D34th Posted March 10, 2010 Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 [quote name='wukong' date='10 March 2010 - 02:17 AM' timestamp='1268198540' post='2220595'] [list] [*]TOOL: a government to government discussion about the scope of our treaty reveals that there are many situation where what we thought should be a mandatory defense but could become optional defense in their view. [/list] [/quote] Ironic since when the \m/ war begun your alliance declared that would not defend your allies if they joined NpO side even when the defense should be mandatory. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suryanto tan Posted March 10, 2010 Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 (edited) double post. sorry. Edited March 10, 2010 by suryanto tan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suryanto tan Posted March 10, 2010 Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 (edited) [quote name='D34th' date='10 March 2010 - 08:23 PM' timestamp='1268220511' post='2220826'] Ironic since when the \m/ war begun your alliance declared that would not defend your allies if they joined NpO side even when the defense should be mandatory. [/quote] Some of your concern has been brought up before by other fine gentleman. If I may kindly direct you to the few posts [url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=82431&view=findpost&p=2220813"]above[/url]. We will accept it amicably if our allies decide to cancel on us after seeing us taking stance to not helping polar during that war. I failed to see an irony here. You perhaps assume that we cancel on TOOL out of anger or disappointment. This is not the case. It is good that we hold a government to government discussion and find out that we have very different views on the meaning of mutual defense and optional offense. When the treaty does not reflect what the signatory expect from, it is best to have it canceled. For the sake of both sides. Hope that answer you, somehow. You are welcome. Edit: A lot of edit, to make it easier to understand. Edited March 10, 2010 by suryanto tan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBone Posted March 10, 2010 Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 Wow, I thought everyone already knew about this....old news is old news. The leadership and members of The Phoenix Federation still hold a very special place in their hearts and minds for the Nusantara Elite Warriors. Bonds like the one we share are more than mere words written on paper. While attitudes shift and treaties come and go some relationships transcend the norm. To our allies....please do not condemn NEW for upholding what they believe to be their best interests, TPF certainly does not. To all the cherry pickers ( Hi T.), LOL, don't be surprised if TPF and NEW still share sides in future conflicts. ....and remember GantanX, your first born son is to be named after me. [img]http://forums.cybernations.net/public/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif[/img] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush Sykes Posted March 10, 2010 Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 [quote name='D34th' date='10 March 2010 - 06:23 AM' timestamp='1268220511' post='2220826'] Ironic since when the \m/ war begun your alliance declared that would not defend your allies if they joined NpO side even when the defense should be mandatory. [/quote] Anyone joining the NpO side in that war would have been declaring in support of NpOs aggressive action. Various chaining and non-chaining clauses exist for just such a reason. I really do not care enough to go check, but I can certainly understand if NEW would have considered anyone declaring on Polars side to be an agggressor, or a supporter of aggression. NEW would also be especially opposed to that side, as, no matter what dress Polar tried to put on it, it was a war intended to punish raiders for not playing by Polars rules...since of course, NEW fully supports the right to raid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mushi Posted March 10, 2010 Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 goodluck NEW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MagicalTrevor Posted March 10, 2010 Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 I thought people already new this :/ obligitary sad to see old ties drift apart, but massive <3 for NEW as per usual Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D34th Posted March 10, 2010 Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 [quote name='Rush Sykes' date='10 March 2010 - 08:55 AM' timestamp='1268222454' post='2220836'] Anyone joining the NpO side in that war would have been declaring in support of NpOs aggressive action. Various chaining and non-chaining clauses exist for just such a reason. I really do not care enough to go check, but I can certainly understand if NEW would have considered anyone declaring on Polars side to be an agggressor, or a supporter of aggression. NEW would also be especially opposed to that side, as, no matter what dress Polar tried to put on it, it was a war intended to punish raiders for not playing by Polars rules...since of course, NEW fully supports the right to raid. [/quote] Do you know how MADPs treaties works since your alliance have at least one right? So I'll not need to go further. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Wilson Posted March 10, 2010 Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 I think I just died due to awesome overload Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valtamdraugr Posted March 10, 2010 Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 After having met theses guys on the battlefield, I can say their cancellation is a certain loss for Tool and TPF. NEW has my attention and I'm eager to see where the winds carry them in the future. Paths diverge but obstacles are opportunities for improvement. Good luck to all involved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salmia Posted March 10, 2010 Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 [quote name='nutkase' date='10 March 2010 - 02:07 AM' timestamp='1268205142' post='2220730'] "TOOL: a government to government discussion about the scope of our treaty reveals that there are many situation where what we thought should be a mandatory defense but could become optional defense in their view." ahaha that one rings a bell [/quote] It is part of our treaty non chaining clause and was not around during Karma so that doesn't apply in the situation you're thinking of Nutkase. And I am not sure who in TOOL doesn't know that this treaty was canceled, they've known for a while or should've. Good luck to NEW in the future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClashCityRocker Posted March 10, 2010 Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 [quote name='D34th' date='10 March 2010 - 07:05 AM' timestamp='1268223063' post='2220841'] Do you know how MADPs treaties works since your alliance have at least one right? So I'll not need to go further. [/quote] pretty sure NEW doesnt have any MADPs, nor did they at the time of the conflict. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haflinger Posted March 10, 2010 Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 [quote name='gantanX' date='10 March 2010 - 12:56 AM' timestamp='1268200919' post='2220642'] when ?? [/quote] He means this: http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=79126 I understand NEW's logic here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arentak Posted March 10, 2010 Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 [quote name='MNNorthStars' date='10 March 2010 - 12:26 AM' timestamp='1268202736' post='2220678'] That reason for canceling on TPF is amazing. NEW = doin it rite. [/quote] I dont know the truth about the TPF thing, but I can imagine it TPF: AH, crap, we're under attack NEW: WE're there bro, see them tards at update TPF: NOOOOO, we have a secret plan, you must wait until the right time NEW: Ok, fine, but we don't like waiting NEW: Its been a week now bro, can we hit em? TPF: Look, its LM, hes in charge, and we're waiting NEW: But, GDI, we wub you, and wanna defend you, this is BS. TPF: Patience TPF: Ok, its been 2 weeks, its go time, kick $@!! NEW: WOOT, RAWR, finally, gonna show then pansies who attacked you who's da man! TPF: Hey, I know you just attacked 2 minutes ago, but we decided to accept a white peace NEW: Nuts! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goldie Posted March 10, 2010 Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 [quote name='Mykelemagne' date='10 March 2010 - 01:43 AM' timestamp='1268203701' post='2220698'] Reps that very well may have come had certain parties intervened more quickly. [/quote] I wish I could think of a better response than "lol". If you think we had the numbers in this war, you would have cried if you saw the numbers for that war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melutar Posted March 10, 2010 Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 Classy and considerate as always. o/ NEW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin McDonald Posted March 10, 2010 Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 Forgive me if this has already been asked, but does this leave you with just the FEAR treaty? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orangbaik Posted March 10, 2010 Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 [quote name='arentak' date='10 March 2010 - 08:25 PM' timestamp='1268227863' post='2220870'] I dont know the truth about the TPF thing, but I can imagine it TPF: AH, crap, we're under attack NEW: WE're there bro, see them tards at update TPF: NOOOOO, we have a secret plan, you must wait until the right time NEW: Ok, fine, but we don't like waiting NEW: Its been a week now bro, can we hit em? TPF: Look, its LM, hes in charge, and we're waiting NEW: But, GDI, we wub you, and wanna defend you, this is BS. TPF: Patience TPF: Ok, its been 2 weeks, its go time, kick $@!! NEW: WOOT, RAWR, finally, gonna show then pansies who attacked you who's da man! TPF: Hey, I know you just attacked 2 minutes ago, but we decided to accept a white peace NEW: Nuts! [/quote] This one is funny.. bro u make my day cheer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orangbaik Posted March 10, 2010 Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 [quote name='Kevin McDonald' date='10 March 2010 - 08:59 PM' timestamp='1268229875' post='2220883'] Forgive me if this has already been asked, but does this leave you with just the FEAR treaty? [/quote] you are right.. better have less ally thats have lionheart than have many but cant depend on. ps: this statement doesnt apply to TPF. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoyoabc Posted March 10, 2010 Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 [quote name='JBone' date='10 March 2010 - 07:44 PM' timestamp='1268221817' post='2220832'] Wow, I thought everyone already knew about this....old news is old news. The leadership and members of The Phoenix Federation still hold a very special place in their hearts and minds for the Nusantara Elite Warriors. Bonds like the one we share are more than mere words written on paper. While attitudes shift and treaties come and go some relationships transcend the norm. To our allies....please do not condemn NEW for upholding what they believe to be their best interests, TPF certainly does not. To all the cherry pickers ( Hi T.), LOL, don't be surprised if TPF and NEW still share sides in future conflicts. ....and remember GantanX, your first born son is to be named after me. [img]http://forums.cybernations.net/public/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif[/img] [/quote] JBone, you're still one person i hold very highly personally and i am sure to say that you're also the person that a lot of NEW members hold very high in TPF forum but until things change, i am afraid a lot of things can't change that drastically. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coekrix Posted March 10, 2010 Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 [quote name='Kevin McDonald' date='10 March 2010 - 02:59 PM' timestamp='1268229875' post='2220883'] Forgive me if this has already been asked, but does this leave you with just the FEAR treaty? [/quote] nope, we also have treaty with WFF Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Logan Posted March 10, 2010 Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 [quote name='Valtamdraugr' date='10 March 2010 - 04:07 AM' timestamp='1268223177' post='2220844'] After having met theses guys on the battlefield, I can say their cancellation is a certain loss for Tool and TPF. NEW has my attention and I'm eager to see where the winds carry them in the future. Paths diverge but obstacles are opportunities for improvement. Good luck to all involved. [/quote] I wish to express the same sentiments. Losing NEW as an ally would be a pretty big hit. One point of Nusantara nation strength is worth at least 2-3 points of NS from any other alliance. Good luck to NEW and their former allies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coursca Posted March 10, 2010 Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 [quote name='suryanto tan' date='10 March 2010 - 01:29 AM' timestamp='1268202900' post='2220684'] We were disappointed that an alliance like TPF would accept a white peace offer after being attacked by 4 alliances for a week. For us, we should have made them pay, even if at the end we failed hard and miserably. I know it is hard for you to understand that, but you do not really have to. If Nusantara being attacked like that, we will mobilize all the resources we have and make sure that they pay dearly, even if it is clear that we will suffer even greater losses at the end. [/quote] I think you're forgetting how bad off TPF still was from the last time alliances came knocking on their door. I largely fail to see the logic in the cancellation and was hoping it was merely a facetious comment. Unfortunately, it seems you are being serious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AvengingAngel256 Posted March 10, 2010 Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 Sad to see friends part ways, but always good to untangle the treaty web a bit. At least those involved are still amicable with no hard feelings. Good Luck to NEW, TPF, and TOOL in the future! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voytek Posted March 10, 2010 Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 (edited) [quote name='Coursca' date='11 March 2010 - 02:26 AM' timestamp='1268235123' post='2220943'] I think you're forgetting how bad off TPF still was from the last time alliances came knocking on their door. I largely fail to see the logic in the cancellation and was hoping it was merely a facetious comment. Unfortunately, it seems you are being serious. [/quote] Oh, don't be such a negative nell. Edited March 10, 2010 by Voytek 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.