An MHAnnouncement

[AnCapistan]

[quote name='Working_Class_Ruler' date='20 March 2010 - 11:14 AM' timestamp='1269108847' post='2231401']
Many of them were doing all that they could to hurt us.
[/quote]

I don't doubt this however what they were doing couldn't have been much. Review the odds and the alliances you listed have reputations of having...lackluster war power. Whereas those on your side are at least semi-competent.

[quote name='nutkase' date='20 March 2010 - 11:15 AM' timestamp='1269108918' post='2231402']Yourself are not involved in this war and losing NS yourself.
[/quote]

I fought in this war, man.

Edited March 20, 2010 by Mr Damsky

[Timeline]

[quote name='Mr Damsky' date='20 March 2010 - 05:39 PM' timestamp='1269106734' post='2231359']
Did I say that? I'm talking about coalition vs. coalition. [b]When NpO withdrew TOP and company not only lost NpO's NS but their numerous allies and allies' allies.[/b]

When you joined against IRON you knew you would have support. And if you were smart enough you knew that support was larger then what IRON and company could muster. The decision (to declare) took no guts.
[/quote]

Harmlins DoW IRON on 29 January 2010 - 06:13 AM (LINK) http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=79461
NpO DoW GOD on the 02 February 2010 - 05:32 AM (Link) http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=79847

NpO DoW TOP on the 06 February 2010 - 05:40 AM (Link) http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=80158

So let me get this right, MHA attacked IRON on the 28 of January (dow posted on the 29th) three days later NpO DoW GOD (this place NpO on the side of TOP) then a following four days later NpO dow TOP.
[quote name='Mr Damsky' date='20 March 2010 - 05:39 PM' timestamp='1269106734' post='2231359']
[b]When NpO withdrew TOP and company not only lost NpO's NS but their numerous allies and allies' allies.[/b] [/quote]


[quote name='Mr Damsky' date='20 March 2010 - 05:39 PM' timestamp='1269106734' post='2231359']
When you joined against IRON you knew you would have support. And if you were smart enough you knew that support was larger then what IRON and company could muster. The decision (to declare) took no guts.
[/quote]

so your saying what IRON and Co. did had taken guts, or was they just plain silly ?

[WorkingClassRuler]

[quote name='Mr Damsky' date='21 March 2010 - 05:16 AM' timestamp='1269108990' post='2231403']
I don't doubt this however what they were doing couldn't have been much. Review the odds and the alliances you listed have reputations of having...lackluster war power. Whereas those on your side are at least semi-competent.
[/quote]

If they had prepared, had the finances, this could have been a very different story indeed. But that still doesn't mean it was easy for us. Surely we can at least agree on that common ground?

[nutkase]

[quote name='Mr Damsky' date='21 March 2010 - 02:16 AM' timestamp='1269108990' post='2231403']

I fought in this war, man.
[/quote]

You fought in the NpO/M conflict which a lot deem separate and you lost around 4K nothing compared to what a lot of other nations on either side are losing. I lost 15K and consider myself very lucky.

So for you to sit back and say we have "no balls" is pathetic in every sense.

[Crymson]

[quote name='Working_Class_Ruler' date='20 March 2010 - 12:04 PM' timestamp='1269108232' post='2231389']
Oh, well thank you. I thought Yankee was our Minister of Foreign Affairs but clearly I was mistaken. Clearly you are our MoFA and know absolutely everything about our relationship with CnG alliances.
[/quote]

Please feel free to correct me with facts.

[quote]
No, you did it in several ways, but it's clearly pointless discussing this with you.
[/quote]

Please elaborate.

[quote]
Well I don't log dump so again, there's no point discussing this here. Or I could give the logs to you and you could dump them for me?
[/quote]

I've gone through my logs again and I don't see anything of what you're referring to. Much has been made of a particular single joking comment I made---one that your government didn't react to nor try to clarify---but even that one didn't refer to us wanting to attack FARK. In fact, throughout our discussions our stance was that we had no quarrel at all with FARK.

