Rebel Virginia Posted August 10, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 Quit the propaganda. The aid to Sorum was prior to the tech raid. The aid was given a mere fifteen minutes before I was attacked. In fact, the aid by Blackjack was given because "tF cares 4 its own." Don't tell me that your alliance was not aware of what Sorum was planning to do, because it really is quite obvious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dochartaigh Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 We supported the fact that our charter allows our members to tech raid, and weren't going to expel Sorum for raidingThis does not mean we supported the idea of Sorum raiding RV, or that we were going to defend him militarily. i don't think anyone mentioned expulsion. i think RV just wanted the raid to end and some reps. looks like he was about to get it until tF renigged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doitzel Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 We supported the fact that our charter allows our members to tech raid, and weren't going to expel Sorum for raidingThis does not mean we supported the idea of Sorum raiding RV, or that we were going to defend him militarily. I think I'll go propose an amendment to our charter that allows our members the right to coordinate strikes against nations in The Family without consent of the Master Council. We'll call it Article VII: Swing-Dancing. Since it's just swing dancing there will be no need for you to retaliate against our nations which are systematically destroying yours. It's not like your alliance was formed to protect each other from attack or anything, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proko Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 We supported the fact that our charter allows our members to tech raid, and weren't going to expel Sorum for raidingThis does not mean we supported the idea of Sorum raiding RV, or that we were going to defend him militarily. Right. Many alliances that raid forbid their members from raiding nations with alliance affiliations. There have been dozens of messy political situations on account of tech raiding, and it seems in this case, as far as I can tell, that both GDI and FAIL were willing to accept a pretty modest peace settlement. I have seen a few old Polar nations get raided and we usually don't treat the attackers very kindly. But we're usually able to work out deals with the alliance of the attacker, and we go our separate ways. What is the Family's problem in this circumstance? This is a problem that happens often, why is peace not easy to come by? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starcraftmazter Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 So it's okay for your government to start wars with other alliances and call them tech raids, and you don't want to be held accountable when your Minister of Foreign Affairs is declaring wars on other alliances while wearing your AA and being recognized by you as a government member?Learn the concept of Responsibility. FAIL is not an alliance. It is an excuse for one individual to act like an attention *seeker*. None is more of an alliance than FAIL, and it gets raided all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aeternos Astramora Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 By the way, two people alliances are rarely considered real alliances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HisK Owns You Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 Have fun RV. Those running The Family have lost a few respectability points with me on this one. Same here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emperor Stranger Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 FAIL is not an alliance. It is an excuse for one individual to act like an attention *seeker*. None is more of an alliance than FAIL, and it gets raided all the time. If that's the way you see it, WOLF hereby doesn't see the AA "Dark Fist" as a sovereign alliance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush Sykes Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 By the way, two people alliances are rarely considered real alliances. When they have military grade treaties, what else would you consider them?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TehChron Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 By the way, two people alliances are rarely considered real alliances. Well, clearly this is one of those "rarely considered" real alliances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proko Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 By the way, two people alliances are rarely considered real alliances. I mean, maybe. But there have been several cases in the past where unaligned individuals have been protected by alliances, and I don't think Optional Clauses should be overlooked. For example, isn't Argent protecting Ejayrazz (or something like that?) WarriorConcept was once protected by Pacifica, and PPF is/was protected by MK. Regardless of whether the alliance is big or not, these protectorates have generally been respected. I'm not trying to make anyone look bad here, I just don't understand where the difficulty in this situation lies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sileath Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 I figure by this point people need a tl;dr. Past: Sorum raids Rebel Virginia -> Rebel Virginia !@#$%*es about it on the OWF, makes an ultimatum to tF -> GDI attacks tF nations -> During negotiations, a non-government member of tF makes an agreement to GDI for peace -> Rest of tF rejects this peace -> Defense of tF nations continues Present: Rebel Virginia !@#$%*es that tF is defending its members, GDI declares war on tF for defending its members Future: tF blows up RV and GDI via superior military tactics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proko Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 I figure by this point people need a tl;dr.Past: Sorum raids Rebel Virginia -> Rebel Virginia !