a contractual and strong moral obligation to prevent the decimation of our other allies. If IRON were permitted to enter the conflict without our obstruction we predict significant damage to our MDoAP allies. Furthermore, we have little faith in the leniency of the New Pacific Order with regards to surrender terms (and our Codex reflects our position on honorable terms). Thus our prediction was that IRON's involvement unopposed would lead to both excess short-term damage in the form of lost infra and excess long-term damage in the form of the continued hegemony and practices of the New Pacific Order over our MDoAP allies. As such our action here was a logical and moral necessity. We accomplish two very important goals: A) We oppose the destruction of our MAoDP allies B) We demand fair and fitting treatment to IRON during and following the conflict. Without having been present in the meetings I can only presume that IRON government fully understood and empathized with our position which is why they permitted the immediate dissolution of the treaty. Lastly, we all witness some unusual behavior in the cyberverse: The only DoW I have ever seen in which members of both referenced alliances acknowledge the dilemma and hail the other A clash of the titans in which the truly largest nations among us all go to war Enemies that may very likely seek to immediately reinstate treaties following the conflict Edited April 25, 2009 by Matthew PK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lackistan Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 I'd like to revisit this post.We entered by choice as part of an MDoAP treaty; doing so required the dissolution of a ToA. Though I am neither able nor required to explain our government's complete rationale for this decision I'll give you my understanding in a nutshell. We knew that IRON would honorably uphold their obligations regardless of whether or not they agreed with the CB. In the current war, IRON's entrance would inevitably pit them in conflict with our other allies. IRON acknowledges that they are drawn by treaty into this conflict and they understand that Gremlins are among a few alliances truly capable of withstanding the force of their upper tier. Gremlins has both a contractual and strong moral obligation to prevent the decimation of our other allies. If IRON were permitted to enter the conflict without our obstruction we predict significant damage to our MDoAP allies. Furthermore, we have little faith in the leniency of the New Pacific Order with regards to surrender terms (and our Codex reflects our position on honorable terms). Thus our prediction was that IRON's involvement unopposed would lead to both excess short-term damage in the form of lost infra and excess long-term damage in the form of the continued hegemony and practices of the New Pacific Order over our MDoAP allies. As such our action here was a logical and moral necessity. We accomplish two very important goals: A) We oppose the destruction of our MAoDP allies B) We demand fair and fitting treatment to IRON during and following the conflict. Without having been present in the meetings I can only presume that IRON government fully understood and empathized with our position which is why they permitted the immediate dissolution of the treaty. Lastly, we all witness some unusual behavior in the cyberverse: The only DoW I have ever seen in which members of both referenced alliances acknowledge the dilemma and hail the other A clash of the titans in which the truly largest nations among us all go to war Enemies that may very likely seek to immediately reinstate treaties following the conflict Wow. Well said. You should have posted this 15 pages ago Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill n ted Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 (edited) Goodluck to Gramlins and IRON Edited April 25, 2009 by bill n ted Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heracles the Great Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 I'd like to revisit this post.We entered by choice as part of an MDoAP treaty; doing so required the dissolution of a ToA. Though I am neither able nor required to explain our government's complete rationale for this decision I'll give you my understanding in a nutshell. We knew that IRON would honorably uphold their obligations regardless of whether or not they agreed with the CB. In the current war, IRON's entrance would inevitably pit them in conflict with our other allies. IRON acknowledges that they are drawn by treaty into this conflict and they understand that Gremlins are among a few alliances truly capable of withstanding the force of their upper tier. Gremlins has both a contractual and strong moral obligation to prevent the decimation of our other allies. If IRON were permitted to enter the conflict without our obstruction we predict significant damage to our MDoAP allies. Furthermore, we have little faith in the leniency of the New Pacific Order with regards to surrender terms (and our Codex reflects our position on honorable terms). Thus our prediction was that IRON's involvement unopposed would lead to both excess short-term damage in the form of lost infra and excess long-term damage in the form of the continued hegemony and practices of the New Pacific Order over our MDoAP allies. As such our action here was a logical and moral necessity. We accomplish two very important goals: A) We oppose the destruction of our MAoDP allies B) We demand fair and fitting treatment to IRON during and following the conflict. Without having been present in the meetings I can only presume that IRON government fully understood and empathized with our position which is why they permitted the immediate dissolution of the treaty. Lastly, we all witness some unusual behavior in the cyberverse: The only DoW I have ever seen in which members of both referenced alliances acknowledge the dilemma and hail the other A clash of the titans in which the truly largest nations among us all go to war Enemies that may very likely seek to immediately reinstate treaties following the conflict Wise, logical, eloquent... is there anything a Grämlins can't do? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sorum Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 Wise, logical, eloquent... is there anything a Grämlins can't do? Attack a 5k nation? o/ Härmlins Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Branimir Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 Furthermore, we have little faith in the leniency of the New Pacific Order with regards to surrender terms (and our Codex reflects our position on honorable terms). Thus our prediction was that IRON's involvement unopposed would lead to both excess short-term damage in the form of lost infra and excess long-term damage in the form of the continued hegemony and practices of the New Pacific Order over our MDoAP allies. I knew it was NPO's fault. We have to be blamed somehow, so that other peoples !@#$ looks less smelly. I am sorry you had to drop a treaty, ignore the wait period and attack your ex treaty "friends" at IRON. That is so terrible. But now that I know we forced your hand to do it, it makes sense. As how would the ever honorable Gre do it, if it wasn't the NPO's doing. That makes sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Stark Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 I knew it was NPO's fault. We have to be blamed somehow, so that other peoples !@#$ looks less smelly. I am sorry you had to drop a treaty, ignore the wait period and attack your ex treaty "friends" at IRON. That is so terrible. But now that I know we forced your hand to do it, it makes sense. As how would the ever honorable Gre do it, if it wasn't the NPO's doing. That makes sense. We at Gre care so much about what you think Branimir that it makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside that you understand Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Branimir Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 We at Gre care so much about what you think Branimir that it makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside that you understand It is enough that you care enough to respond, it is overwhelming that you care so much that you have warm and fuzzy feelings. When so honorable people care, it makes me happy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Flinders Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 I knew it was NPO's fault. We have to be blamed somehow, so that other peoples !@#$ looks less smelly. You can mock and joke it off, but the explanation makes complete sense. You have a terrible track record. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Empire of TPC Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 I dont post much... Once I read your explaination, Matthew PK, I was impressed and just had to give you some appreciation for what Grams is doing to level the playing field. I do hope IRON gets fair treatment as well for fulfilling their obligations. Here's to honor, and honorable/decent alliances on both sides of the conflict. o/ GRE o/ IRON o/ STA, of course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
President Obama Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 It is enough that you care enough to respond, it is overwhelming that you care so much that you have warm and fuzzy feelings. When so honorable people care, it makes me happy. I love you Branimir Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Branimir Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 You can mock and joke it off, but the explanation makes complete sense. You have a terrible track record. The answer previously presented, we dropped our treaty, ignored the wait period, and attacked IRON because of the strategic war necessity for our block was fine. Bringing the big old NPO in it was overkill for my taste. Such a cliché. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBRaiders Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 You missed the part where both alliances waived the waiting period. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Branimir Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 (edited) You missed the part where both alliances waived the waiting period. Well I must have. Can you link me where IRON waived the wait period in their treaty with you? Obviously missed that. Edited April 25, 2009 by Branimir Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finch Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 Yes show this man the link at once it is not possible for another alliance to agree and not post anything because it does not concern any other partied accept IRON and GRE. Seriously bud IRON agreed to it, if they didnt im sure they would be in here right now saying stuff about it, but they are not. The want to have a nice clean fight like we do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBRaiders Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 I can't link you, but can you link me to where anyone from IRON says we are lying and it wasn't waived. Obviously missed that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenadian Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 I'd like to revisit this post.We entered by choice as part of an MDoAP treaty; doing so required the dissolution of a ToA. Though I am neither able nor required to explain our government's complete rationale for this decision I'll give you my understanding in a nutshell. We knew that IRON would honorably uphold their obligations regardless of whether or not they agreed with the CB. In the current war, IRON's entrance would inevitably pit them in conflict with our other allies. IRON acknowledges that they are drawn by treaty into this conflict and they understand that Gremlins are among a few