[quote]
TOP attacking FARK would have kept us neutral against TOP, as we could not attack a treaty partner.
[/quote]

Still, we didn't intend to attack FARK.

[quote]
We also made it very clear that we did not wish to get involved, I certainly know from firsthand experience what went on in our Government forums and the direction our position was heading prior to your aggressive attack on CnG. Oh, but you're our MoFA so clearly you should know this too, right?
[/quote]

I'm speaking from my own discussions with your government. That's all I have to go by.

[quote]
No, not all communication but you stopped discussing your intentions with us until after you had declared. We had been discussing quite openly with you what we'd do given the myriad of circumstances being batted about (ie: you attacking FARK) and LM himself has admitted that you deliberately did not tell us you'd be attacking aggressively. When it became clear that we weren't going to be your meatshield, you didn't want to share with us any more. You took your toys and played with the other kids. Well congratulations, you get to play with them all by yourselves now.
[/quote]

Never did we have any discussions about TOP attacking FARK. Again, you're trying to tell me things that never happened. And yes, I too admitted that we felt it would be irresponsible to share our plans with MHA, given that MHA would be on the other side of the war from us, even if indirectly so. It would not have been fair to the others on our side of the war. Would you consider it fair to share war plans with an ally on the other side of a war from you?

That said, yes, much of TOP felt that our friendship was dead after you attacked IRON.

[quote]
No one needs to make TOP look bad, you do it fine on your own. Nothing excuses a log dump on former friends, Crymson. You should be ashamed.
[/quote]

Please respond to the allegation I've made and to the evidence I've presented with which to support it.

[quote]
So your Coalition attacked FARK in order to draw our IRON? Or did I read that wrong?
[/quote]

You did entirely read that wrong.

[quote]
Anyway, it looks like pure paranoia and self-fulfilling prophecy. CnG would have been suicidal to attack TOP aggressively, nor did they have any intention of doing so, nor would we have supported them if they did. But you went ahead and declared aggressively anyway and this is where we are.
[/quote]

Please reread what I wrote; I believe you substantially misread or misunderstood much of it.

[quote name='nutkase' date='20 March 2010 - 12:15 PM' timestamp='1269108918' post='2231402']
We came to the defence of a ally, and in that action many of our nations have been attacked with nuclear arms and reduced to less then a quarter of their starting NS. So don't sit there and mock us when a large number of our nations still burn especially when yourself are not involved in this war and losing NS yourself.
[/quote]

Though I am not arguing MrDamsky's point in this event, I think it is worth noting that you did not enter this war in defense of an ally.

Edited March 20, 2010 by Crymson

[AnCapistan]

[quote name='Timeline' date='20 March 2010 - 11:19 AM' timestamp='1269109142' post='2231406']
Harmlins DoW IRON on 29 January 2010 - 06:13 AM (LINK) http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=79461
NpO DoW GOD on the 02 February 2010 - 05:32 AM (Link) http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=79847

NpO DoW TOP on the 06 February 2010 - 05:40 AM (Link) http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=80158

So let me get this right, MHA attacked IRON on the 28 of January (dow posted on the 29th) three days later NpO DoW GOD (this place NpO on the side of TOP) then a following four days later NpO dow TOP.

[/quote]

The NpO-GOD war was because of GOD's DoW on NSO. I'm sure it indirectly helped TOP but when Polar declared on TOP...well you know.

[quote]
so your saying what IRON and Co. did had taken guts, or was they just plain silly ?
[/quote]

It was somewhat opportunism and somewhat utter stupidity.

Also
[quote]
So let me get this right, MHA attacked IRON on the 28 of January (dow posted on the 29th)[/quote]

Did you guys really attack before you posted a DoW?

[DaveII]

[quote name='Mr Damsky' date='20 March 2010 - 02:13 PM' timestamp='1269108763' post='2231400']
You guys said it did. I'm merely refuting that point.
[/quote]

I don't really think it's a point. It's more of a subjective statement... y'know, an opinion? You can argue that opinions can be refuted but I want to point out that this type of nonsense arguing does nothing but lead to trolling.

