Vanguard Edict

[Marty McFly]

Polar got used to people giving in to the shake-downs I suppose. Sorry, folks, you're not NPO and you didn't do half the legwork they had to get that kind of monopoly on things. Your foundation was tenuous, and you acted far too early.

Oh how easily we forget.

Polar hasn't had a real war since 2008. What shake-downs have we gotten used to since August of 2008?

[TehChron]

Yes, people like this who sign treaties with a potentially opposing second on the eve of global war, even if the treaty had been in the works for a while, are scum I'm sure you wouldn't associate with.

Wait.

IRON takes months to vote on treaties, what can I say?

Aside from you're more or less stating that they're even worse for being so petty as to pull this move in order to make some kind of a point?

[D34th]

Polar got used to people giving in to the shake-downs I suppose. Sorry, folks, you're not NPO and you didn't do half the legwork they had to get that kind of monopoly on things. Your foundation was tenuous, and you acted far too early.

What are you talking about? No conspiracy theories here or "NpO is the new NPO" please, I don't like to use tin foil hats.

[Urmom]

Wasn't it many of your alliance mates clammoring about the need for treaty just a few days ago?

I'm sure that some people in TOP, seeing as there are around 200 members, feel that we should have physical treaties. So to answer your question, probably. That doesn't go to say that everyone in TOP is in favor of that. We had the "Avernite Doctrine" idea for quite some time, but never really followed through with it since many weren't convinced that it would be practical unless everyone else did it. And I think the general consensus of the recent cancellation topics that we've had was that we don't need treaties to remain very friendly and close with certain alliances.

[cookavich]

Do what you feel you gotta do, Vanguard.

[The FSM]

This person is correct. Hi Alekhine . iFOK has been over at the Vanguard boards and vice versa for quite some time now, not just for lame chit-chatting but for the real deal. We got to know Vanguard quite well in the last months and they us (I hope ). Considering SLCB already holds a MDoAP with our new found brothers in Vanguard and the fact that FCO holds them very dearly, we decided to take the step and just did a four-way in 1 step instead of each Stickmen signatory signing an individual treaty with Vanguard.

Whether or not you believe it, this was in the works for quite some time.

You folks really need to work on your timing then. If this treaty really has been in the works as you say than I expect you would have told Vanguard ahead of time that you were going to be activating your treaty with FOK and thus getting involved in this war so that they could avoid posting the treaty at the worst possible time and incurring a sizable blow to their standing among alliances. If Vanguard was already treaties to Stickmen (in essence) through their MDoAP with your own alliance, Kriekfreak, then Vanguard really would not have needed to announce this treaty before the war started because, as many people here are saying, it would not have changed the nature of their involvement in this conflict (which is something I also dispute).

If you are communicating on a level that that is commensurate with the treaty that was just announced, and if this treaty is really as moot (in regards to Vanguards involvement in this war) as people say it is, then Vanguard could have quite easily have announced it before your bloc declared or, if time was not permitting, after hostilities had ended.

Yet here we are and Vanguard has posted neither before nor after the war, but during. Which means something is not quite right in the Vanguard-Stickmen relationship. Either Stickmen is not communicating on a level commensurate with an MDoAP treaty with Vanguard, or this treaty was necessary for Vanguard to be properly aligned in this war.

[Xiphosis]

Indeed, which is why I am shocked to see Vanguard throw them by the wayside without a moments hesitation.

You missed my point.

I think you forget who started this mess.

[Adrian LaCroix]

To be fair, the forums have been down for a couple days, so this timing may have been the best they could do.

[Doitzel]

That's why I love war, in war times you know who alliance/people really are...

My thoughts exactly.

[TehChron]

To be fair, the forums have been down for a couple days, so this timing may have been the best they could do.

[ooc]Its been common knowledge that theres been an alternative prepared for the past few days, actually. And FOK declared on their wiki page[/ooc]

That argument is nonsensical.

[Geoffron X]

Wow, that is opportunism at the lowest level.

This is not an ironic statement. Tech raiding is opportunism; attacking an alliance that has many nukes, with friends with many nukes, is not. That said,

No kidding, $@!& over your own allies much?

I know you're in STA and not NpO, but this is ironic, I'm very sorry to say. Not that I don't agree with the war, but Polar kinda did that with Rok. (And not that I don't agree with screwing over Rok either, heheh.)

