Siberian Tiger Alliance Announcement

[Wu Tang Clan]

I believe STA declared war on at least one ally of an OPP member, IIRC. Correct me if I'm wrong.

-Bama

Nope. All of OPP declared on STA. http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=31090.

Edit: STA not NpO

Edited May 10, 2009 by Wu Tang Clan

[bzelger]

Nice use of the past tense there, bzelger.

Also, curious that you say you have an interest in a healthy sphere, when you cancel a treaty promoting a healthy sphere because it wouldn't let you move in and attack people on the sphere.

It's past tense because we are no longer signatories. I also read your post as past-tense, although now that I review it I see that's not the case. Let's not have an argument over semantics please.

Yes, we have an interest in a healthy sphere; many of our members have trade partners in TPF. We also have an interest in the well-being of our allies. When those two came into conflict we chose our MDP partner. We still worked to avoid intra-sphere violence, and have succeeded in doing so.

[HeinousOne]

Nope. As I have stated multiple times, I think STA made the right and necessary decision, and I give you huge props for that. I still like you guys. I just wish you'd quit saying that the NAP was selectively enforced.

-Bama

The problem lies in our differing attitudes on what is considered aggression. It seems we feel that attacking an MDP partner of ours is an act of aggression upon us. You obviously do not as you feel it is a proper thing to do to shield such actions with the NAP instead of adhering to the NAP and not doing something that we would consider an aggressive act.

Its a Great War, people get aggressive, when that happens its a natural thing that non aggression pacts are going to become outdated. As stated by our leaders, the bloc can be relooked at after all hostilities have ended but for now if any white alliances are going to attack an MDP of ours then they will have to do so without shielding their aggressive acts with a nonaggression pact.

[BamaBuc]

Nope. All of OPP declared on NpO. http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=31090.

I assume you mean STA. Anyway, I went back and looked at the STA DoW, and they declared on everyone attacking NpO and allies. I seem to recall at least one alliance they attacked being allied to an OPP member.

[Haflinger]

Are there rules stating that a purple alliance cannot take a protectorate that is not on purple?

No.

However, nearly all of our protectorates are purple. And Pegasus, which is similar to OPP in many ways, is integrally tied into the whole purple unity system, instead of just being run by one alliance, outside of the unity bloc.

Also I can't imagine a Purple team alliance's protectorate attacking someone their protector had a treaty to. Just... wouldn't make sense.

Edit: left out a word.

Edited May 10, 2009 by Haflinger

[Wu Tang Clan]

I assume you mean STA. Anyway, I went back and looked at the STA DoW, and they declared on everyone attacking NpO and allies. I seem to recall at least one alliance they attacked being allied to an OPP member.

MCXA, TOP, Grämlins, Umbrella, FOK, RnR, and FARK. Perhaps.

But from the OPP.

Outside Treaties OPP members are prohibited from signing outside treaties without prior approval from TPF. Additionally, OPP as an entity is prohibited from signing any treaties

Optional Aggression While it's always preferable to resolve issues diplomatically, it is understood that it is not always possible. In the event that an aggressive action is desired, the signatory protectorate is required to inform TPF and the other OPP members.

TPF had to have known. And apparently did nothing to prevent it.

[BamaBuc]

The problem lies in our differing attitudes on what is considered aggression. It seems we feel that attacking an MDP partner of ours is an act of aggression upon us. You obviously do not as you feel it is a proper thing to do to shield such actions with the NAP instead of adhering to the NAP and not doing something that we would consider an aggressive act.

Its a Great War, people get aggressive, when that happens its a natural thing that non aggression pacts are going to become outdated. As stated by our leaders, the bloc can be relooked at after all hostilities have ended but for now if any white alliances are going to attack an MDP of ours then they will have to do so without shielding their aggressive acts with a nonaggression pact.

Most people don't believe that an NAP extends to a signatory's allies. If you do believe that, that's fine. But like you, TPF had an MDP obligation. I think most of us understand that your MDP allies come first, and that you had to put them before an NAP. I respect that. I wish you'd see that we were doing the same thing, and not trying to use an NAP to shield ourselves. I think we'd have preferred not to attack an ally of a SNOW member, but like you, we rightly put our allies first.

-Bama

[BamaBuc]

MCXA, TOP, Grämlins, Umbrella, FOK, RnR, and FARK. Perhaps.

But from the OPP.

TPF had to have known. And apparently did nothing to prevent it.

I assume they did nothing to prevent it because OPP wasn't bound to not attack STA. Look, we (TOOL) realized after the war that not having protectorates sign the NAP was a weakness in the treaty. Not sure if anything came of it or not. But at the time, it was legal.

-Bama

[Wu Tang Clan]

I assume they did nothing to prevent it because OPP wasn't bound to not attack STA. Look, we (TOOL) realized after the war that not having protectorates sign the NAP was a weakness in the treaty. Not sure if anything came of it or not. But at the time, it was legal.