alliances truly capable of withstanding the force of their upper tier. Gremlins has both a contractual and strong moral obligation to prevent the decimation of our other allies. If IRON were permitted to enter the conflict without our obstruction we predict significant damage to our MDoAP allies. Furthermore, we have little faith in the leniency of the New Pacific Order with regards to surrender terms (and our Codex reflects our position on honorable terms). Thus our prediction was that IRON's involvement unopposed would lead to both excess short-term damage in the form of lost infra and excess long-term damage in the form of the continued hegemony and practices of the New Pacific Order over our MDoAP allies. As such our action here was a logical and moral necessity. We accomplish two very important goals: A) We oppose the destruction of our MAoDP allies B) We demand fair and fitting treatment to IRON during and following the conflict. Without having been present in the meetings I can only presume that IRON government fully understood and empathized with our position which is why they permitted the immediate dissolution of the treaty. Lastly, we all witness some unusual behavior in the cyberverse: The only DoW I have ever seen in which members of both referenced alliances acknowledge the dilemma and hail the other A clash of the titans in which the truly largest nations among us all go to war Enemies that may very likely seek to immediately reinstate treaties following the conflict Post more, good sir. Also, HAI BRANIMIR! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ejayrazz Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 (edited) I knew it was NPO's fault. We have to be blamed somehow, so that other peoples !@#$ looks less smelly. I am sorry you had to drop a treaty, ignore the wait period and attack your ex treaty "friends" at IRON. That is so terrible. But now that I know we forced your hand to do it, it makes sense. As how would the ever honorable Gre do it, if it wasn't the NPO's doing. That makes sense. Ignore the wait period? It was waived, I believe NPO has done worse: Ignored the cancellation period and simply attacked, where as we had a mutual agreement. It is enough that you care enough to respond, it is overwhelming that you care so much that you have warm and fuzzy feelings. When so honorable people care, it makes me happy. You don't need to care in order to respond. Seems you care about us Gremlins then, eh? How cute. Well I must have. Can you link me where IRON waived the wait period in their treaty with you? Obviously missed that. IRON is your ally...perhaps you should talk to them. I mean...the lack of communication which your alliance practices lead everyone into this mess in the first place. Edited April 25, 2009 by Ejayrazz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Flinders Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 The answer previously presented, we dropped our treaty, ignored the wait period, and attacked IRON because of the strategic war necessity for our block was fine. Bringing the big old NPO in it was overkill for my taste. Such a cliché. Not overkill at all. Simply laying out all the factors in their decision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Branimir Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 because it does not concern any other partied accept IRON and GRE To use another cliché: When something is declared in public, it becomes subject to public attention and questioning. Further more, now then, if its a case of-- IRON didn't posted anything in that regard, but isn't objecting so they as such agree-- you can see from where my confusion can come in that regard. I am no mind reader. But now that we got that straight, thats fine. IRON wants a clean fight, so who cares about treaties and clauses. Well gentleman, I wish you a clean fight then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ejayrazz Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 To use another cliché: When something is declared in public, it becomes subject to public attention and questioning. Further more, now then, if its a case of-- IRON didn't posted anything in that regard, but isn't objecting so they as such agree-- you can see from where my confusion can come in that regard. I am no mind reader. But now that we got that straight, thats fine. IRON wants a clean fight, so who cares about treaties and clauses. Well gentleman, I wish you a clean fight then. Likewise. Have fun and enjoy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Branimir Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 (edited) Not overkill at all. Simply laying out all the factors in their decision. Well yes, an overkill. Seeing as to how in this war everything is going, I do so believe that it is. Throw it in for good measure-- it seemed to me. Ignore the wait period? It was waived, I believe NPO has done worse: Ignored the cancellation period and simply attacked, where as we had a mutual agreement. I do also so apologize for my mistake-- it wasn't ignored it was waived. And of course, we are the big bad wolf. We can not have a post not saying that now can we? You don't need to care in order to respond. Seems you care about us Gremlins then, eh? How cute. Oh good sir touche, touche. IRON is your ally...perhaps you should talk to them. I mean...the lack of communication which your alliance practices lead everyone into this mess in the first place. No, a well played trap of the vengeance vendetta group, glorifying themselves and abusing the meaning of the word "karma", has lead the world into this position. Also I am sure you are not really objecting to the current situation. As I said the first day-- well played and kudos, karma. Regardless, gentleman, a clean fight I wish you-- nothing below the waste and no ear bitting. Edited April 25, 2009 by Branimir 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.