Locke Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 May be you missed that our treaty with UPN is no chaining. No, I didn't. Neither is this one. My (Haf's too, I hope ) point was that we're effectively in the same relationship with you as the IAA already. That MDAP is basically a statement saying that we move as one alliance, so wherever UPN goes, so do we. And you hold the same level of relationship with UPN as you do with the IAA. Not that I would mind looking to get closer to you on our own accord, of course. Also, I just noticed that you termed the aggression article as mutual, not optional; is there a hidden part in that like the IAA/Invicta Article VI? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chimaera Posted September 24, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 No Locke, it's just optional mutual aggression. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Locke Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 No Locke, it's just optional mutual aggression. Yeah, that's what I thought at first, but when I think of that I think of the BFF aggression clause and it doesn't look like that at all. =\ Is it just implied through the title then as opposed to being written out in the article? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haflinger Posted September 24, 2009 Report Share Posted September 24, 2009 That is supposed to make me feel.....better? The point is that Invicta's forces already are pledged to the defence of NpO via the UPN MDP. If NpO is attacked in a manner which causes their treaty with UPN to be invoked, we're coming too. Our treaty with IAA is additionally nonchaining, so really, their entering into a defence arrangement with an alliance who we are already pledged to defend - even if indirectly - makes our strategic position stronger, not weaker, because if someone decides to attack the Polars for some reason there will be more forces available to aid our side. So like I said earlier, I'm quite happy to see this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New Frontier Posted September 25, 2009 Report Share Posted September 25, 2009 Good luck, Polar brethren. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeinousOne Posted September 25, 2009 Report Share Posted September 25, 2009 Hey look....I don't want to be a downer on my brethren's thread here but I just don't want to see them get so closely tied to the purple sphere in this day and age. You may take that personally but it isn't personal. So telling me how it chains together to get more purple coming to the aid of NpO or whatever just isn't doing it for me. Once again, best of luck to my Polar brothers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BamaBuc Posted September 25, 2009 Report Share Posted September 25, 2009 Hey look....I don't want to be a downer on my brethren's thread here but I just don't want to see them get so closely tied to the purple sphere in this day and age. You may take that personally but it isn't personal. So telling me how it chains together to get more purple coming to the aid of NpO or whatever just isn't doing it for me.Once again, best of luck to my Polar brothers. I believe Haf is just trying to say that such ties to Purple were already in place and aren't new. Congrats Polar and IAA. -Bama Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Locke Posted September 25, 2009 Report Share Posted September 25, 2009 Hey look....I don't want to be a downer on my brethren's thread here but I just don't want to see them get so closely tied to the purple sphere in this day and age. You may take that personally but it isn't personal. So telling me how it chains together to get more purple coming to the aid of NpO or whatever just isn't doing it for me.Once again, best of luck to my Polar brothers. Bama nailed it. You're a bit late on that. But I'm sure the next time we go looking for treaties with your friends, we'll ask for your approval first, okay? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Litha Riddle Posted September 25, 2009 Report Share Posted September 25, 2009 I believe Haf is just trying to say that such ties to Purple were already in place and aren't new.Congrats Polar and IAA. -Bama I'd say being closer to purple is a good thing, they are the lovers of Bob after all Congrats on the new treaty Polaris and IAA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proko Posted September 25, 2009 Report Share Posted September 25, 2009 (edited) Yeah, that's what I thought at first, but when I think of that I think of the BFF aggression clause and it doesn't look like that at all. =\ Is it just implied through the title then as opposed to being written out in the article? Should either signatory find it necessary to commit an act of aggression upon a third party, they may request military support from the other signatory, though this request is under no circumstances an obligation. The article is titled "Mutual Aggression" because it clarifies the circumstances under which mutual aggression is defined. A MDP could have a section titled "Mutual Aggression" that declares "This treaty is not in any way whatsoever justification for mutual aggression," because it is defining mutual aggression in the context of the treaty. Edited September 25, 2009 by Proko Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proko Posted September 25, 2009 Report Share Posted September 25, 2009 Polaris is MDoAP'ed to UPN and UPN is chaining MDAP'ed to us. If UPN or IAA is attacked, I expect Invicta and Polaris to be fighting side by side. If Invicta is attacked and UPN and IAA defend you, do not automatically assume Polaris will take up the call. Our treaties with both make such defense optional. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Locke Posted September 25, 2009 Report Share Posted September 25, 2009 If UPN or IAA is attacked, I expect Invicta and Polaris to be fighting side by side. If Invicta is attacked and UPN and IAA defend you, do not automatically assume Polaris will take up the call. Our treaties with both make such defense optional. Never claimed otherwise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chimaera Posted September 25, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 25, 2009 If UPN or IAA is attacked, I expect Invicta and Polaris to be fighting side by side. If Invicta is attacked and UPN and IAA defend you, do not automatically assume Polaris will take up the call. Our treaties with both make such defense optional. Have I mentioned today that I love Polaris? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted September 26, 2009 Report Share Posted September 26, 2009 Congrats to the New Polar Empire Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New Frontier Posted September 28, 2009 Report Share Posted September 28, 2009 This is accurate. The basic feeling amongst IAAers was that is was high time for our return, and NPO's diminished state simply made that easier - it was in no way, shape, or form, the defining piece of our decision. Oh, how the story changes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mathias Posted September 28, 2009 Report Share Posted September 28, 2009 Oh, how the story changes. Yes, because you would know the story. As a member of IAA, you were intricately involved in the reformation process that began before the Karma War started. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiasmaCircle Posted September 28, 2009 Report Share Posted September 28, 2009 Is this going to be another debate on the IAA's reformation? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mathias Posted September 28, 2009 Report Share Posted September 28, 2009 Is this going to be another debate on the IAA's reformation? Hopefully not, it's honestly not that interesting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiasmaCircle Posted September 28, 2009 Report Share Posted September 28, 2009 Been there, seen that. Bought the T-Shirt. And it shrunk way more than Chim said it would. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chimaera Posted September 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 28, 2009 Been there, seen that. Bought the T-Shirt.And it shrunk way more than Chim said it would. Oh, sorry. When I meant it shrinks, I meant like shrink wrap. That must be a little tight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nosoup4you Posted September 28, 2009 Report Share Posted September 28, 2009 Congrats to you both! o/NpO o/IAA o/ Blue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kim Jaym Il Posted September 28, 2009 Report Share Posted September 28, 2009 And it shrunk way more than Chim said it would. I think we have all been in this position with him before. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucas Perry Posted September 28, 2009 Report Share Posted September 28, 2009 Congrats one the treaty, guys. Good luck in the future. 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.