Lord Caspian Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 With the 5 day cancellation period completed, the MDoAP between the Viridian Entente and FIRE is considered canceled. Reasons have been given in private. We wish FIRE success in their future. Cornelius, Lord Sol, Duke Caspian, Secretary of State God of Salt, Secretary of Interior Smooth, Secretary of Defense Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Xander the Only Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 Expected/10 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gen Lee Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 liars, liars Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
im317 Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 about time we got this posted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kobiashiy Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 Best of luck to both VE and FIRE in the future! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UberSpion Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 so shocking, no one on planet bob saw this coming Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoomzoomzoom Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 Guess it is pretty much expected. Good luck sorting out your foreign affairs FIRE. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Svendonia Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 WHAT COULD BE GOING ON THE ROOF IS ON FIRE Best wishes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TehChron Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 Huh. I kinda could tell what happened with Ragnarok falling apart, as the general tone was about the treaty being the result of friendship with Carter. But wasnt VE supposed to have a higher criteria for establishing such a treaty other than "'Cause we like diz d00d"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Archer Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 Very nice VE. o/ VE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nintenderek Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 But wasnt VE supposed to have a higher criteria for establishing such a treaty other than "'Cause we like diz d00d"? I thought so too. I guess I must have been wrong. This was the one treaty I was actually expecting we would keep. Nice to know that as soon as a little bit of internal drama happens in an alliance, everyone decides to drop treaties with that alliance. It tells you a lot about Planet Bob. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tygaland Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 I thought so too. I guess I must have been wrong. This was the one treaty I was actually expecting we would keep. Nice to know that as soon as a little bit of internal drama happens in an alliance, everyone decides to drop treaties with that alliance. It tells you a lot about Planet Bob. You can't honestly be surprised that treaties are signed for such flimsy reasons, can you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nintenderek Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 You can't honestly be surprised that treaties are signed for such flimsy reasons, can you? No, I just expect better from an alliance I respect, like VE. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Icepick Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 The treaty was really just a carry over from the name change and the reason for the cancel was all over the place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TypoNinja Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 (edited) I thought so too. I guess I must have been wrong. This was the one treaty I was actually expecting we would keep. Nice to know that as soon as a little bit of internal drama happens in an alliance, everyone decides to drop treaties with that alliance. It tells you a lot about Planet Bob. You have more than "A bit of internal drama" you ended up with a fairly sever change in government following a diplomatic cluster $%&@. Edit so I don't double post. No, I just expect better from an alliance I respect, like VE. We don't hate you, we just are not sure of where you are going now, ask us again after you've settled down. You are an unknown to us currently and we'd be fools to hold a high level treaty with an unknown quantity. Edited July 7, 2009 by TypoNinja Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
President Kuse Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 Finally, Also I called it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheEraser Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 Huh.I kinda could tell what happened with Ragnarok falling apart, as the general tone was about the treaty being the result of friendship with Carter. But wasnt VE supposed to have a higher criteria for establishing such a treaty other than "'Cause we like diz d00d"? this treaty was established to give The Syndicate a better strategic position going into the war. VE needed this treaty to take some pressure off of them and it did its job beautifully. It also prevented The Syndicate from having to go to war with IRON, who would have trashed us. We got an easy war, and VE got some needed relief. not surprised this treaty lasted such a short time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nintenderek Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 You have more than "A bit of internal drama" you ended up with a fairly sever change in government following a diplomatic cluster $%&@. There was a one member change in government. The rest was pretty much the same, besides regents being promoted. That's hardly a sever change in government. While it was a diplomatic cluster $%&@, I noticed that none of our allies seemed to want to help in any way, shape or form. We didn't even hear from VE until the next day. People from MCXA were asking me about it before VE was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Wallace Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 Best of luck to FIRE and hopefully one day soon you guys will be the dominant alliance on Red. B) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TehChron Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 There was a one member change in government. The rest was pretty much the same, besides regents being promoted. That's hardly a sever change in government. While it was a diplomatic cluster $%&@, I noticed that none of our allies seemed to want to help in any way, shape or form. We didn't even hear from VE until the next day. People from MCXA were asking me about it before VE was. Although that still doesnt address the larger point of: "Why have such a substantial treaty based upon a single person in the government? Shouldnt there be a bit of a stronger bond involved?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TypoNinja Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 There was a one member change in government. The rest was pretty much the same, besides regents being promoted. That's hardly a sever change in government. While it was a diplomatic cluster $%&@, I noticed that none of our allies seemed to want to help in any way, shape or form. We didn't even hear from VE until the next day. People from MCXA were asking me about it before VE was. This is kind of the root of the problem you had, lack of communication, Carter did talk to us after, no surprise he didn't tell the rest of his gov anything after the fact, he didn't tell anyone before the fact either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nintenderek Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 Although that still doesnt address the larger point of:"Why have such a substantial treaty based upon a single person in the government? Shouldnt there be a bit of a stronger bond involved?" I agree, however I would hope that an alliance would be willing to start a friendship off the existing treaty if it made the mistake of signing because of one person in the first place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin32891 Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 Another one really? These treaties are what less than 2 months old? Well I wish you FIRE the best of luck. o/ Red Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
President Kuse Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 Any kindof questionable leadership, regardless of who it is makes a fairly bad imprint on ones Alliance. And considering the gravity of who it was and everything thereof, we had to make the right call and I support our Parliament fully on this decision and have been for awhile now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TypoNinja Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 (edited) I agree, however I would hope that an alliance would be willing to start a friendship off the existing treaty if it made the mistake of signing because of one person in the first place. We are entirely willing to be friends with the new FIRE, (considering the autocratic power Carter held previously, any government without him becomes very different) but the friendship needs to come before the military treaties. Edited July 7, 2009 by TypoNinja 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.