JT Jag Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 Counterpoint: Nothing about this war is fun. We need a catchy name for this war, and "Unjust War II" is just uncreative and inaccurate. And it's not "The Just War" because neither side is just.How about "World War Lame"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TehChron Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 I have no opinion on your stance in regards to this conflict, but I do applaud your application of the spirit of treaties. You're already catching some flak over it and I'm sure that will continue, but that is mostly from those that don't understand what a treaty is supposed to mean. I'd hope you would take some time to reevaluate your treaties. If you have to put words to a relationship it's not a friendship, it's a contract. This move shows you are beyond contracts. In any case, good show. Regardless of the move itself, I'm infuriated by the double standards being shown by a lot of folks here. I recall quite vividly that many of them threw a lot of crap at the ODN for doing something very similar.What hypocrisy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 Counter-counter point: For anyone who has allies on different sides, yeah. True. NEW does not suffer from that problem as far as I can tell. Quite possibly WAPA could end up on the other side due to their treaty with TGE. If that ends up being the case, then NEW has allies on different sides, and NEW goes D: I agree with your point besides that though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D34th Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 I have no opinion on your stance in regards to this conflict, but I do applaud your application of the spirit of treaties. You're already catching some flak over it and I'm sure that will continue, but that is mostly from those that don't understand what a treaty is supposed to mean. I'd hope you would take some time to reevaluate your treaties. If you have to put words to a relationship it's not a friendship, it's a contract. This move shows you are beyond contracts. In any case, good show. If they don't like contracts, don't sign them like FAN do, but if they sign everyone expect them to follow it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earl Dumarest Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 Anyone who reads the OP as a Declaration Of Neutrality really ought to go and re-read it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jens of the desert Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 or oDoAPs. NEW. Sigh. Wars aren't entered due to the validity or invalidity of the CB. Or, not usually. Your mutual defense pacts don't come with disclaimers. They should... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Detlev Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 polar could take a lesson from NEW, and that lesson is don't be stupid. PS: thanks for kicking off a huge, useless war that nobody wants but you all to stroke your ridiculous sense of cybermorality, NpO. Well done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 Regardless of the move itself, I'm infuriated by the double standards being shown by a lot of folks here. I recall quite vividly that many of them threw a lot of crap at the ODN for doing something very similar. What hypocrisy. You only have to go back a few weeks and see the insults that were thrown around for people not being there within a few hours for an ally. The same people are applauding an alliance that is saying they will not stand by any ally who enters this war because they are duty bound even though NEW have treaties (their word of honour) stating they will defend their allies or attack with them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiss Goodbye Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 (edited) Anyone who reads the OP as a Declaration Of Neutrality really ought to go and re-read it! You know, you're right. I just read a little bit more carefully and realized that they only said they wouldn't support Polar's side. They didn't comment on whether they'd back you folks. Noted. Thanks for helping clarify that; I couldn't imagine NEW actually sitting out of a war. Edited January 25, 2010 by Kiss Goodbye Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
x Tela x Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 We believe we are all equal and a player should not have more say than the Admin Almighty Himself on how we should play this. Tell that to FoA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D34th Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 polar could take a lesson from NEW, and that lesson is don't be stupid. PS: thanks for kicking off a huge, useless war that nobody wants but you all to stroke your ridiculous sense of cybermorality, NpO. Well done. One more post of MK insulting us. Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kriekfreak Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 (edited) This decision must have been hard for you guys. I respect you for telling what's really on your mind instead of beating around the bush like most of us. I always have and always will count you as my friends and brothers in arms. Good luck, you will be needing it from all those haters. NEW Edited January 25, 2010 by kriekfreak Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hassman Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 Jesus guys, you are pouncing like a pair of ravaged dogs with zombie rabies, when an alliance says there going neutral respect it but don't cry about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 One more post of MK insulting us. Thanks. I laughed. No one takes detlev seriously. No one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merrie Melodies Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 One more post of MK insulting us. Thanks. It would appear Polaris has become infected with a horrible virus known as Treaty Deficit Disorder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derwood1 Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 So what you are trying to say is that some of your allies join the conflict in the Polaris's side you will not honor your treaties with them, this is a very honorable move Also this war isn't a "carefully orchestrated pseudo-morality crusade" we don't orchestrated the \m/ raid against FoA, we don't orchestrated \m/ members acting like idiots in private. We also stand for our belives and do not support coawards moves like bully the weak just because you can. But this expected comming from an alliance who behave like \m/. How I said yesterday, in war time you see where your allies stands, happily I'm not allied with such alliance. LOL they see through your thinly veiled aggression and unacceptable dealings in Bob affairs why would they help your cause? o/NEW! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JT Jag Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 Has anyone considered the possibility that NEW has intelligence that other allies of theirs may not be in the war yet but plan on entering it on the other side shortly, and NEW just doesn't want to fight their friends? This is a respectable stance imo, though I would suggest that in the future NEW avoid signing pacts as binding as this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scutterbug Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 One more post of MK insulting us. Thanks. Count me down for MHA insulting Polaris please? NEW I respect your position, the treaty web as it stands is very unforgiveable in most wars and many of us should take a step back and look at where our ties are. In this case neutrality/not defending Polaris is the best move. Polaris have as weak a CB as RoK/Athens did those couple weeks back and personally i want to see their cities burn to the ground! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dochartaigh Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 Hmm. A tough decision to make. For those of you boo-hooing, and those of you who are congratulating them simply because you are on the "opposite" side of the treaty web and want to see those not allied to you lose a pillar of support, I say you're both wrong and petty. Granted, a treaty is a important promise, and an obligation, but they are not built out of stone. They are adaptable to the circumstance. If those who are treatied with NEW are truly their friends, then they will have come to an understanding in private. Good friends can respect each others differences of opinion. Should there be a review of the type of treaty one holds with another should an occasion like this arise? Of course. Would I be a little disappointed in their decision. Yes. But I have much more respect for those that stand by their convictions than those who throw away those convictions simply because they are not shared with their friends. I would hope that all who are allied to, or closely linked, to consider any verbal attacks in bad form. Kzoppistan, if treaties were not built on stone, then that is only because they are the optional kind. the ones that obligate defense or aggression are well mandatory and thus, the groundwork they are laid upon is stone. This is just pathetic, i have never agreed that an alliance should ever back out of a treaty they signed. if they want that option then sign only optional treaties. if you wish to treat those optional treaties as if they are mandatory 99% of the time, then great. you still will have the leeway should that 1% chance you don't wish to honor the option should it come up. frankly, those who honored their treaties with \m/ and with PC are doing what they should. PC from what i heard, asked their allies to stay out of this war and yet they entered. hell i don't even like Stickmen at all but in this war, they are far better than NEW. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenex Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 (edited) Regardless of the move itself, I'm infuriated by the double standards being shown by a lot of folks here. I recall quite vividly that many of them threw a lot of crap at the ODN for doing something very similar. What hypocrisy. I am sorry but this has to be said.. QFT. I am surprised it took someone this long.. I remember someone mentioning that we were going to make a list of all the alliances that have done the exact same thing ODN has, but yet they are applauded for it when we were criticized. Edited January 25, 2010 by Lenex Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mpol777 Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 If they don't like contracts, don't sign them like FAN do, but if they sign everyone expect them to follow it. It is that expectation that makes the bastardized version of treaties used on planet Bob so worthless. Well, it's one of the things that make them worthless, but it's high on the list. This happens every war. People run around shaking pieces of paper, arguing about who was expected to do what. A good relationship is based on communication, not blind expectations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TehChron Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 It would appear Polaris has become infected with a horrible virus known as Treaty Deficit Disorder. Considering all the crap you've said about the ODN, you are full of !@#$. Get out. Seriously, you shameless hypocrite. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rsoxbronco1 Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 Tell that to FoA. Yeah, everyone knows that FoA asked for NpO's help. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheEraser Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 Nusantara Declaration Falsehood is never so successful as when she baits her hook with truth, and no opinions so fatally mislead us, as those that are not wholly wrong - Charles Caleb Colton Our stance about the current ongoing conflict had been conveyed in private to our allies, but we feel the need to announce it publicly. Nusantara will not lend a hand to help a nation's poor attempt to police the world, nor will Nusantara help defending any alliances who get attacked for trying to support this carefully orchestrated pseudo-morality crusade, directly or indirectly. We encourage our allies, alliances, and nation leaders of the world in general, to not put too much power on a single nation leader or you will be disappointed seeing that those powers you entrusted on him, being abused for satisfying personal ego and for settling down personal grudge, hidden under the false premise of restoring the moral of the community. We understand if you must enter the war on that side, it is your choice, but understand that we won't be with you this time. [ooc] We believe we are all equal and a player should not have more say than the Admin Almighty Himself on how we should play this. [/ooc] Have a Nice Day /s/ MahaPrabu - Cyrus0321 Mahapatih - gantanX so you just announced that you would dishonor your treaties and let your friends get attacked? thats pathetic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derwood1 Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 (edited) It is that expectation that makes the bastardized version of treaties used on planet Bob so worthless. Well, it's one of the things that make them worthless, but it's high on the list. This happens every war. People run around shaking pieces of paper, arguing about who was expected to do what. A good relationship is based on communication, not blind expectations. Now that is some good stuff right there Edited January 25, 2010 by Derwood1 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.