Lack of declarations against RoK

[von Metternich]

FB came up on this thread..and I can't remember if Pacifica is in Frostbite or not...

Can someone remind me plz?

[Tarikmo]

FB came up on this thread..and I can't remember if Pacifica is in Frostbite or not...

Can someone remind me plz?

I wasn't aware FB was still around.

[von Metternich]

Oh...its not?

Mah bad.

[zzzptm]

In response to the OP with a million anime graphics:

Nobody attacked RoK because of the QUARANTINE.

If you have not heard about the QUARANTINE, then you are among those The MAN deems expendable. Who is The MAN? Dude, if you have to ask, you'll never know.

Fnord.

[BraveNewWorld]

Look, everybody knows why nobody attacked RoK, so it seems that the only point of these various posts and threads is to try and get the CC to admit it so you can call them cowards or something. You just look like children doing this, OK? CC made a strategic decision to try and delay the entrance of Polaris into this war, if I were them, I would probably have done the same thing. If you recall in the Karma war, the same thing was done, with nobody attacking STA. (However, you may also recall that Polaris entered anyways, we are not played that easily)

If/When/Where Polaris enters this war will be controlled only by Grub, nobody else, but I do not fault them for trying to strategize, and am ashamed that others would call them cowards for doing so.

[Aeternos Astramora]

Again, not the point.

With TPF's request for assistance against its attackers, those with MDP's or higher with TPF are obligated to attack Ragnarok.

LM: "I knew I forgot someone. Oh man, do I feel silly!"

Arrnea, exactly what are you trying to prove by pursuing this argument?

It is blatantly obvious that RoK was not declared upon to avoid activating its MDP's. Since this is an action that makes the war much more winnable, it is also very rational. The idea that CC should sabotage their own war effort - and thereby minimizing the chances of TPF actually being saved - for the sake of legislative accuracy is insane. That is not what a good ally does, and quite obviously not what TPF wants, or what it was envisioning when signing the agreement. Given that it is impossible for a piece of paper to cover every possible situation, it is necessary for a modicrum of common sense being available to interpret the best way to apply it - this is why Judiciaries exist.

I'm quite sure you realise that sticking so closely to the written parameters of an agreement that you reach the point where you are going against the point and logic of the agreement in the first place is not how stuff works - not in international politics, not in domestic law, not anywhere. And the reason that it doesn't work that way is because it would be downright stupid for it to do so. Only robots would work that way, and we are humans.

You know this very well, yet you insist on trying to make a point by claiming that these alliances are Obligated to hit RoK. If they believe hitting RoK would damage TPF's chances, then the logical extension of your point would be that it is the obligation of TPF's allies to damage TPF's war chances. That, quite obviously, runs contrary to common sense, and since CC is not composed of robots, they don't do that.

Really, you're not getting anywhere with your argument.

If you factor in all the Purple/TOP/TPF supporters/CnG/SF people likely to come in there isn't a big difference between the two sides, and one or two sanctioned alliances (especially one as influential as NpO) can determine the outcome of the war.

/thread.

where can I get a degree in E-Law ?

This.

Perhaps there is a different CB on RoK that they plan on using a little later, maybe 6 months later.

No. The CB in six months will be this: "In the War is Peace Mode, we have received intelligence that the opposing side, before the date of their surrender, had planned on launching nukes after [insert date]. Therefore, we declare war.

[onbekende]

stop desiring our presence in your nations, the time that you "ruled" CN has yet come, will not come and shall never happen. Perhaps get your spies to attack some of your alliance mates to get some justification (althou that would be AGAIN wrong justitification)

[Hiro Nakara]

While I am not engaging in any public debates as to why things are the way they are or why the coalition will act as it will, I will target anyone calling me a liar. Parties on all sides of this war have been notified as to the extent of things regarding me. There is a reason why you haven't seen them lambasting me about it. Watch yourself.

I should have made myself clearer for you LM, I was not stating you were the liar I believe you to be a truthful type of guy, but I know for a fact it was not just one man organising things, you should not have to appologise about being away dealing with R/L things The machines of industry would have rolled on without your prescence is what I was meaning, I genuinly did not try to offend you or call you a liar. But I know there is just not you organising this and if it apeared to be an ooc attack on your honesty or i came across in that maner I do appologise as that was not my intention.

