Iron Supplements

[Boondock]

Best of luck guys. I know it'll be fun and interesting. Even if I can't hit any of you guys!

[tobiash]

[quote name='Thorgrum' date='03 February 2010 - 09:00 PM' timestamp='1265227229' post='2156949']
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. [/quote]

I am sorry, if I came of as un-civil. I only intented to state the 'fact', that OG will defend any MD-allied from what we perceive as an agressive attack. You might have attacked to help a friend, but since we do not share you view on the paper-less world, we can only perceive your attack as an aggressive act.


[quote name='Thorgrum' date='03 February 2010 - 09:00 PM' timestamp='1265227229' post='2156949']
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.
[/quote]

"The road to hell is paved with good intentions."

I am sure that you had the best intentions, when you declared on IRON. But we standby our MD-allieds no matter what! That is why these allieds do not have a ODP treaty with us.
As for your statement about us (OG) being the agressors for defending our allied, I can only say that it looks like very few other people shares our view.

[Saber]

[quote name='Thorgrum' date='03 February 2010 - 06:04 PM' timestamp='1265216690' post='2156723']
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?
[/quote]
Yes, we can agree on that.

[Kzoppistan]

I checked the wiki but maybe it's not up to date or maybe I missed something. Thorgrum, what treaties do Harmlins have with the members of CnG? Knowing that would alleviate my confusion at the moment.

[quote name='AvengingAngel256' date='03 February 2010 - 11:47 AM' timestamp='1265212060' post='2156598']
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.
[/quote]

If that is the answer, then there isn't a treaty. That being the case, GRE's action is an aggressive one.

You asked some one earlier how to define legal, an especially difficult thing to do in a world where the proper code of conduct is often in debate by parties who do not constitute an overwhelming majority. But I'll venture a tentative answer, one that harkens back to the beginning of any legal theory: precedent, an agreement of the majority, and the right of arms to enforce it.

For a long time now, e-paper has been the standard to determine obligations between two alliances. It has been a generally accepted premise that those that enter in defense of another are viewed as being less an offending party to the target of the attacks in question. The reasoning behind this is that the penalties, should the defender be defeated, should be less in order to encourage every alliance on Bob to defend their allies should occasion arise. To some degree, it is a privileged position, and the precedent has been set with the view that it benefits all. To keep people from abusing that privilege, a system of codified treaties existed, and exists, in order to prove that they do indeed deserve that privilege in the event of defending their ally. Otherwise, [b]anyone[/b] could claim to be defending their friends, but going on only word of mouth, the issue becomes murky. So e-paper exists to make proof.

Without it, one does not have the right to receive the privilege of lesser penalties. Many bandwagoners have been punished to establish this precedent.

All that said, two points remain: one, it is undeniable that we're seeing a shift in what is viewed as proper conduct. Should Harmlins not only "win" this engagement, but also survive the consequences of changing a world into one where anyone can attack another and call it defense, so provided there is some sort of established bond between them, then the precedent will be changed for as long as it can be maintained. Two, none of this really matters in this case should white peace be accepted by all parties. Since no punishment nor reward will be lavished by those that have broken the precedent, in which case one emerging paradigm is stalemated against the other.

Personally, I'm not into e-lawyering and am just looking forward to a good fight. I think we can all agree on that.

Edited February 3, 2010 by Kzoppistan

[Harry Dresden]

Okay, that's enough discussing who did and did not have a treaty and whether you can have a treaty without a document. Any more posts on that note will be seen as derailing and subsequently warned.

[Zangmonkey]

As OG stated, they were absolved from military responsibility. I am proud of them for committing their forces regardless of it.

Regardless of one's view of the sides; I hope we can all appreciate to merit of two parties willingly conflict not by a treaty obligation but by a moral obligation.

This is not a derailment, it is a hail.

Edited February 3, 2010 by Matthew PK

[Kzoppistan]

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='03 February 2010 - 06:15 PM' timestamp='1265235355' post='2157237']
As OG stated, they were absolved from military responsibility. I am proud of them for committing their forces regardless of it.

Regardless of one's view of the sides; I hope we can all appreciate to merit of two parties willingly conflict not by a treaty obligation but by a moral obligation.

This is not a derailment, it is a hail.
[/quote]

Well said, Mathew PK.

