Sargun II Posted December 4, 2009 Report Share Posted December 4, 2009 If they're a real ally, then I would fight for them. If they're an ally by paper only, then I would not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
empirica Posted December 4, 2009 Report Share Posted December 4, 2009 As one of the leaders in my alliance, I am personally at least 1/3 responsible for the treaties we sign. Therefore I feel strongly linked to all my allies and will defend them to the last. In my pre-leadership days, I am fairly certain I would have fought for an ally, regardless of my feelings. However, the situation you speak of have not happened to me personally, so I cannot be 100% on it. I'd say many alliances give members the right to opt out of military engagement. Sometimes you need peace-moders for the rebuild. Sometimes you have people who need to be away for part or all of the war. Stuff happens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wickedj Posted December 4, 2009 Report Share Posted December 4, 2009 If they're a real ally, then I would fight for them.If they're an ally by paper only, then I would not. Define this. surely you wouldnt sign a treaty with someone just for the hell of it? I mean i sure as hell would defend every single ally CSN has..else i'd be raising hell to drop that treaty speaking of, brb cancelling Corp treaty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Groucho Marx Posted December 4, 2009 Report Share Posted December 4, 2009 It's one nation, not the alliance. Exactly. Like I said, if I had to defend another alliance that mine was allied to in some way I wouldn't back out of it at all regardless of what the deal is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goldie Posted December 4, 2009 Report Share Posted December 4, 2009 The excuse of 'I'm in my alliance because of the community, not because of the treaties' is all well and good, but honestly, how tight can you be with your alliance-mates, and how much can you respect the community, if you aren't willing to fight alongside your alliance-mates whenever you are asked to, including the times when it is in defense of an alliance you may not like? Honestly, if someone in an alliance decides not to fight because of the way they feel about one of our allies, the person would probably get ostracized on several levels by their alliance-mates for not being willing to go to war with them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneBallMan Posted December 4, 2009 Report Share Posted December 4, 2009 Treaty = Defend. My nation is at the service of my alliance and I will stand with my brethren in defense of a treatied ally. Don't have to like it, in fact there have been a few situations where I haven't, but there is no reason to be in alliance if you won't honor your word and defend the word of your alliance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wickedj Posted December 4, 2009 Report Share Posted December 4, 2009 I find the responces from some people are are in alliances who just bailed on the NPO a few months ago. atleast a couple of yall left to go fight Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Louis the II Posted December 4, 2009 Report Share Posted December 4, 2009 I'm asking would you refuse to defend an ally for whatever reason. I can't see me NOT defending an ally. whatever the reason. Actually the only impass would be if an ally attacks another ally. Even this way I would think I might defend the one that was attacked first. No matter if is a bad political move, or if my ally screwup. I will be marching with them. To say that you are good friend when things are going well it is easy. At least my opinion...but I can understand and respect diifferent opinions. I wish others do that too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hippy Posted December 4, 2009 Report Share Posted December 4, 2009 If you are truly an ally, you would defend them whatever the cost. Stuff goes bad sometimes, but you have to accept the consequences and try to be better for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Bad Posted December 4, 2009 Report Share Posted December 4, 2009 Like I care who or what I am fighting about, if war comes like my allies or not I am all in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Chocolate Posted December 4, 2009 Report Share Posted December 4, 2009 Interesting. So no one, so far, will stand up for the individual rights of a nation, but rather blindly follow, or not so blindly follow orders that are given, because they are given.So, why do you give up your individual sovereign rights so easily? As a leader of an alliance, I'd never ask our members this question. Well, okay - not do so and then expect that they would give me an honest answer... If a poll went along with this question, and it was assumed that the person refusing has the right to do so (as opposed to being attacked a traitor the moment the alliance could do so) in the poll, maybe you'd get a different outcome. Oh, and for the record, (insert standard answer here.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schattenmann Posted December 4, 2009 Report Share Posted December 4, 2009 (edited) Yes, done it. When an ally has gotten your sig on a treaty under false pretenses or withheld serious info prior to signing, or when an ally is in breach of all legality, then the treaty is dead. For example, when GATO violated its surrender terms by allowing a Kaos reroll into the alliance and to hold a FA position, then negotiated military treaties with alliances (like Browncoats), those treaties were void. GATO knew that they were up for a butt-kicking and that their terms breach would bring war to people, and their lies-of-omission made those treaties worthless. People also tend to be retarded and think that a MDP means that they defend their allies in aggressive situtions, like when MDP Partner X spies on an alliance (an aggressive act of war) and gets attacked in response. A treaty partner that defends Partner X is not "defending"--they're in a mutual aggression movement. Edited December 4, 2009 by Schattenmann Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sargun II Posted December 4, 2009 Report Share Posted December 4, 2009 Define this. surely you wouldnt sign a treaty with someone just for the hell of it? I mean i sure as hell would defend every single ally CSN has..else i'd be raising hell to drop that treatyspeaking of, brb cancelling Corp treaty This was a personal question to every person on this board. I speak for myself when I say that an ally is someone who stands by you even if the odds of success are low, someone who gives you words of support and has shown a willingness to accept the faults of themselves or others. If you disagree, that's fine with me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpoiL Posted December 4, 2009 Report Share Posted December 4, 2009 I'd defend NSO. You're a sweetheart. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xiphosis Posted December 4, 2009 Report Share Posted December 4, 2009 No. If an ally got attacked for a valid and founded reason, I'd smack myself for it and fix it later, but I wouldn't !@#$%* out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prime minister Johns Posted December 4, 2009 Report Share Posted December 4, 2009 When I swear to defend something or someone, I obey that oath to the letter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sigrun Vapneir Posted December 4, 2009 Report Share Posted December 4, 2009 (edited) No. If an ally got attacked for a valid and founded reason, I'd smack myself for it and fix it later, but I wouldn't !@#$%* out. I actually agree with you for once. The way I think of it is if, let us say, I am having business with a man who I barely know. It turns out he murdered your sister and thousands of others and you have been chasing him for 10 years. You kill him. Good for you. At my table. BAD for you. You were perfectly justified to kill him, but the man was at my table. You could have waited an hour and I wouldnt care. But now I will have to kill you. Edited December 4, 2009 by Sigrun Vapneir Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mack Truck Posted December 4, 2009 Report Share Posted December 4, 2009 I would never bail on MK. I contemplated leaving fairly soon after first joining, because I disagreed with the Second Shark War, but I decided that I liked the alliance too much to leave over that. Same as now. Although there are alliances I can imagine joining if MK were to disband I'm not going to leave until that happens, so I'll be in any war I'm told to fight in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skippy Posted December 4, 2009 Report Share Posted December 4, 2009 As it stands, I would fight for any of my allies regardless of the reason. I would go to the end with them. Hypothetically? The do something wrong? They are still our allies, my allies, my friends. I stand by them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astronaut jones Posted December 4, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 4, 2009 (edited) So then, since everyone seems to be in agreement that you stick by your allies no matter what, even if they're in the wrong... How many of you have ever been in an alliance that has canceled a treaty on the eve of war? How many of you have stood up for your allies regardless of the canceled treaty, as they were most definitely canceled as a means to avoid war and destruction? Have any of you actually backed up your claims here, or is this mere posturing on your part? I mean, as many of you have stated, an ally is an ally, even if they're in the wrong.. so how many of you have practiced what you're preaching here? Or do those canceled treaties not count, as those were "bad allies" for whatever reason? Edited December 4, 2009 by astronaut jones Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prime minister Johns Posted December 4, 2009 Report Share Posted December 4, 2009 So then, since everyone seems to be in agreement that you stick by your allies no matter what, even if they're in the wrong...How many of you have ever been in an alliance that has canceled a treaty on the eve of war? How many of you have stood up for your allies regardless of the canceled treaty, as they were most definitely canceled as a means to avoid war and destruction? Have any of you actually backed up your claims here, or is this mere posturing on your part? I mean, as many of you have stated, an ally is an ally, even if they're in the wrong.. so how many of you have practiced what you're preaching here? I have fought to the destruction of my nation in accordance with an oath and fought until I could fight no more, accumulating 60 days worth of debts and deleting as a destroyed husk with nothing of value left to give. I when I make an oath it gets honored. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astronaut jones Posted December 4, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 4, 2009 I have fought to the destruction of my nation in accordance with an oath and fought until I could fight no more, accumulating 60 days worth of debts and deleting as a destroyed husk with nothing of value left to give.I when I make an oath it gets honored. And you're one of very few then. I'm not saying that people shouldn't defend an ally, of course they should, but the things that people are saying in this thread does not mesh with reality. The reality is, probably everyone, or damn near close to everyone, has "bailed" on an ally, for shoddy reasons at best, and while the notion that one would stick up for an ally even if they're wrong is admirable, it is very rarely true. Even those in the karma war, on the side of NPO bailed on them before being forced back into the fight. So.. if we can all get passed the lies and back to the truth, that would be great. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haflinger Posted December 4, 2009 Report Share Posted December 4, 2009 How many of you have ever been in an alliance that has canceled a treaty on the eve of war? How many of you have stood up for your allies regardless of the canceled treaty, as they were most definitely canceled as a means to avoid war and destruction? Never happened to me. I guess that's a perk of being in government, which I have been for quite some time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astronaut jones Posted December 4, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 4, 2009 Never happened to me. I guess that's a perk of being in government, which I have been for quite some time. Are you sure? Think long and hard on that one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haflinger Posted December 4, 2009 Report Share Posted December 4, 2009 Are you sure? Think long and hard on that one. If you think Invicta's made an eve-of-war cancellation, then go ahead and make your accusation. 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.