Jump to content

A Statement from the STA


Recommended Posts

[quote name='mhawk' date='03 February 2010 - 02:37 PM' timestamp='1265236656' post='2157283']
I couldn't stop a show that I wasn't running heinous. However I think at the point where you guys were well aware of the situation, moreso than I, it would have been a good time to state you'd join the other side if the attack happened instead of relaying that message. Either way what is done is done and very hard not to feel quite a bit of disappointment in this announcement.
[/quote]

We had to expressly state that we would do our best to defend our allies if they asked us to? Uhmm, isn't that the whole point of adding your signature at the end of the treaty? It kind of says you'll follow through on your word.

Also, at the time, we were involved in wars so I'm sure we weren't expecting to have the forces available to be able to fight iFOK/FCO/CSN AND TOP.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 324
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

[quote name='lakerzz8' date='03 February 2010 - 02:50 PM' timestamp='1265237444' post='2157317']
We had to expressly state that we would do our best to defend our allies if they asked us to? Uhmm, isn't that the whole point of adding your signature at the end of the treaty? It kind of says you'll follow through on your word.

Also, at the time, we were involved in wars so I'm sure we weren't expecting to have the forces available to be able to fight iFOK/FCO/CSN AND TOP.
[/quote]
Perhaps I'm expecting too much that if there is a large number of people preparing to risk it all to defend you and your allies, that something as critical as stating in no uncertain terms if they do what they told you, you'll likely attack them. I understand you are honoring a treaty and good for you guys. However please don't play it off as casual as it just happened randomly and you're a victim of circumstance. I'm pretty sure if STA had made it clear they'd leave the war and redeploy on the other side that someone planning that attack would have changed the game plan. As it is now we have a bunch of our friends that were working to help you and your allies going into the abyss of a hungry mob.

Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='mhawk' date='03 February 2010 - 06:05 PM' timestamp='1265238346' post='2157345']
Perhaps I'm expecting too much that if there is a large number of people preparing to risk it all to defend you and your allies, that something as critical as stating in no uncertain terms if they do what they told you, you'll likely attack them. I understand you are honoring a treaty and good for you guys. However please don't play it off as casual as it just happened randomly and you're a victim of circumstance. I'm pretty sure if STA had made it clear they'd leave the war and redeploy on the other side that someone planning that attack would have changed the game plan. As it is now we have a bunch of our friends that were working to help you and your allies going into the abyss of a hungry mob.
[/quote]
That's not the whole story though. We got out of the war because the ar\m/istice dropped the bottom out of our whole reason for being there. Had that not occurred we'd still be in there. I spent two days in :psyduck: mode without a clue what was going on. Once out of the war we had no option but to honor the treaty that had been activated by the unprovoked assault.

I know it's not much comfort to you, but I feel like !@#$ for leaving people who I was fighting alongside like this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='bzelger' date='03 February 2010 - 03:13 PM' timestamp='1265238800' post='2157356']
That's not the whole story though. We got out of the war because the ar\m/istice dropped the bottom out of our whole reason for being there. Had that not occurred we'd still be in there. I spent two days in :psyduck: mode without a clue what was going on. Once out of the war we had no option but to honor the treaty that had been activated by the unprovoked assault.

I know it's not much comfort to you, but I feel like !@#$ for leaving people who I was fighting alongside like this.
[/quote]
Then I'll leave it at that and hope to see that reflected sometime in the future :/

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure why our treaty with Stickmen was brought up. I said it would not be used at all in the war, and it wasn't. MK's official request for assistance has nothing to do with our Stickmen treaty.

Moving on, I appreciate STA's support, especially considering NpO's re-entry to the conflict.

Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='mhawk' date='03 February 2010 - 03:05 PM' timestamp='1265238346' post='2157345']
Perhaps I'm expecting too much that if there is a large number of people preparing to risk it all to defend you and your allies, that something as critical as stating in no uncertain terms if they do what they told you, you'll likely attack them. I understand you are honoring a treaty and good for you guys. However please don't play it off as casual as it just happened randomly and you're a victim of circumstance. I'm pretty sure if STA had made it clear they'd leave the war and redeploy on the other side that someone planning that attack would have changed the game plan. As it is now we have a bunch of our friends that were working to help you and your allies going into the abyss of a hungry mob.
[/quote]

Just curious, the attack on CnG would have predictabley brought in several thousand nations against those that attacked CnG. However, you say the plans would have changed if you had known the 150 nations of the STA would also be added to that list?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I see a lot of folks on both sides, [i]regardless of those sides being acknowledged or not[/i], hailing or booing this decision, and the folks that are not are espousing pity at the unfortunate circumstances STA had been thrown into.

The only people who seem OK with it are those in Polar and NSO....which says quite a bit about those two alliances in my book.

As far as pity for STA, they put themselves in this position with the papers the decided to sign. They are grown ups and will have to deal with that.

Being closely connected to two alliances as connected as NpO and MK almost guarantees that at some point in time you will have conflicts. How and when those conflicts fall is any ones guess, seems to me STA did the only thing they could, regardless of BFFs.

Yea, it's disappointing but so were the Eagles this year, I'll live.

Now the stunt that MK pulled, by actually asking a treaty partner to render assistance....well what can you expect from filthy LUE scum like that. [img]http://forums.cybernations.net/public/style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif[/img]

Edited by JBone
Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='JBone' date='03 February 2010 - 03:33 PM' timestamp='1265240003' post='2157387']
I see a lot of folks on both sides, [i]regardless of those sides being acknowledged or not[/i], hailing or booing this decision, and the folks that are not are espousing pity at the unfortunate circumstances STA had been thrown into.

The only people who seem OK with it are those in Polar and NSO....which says quite a bit about those two alliances in my book.

As far as pity for STA, they put themselves in this position with the papers the decided to sign. They are grown ups and will have to deal with that.

Being closely connected to two alliances as connected as NpO and MK almost guarantees that at some point in time you will have conflicts. How and when those conflicts fall is any ones guess, seems to me STA did the only thing they could, regardless of BFFs.

[b]Yea, it's disappointing but so were the Eagles this year, I'll live.[/b]

Now the stunt that MK pulled, by actually asking a treaty partner to render assistance....well what can you expect from filthy LUE scum like that. [img]http://forums.cybernations.net/public/style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif[/img]
[/quote]
The problem was you had expectations for them. :P

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have different opinions on some of the things that are being implied etc, regardless of all that stuff, STA were in a tough situation before and have been put so again, Seeing your position, I'd guess you only had very uncomfortable scenarios to choose from, Good luck.

Edited by shahenshah
Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='Feanor Noldorin' date='03 February 2010 - 04:04 PM' timestamp='1265231061' post='2157096']
Your misunderstanding what I'm saying here. The reason we are "belittling" you is because of the attitudes many people on your side have of us. Notice how we are not hating on the people who are coming to your assistance. We fully understood that from a numbers perspective that you would have to call in alot of people to fight us and we knew that would happen.

The thing that [i]amuses[/i] us is that you guys (and others) have portrayed us, for a very long time, as an inflated alliance full of cowards and pushovers but yet you need so much help to even try and drag us down.
[/quote]

So what you just said is you have avoided every war you possibly could for the last 4 years just so you could attack C&G? Reputations don't change over night. Look at how long MK had to work to prove to you people that they were not LUE. Look at the work that Athens is currently making an attempt to do to prove they are not evil. Look at the long road ahead of GGA.

As much respect as you have gained for fighting this war, you can't duck the history that for 3 years you guys have weaseled out of anything that wasn't at least 4 v 1 odds in your favor. You want peoples respect, earn it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To our war time allies let me just say this, we at the New Polar Order knew this would likely happen and we are wishing them luck, the only thing that will happen by continuing to verbally assault our friends is to piss us off. I would recommend that you wish your respective allies luck and leave it at that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='frydchikn' date='03 February 2010 - 08:35 PM' timestamp='1265247359' post='2157636']
I just wanted to welcome you to the war and say I hope we both have a good time.

One quick question though... is 70 million within your alliance's warchest requirements for a nation of 13k infra?
[/quote]
After a careful study of your own alliance's public statements I'm pretty sure I know the answer to this one.

*ahem*

$70 million? That seems rather high. :huh:

Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='Starcraftmazter' date='03 February 2010 - 12:55 AM' timestamp='1265176518' post='2155528']
What, no claims of TOP being outnumbered, by NSO and it's cronies? They've had a lot more NS put on them since our DoW, surely you don't have double standards? :lol1:


Welcome to the fight STA.
[/quote]

I rarely post on the owf forum anymore because most of it comes from people like you who can't give anything a rest. I have yet to see a hint of logic in your posts as you constantly take pot shots at NSO.

I fail to see why you associate this war with "NSO and its cronies." Last I checked NSO didn't start either of these wars. In fact, last I checked NSO has only entered on both fronts in defense of an ally. Your hatred of NSO is consuming you. You don't seem to realize NSO is not the focal point of either war, however, we gladly accept all the attention you are giving us. Also, for someone who was calling for NSO's death just a short while ago, this is an excellent opportunity for you to give into your hate and attack us.

Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='Lennox' date='03 February 2010 - 08:57 PM' timestamp='1265248655' post='2157662']
I rarely post on the owf forum anymore because most of it comes from people like you who can't give anything a rest. I have yet to see a hint of logic in your posts as you constantly take pot shots at NSO.

I fail to see why you associate this war with "NSO and its cronies." Last I checked NSO didn't start either of these wars. In fact, last I checked NSO has only entered on both fronts in defense of an ally. Your hatred of NSO is consuming you. You don't seem to realize NSO is not the focal point of either war, however, we gladly accept all the attention you are giving us. Also, for someone who was calling for NSO's death just a short while ago, this is an excellent opportunity for you to give into your hate and attack us.
[/quote]


I know you'd never say it yourselves, but I will say it for you, because you deserve to have it said about you. NSO has acted perhaps the most honorably out of anyone in this affair. They declared only in defense of an ally, and they stayed in the war to defend an ally. They are more than willing to throw away every ounce of infra they have to defend their friends, even when some people on their own side of the war can't keep their negative comments about their alliance to themselves. NSO declared in defense of STA, an alliance they are not even allied to anymore, and for that we will forever be grateful, and we owe them a big one.

I get that a lot of folks don't like NSO. Let their actions speak louder than their words. They may say some things you don't like, but when it comes time to actually do something, their actions scream out that they are good, solid folks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='Lennox' date='04 February 2010 - 01:57 AM' timestamp='1265248655' post='2157662']
I rarely post on the owf forum anymore because most of it comes from people like you who can't give anything a rest. I have yet to see a hint of logic in your posts as you constantly take pot shots at NSO.

I fail to see why you associate this war with "NSO and its cronies." Last I checked NSO didn't start either of these wars. In fact, last I checked NSO has only entered on both fronts in defense of an ally. [b]Your hatred of NSO is consuming you.[/b] You don't seem to realize NSO is not the focal point of either war, however, we gladly accept all the attention you are giving us. Also, for someone who was calling for NSO's death just a short while ago, this is an excellent opportunity for you to give into your hate and attack us.
[/quote]

Shouldn't you have said "Mission accomplished" by that bold point? :P

Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='pezstar' date='03 February 2010 - 09:54 PM' timestamp='1265252045' post='2157777']
They declared only in defense of an ally, and they stayed in the war to defend an ally.
[/quote]

No, they declared to assist an aggressive action, not [i]defend[/i]. There's a pretty big difference, but no difference in how much courage it took: a lot.

Make no mistake about this, though: the Sith didn't declare this war to be 'honorable'. They did it because they saw it as advantageous to do so.

Edit:

[quote] people like you who can't give anything a rest ... Your hatred of NSO is consuming you. [/quote]

Oh, the irony. :P

Edited by Penkala
Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='Penkala' date='04 February 2010 - 01:35 PM' timestamp='1265254530' post='2157845']
No, they declared to assist an aggressive action, not [i]defend[/i]. There's a pretty big difference, but no difference in how much courage it took: a lot.

Make no mistake about this, though: the Sith didn't declare this war to be 'honorable'. They did it because they saw it as advantageous to do so.

[/quote]
We did it to defend IRON, we have said that many, many times. If it was just TOP or if they dragged along someone else instead we would not be involved.

Although, you and I are wayy off topic, so STA, this is sad to see, especially after when we helped you out, good luck out there.

Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='Penkala' date='03 February 2010 - 10:35 PM' timestamp='1265254530' post='2157845']
No, they declared to assist an aggressive action, not [i]defend[/i]. There's a pretty big difference, but no difference in how much courage it took: a lot.

Make no mistake about this, though: the Sith didn't declare this war to be 'honorable'. They did it because they saw it as advantageous to do so.

Edit:



Oh, the irony. :P
[/quote]

You are no different than SCM, so my first post applies to you as well. We did not declare to assist an aggressive action, or else we would have simply gone in with IRON and attacked CnG aggressively. The fact you call this an advantageous move by the NSO is completely wrong, and I'm not sure where you derived that notion from. Being involved in over 5 or 6 fronts and being outmatched by over 27million NS at times certainly does not qualify as advantageous by any standards.

Also, I seem to be missing the irony.

Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='Penkala' date='03 February 2010 - 10:35 PM' timestamp='1265254530' post='2157845']
No, they declared to assist an aggressive action, not [i]defend[/i]. There's a pretty big difference, but no difference in how much courage it took: a lot.

Make no mistake about this, though: the Sith didn't declare this war to be 'honorable'. They did it because they saw it as advantageous to do so.
[/quote]
You are one of the worst at spin. Let someone else do it. You fail.

The NSO is only in this war because FOK declared on Polar. Period. We are only still in this war because Fark decided they did not want peace with us and declared on IRON. We are at war with CSN because out of the two dozen or so alliances in this war the only alliance that could be bothered to come to the defense of STA was one that was at the time already fighting a ten to one war and didn't even have a treaty with them.

You can take your opinion and shove it up your $@!. That is all it is worth anyway.

Edited by Ivan Moldavi
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...