[Elspeth KSheyna]

Pray tell good sirs and ladies, what is this concern over whom of The Phoenix Federation’s Mutual Defense treaty partners declare on which offending nation? We do believe that the people of k’Sheyna are confused by the dithering of this inquiry. If The Phoenix Federation is aggrieved by the lack of repelling force dispatched against Ragnarok by their Mutual Defense treaty partners, is it not the place of The Phoenix Federation, and only The Phoenix Federation, to protest?

Within the nation of k’Sheyna the people hold a principle which provides that a person may waive any right they have if such a waiver of right is knowingly and intentionally done. While we of k’Sheyna do not permit the inadvertent waiver of a right, we do not preclude any person of sound mind from choosing for themselves to give up that right. Only when a person has been found to be an imbecile or of feeble mind are all their rights enforced to their benefit without regard to their desires.

Good sirs and ladies, so too should not The Phoenix Federation be permitted to choose to enforce, or not, its rights against its Mutual Defense treaty partners? Should not The Phoenix Federation be permitted to make this choice without the interference of those of us on Planet Bob who would disagree? We believe so.

Dispatched on behalf of the People of k’Sheyna

Queen Elspeth, humble servant of the People of k’Sheyna

(tl;dr – what business is it of anyone but TPF whether any of their MD treaty partners attacks RoK or not? Butting out would be a good plan.)

[von Metternich]

Look, everybody knows why nobody attacked RoK, so it seems that the only point of these various posts and threads is to try and get the CC to admit it so you can call them cowards or something. You just look like children doing this, OK? CC made a strategic decision to try and delay the entrance of Polaris into this war, if I were them, I would probably have done the same thing. If you recall in the Karma war, the same thing was done, with nobody attacking STA. (However, you may also recall that Polaris entered anyways, we are not played that easily)

If/When/Where Polaris enters this war will be controlled only by Grub, nobody else, but I do not fault them for trying to strategize, and am ashamed that others would call them cowards for doing so.

This is exactly why. Stop trolling Coalition of Excuses and calling them cowards. Arrnea (and everyone else), if you didn't already know this when you made the thread, and if you didn't figure it out after all these posts, then just look at this.

End of story.

Edited January 2, 2010 by Famzy

[SpoiL]

No. The CB in six months will be this: "In the War is Peace Mode, we have received intelligence that the opposing side, before the date of their surrender, had planned on launching nukes after [insert date]. Therefore, we declare war.

Equally valid, yes?

[Ying Yang Mafia]

ZOMG NOBODY ATTACKED ROK.

COWARDS

[D34th]

Are you sure? They said defensive as well.

I am more then a little confused about it though.

As to the second matter (Ragnarok's aggression against IRON/NSO/NATO/GC) -

* Point 1:

We consider Ragnarok to have attacked IRON/NSO/NATO/GC. We consider anyone who declares on Ragnarok's side to be the aggressors, and IRON/NSO/NATO/GC to be fully justified in defending themselves via military conflict against Ragnarok. We consider anyone who declares on IRON/NSO/NATO/GC to be the attackers. This includes those whose declarations have multiple degrees of separation from the intitial conflict.

See they consider RoK to be the agressive part of a possible war against IRON/NSO/NATO/GC because IRON/NSO/NATO/GC do not declared against RoK

Point 3:

We will defend any allies who enter this conflict defensively. So that there is no ambiguity, that means on the defensive side of the war (see point 1).

As Rok being considered the agressive part of the war, any allies of RoK who attacks IRON/NSO/NATO/GC will be attacked for Grämlins.

I have a much simpler one. They didn't want NpO or MHA to enter. See how easy that one was?

There are two possibilities: Or you are wrong or they are idiots because Polaris has a MDoAP with Ragnarok and can easily enable the agressive clause to help them if Grub wishes to do so.

[Nizzle]

I should have made myself clearer for you LM, I was not stating you were the liar I believe you to be a truthful type of guy, but I know for a fact it was not just one man organising things, you should not have to appologise about being away dealing with R/L things The machines of industry would have rolled on without your prescence is what I was meaning, I genuinly did not try to offend you or call you a liar. But I know there is just not you organising this and if it apeared to be an ooc attack on your honesty or i came across in that maner I do appologise as that was not my intention.

Ah yes, please ignore LM and go to war anyway...because how things are now is not fair at all.

Quite the potent argument.

Edited January 2, 2010 by Nizzle

[Jyrinx]

See they consider RoK to be the agressive part of a possible war against IRON/NSO/NATO/GC because IRON/NSO/NATO/GC do not declared against RoK

As Rok being considered the agressive part of the war, any allies of RoK who attacks IRON/NSO/NATO/GC will be attacked for Grämlins.

I think it depends on *why* they declare on RoK, but since I'm not Grämlins I'm not sure. I think if IRON attacks RoK in defense of TPF, then Grämlins will consider IRON the aggressor. That's what the OP suggests to me.

Someone from Grämlins want to clarify? Or have they already clarified and I missed it?

[maxnmike]

See they consider RoK to be the agressive part of a possible war against IRON/NSO/NATO/GC because IRON/NSO/NATO/GC do not declared against RoK

As Rok being considered the agressive part of the war, any allies of RoK who attacks IRON/NSO/NATO/GC will be attacked for Grämlins.

There are two possibilities: Or you are wrong or they are idiots because Polaris has a MDoAP with Ragnarok and can easily enable the agressive clause to help them if Grub wishes to do so.

Could just be me, but I think they are saying that the RoK, IRON/NSO/NATO/GC thing is a separate issue from the current war so if anyone declares on RoK due to the current war RoK will be on the defensive side but if they declare on RoK due to the IRON/NSO/NATO/GC issue then RoK will be on the aggressive side.

[Nizzle]

I think it depends on *why* they declare on RoK, but since I'm not Grämlins I'm not sure. I think if IRON attacks RoK in defense of TPF, then Grämlins will consider IRON the aggressor. That's what the OP suggests to me.

Someone from Grämlins want to clarify? Or have they already clarified and I missed it?

That's right. However, if the alliances who suffered RoK's multi declare and use that as a CB...RoK will be the aggressor. Incidentally, I wouldn't expect this to happen since it would be a definitive display of hypocrisy as opposed to the ones everyone is currently trying to prove.

EDIT: b10 above

Edited January 2, 2010 by Nizzle

[Mixoux]

Ah yes, please ignore LM and go to war anyway...because how things are now is not fair at all.

Quite the potent argument.

I'm not trying to discredit LM's abilities or anything, but, why not? Why do alliances have war ministers and milcom anymore if it ends up being passed on to other alliances to do the planning? :/

[Nizzle]

I'm not trying to discredit LM's abilities or anything, but, why not? Why do alliances have war ministers and milcom anymore if it ends up being passed on to other alliances to do the planning? :/

...why does it matter?

All these conversations do is make it seem like you guys are totally unprepared for the move they have made and you blame it on them waiting for LM. It's really bad form. Let it go.

[Severus Snape]

This thread is IC.

Just an observation.

[Bob Janova]

If they allow RoK to keep rolling TPF, they can easily push TPF further and further down, so they're going to have to grasp this nettle at some point. But declaring 'we recognise a state of defensive hostilities with most, but not all, of the aggressors' just looks rather weak.

[Nizzle]

If they allow RoK to keep rolling TPF, they can easily push TPF further and further down, so they're going to have to grasp this nettle at some point. But declaring 'we recognise a state of defensive hostilities with most, but not all, of the aggressors' just looks rather weak.

I agree. If they keep attacking TPF, TPF will lose more strength is a rather strong argument.

[Hiro Nakara]

Ah yes, please ignore LM and go to war anyway...because how things are now is not fair at all.

Quite the potent argument.

I will be at war nothing is changing that, I also pmed this to LM and my forum post due to the fact I really don't go around making ooc attacks on people in a game and I would hate for him to think that was an attack on him in an out of character fasion, I was not calling him a liar. I'm big enough to man up and appologise if I think I have upset someones through me not making myself clear enough. Regardless of sides if I think I have caused someoen disstress or anger through me comming across in the wrong manner, then i will appologise in public and in private, thats just the way I am.

[avernite]

If they allow RoK to keep rolling TPF, they can easily push TPF further and further down, so they're going to have to grasp this nettle at some point. But declaring 'we recognise a state of defensive hostilities with most, but not all, of the aggressors' just looks rather weak.

Then again, at the same time those others can easily push Athens, \m/ and GOD down.

The question is, is sacrificing those alliances worth crushing TPF?

Probably not, so declaring on RoK is rather unnecessary.

[D34th]

Then again, at the same time those others can easily push Athens, \m/ and GOD down.

The question is, is sacrificing those alliances worth crushing TPF?

Probably not, so declaring on RoK is rather unnecessary.

How they will easily push Athens, \m/ and GOD down without declare wars?