Glory in battle for all! o/

[Thorgrum]

[quote name='tobiash' date='03 February 2010 - 08:42 PM' timestamp='1265229757' post='2157041']
I am sorry, if I came of as un-civil. I only intented to state the 'fact', that OG will defend any MD-allied from what we perceive as an agressive attack. You might have attacked to help a friend, but since we do not share you view on the paper-less world, we can only perceive your attack as an aggressive act.[/quote]

Not need for apologies, Im an $@! but I have enough humility to admit it. You made the point of "perception" and while you and I share a different one, I think we can both agree we are in this fight for the right reasons. Helping friends.



[quote]"The road to hell is paved with good intentions."

I am sure that you had the best intentions, when you declared on IRON. But we standby our MD-allieds no matter what! That is why these allieds do not have a ODP treaty with us.
As for your statement about us (OG) being the agressors for defending our allied, I can only say that it looks like very few other people shares our view.[/quote]


At the end of all this I suspect the debate will rage as to whom was the aggressor, how it related to the NpO \M/ war etc and the gramlins OG battle will be a notable side story. Good luck in battle, when its over Im going to stop by and say hello to you all, I go by Odin on IRC.

EDIT: Removed some content [OOC] sorry to the mod I read it after I posted [OOC]

Edited February 4, 2010 by Thorgrum

[Ch33kY]

We ride to war becaue our allies have called upon us. We always support our allies in their time of need. But let this be a warning, do not take us for granted.

And to our opponents, do not think that we are weak because we seek an immediate fair and peaceful settlement to this ridiculous war. We fight with courage, honour and a whole lot of nukes. Nothing personal Gramlins. In this senseless war we are pitted against an alliance we thoroughly resepct. There are few wars where you can honestly say that. I hope you feel the same. See you on the battlefield.

Glory to the Old Guard!

Integrity. Stability. Tradition. And Nukes.

Edited February 4, 2010 by Ch33kY

[mrniice]

Note to all that I am removing myself from the field of battle.

[OOC] My 4 yr old son tripped on his blanket while bringing it down the stairs and broke his femur. I've spent the last 36 hours in the hospital with him while they operated on him to insert a titanium rod into his femur. I'm going to get some sleep and then go back to the hospital.[/OOC]

o/ OG
o/ Gremlins
o/ Mad Mike

[Kzoppistan]

Oh wow, sorry to hear that, that's horrible.

You and your son will be in my thoughts. Let's hope everything works out alright.

[Empress Theodora]

[OOC]real life and family first.. Hope all goes well{ooc]

I've personally contacted chill about this. WE hope an amiable solution for extricating this nation from the front lines can be achieved promptly.

[brickyard]

O/ OG

[Thorgrum]

[quote name='MrNiice' date='05 February 2010 - 01:44 AM' timestamp='1265334243' post='2159977']
Note to all that I am removing myself from the field of battle.

[OOC] My 4 yr old son tripped on his blanket while bringing it down the stairs and broke his femur. I've spent the last 36 hours in the hospital with him while they operated on him to insert a titanium rod into his femur. I'm going to get some sleep and then go back to the hospital.[/OOC]

o/ OG
o/ Gremlins
o/ Mad Mike
[/quote]

When you Ericus and Reyne came over to Argent I was very skeptical of all of you, that changed once I got to know you all as alliance mates. You are an exceptional person MrNiice while I dont like be lined up against you in this war I knew you would be a worthy foe and an honorable one as well. Good luck in the other world and I hope this matter can be resolved in a reasonable manner for all parties.

When matters clear do drop me a note I always enjoyed our chats.

[OOC] good luck Niice, with a great dad like you that kid will be running circles around you in no time. [OOC]

[arentak]

In all fairness, its ALWAYS subjective.

A attacks B.

B's friend C attacks A.

A's friend D attacks C.

Is C an aggressor?

Is D an aggressor?

Everyone answers however it fits their agenda, twisting the facts to proove their point.

Everyone manipulates things to try to be the defender.

I like these treaties that say "Hey, A likes C, C likes A, we roll together", and doesn't spell out subjective terms like attack and defense.

[eejack]

o/ Old Guard
o/ Zenith
o/ IRON

and o/ Grämlins - you guys are a lot of fun and been a pleasure to get blowed up by.

[Haflinger]

[quote name='Poobah' date='02 February 2010 - 11:49 PM' timestamp='1265172545' post='2154652']
You don't mean to come across this dense, do you?. I mean, it's not like Gremlins is twice the size of Old Guard in terms of the number of nations, plus closer to three times as big in terms of NS.

But hey, they lack testicular fortitude.
[/quote]
I wish you'd never left MHA. Things have gone down so far...