I've yet to see anyone in MHA try to make us seem high and mighty but in efforts to put an end to childishness, I condemn anyone in MHA who made a comment stating we're high and mighty for what we've done.

Let's handle a cancellation announcement like adults and not resort to such ill-fated measures.

[AnCapistan]

[quote name='nutkase' date='20 March 2010 - 11:22 AM' timestamp='1269109338' post='2231410']
You fought in the NpO/M conflict which a lot deem separate and you lost around 4K nothing compared to what a lot of other nations on either side are losing. I lost 15K and consider myself very lucky.

So for you to sit back and say we have "no balls" is pathetic in every sense.
[/quote]

No I didn't. I rouged CnG and SF when it became clear TOP would lose. I've lost around the same as you have as well. I've been fighting fairly consistently since this crap started.


Where are you getting your facts man?

Edited March 20, 2010 by Mr Damsky

[nutkase]

[quote name='Mr Damsky' date='21 March 2010 - 02:29 AM' timestamp='1269109768' post='2231419']
No I didn't. I rouged CnG and SF when it became clear TOP would lose. I've lost around the same as you have as well. I've been fighting fairly consistently since this crap started.


Where are you getting your facts man?
[/quote]

Your chart they only go so far back

Edited March 20, 2010 by nutkase

[WorkingClassRuler]

[quote name='Crymson' date='21 March 2010 - 05:23 AM' timestamp='1269109387' post='2231412']
Please feel free to correct me with facts.
[/quote]

Uh, mate, you're the one making up arguments such as "MHA had no friendship with CnG at all." There is only the reply of "yes, we did", as evident by our declaration in their defense.

Generally reality > assumptions.

[quote name='Crymson' date='21 March 2010 - 05:23 AM' timestamp='1269109387' post='2231412']
Please elaborate.
[/quote]

It is clearly pointless. You have no intention of seeing anything except us attacking IRON, and everything else was a lie/dishonest/violation THAT MHA DID FIRST AND WAY WORSE. Don't pretend you want to see the facts to have a merit-based argument.


[quote name='Crymson' date='21 March 2010 - 05:23 AM' timestamp='1269109387' post='2231412']
Never did we have any discussions about TOP attacking FARK. Again, you're trying to tell me things that never happened. And yes, I too admitted that we felt it would be irresponsible to share our plans with MHA, given that MHA would be on the other side of the war from us, even if indirectly so. It would not have been fair to the others on our side of the war. Would you consider it fair to share war plans with an ally on the other side of a war from you?

That said, yes, much of TOP felt that our friendship was dead after you attacked IRON.
[/quote]

It's one thing to keep your war plans secret, it's another to create a whole Coalition for war and aggressively attack others without telling your allies. Where was the head's up about that? Oh right, there wasn't.

It's also nice to finally see you admit that you thought our relationship was dead from that point, while MHA Gov tried every day to talk to you and to understand your position, and rectify the problems. Completely justifies all the crap you pulled after the war started, like aiding our enemy. Because we were dead to you, right? Yet on our side, the movement to cancel actually came from the membership, who'd had enough of TOP's treaty violations. They were sick of their enemies being aided by our supposed ally, and only after this occurred far, far too times.

You wonder why other people here have been saying this is long over due? That's why.

[quote name='Crymson' date='21 March 2010 - 05:23 AM' timestamp='1269109387' post='2231412']
Please respond to the allegations I've made.
[/quote]

No? I don't know why you're trying to make demands of me, it never works for anyone. Well, that and because as I've said it's clearly pointless because you will not have a reasonable argument about this, you are making false claims of MHA Government lying to you and deceiving you. So I'm not going to respond to that nonsense.

[quote name='Crymson' date='21 March 2010 - 05:23 AM' timestamp='1269109387' post='2231412']
You did entirely read that wrong.

Please reread what I wrote; I believe you substantially misread or misunderstood much of it.
[/quote]

Feel free to explain it in a way that doesn't say "We were convinced that CnG were going to attack us so we attacked them first" because that's what you did. The fact that CnG were not going to attack you is apparently irrelevant because you convinced yourselves they would. Paranoia. Self-fulfilling prophecy.

