tobbogon Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 ADI is in an impossible situation with allies on either side - this was the best option. This isn't the first time an alliance has had allies on both sides of a war. Heck, read up about GDA in the BLEU war. Just look at how much people like them now. They did EXACTLY what ADI is doing now. Except for the part where ADI promised RoK that they would defend them to the death, and then post on the OWF that they aren't going to do anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robster83 Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 Ummm dont mean to point out the glaring flaw in your post but your not allied to TPF???Mediate if your friends are involved is great but RoK didnt declare war on your friends. Publically bailing on allies AFTER giving them your support, AFTER you were well aware of FEAR's treaty is... well honourable isnt exactly the word I would choose to to describe Wrabuck at this moment. I was speaking about FEAR. As far as I am concerned the validity of the CB wasnt confirmed. We didnt say to you we are abandoning you, we tried to bring peace, if someone had declared on you we were ready to counter - that was our orders, to keep other alliances of Ragnarok's back. However we wanted RoK to attempt and resolve this diplomatically, but you just cancelled. So perhaps its good we parted ways. Shows who our real friends are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magister Populi Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 In fact, and as we already stated, we have spoken to TPF without your mediation. Had you brought your concerns to us istead of speaking with FEAR and making this knee-jerk post, you would have known that and still been allied to an alliance so commited to you that it was once willing to break years of aqua peace on your behalf.You are not in the right here in any way, shape, or form. It seems like you just want a war one way or the other. It's a regrettful set of circumstances we find ourselves in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delta1212 Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 It seems like you just want a war one way or the other.It's a regrettful set of circumstances we find ourselves in. Yes it is. This topic made them worse. It was a terrible idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hizzy Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 (edited) I didn't ask what it was called but tu chez anyway. oh god I love this place. Touché. Edited December 28, 2009 by hizzy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gofastleft Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 I was speaking about FEAR. As far as I am concerned the validity of the CB wasnt confirmed. We didnt say to you we are abandoning you, we tried to bring peace, if someone had declared on you we were ready to counter - that was our orders, to keep other alliances of Ragnarok's back. However we wanted RoK to attempt and resolve this diplomatically, but you just cancelled. So perhaps its good we parted ways. Shows who our real friends are. but that is not what the OP said. Should RoK make a true and real attempt to negotiate terms with TPF and company, and those talks fail, it will be at that point that ADI will defend RoK to the death. However, without such an attempt at diplomacy over the matter, ADI will not get involved on either side of the conflict. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyperbad Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 A quick way to end the friendship. My friends and I insult each other all the time and we don't even take it personally but are more understanding. I suppose the friendships that don't run deep are more likely to be terminated after a single insult but if you're as good a friends as people are talking about you don't let one such as this come between you. Of course this isn't what RoK is feeling, but rather a breach of trust so this all is moot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Petrovich4 Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 I am Bob. He is BobJanova. I eat my tongue, BobJanova is correct on the wording of the treaty being what matters. My bad!! I'm with Bobby J on this one. Please tell me there is not a random dude called Bobby J on these forums - I mean u BobJanova!!!! ANyways, continue with the nuclear launches. And treaty word play. And peace talks. While peace may talk, guns bark and missiles roar - they are much louder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
energizer Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 So.... ADI plays e-lawyer in assuming they have no obligation to assist their "brethren"? I was always told that if your brother made a $%&@ed up move, you can despise him, maybe even hate him, but you still protect him. If you truly feel not assisting RoK out of personal decision, then it should be painfully clear that a defense treaty was not the right option for you to take. Thanks much, just made the list of alliances who choose pixels over friends. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaitlinK Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 I was speaking about FEAR. As far as I am concerned the validity of the CB wasnt confirmed. We didnt say to you we are abandoning you, we tried to bring peace, if someone had declared on you we were ready to counter - that was our orders, to keep other alliances of Ragnarok's back. However we wanted RoK to attempt and resolve this diplomatically, but you just cancelled. So perhaps its good we parted ways. Shows who our real friends are. Actually Sunshine, RoK had talked to TPF before this failed public stunt of Warbuck's was posted, and WAY before you were dumped. Its those little details your leader would have known had he talked to RoK before posting. Your leaders actions reflect poorly on the rest of you I am afraid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leigon Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 I did?Also- After that I asked RoK like 10 times to negotiate because they put us in a bad spot. I wanted it to be a last resort to go to war. That is why this OP showed up. I know I told RoK they have my support, and if they don't try to tell me "you MUST do this" and admit it is optional aggression and just respond to a little request, I'd fight for them until we had nothing left to throw at their enemies. But I was lied to, manipulated and then denied all reasonable requests. Then why didn't you just retract your statement of support in private? A good explanation in private and a DoN claiming conflicting treaties might have even saved you the treaty with RoK. Also it would only have been optional agression if they'd asked you in on the TPF front. Instead they wanted you to help