-Bama

It was legal. But can you say TPF was working for a unified white, after seeing what happened? That is what SNOW is about. And it was violated (whether it was legal or not) far before this cancellation. You can not get bent over this. In fact STA deserves praise for sticking in SNOW as long as they did. They were betrayed long ago, and you know it.

[Mathias]

SNOW was never about white unity, it was about tC and 1V controlling white.

o/ STA

[BamaBuc]

It was legal. But can you say TPF was working for a unified white, after seeing what happened? That is what SNOW is about. And it was violated (whether it was legal or not) far before this cancellation. You can not get bent over this. In fact STA deserves praise for sticking in SNOW as long as they did. They were betrayed long ago, and you know it.

Not really. If OPP had allies under attack by STA (which I'm still not sure about, could someone from STA clarify exactly who they declared on?), then it wasn't anything to do with TPF. If TPF did use OPP to circumvent SNOW, that's wrong, and you're right, it's against what SNOW stands for. But this should have been dealt with then. If STA viewed that as a betrayal by TPF, they should have said so then. They seem to have been content to continue being part of SNOW.

-Bama

[bzelger]

Not really. If OPP had allies under attack by STA (which I'm still not sure about, could someone from STA clarify exactly who they declared on?), then it wasn't anything to do with TPF. If TPF did use OPP to circumvent SNOW, that's wrong, and you're right, it's against what SNOW stands for. But this should have been dealt with then. If STA viewed that as a betrayal by TPF, they should have said so then. They seem to have been content to continue being part of SNOW.

-Bama

I believe the issue was brought up then, to essentially no response. The STA was attacked by DefCon before we declared war on anyone.

In any case, this thread is not to whine about past events and I really wish it would get off of that. The only reason those issues are germane is to refute the white-on-white nonsense.

[Wu Tang Clan]

Not really. If OPP had allies under attack by STA (which I'm still not sure about, could someone from STA clarify exactly who they declared on?), then it wasn't anything to do with TPF. If TPF did use OPP to circumvent SNOW, that's wrong, and you're right, it's against what SNOW stands for. But this should have been dealt with then. If STA viewed that as a betrayal by TPF, they should have said so then. They seem to have been content to continue being part of SNOW.

-Bama

There was quite a public outcry from STA at the time, iirc. However, could it be that STA was still willing to accomplish a unified white despite the iniquities that occurred? Could it be that STA was willing to put the past behind them and continue to solidify their sphere? And could it be that recent events were just the straw that broke the camels back?

[Poobah]

Not really. If OPP had allies under attack by STA (which I'm still not sure about, could someone from STA clarify exactly who they declared on?), then it wasn't anything to do with TPF. If TPF did use OPP to circumvent SNOW, that's wrong, and you're right, it's against what SNOW stands for. But this should have been dealt with then. If STA viewed that as a betrayal by TPF, they should have said so then. They seem to have been content to continue being part of SNOW.

-Bama

STA declared on everyone at war with Polar at the time. SSW18 has an MDP with NPO, however, neither TPF nor NPO were engaged with STA at the time. (I think I have this right...although it was a while ago)

So...yeah...I didn't see any crying "ZOMG WHITE UNITY WTF U SUK" at the time of STA being attacked (without a valid CB if my interpretation and memory is correct) by OPP.

If I remember correctly, I don't think OPP gave any reason for their war at the time either except "we're OPP," but I'm not positive of it.

[BamaBuc]

I believe the issue was brought up then, to essentially no response. The STA was attacked by DefCon before we declared war on anyone.

In any case, this thread is not to whine about past events and I really wish it would get off of that. The only reason those issues are germane is to refute the white-on-white nonsense.

And I certainly agree with you on that issue. And I will certainly vouch for the work STA put into SNOW despite how they felt about that war.

-Bama

[bzelger]

STA declared on everyone at war with Polar at the time. SSW18 has an MDP with NPO, however, neither TPF nor NPO were engaged with STA at the time. (I think I have this right...although it was a while ago)

So...yeah...I didn't see any crying "ZOMG WHITE UNITY WTF U SUK" at the time of STA being attacked (without a valid CB if my interpretation and memory is correct) by OPP.

If I remember correctly, I don't think OPP gave any reason for their war at the time either except "we're OPP," but I'm not positive of it.

Just for the sake of accuracy, SSSW18 did not have a treaty with the NPO until later. At the start of the conflict it was actually the STA who help a defensive treaty with the NPO. STA and the NPO were never directly engaged, nor were STA and TPF.

[Uhtred]

It's always been a joke to STA. I was amazed when they signed onto SNOW, since they had snubbed their noses at most prior white-unity exercises.

On the contrary, we signed it because it was the only one which didn't seem a joke to us. All previous attempts were either too politicised (eg. Atlantis and friends' attempts to push for a white sphere MDP bloc despite the sphere being divided down the middle at the time) or were simply too feeble to even get off the ground.