[The FSM]

To be fair, the forums have been down for a couple days, so this timing may have been the best they could do.

Indeed they have been. But if this treaty does nothing to alter Vanguard's political orientation as previous posters have said (because Vanguard was already treatied with iFOK) then Vanguard could have avoided the fallout of this announcement and still fought with their friends through existing treaties if only they had waited until after the conflict was over. The fact they felt the need to get this announcement in now makes me think there is an ulterior motive.

[Alekhine]

Indeed they have been. But if this treaty does nothing to alter Vanguard's political orientation as previous posters have said (because Vanguard was already treatied with iFOK) then Vanguard could have avoided the fallout of this announcement and still fought with their friends through existing treaties if only they had waited until after the conflict was over. The fact they felt the need to get this announcement in now makes me think there is an ulterior motive.

Maybe they felt that since they signed the treaty, they should announce it? The timing is kinda poor, but if you actually have the treaty signed, you might as well announce it.

[omfghi2u2]

Indeed they have been. But if this treaty does nothing to alter Vanguard's political orientation as previous posters have said (because Vanguard was already treatied with iFOK) then Vanguard could have avoided the fallout of this announcement and still fought with their friends through existing treaties if only they had waited until after the conflict was over. The fact they felt the need to get this announcement in now makes me think there is an ulterior motive.

You mean Vanguard was allied to SLCB. Just pointing that out now.

And I agree 100% with all the statements that had been said by this man. Could not have worded my sentiments any better.

-omfg

[kriekfreak]

You folks really need to work on your timing then. If this treaty really has been in the works as you say than I expect you would have told Vanguard ahead of time that you were going to be activating your treaty with FOK and thus getting involved in this war so that they could avoid posting the treaty at the worst possible time and incurring a sizable blow to their standing among alliances. If Vanguard was already treaties to Stickmen (in essence) through their MDoAP with your own alliance, Kriekfreak, then Vanguard really would not have needed to announce this treaty before the war started because, as many people here are saying, it would not have changed the nature of their involvement in this conflict (which is something I also dispute).

If you are communicating on a level that that is commensurate with the treaty that was just announced, and if this treaty is really as moot (in regards to Vanguards involvement in this war) as people say it is, then Vanguard could have quite easily have announced it before your bloc declared or, if time was not permitting, after hostilities had ended.

Yet here we are and Vanguard has posted neither before nor after the war, but during. Which means something is not quite right in the Vanguard-Stickmen relationship. Either Stickmen is not communicating on a level commensurate with an MDoAP treaty with Vanguard, or this treaty was necessary for Vanguard to be properly aligned in this war.

I'll agree that the timing was a bit off, but that doesn't change the fact that this announcement was coming one way or another. Does it really matter if they announced this before our DoW or after? The outcome will stay the same, regardless.

In the end, we don't give a !@#$ about what people think of this. We are all sovereign alliances that can make up their own minds when to announce a treaty. We are not here to satisfy the masses. That will be all.

[Marty McFly]

Xiphiosis, I await your response my post about your shake-down comment.

[The FSM]

Maybe they felt that since they signed the treaty, they should announce it? The timing is kinda poor, but if you actually have the treaty signed, you might as well announce it.

If waiting until after the conflict has ended is a perfectly acceptable alternative (many alliances do hold off on announcing treaties if they are agreed to shortly before or during a war) and doing so will avoid you being seen in the eyes of a broad swath of this community as blatant opportunists then I would hold off on announcing.

However, that is just the way I conduct foreign affairs and by no means do I expect all alliances to do things the same way I do.

[Alekhine]

If waiting until after the conflict has ended is a perfectly acceptable alternative (many alliances do hold off on announcing treaties if they are agreed to shortly before or during a war) and doing so will avoid you being seen in the eyes of a broad swath of this community as blatant opportunists then I would hold off on announcing.

However, that is just the way I conduct foreign affairs and by no means do I expect all alliances to do things the same way I do.

Unless Vanguard uses this particular treaty as a way into the conflict, or as justification not to follow some other treaty, then I don't think that the opportunist label really would apply. If Vanguard does use this treaty to enter, then I will agree with everyone and say that they were opportunistic. However, I'll trust Rafa when he said that that won't be the case.

[Zombie Glaucon]

You come to the hood, you best be ready.

Weird Al?