them should they get counter attacked. This is a case of chaining defense which in your treaty isn't excepted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Druss the Legend Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 Pathetic. And to think I was developing more respect for your alliance with every passing day. You lied to your ally, and then go on the OWF and lie about them. You told RoK you would have their back regardless, yet you post that you will not. You really can't have your cake and eat it too. ADI is now the Atlantis 2.0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wickedj Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 So.... ADI plays e-lawyer in assuming they have no obligation to assist their "brethren"? I was always told that if your brother made a $%&@ed up move, you can despise him, maybe even hate him, but you still protect him.If you truly feel not assisting RoK out of personal decision, then it should be painfully clear that a defense treaty was not the right option for you to take. Thanks much, just made the list of alliances who choose pixels over friends. Last year we had the Friends > Infra war, this time around we're looking at the Infra > Friends war lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kulomascovia Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 (edited) I'm glad that ADI has decided to embrace diplomacy over mindless conflict. However, I'm saddened to see that Hoo sees this as a betrayal rather than as an attempt at a peaceful resolution. Good luck with resolving this issue in the future. EDIT: Syntax issues. Edited December 28, 2009 by kulomascovia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JWConner Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 Or sending an alliance out to merge into RoK and try to disrupt it internally. You can agree or disagree with whether this is acceptable in a time of war, and have an opinion on whether it can be used as a CB at this time or not. But trying to deny TPF never even did anything in the first place will just lead to a loss of credibility. We can all see it. What's the world coming to when I begin agreeing with Penkala?!?! Also, as I'm sure it's been said in previous pages, but as I was behind (ooc: page 8) and it suddenly jumped (ooc: page 14) I'm gonna mention it anyways.... DO YOUR OWN DAMN WORK! If you're unsure of who allies are of YOUR allies, then read. It doesn't take much effort. Really. It doesn't. Being lazy is no excuse. Because you're lazy and chose to grandstand to feel important here in the public eye, you've now lost a fairly powerful ally. Good job. Oh, and this is coming from a guy who will undoubtedly be nuking someone on that side of the conflict...or I won't...that's TBD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 I'm glad that ADI has decided to embrace diplomacy over mindless conflict .However, I'm saddened to see that Hoo sees this as a betrayal rather than as an attempt at a peaceful resolution. Good luck with resolving this issue in the future. They did not embrace diplomacy, they embraced lying/misleading their ally into thinking they were supporting them. And what is the problem with conflict? You act like it is the worst thing in the Cyberverse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kulomascovia Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 (edited) Double post. Ignore. Edited December 28, 2009 by kulomascovia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernkastel Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 I knew there was something I always loved about ADI. Truly an honorable alliance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kulomascovia Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 They did not embrace diplomacy, they embraced lying/misleading their ally into thinking they were supporting them.And what is the problem with conflict? You act like it is the worst thing in the Cyberverse. They offered to act as a neutral arbiter to a polarizing issue. I don't think their intentions were to lie or mislead RoK in order to get out of the war; they could have easily done that by saying they wanted to stay out of the issue. I think there is some misunderstanding between the two parties. I suggest that Hoo and Warbuck speak with each other after things cool down a bit. I don't have a problem with conflict when no other options are available. What I dislike is mindless conflict, where two parties squabble over an issue that could have been resolved diplomatically. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Warbuck Posted December 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 They offered to act as a neutral arbiter to a polarizing issue. I don't think their intentions were to lie or mislead RoK in order to get out of the war; they could have easily done that by saying they wanted to stay out of the issue. I think there is some misunderstanding between the two parties. I suggest that Hoo and Warbuck speak with each other after things cool down a bit. I don't have a problem with conflict when no other options are available. What I dislike is mindless conflict, where two parties squabble over an issue that could have been resolved diplomatically. This. You just said what I've been trying to say for 15 pages. Thank you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 (edited) This. You just said what I've been trying to say for 15 pages. Thank you. Then you shouldn't be signing MDPs. As well as what Tautology said :v Edited December 28, 2009 by Penlugue Solaris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tautology Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 If you'd done that originally instead of posting this thread, you could've avoided this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SupremePrince Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 Having friends on both side during a conflict is hard and it is a difficult situation to be in. However, you should have consider other methods of handling this. If all else fail, you could have went neutral. Don't make promises you can't keep. Good luck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Warbuck Posted December 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 Having friends on both side during a conflict is hard and it is a difficult situation to be in. However, you should have consider other methods of handling this. If all else fail, you could have went neutral. Don't make promises you can't keep. Good luck. That's what we did.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Tom Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 ADI you might not like the reson for the war, but you should stick with your allies. And not stick a knife in the back of your friend. 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.