scutterbug Posted January 18, 2010 Report Share Posted January 18, 2010 then thats far from the we(gre) and mha consult. More like Gre gov tell MHA gov and thats that. Regardless of the fact they have full access to our forums and could discuss it between memberships like one would expect brothers to. BUt hey what would i know afterall. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted January 18, 2010 Report Share Posted January 18, 2010 then thats far from the we(gre) and mha consult. More like Gre gov tell MHA gov and thats that. Regardless of the fact they have full access to our forums and could discuss it between memberships like one would expect brothers to.BUt hey what would i know afterall. That is how an alliance treats secrets. Your government had the option to tell you, and they didn't either. Gremlins going against your government doesn't really seem like the best course of action, if they really are your brothers they need to respect the parents just like you do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scutterbug Posted January 18, 2010 Report Share Posted January 18, 2010 (edited) That is how an alliance treats secrets. Your government had the option to tell you, and they didn't either. Gremlins going against your government doesn't really seem like the best course of action, if they really are your brothers they need to respect the parents just like you do. So i have to respect Ramirus for running gre into the ground. God hell no! Its just amusing this brotherly relationship that gets portrayed on the OWF is just a big smoke screen for the lack of one we truely share imo. Edited January 18, 2010 by scutterbug Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kriekfreak Posted January 18, 2010 Report Share Posted January 18, 2010 I guess someone is feeling bitter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HellAngel Posted January 18, 2010 Report Share Posted January 18, 2010 then thats far from the we(gre) and mha consult. More like Gre gov tell MHA gov and thats that. Regardless of the fact they have full access to our forums and could discuss it between memberships like one would expect brothers to.BUt hey what would i know afterall. I dont think there was any malicious intent behind it. I mean, Gre got over MHA signing that special NPO treaty and not telling us about it just days before Härmlins was announced. Sometimes stuff like that happens... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorkingClassRuler Posted January 18, 2010 Report Share Posted January 18, 2010 I dont think there was any malicious intent behind it. I mean, Gre got over MHA signing that special NPO treaty and not telling us about it just days before Härmlins was announced. Sometimes stuff like that happens... LOL ouch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PakAttack Posted January 18, 2010 Report Share Posted January 18, 2010 You guys are the coolest. Love you Gre Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kriekfreak Posted January 18, 2010 Report Share Posted January 18, 2010 I dont think there was any malicious intent behind it. I mean, Gre got over MHA signing that special NPO treaty and not telling us about it just days before Härmlins was announced. Sometimes stuff like that happens... And the funny thing about that was that it took Gra to make right on that error. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syzygy Posted January 18, 2010 Report Share Posted January 18, 2010 Wow, *that* took long. Even beats TOP Speed . Grats & good luck anyway (although I think this one comes like one year too late ^^)! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sigrun Vapneir Posted January 18, 2010 Report Share Posted January 18, 2010 Wow, *that* took long. Even beats TOP Speed . Grats & good luck anyway (although I think this one comes like one year too late ^^)! Syz, with all due respect, a year ago it would have only triggered our ragnarök for nothing. Today they might be able to pull this off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorgrum Posted January 18, 2010 Report Share Posted January 18, 2010 (edited) then thats far from the we(gre) and mha consult. More like Gre gov tell MHA gov and thats that. Regardless of the fact they have full access to our forums and could discuss it between memberships like one would expect brothers to.BUt hey what would i know afterall. Harmlins have access to our boards as well and there were several members of MHA who i saw posting in thread discussions. were you one of them? Hi pot, meet Mr kettle, he's black Edited January 18, 2010 by Thorgrum Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saber Posted January 18, 2010 Report Share Posted January 18, 2010 Well, when it comes time and they exercise their right to do whatever they damn well please then you can put in an official baseless complaint and the rest of us can promptly ignore it. I believe (am not certain, but I'm relatively sure) that if one of our allies declared offensive war on unaffiliated alliance, and suddenly big coalition formed to "defend" said alliance, TOP would still consider that coalition aggressive and defend our ally. I'm pretty sure lot if not most alliances in CN would act in the same way. Sure, you can declare wars with no CB, but don't expect your opponents to recognize it as defence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sigrun Vapneir Posted January 18, 2010 Report Share Posted January 18, 2010 (edited) I believe (am not certain, but I'm relatively sure) that if one of our allies declared offensive war on unaffiliated alliance, and suddenly big coalition formed to "defend" said alliance, TOP would still consider that coalition aggressive and defend our ally. You would "defend" an ally by jumping into an admittedly offensive war? Really? Sure, you can declare wars with no CB, but don't expect your opponents to recognize it as defence. Edited January 18, 2010 by Sigrun Vapneir Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Janova Posted January 18, 2010 Report Share Posted January 18, 2010 (edited) Try it out; 'defend' FoA. I guarantee that the raiders' MDP partners would roll in to 'defend' their aggressive friends on exactly this basis (and in fact the fact that no alliance tried this, even though the three initial aggressors were laughably weak in themselves, shows that to be the case). Edit: Yes, I know they took a peace settlement already; imagine this point being made before they had done so. They took that agreement because they knew nobody would defend them because of exactly the reasoning Saber is following here. Edited January 18, 2010 by Bob