@#$%*es about it on the OWF, makes an ultimatum to tF -> GDI attacks tF nations -> During negotiations, a non-government member of tF makes an agreement to GDI for peace -> Rest of tF rejects this peace -> Defense of tF nations continues Present: Rebel Virginia !@#$%*es that tF is defending its members, GDI declares war on tF for defending its members Future: tF blows up RV and GDI via superior military tactics. Why doesn't the Family want peace? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scutterbug Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 (edited) Oh RV not attention seeking and truth bending again are we. Get over yourself already. On a personal level and not one representing MHA, i do support Sorum and The Family, you finally got your just desserts in running your mouth and now ur still running it off. Edited August 10, 2009 by scutterbug Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emperor Stranger Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 I figure by this point people need a tl;dr.Past: Sorum raids Rebel Virginia -> Rebel Virginia !@#$%*es about it on the OWF, makes an ultimatum to tF -> GDI attacks tF nations -> During negotiations, a non-government member of tF makes an agreement to GDI for peace -> Rest of tF rejects this peace -> Defense of tF nations continues Present: Rebel Virginia !@#$%*es that tF is defending its members, GDI declares war on tF for defending its members Future: tF blows up RV and GDI via superior military tactics. FAIL and GDI are defending, I don't see how you can consider it "defense of tF". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aeternos Astramora Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 I figure by this point people need a tl;dr.Past: Sorum raids Rebel Virginia -> Rebel Virginia !@#$%*es about it on the OWF, makes an ultimatum to tF -> GDI attacks tF nations -> During negotiations, a non-government member of tF makes an agreement to GDI for peace -> Rest of tF rejects this peace -> Defense of tF nations continues Present: Rebel Virginia !@#$%*es that tF is defending its members, GDI declares war on tF for defending its members Future: tF blows up RV and GDI via superior military tactics. Seems about right to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebel Virginia Posted August 10, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 FAIL is not an alliance. It is an excuse for one individual to act like an attention *seeker*. None is more of an alliance than FAIL, and it gets raided all the time. Are we really having this argument again? FAIL has a forum, a charter, a government, and treaties. In fact, we are getting offers for treaties at the moment. If you wish to pretend we are not an alliance, go right ahead. I won't stop you. It doesn't change this situation though, nor what the Family has done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sileath Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 Why doesn't the Family want peace? We want reparations due to innocent nations being attacked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hell Scream Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 FAIL is not an alliance. It is an excuse for one individual to act like an attention *seeker*. None is more of an alliance than FAIL, and it gets raided all the time. Any alliance that has an Alliance Affiliation and more than 1 member is an alliance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TehChron Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 FAIL is not an alliance. It is an excuse for one individual to act like an attention *seeker*. None is more of an alliance than FAIL, and it gets raided all the time. None doesnt have a charter, and therefore, is most assuredly not an alliance. Are we really having this argument again? FAIL has a forum, a charter, a government, and treaties. In fact, we are getting offers for treaties at the moment.I expect all offers to be ran by me, as a Triumverate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proko Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 We want reparations due to innocent nations being attacked. And, subsequently, I assume you're willing to pay Rebel Virginia for the damages incurred by the Family? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emperor Stranger Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 We want reparations due to innocent nations being attacked. A song comes to mind... "You can't always get what you want!" In other words, tF started it, FAIL and GDI responded accordingly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aeternos Astramora Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 FAIL and GDI are defending, I don't see how you can consider it "defense of tF". Because they attacked tF nations that were not attacking RV. It was a tech raid. GDI declared on multiple nations not involved in the tech raid and so escalated it to alliance war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacapo Saladin Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 I figure by this point people need a tl;dr.Past: Sorum raids Rebel Virginia -> Rebel Virginia !@#$%*es about it on the OWF, makes an ultimatum to tF -> GDI attacks tF nations -> A tF approved negotiator accepts peace -> sileath rejects this peace -> Defense of tF nations continues Present: Rebel Virginia !@#$%*es that tF is defending its members, GDI declares war on tF for defending its members Future: tF blows up RV and GDI via superior military tactics. I fixed it for you right thar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hell Scream Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 We want reparations due to innocent nations being attacked. What do you mean? The "innocent' nations payed for the mistakes of their Govt member Sorum, who declared war on a sovereign alliance with the support of your leader Blackjack who aided him 15 minutes before war was declared as support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts