Iron Supplements

[pasquali]

This brings me no pleasure - I have always considered Gramlins to be friends of the highest caliber, and I have fought alongside them in the past (ironically enough, against IRON).

However, just because they (along with a large majority of Planet Bob) have no use or respect for treaties does not mean Old Guard feels the same way. It is entirely within their soveriegn rights to attack whoever they want for whatever reason they want. Old Guard, however, gave their word in a treaty that they would defend IRON against unprovoked attacks, and we take our word very seriously. The Gramlins attack was not triggered by any similar mutual defense agreement. IRON did not attack Gramlins, nor any identifiable Gramlins ally (namely MHA), so there was no provocation. Therefore, Gramlins chose to attack IRON aggressively, much as IRON chose to attack C&G aggressively.

Whether we agree with the larger war or not, whether we like Gramlins or not, whether we get pounded into dust or not, we take our words and our treaties seriously.

To my opponents - I would gladly help rebuild you when the dust settles. For now, though, I will do my absolute best to turn your nations into parking lots.

War is hell.

[AvengingAngel256]

[quote name='pasquali' date='03 February 2010 - 10:40 AM' timestamp='1265211635' post='2156587']
This brings me no pleasure - I have always considered Gramlins to be friends of the highest caliber, and I have fought alongside them in the past (ironically enough, against IRON).

However, just because they (along with a large majority of Planet Bob) have no use or respect for treaties does not mean Old Guard feels the same way. It is entirely within their soveriegn rights to attack whoever they want for whatever reason they want. Old Guard, however, gave their word in a treaty that they would defend IRON against unprovoked attacks, and we take our word very seriously. The Gramlins attack was not triggered by any similar mutual defense agreement. IRON did not attack Gramlins, nor any identifiable Gramlins ally (namely MHA), so there was no provocation. Therefore, Gramlins chose to attack IRON aggressively, much as IRON chose to attack C&G aggressively.

Whether we agree with the larger war or not, whether we like Gramlins or not, whether we get pounded into dust or not, we take our words and our treaties seriously.

To my opponents - I would gladly help rebuild you when the dust settles. For now, though, I will do my absolute best to turn your nations into parking lots.

War is hell.
[/quote]

I think you're mistaking the Gramlins move to a paperless system for disrespect for treaties. Am I getting that right? Well... No. I'll just let you know, Gramlins respect treaties, but what they respect more is friendship. Their friendship with MK is their treaty. Their Friendship with MK is the CB for their declaration in defending MK from their agressor.

[Sephiroth]

[quote name='AvengingAngel256' date='03 February 2010 - 10:17 AM' timestamp='1265210260' post='2156550']
SO the Harmlin declaration on IRON was in defense of MK, Not an Agressive War.
[/quote]
Does it really matter? You consider your war with IRON defensive because they declared on MK (who are friends with an ally of yours), but the reality is they didn't declare on you or your ally, so its really not. If you want to declare on OG then do so, but I don't think Gremlins care about aggressive/defensive war arguments.

I think Steelrat has the right attitude over this war,

[quote name='Steelrat' date='03 February 2010 - 01:31 AM' timestamp='1265178689' post='2155795']
Thx OG and hell yes

I thought i won´t get any more targets and have to stick with Bubbler, now i´m happy. See you on the other side, have fun.
[/quote]

So Have Fun, Peace is a Lie.

[pasquali]

Trust me - I get it. But there's gonna have to be something a tad less nebulous than friendship to change the facts of the matter. As it stands, there is no way Old Guard could not come to the defense of IRON even if we wanted to sit it out. Treaties have a definite beginning and a definite end, and they can be kept track of and referenced as needed. Friendship, laudable as it is, cannot.

These are the risks and drawbacks of a paperless system. That's how Gramlins wanted it, and this is the instantly obvious result.

[Thorgrum]

[quote name='pasquali' date='03 February 2010 - 03:40 PM' timestamp='1265211635' post='2156587']
However, just because they (along with a large majority of Planet Bob) have no use or respect for treaties does not mean Old Guard feels the same way.[/quote]

We have respect for treaties, absolutely we just dont feel they are necessary to represent friendship we have with other alliances. You somewhat get the gist of it at this point in your post...

[quote]It is entirely within their soveriegn rights to attack whoever they want for whatever reason they want. [/quote]

Yes, we attack people who attack our friends, unlike you (it seems) we dont need a piece of paper to justify that action. Apparantly, you do as evidenced by your comments here.

[quote]Old Guard, however, gave their word in a treaty that they would defend IRON against unprovoked attacks, and we take our word very seriously. The Gramlins attack was not triggered by any similar mutual defense agreement.[/quote]

We understand some alliances dont have the ability to look at things differently and or try a new path forward. Its an honor to meet an alliance who takes thier word seriously, as do we, perhaps when this is over you will consider the necessity to codify your word, should be enough just to give it in my view particularly for an honorable alliance like OG.

[quote]IRON did not attack Gramlins, nor any identifiable Gramlins ally (namely MHA), so there was no provocation. Therefore, Gramlins chose to attack IRON aggressively, much as IRON chose to attack C&G aggressively.[/quote]

In your paper treaty world yes that would be correct. I dont know how much you come here (dont see many OG around) but Gramlins no longer needs a paper treaty to defend thier friends when they are attacked. The basis for your argument would apply if the same principal of conduct were adhered to by all parties. It isnt, Gramlins dosent treaty any longer we defend our friends when they are attacked for no just cause.

[quote]To my opponents - I would gladly help rebuild you when the dust settles. For now, though, I will do my absolute best to turn your nations into parking lots.[/quote]

Thats noble and appreciated, im sure we will rebuild just fine. I would urge you to apply the resources, material and otherwise to the consideration of your paper treaties and if you want to be allied to people who attack preemptively as aggressors.

Good luck on the battle field.

[mrniice]

[quote name='Sigrun Vapneir' date='03 February 2010 - 10:25 AM' timestamp='1265210731' post='2156563']
Uhh IRON attacked MK. Everyone knows MK and Gre are tight. So Gre hit IRON. MHA helps Gre. Your point is not only flacid it is uninformed and factually incorrect.
[/quote]

Just because you are tight doesn't make it legally a defensive war.

I was in the Citadel's inner circle when (DAC)Syzygy, who is interestingly not in Gre any more, debated the merits of a paperless world. While laudable, it makes every war you enter one of aggression.

[Thorgrum]

[quote name='MrNiice' date='03 February 2010 - 04:07 PM' timestamp='1265213247' post='2156633']
Just because you are tight doesn't make it legally a defensive war.

I was in the Citadel's inner circle when (DAC)Syzygy, who is interestingly not in Gre any more, debated the merits of a paperless world. While laudable, it makes every war you enter one of aggression.
[/quote]

Please define "legally" as applied to your comment, the GRE decleration and the counter from OG. Better yet, let me ask you a question old friend, do you believe the prescence of an agreed treaty is the sole basis for an alliance making a legal, or illegal action?

[Saber]

I have to say that Gremlins should stop being upset that not everyone sees their paperless treaties as real treaties. I know I told you not everyone will see it your way. It was your decision, don't complain when people use it to enter against you.

[Saber]

[quote name='Thorgrum' date='03 February 2010 - 05:10 PM' timestamp='1265213426' post='2156640']
Please define "legally" as applied to your comment, the GRE decleration and the counter from OG. Better yet, let me ask you a question old friend, do you believe the prescence of an agreed treaty is the sole basis for an alliance making a legal, or illegal action?
[/quote]
From a legal standpoint it's not a defensive war. (Gre's war against IRON)

[Thorgrum]

[quote name='Saber' date='03 February 2010 - 04:13 PM' timestamp='1265213582' post='2156645']
I have to say that Gremlins should stop being upset that not everyone sees their paperless treaties as real treaties. I know I told you not everyone will see it your way. It was your decision, don't complain when people use it to enter against you.
[/quote]

Im not upset in the least and no one is complaining that I can see Saber, we are having a civil chat and here you come to muck it up. This isnt citadel man

Hope all is well with you though, nice mess you got us all into.

[Thorgrum]

[quote name='Saber' date='03 February 2010 - 04:13 PM' timestamp='1265213629' post='2156647']
From a legal standpoint it's not a defensive war. (Gre's war against IRON)
[/quote]

You didnt define legal.

I'll help... From Irons DOW

[quote]<Lando[Athens]> well guys.
<Londo[Athens]> don't dissapoint me.


<Londo[Athens]> when I wake up I expect to see a DoW.

<Londo[Athens]> THE TROLLING WILL CONTINUE

<Londo[Athens]> UNTIL IRON ACTUALLY DOWS


ask and you shall recieve, to further improve community standards, fight trolling, IRON and DAWN hereby declare war against CnG[/quote]

They declared on CnG, we have friends in CnG and defended them, Iron is the aggressor in this instance.

[Lackistan]

[quote name='Saber' date='03 February 2010 - 04:13 PM' timestamp='1265213582' post='2156645']
I have to say that Gremlins should stop being upset that not everyone sees their paperless treaties as real treaties. I know I told you not everyone will see it your way. It was your decision, don't complain when people use it to enter against you.
[/quote]
I do not see Gremlins complaining about OG declaring on them. I see a few cheering it on, even.

That said, while this paperless treaty thing is all well and good and idealistic and a long time coming, it is still in a paper treaty world. Though it's not like this exact same discussion wouldn't have occurred if a treaty did exist.

[Saber]

[quote name='Thorgrum' date='03 February 2010 - 05:18 PM' timestamp='1265213926' post='2156657']
You didnt define legal.

I'll help... From Irons DOW



They declared on CnG, we have friends in CnG and defended them, Iron is the aggressor in this instance.
[/quote]
I'll help.

[b]From a legal standpoint Gremlins declaration on IRON is not defensive. [/b]

At least legal standpoint most of the world agrees with, including TOP and Old Guard. Your declaration is legal, there is nothing banning anyone from attacking another alliance (unless your charter bans or similar) but it is not defensive. There is a big difference.

You can see it as defensive activation but don't expect rest of the world just to fall in line with your new radical FA perspective where you don't need treaties for anything. You didn't see TOP complaining in CnG allies DoWs of activation. I suggest you do the same and just hand us our @#$% on the battlefield.

EDIT: Perhaps replace "complaining" with "trying to convince everyone of their paperless idea". For me it looks the same. OG said they don't recognize it, I'd agree with them and I doubt I'm the only one.

Edited February 3, 2010 by Saber

[pasquali]

[quote name='Thorgrum' date='03 February 2010 - 10:59 AM' timestamp='1265212774' post='2156622']


In your paper treaty world yes that would be correct. I dont know how much you come here (dont see many OG around) but Gramlins no longer needs a paper treaty to defend thier friends when they are attacked. The basis for your argument would apply if the same principal of conduct were adhered to by all parties. It isnt, Gramlins dosent treaty any longer we defend our friends when they are attacked for no just cause.


[/quote]

I come here several times a day, and in fact I commented at the time when Gramlins announced their new direction. I remember well discussions about the concept long ago in Citadel. Although I don't speak often, I am well informed on both the history and current events of Planet Bob.

Gramlins do not need to justify their actions according to the dictates of the rest of the world, and I fully respect that brave new direction. However, the rest of the world does not play by those rules, and this is the the natural consequence of the chosen path. I accept that your friends were attacked for no just cause, and I laud your willingness to do what you feel is right. But merely because you have made new rules for yourselves does not mean we are obligated to accept them for ourselves. We respond the same to you as we would any other alliance.

[Thorgrum]

[quote name='Saber' date='03 February 2010 - 04:26 PM' timestamp='1265214362' post='2156669']
At least legal standpoint most of the world agrees with,[/quote]

We can agree on this point then, but no where in thier decleration did they specify it was in defense of anyone they attacked aggressively a bloc that included friends and former "legal" allies. You know this Saber no amount of E lawyering can change the wording of the IRON dow on CnG.


[quote] You didn't see TOP complaining in CnG allies DoWs of activation. I suggest you do the same and just hand us our @#$% on the battlefield.
[/quote]

I dont see anyone at GRE complaining cant speak for the CnG block Saber. I think it would be a very hard sell internally to declare on TOP while we fought a lot we still have a relationship with you guys (bar specific personalities) but since you are the aggressors in this war Saber ( I dont need to repost TOP's DOW do I?) then if you wanted GRE on the battlefield you could have simply declared on us.

EDIT: I posted before your Edit Saber, fair point.

Edited February 3, 2010 by Thorgrum

[Bob Janova]

Just because IRON entered aggressively (which I don't think anyone would argue with) does not mean that any war on them is automatically defensive. The legal definition of defensive used in most non-chaining treaties is effectively 'mandated by treaty', and by ditching all your treaties you made sure that by the legalities of most alliances, everything you do cannot be considered defensive. In a coalition war that is sometimes extended to 'mandanted by treaty to enter somewhere on this side', but that still wasn't the case.

(e: typo)

Edited February 3, 2010 by Bob Janova

[Thorgrum]

[quote name='Bob Janova' date='03 February 2010 - 04:50 PM' timestamp='1265215820' post='2156699']
Just because IRON entered aggressively (which I don't think anyone would argue with) does not mean that any war on them is automatically defensive. The legal definition of defensive used in most non-chaining treaties is effectively 'mandated by treaty', and by ditching all your treaties you made sure that by the legalities of most alliances, everything you do cannot be considered defensive. In a coalition war that is sometimes extended to 'mandanted by treaty to enter somewhere on this side', but that still wasn't the case.

(e: typo)
[/quote]

I cant argue with that logic, when the logic is based on specific legalities of treaties. It just happens to no longer apply to GRE but Saber's point is fair just because we roll this way now we cant expect everyone to simply accept it and apply it universally. However, we all agree Iron is the aggressor, so can we say Gre aggressively defended thier friends in CnG? Compramise is a good thing no?

[pasquali]

Heheheh - I'll absolutely buy that. Cheers!

[Omas Nams]

Best of luck to our old friends in OG. Best of luck on the battlefield

(Also, other discussions in this thread are pointless, and slightly annoying.)

[Fine Arts]

Yes, best of luck to our old Grämlin friends.

[Buds The Man]

Wow so much fun in one thread ill have to limit my self to good luck OG this couldnt have been easy for you.

Boy ill tell you what teh more i see the more Super Complainers seems to fit.

o/ OG have some fun.

[TsarN]

Seriously? OG is attacking us? Wow what complete trash they have turned into.

[Sephiroth]

[quote name='TsarN' date='03 February 2010 - 02:36 PM' timestamp='1265225789' post='2156926']
Seriously? OG is attacking us? Wow what complete trash they have turned into.
[/quote]
You declare on their ally then call them trash for honoring their treaty, not what I'd expect from a Gremlin.

[tobiash]

[quote name='TsarN' date='03 February 2010 - 08:36 PM' timestamp='1265225789' post='2156926']
Seriously? OG is attacking us? Wow what complete trash they have turned into.
[/quote]

That's what happen when you attack a MD-allied of ours as aggressor.

[Thorgrum]

[quote name='tobiash' date='03 February 2010 - 07:49 PM' timestamp='1265226587' post='2156942']
That's what happen when you attack a MD-allied of ours as aggressor.
[/quote]

I dont share TsarN's personal opinion of OG, Im certainly not a picture of civility at times but your side seems to keep trying to slip in the word "aggressor" in relation to GRE. I hate to break it to you and yours again but you are following IRON as aggressors. We are defending friends mate, I posted the Iron DOW its very clear not sure why there is continued confusion other then we dont have treaties.

That fact aside dosent negate the intent of the GRE action as expressed here:

[quote]Ladies and Gentlemen of Bob,

It is time for the Harmlin to enter this fray. [b]IRON and their minions have brought untoward aggression against our friends and the Harmlins shall see our way in to protect them.[/b] We are prepared to stand and fight among our many friends as they stand and fight for theirs.

With that said, Harmlins have their towels ready and hereby declare war on IRON.

Signed for MHA:
Jadoo1989 - Triumvir
Draden - Triumvir
Pudge1975 - Triumvir

Signed for GRE:
RamirusMaximus - Judicator
Synth_FG - Executor
Matthew PK - Acting Praetor [/quote]

I bolded the relevant part that address GRE intent, we came in to defend friends based on the IRON aggressive DOW. no amount of e lawyering can change that sadly so the sooner you all accept you are the aggressor here (not a new concept for you all at OG and IRON) the sooner we can get to the end game, what ever that maybe.