[Denial]

Alright, gentlemen, let's clear up a few misunderstandings. Firstly, Vanguard has held a MDOAP with SLCB for quite some time, and were there protectors prior to that. Vanguard did not need additional treaties with iFOK and FCO if we wished to enter any conflict on the side of Stickmen. The fact of the matter is that there has been a mutual and concerted effort between the signatory alliances to further develop relations for many months now. In fact, one of the last goals I set for Vanguard in the foreign policy arena, prior to my retirement, was to strengthen our friendship between ourselves and iFOK and FCO. Rafa Nadal, Pocho, Stumpy, our diplomatic body, and myself have worked assiduously towards fulfilling this goal; the announcement of this four-way treaty can be viewed as these efforts reaching fruition. Yes, this treaty has been released to the public on the eve of a major conflict, yet this has more to do with the fact that lines of communication have been down for quite some time than any war-time concerns. As mentioned previously, ties to FCO and iFOK were in no way necessary if we wished to enter this conflict on their side. Hell, as Polar valiantly displayed, you apparently do not need a casus belli or any form of legal pathway to enter warfare.

Secondly, Vanguard holds the Siberian Tiger Alliance in extremely high regard. Despite my retirement, I regularly converse with STA government members, and consider them amongst our closest friends and allies. All of us are extremely disappointed that Vanguard and STA may fall on opposite sides in this conflict, yet just as Vanguard understands that STA maintains certain foreign ties outside of the Vanguard-STA relationship, we hope that STA can acknowledge that Vanguard too holds many other foreign ties and close friendships that must be taken into account before reaching any decision. Despite our admiration for Polaris as a whole, it is no secret that Vanguard strongly disagrees with Polar's recent actions, and generally cannot agree with many of the opinions held or ludicrous threats issued by their Emperor. Furthermore, Vanguard's opinion on technology raiding is well known; we would much rather see the practice abandoned throughout the Cyberverse. However, attacking an alliance with a flagrant disregard for the ties that alliance holds and the ensuing implications for countless alliances is not the way to rid the Cyberverse of the abhorrent process of technology raiding. Rather, this will only strengthen the resolve of technology raiders; it is counter-intuitive. Polaris attacked \m/, a treaty partner of its own ally, Ragnarok. Ragnarok is also a direct MDOAP partner of Vanguard's. Poison Clan, another ally of \m/, is closely tied with Complaints & Grievances through additional MDOAPs. FOK, long-time friends and war-time allies of Vanguard entered the fray, as did Stickmen, who we were already closely aligned with. You see, the problem here is that Polar never came to the entirety of Complaints & Grievances, calmly stated its case, and requested our assistance. Rather, through their belligerence, Polaris demanded our compliance, to the point of forsaking many of our allies. That is something that C&G, particularly Vanguard, will not let stand. In fact, such behaviour will only intensify our eventual response. Not to mention that C&G has only recently been on the receiving end of Grub's threats, despite the fact that Mushroom Kingdom and Greenland Republic are their allies. If Polar, and by extention STA, expects more support during times of war, perhaps they should work more effectively towards improving the manner in which Polar treats its allies in times of peace.

[Xiphosis]

Xiphosis, I await your response my post about your shake-down comment.

This is twice now that NpO has come in after a situation was resolved to demand the alliance prostrate themselves and pay reparations to the assailed party "or else." The world police suit looks good on you, but the timing was all wrong.

[omfghi2u2]

I understand that you admit that the timing was bad, but you even acknowledged that you can enter this war through SCLB. Well why not and wait till after the war is over? What difference would it make if you announced this after since you could still enter regardless? Maybe I missed this? My reading skills be no good.

-omfg

[Xiphosis]

Well why not and wait till after the war is over?

War shouldn't really dictate treaty announcements. It's not the traditional move, but then traditionally people waited until they had valid and solid reasons to attack people, so I suppose this generation is just throwing convention right out the window.

Edit: And actually, had Vanguard or Stickmen started it all I'd probably be outraged. That is poor show, but just because NpO went off and pulled a petulant move doesn't mean we all have to DROP EVERYTHING.