Janova Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sigrun Vapneir Posted January 18, 2010 Report Share Posted January 18, 2010 Try it out; 'defend' FoA. I guarantee that the raiders' MDP partners would roll in to 'defend' their aggressive friends on exactly this basis (and in fact the fact that no alliance tried this, even though the three initial aggressors were laughably weak in themselves, shows that to be the case). I think your analysis misses numerous salient points. The settlement was accepted before anyone had time to roll, and yes I know you made a PS about it but you dont actually account for it. Also no one was strongly motivated to defend them, they didnt defend themselves and had no strong friendships that I know of. If someone attacks the Grämlins I expect they will be refusing peace offers and flinging nukes. And they do have friends who have good reasons to want them to stick around, treaty or no treaty. There is more to add but you will have to catch me elsewhere for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vladimir Stukov II Posted January 18, 2010 Report Share Posted January 18, 2010 You would "defend" an ally by jumping into an admittedly offensive war? Really? friends > infra Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zangmonkey Posted January 18, 2010 Report Share Posted January 18, 2010 So i have to respect Ramirus for running gre into the ground. God hell no! Its just amusing this brotherly relationship that gets portrayed on the OWF is just a big smoke screen for the lack of one we truely share imo. On the other hand, there were MHA members in our forum involved in the recent thread where this was discussed. I apologize that you think the level of communication was inadequate but how do I know whether or not you choose to look in our shared forums? The fact that you may not have seen the discussion isn't evidence that it didn't occur. Additionally, you're entitled to your opinion about Ramirus but there are a number of upper-tier members (including me) who could have voted this move down if we didn't agree with it. In fact, the domino that started this chain wasn't even Ramirus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zangmonkey Posted January 18, 2010 Report Share Posted January 18, 2010 Try it out; 'defend' FoA. I guarantee that the raiders' MDP partners would roll in to 'defend' their aggressive friends on exactly this basis (and in fact the fact that no alliance tried this, even though the three initial aggressors were laughably weak in themselves, shows that to be the case).Edit: Yes, I know they took a peace settlement already; imagine this point being made before they had done so. They took that agreement because they knew nobody would defend them because of exactly the reasoning Saber is following here. Is this an invitation to come to the military defense of every nation that gets raided? That isn't our motivation nor is it our intent here. We are not claiming to be caped crusaders; lurking in the shadows to pounce on shoplifters and pursesnatchers. Everybody is welcome to call our notion of justice biased, subjective, specious.... To me, that isn't a point worth arguing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sigrun Vapneir Posted January 18, 2010 Report Share Posted January 18, 2010 friends > infra That's great, I have no problem with that. But it doesnt magically transform an aggressive war into a defensive one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Janova Posted January 18, 2010 Report Share Posted January 18, 2010 Is this an invitation to come to the military defense of every nation that gets raided? Not really, it's a thought experiment about aggression and defence, not directed at Grämlins in particular. To relate it to Grämlins you need to hypothesise a friend of yours (other than MHA with whom you still share a treaty) coming under attack. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zangmonkey Posted January 18, 2010 Report Share Posted January 18, 2010 friends > infra right > wrong Say a nation who is a friend of mine uses his beer and automobiles irresponsibly, goes off his asphalt and damages another unrelated nation; I will work to help my friend avoid cruelty but not punishment. In fact, a friend with that problem needs punishment to help amend his ways. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syzygy Posted January 18, 2010 Report Share Posted January 18, 2010 right > wrong Say a nation who is a friend of mine uses his beer and automobiles irresponsibly, goes off his asphalt and damages another unrelated nation; I will work to help my friend avoid cruelty but not punishment. In fact, a friend with that problem needs punishment to help amend his ways. wait, you *still* discuss in this endless circle? I mean, that same discussion went for like 3 years in Citadel... I am proud you still try to convince people that offering unconditional protection for an aggressor is wrong, regardless how much "friendship" or "treaties" exist (in fact that was the main reason why thugs like GOONS, \m/ or megalomaniacs like Bilrow and his LoLGGA could do their !@#$%^&* for so long, NPOs power just kept them alive and made any resistance pointless), but I also believe it's complete and utter waste of time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Taco Posted January 18, 2010 Report Share Posted January 18, 2010 I dont think there was any malicious intent behind it. I mean, Gre got over MHA signing that special NPO treaty and not telling us about it just days before Härmlins was announced. Sometimes stuff like that happens... Dang Hellangel. I thought we all agreed to pretend that never happened. I know I agreed at least... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zangmonkey Posted January 18, 2010 Report Share Posted January 18, 2010 wait, you *still* discuss in this endless circle? I mean, that same discussion went for like 3 years in Citadel... I am proud you still try to convince people that offering unconditional protection for an aggressor is wrong, regardless how much "friendship" or "treaties" exist (in fact that was the main reason why thugs like GOONS, \m/ or megalomaniacs like Bilrow and his LoLGGA could do their !@#$%^&* for so long, NPOs power just kept them alive and made any resistance pointless), but I also believe it's complete and utter waste of time. The cyberverse persists on circular arguments, Syz. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inferno Posted January 18, 2010 Report Share Posted January 18, 2010 Ertyy, Praetor and co-head minion I made that awesome Flag i dont like you use it. 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.