Not really. If OPP had allies under attack by STA (which I'm still not sure about, could someone from STA clarify exactly who they declared on?), then it wasn't anything to do with TPF. If TPF did use OPP to circumvent SNOW, that's wrong, and you're right, it's against what SNOW stands for. But this should have been dealt with then. If STA viewed that as a betrayal by TPF, they should have said so then. They seem to have been content to continue being part of SNOW.

-Bama

We declared on every alliance at war with Polar, as we were obligated to do. The fact that we were pre-emptively attacked by DefCon and by OPP prior to any involvement in the war makes that a moot point anyway. The issue was brought up with SNOW at the time but the only response was a facetious suggestion that the offending alliances were removed.

Edited May 10, 2009 by Uhtred

[Bernkastel]

A very sensible and honorable move, STA.

[BamaBuc]

On the contrary, we signed it because it was the only one which didn't seem a joke to us. All previous attempts were either too politicised (eg. Atlantis and friends' attempts to push for a white sphere MDP bloc despite the sphere being divided down the middle at the time) or were simply too feeble to even get off the ground.

We declared on every alliance at war with Polar, as we were obligated to do. The fact that we were pre-emptively attacked by DefCon and by OPP prior to any involvement in the war makes that a moot point anyway. The issue was brought up with SNOW at the time but the only response was a facetious suggestion that the offending alliances were removed.

The wiki shows your DoW first. And I do remember discussing protectorates having to sign the NAP in the future, but I don't remember if it got off the ground or not.

-Bama

[Wu Tang Clan]

The wiki shows your DoW first. And I do remember discussing protectorates having to sign the NAP in the future, but I don't remember if it got off the ground or not.

-Bama

Well as long as we're still on this topic. The DefCon DoW was announced 6 mins before STA's. And OPP's was announced about 50 mins after STA's.

In summary. DefCon hit STA. STA hit everyone who hit Polar. OPP hit STA. In that order.

[Poobah]

Just for the sake of accuracy, SSSW18 did not have a treaty with the NPO until later. At the start of the conflict it was actually the STA who help a defensive treaty with the NPO. STA and the NPO were never directly engaged, nor were STA and TPF.

My bad. (OOC: at that time I was preparing to move from New Jersey to Massachusetts so I wasn't super on top of CN). How did OPP attack you guys then?

[BamaBuc]

My bad. (OOC: at that time I was preparing to move from New Jersey to Massachusetts so I wasn't super on top of CN). How did OPP attack you guys then?

I think at least one OPP member was allied to one of the alliances covered by STA's DoW. I could me wrong on that though.

-Bama

[Bernkastel]

So, are you stating that STA has no friends on white?

I'll just chime in on this.

STA wasn't invited when work started on the White sphere MDoAP bloc, Whiteacre or Blizzard or something, don't recall what it was named. Let me see if I recall correctly -- TPF, TOOL, DefCon, FEAR, NEW, TGE, UCN, WAPA and Zenith. All the other signatories of SNOW at that time. Most of us turned it down I believe for various reasons -- like FEAR, TOOL, DefCon... dunno about any others.

The only one not invited? STA.

Even if they were still under terms, they should have been invited in on the talks and to help shape the White Unity bloc. I mean WAPA, who doesn't believe in anything above a MDP or ODP or something (don't quite recall...), was invited to help and all that stuff.

Yeah, just from my standpoint, STA doesn't have any friends on White... and that's just a shame in the strongest sense of the word.

Edited May 10, 2009 by Balsamic Vinegar

[Uhtred]

The wiki shows your DoW first. And I do remember discussing protectorates having to sign the NAP in the future, but I don't remember if it got off the ground or not.

-Bama

The attacks came long before they announced the declaration, as was referred to in the announcement itself.

[Vespassianus]

It was not a joke to us; we have as much interest in a healthy sphere as anyone. I don't know why we didn't sign WET as I wasn't in STA at the time (that was an awful treaty anyway, and many chose not to sign that), and we have other reasons not to have been interested in the stronger treaties that were batted around from time to time (that were never in danger of coming to fruition for other reasons, I might add).

Edit:

Hi Vesp.

I consider you guys to be my friends. As has been stated, we did not leave this treaty because the economic cooperation was against our interests or because it was poorly run. We had an overriding obligation to a close ally.

Hey Bzelger!

Personally i like you, no problems, but i really don't like this move by STA. A NAP wasn't a big deal, if you consider us friends, than why do you cancel a treaty like this? There are some white alliances who are not so familiar with most of white, but they can keep this treaty to have a healthy sphere as you said. If you look for further cooperation with white alliances than why did you cancel the basic white unity treaty?

I know that you still don't like SSW18 for attacking you in the last GW, but they were not part of SNOW this time. If it's the reason of cancellation it's so lame.