Edited January 25, 2010 by Xiphosis

[Jyrinx]

Alright, gentlemen, let's clear up a few misunderstandings. Firstly, Vanguard has held a MDOAP with SLCB for quite some time, and were there protectors prior to that. Vanguard did not need additional treaties with iFOK and FCO if we wished to enter any conflict on the side of Stickmen. The fact of the matter is that there has been a mutual and concerted effort between the signatory alliances to further develop relations for many months now. In fact, one of the last goals I set for Vanguard in the foreign policy arena, prior to my retirement, was to strengthen our friendship between ourselves and iFOK and FCO. Rafa Nadal, Pocho, Stumpy, our diplomatic body, and myself have worked assiduously towards fulfilling this goal; the announcement of this four-way treaty can be viewed as these efforts reaching fruition. Yes, this treaty has been released to the public on the eve of a major conflict, yet this has more to do with the fact that lines of communication have been down for quite some time than any war-time concerns. As mentioned previously, ties to FCO and iFOK were in no way necessary if we wished to enter this conflict on their side. Hell, as Polar valiantly displayed, you apparently do not need a casus belli or any form of legal pathway to enter warfare.

The last line wasn't really necessary and was just an unnecessary jab at Polar, but point taken regardless: this was in the works for a while and was a major foreign policy goal. Yet, did it really not occur to anyone in Vanguard that allying a bloc that just attacked our MDoAP partner would be something that STA would like some warning of? Our membership is quite angry, and I have very little to tell them because I had no warning of this at all.

Secondly, Vanguard holds the Siberian Tiger Alliance in extremely high regard. Despite my retirement, I regularly converse with STA government members, and consider them amongst our closest friends and allies. All of us are extremely disappointed that Vanguard and STA may fall on opposite sides in this conflict, yet just as Vanguard understands that STA maintains certain foreign ties outside of the Vanguard-STA relationship, we hope that STA can acknowledge that Vanguard too holds many other foreign ties and close friendships that must be taken into account before reaching any decision.

Indeed, we understand. We fully knew that Vanguard and MK may not be able to aid us during this war. And you know what, that's perfectly fine. You guys are in a tight spot and we get that. We've had a great relationship as alliances and we respect you as well. That said, while we knew you may end up not being able to help us, we didn't think you'd go out and ally alliances basically as they attacked Polar.

Despite our admiration for Polaris as a whole, it is no secret that Vanguard strongly disagrees with Polar's recent actions, and generally cannot agree with many of the opinions held or ludicrous threats issued by their Emperor. Furthermore, Vanguard's opinion on technology raiding is well known; we would much rather see the practice abandoned throughout the Cyberverse. However, attacking an alliance with a flagrant disregard for the ties that alliance holds and the ensuing implications for countless alliances is not the way to rid the Cyberverse of the abhorrent process of technology raiding. Rather, this will only strengthen the resolve of technology raiders; it is counter-intuitive. Polaris attacked \m/, a treaty partner of its own ally, Ragnarok. Ragnarok is also a direct MDOAP partner of Vanguard's. Poison Clan, another ally of \m/, is closely tied with Complaints & Grievances through additional MDOAPs. FOK, long-time friends and war-time allies of Vanguard entered the fray, as did Stickmen, who we were already closely aligned with. You see, the problem here is that Polar never came to the entirety of Complaints & Grievances, calmly stated its case, and requested our assistance. Rather, through their belligerence, Polaris demanded our compliance, to the point of forsaking many of our allies. That is something that C&G, particularly Vanguard, will not let stand. In fact, such behaviour will only intensify our eventual response. Not to mention that C&G has only recently been on the receiving end of Grub's threats, despite the fact that Mushroom Kingdom and Greenland Republic are their allies. If Polar, and by extention STA, expects more support during times of war, perhaps they should work more effectively towards improving the manner in which Polar treats its allies in times of peace.

I would like to note STA has not taken any official stance on the CB Polar used for the war. I would also like to note STA is not NpO. Truth be told, we didn't expect anything in the sense of military support from Vanguard or MK because we know how crappy the situation is for you and all of CnG.

Meh, at the end of the day you guys are a sovereign alliance and you don't have an obligation to inform us of who you're allying. But in the extraordinary circumstances that have manifested themselves here, did it really not occur to at least notify us?

Edited January 25, 2010 by Jyrinx

[Zombie Glaucon]

War shouldn't really dictate treaty announcements. It's not the traditional move, but then traditionally people waited until they had valid and solid reasons to attack people, so I suppose this generation is just throwing convention right out the window.

Edit: And actually, had Vanguard or Stickmen started it all I'd probably be outraged. That is poor show, but just because NpO went off and pulled a petulant move doesn't mean we all have to DROP EVERYTHING.

DROP EVERYTHING is equivalent to putting things on hold for a couple of weeks?