[MCRABT]

[quote name='Cormalek' date='20 March 2010 - 01:54 PM' timestamp='1269093268' post='2231262']
I can't tell if you're lying on purpose here or just don't know all(any?) facts. I hope I don't tattle some classified stuff here, but here:

The day before the attack, it was still unsure if we are going in at all. 7 hours before the attack some of us were told to be prepared to check before the crucial strategic moment [ooc:update] whether we were at war. The decision was made in last hours prior to attack, because of which there was no friggin target list. While the command worked hard in those last hours, and put together one, it was a last minute thing; personally I was able to hit only 1 of assigned targets, and had little under 20 minutes to figure out which, and start shooting. We went DefCon3 to 1 in a matter of hours.

So - [b]no[/b]. there was no definite and long planned offensive. Something that - if you were well informed, instead of pretending to be well informed - you'd know, seeing how small number of initial wars on MHA-IRON front was, especially those with highest initiative factor [ooc:update-quads].

While all of your opinions seem balanced + we have a lot of warm feelings toward IRON atm (because even though we're opponents, you are a honorable opponent. Things get funny that way sometimes.), it seems that you base some of them on inaccurate(at best) arguments.
[/quote]

Well now if you knew anything at all you would know I was informed as anyone you will speak with on this side of the fence in the build up to the CnG pre-empt, in fact I signed it off on IRON's behalf. So put your e-peen away I have been high level gov for the best part of 3 years and I think you will find I am substantially more informed than you are. We knew MHA intended to attack us if we hit FARK, MHA told us that "an attack on a direct ally would result in your entrance". Since FARK had attacked our MDP ally 4-5 days before IRON took any action I would say that you would have to be grossly incompetent not to have had IRON lined up as your target, furthermore since MHA have claimed that you knew nothing about our offensive on CnG until it happened, I would suggest that you ought to tread very carefully before accusing me of lying or being uniformed.

While I do not doubt MHA were not planning to attack us offensively I have no doubt that you would have attacked us regardless of how we entered this war (providing it was on the Polar side) and yourselves and TOP would still have found yourselves on opposite sides. If you claim otherwise you are lying or are just completely ignorant.

[Believland]

[quote name='Timeline' date='20 March 2010 - 06:02 AM' timestamp='1269079327' post='2231174']
I am not MHA government, my views are not that of my alliance, my views are that of mine and mine alone. Also I think you are mistaken with the course of this war, it has nothing to do with \m/ vs NpO, not sure why you claim it is, CnG or TOP and co had not made any dow within the \m/ vs NpO war, TOP and co. DoW CnG the day \M/ and NpO gave each other white peace, the following day everyone else within the \M/ vs NpO war gave white peace. then the dow's for tops actions vs CnG rolled in.
[/quote]
What are you talking about? Somewhere you must have messed up your time line. It has a lot to do with \m/-NpO war. TOP did a preemptive strike against CnG, because NpO/TOP/the rest thought that CnG were going to side against their treaty partners in NpO. Shortly after NpO gave \m/ white peace. TOP was not knowledgeable about \m/-NpO's peace talks and if they were, I doubt this situation would have happened.


MHA, you share as much of the blame you're putting on TOP.

[Crymson]

[quote name='Working_Class_Ruler' date='20 March 2010 - 12:48 PM' timestamp='1269110862' post='2231429']
Uh, mate, you're the one making up arguments such as "MHA had no friendship with CnG at all." There is only the reply of "yes, we did", as evident by our declaration in their defense.

Generally reality > assumptions.
[/quote]

In that event, please elaborate. You have not done so yet.

[quote]
It is clearly pointless. You have no intention of seeing anything except us attacking IRON, and everything else was a lie/dishonest/violation THAT MHA DID FIRST AND WAY WORSE. Don't pretend you want to see the facts to have a merit-based argument.
[/quote]

Please elaborate.

[quote]
It's one thing to keep your war plans secret, it's another to create a whole Coalition for war and aggressively attack others without telling your allies. Where was the head's up about that? Oh right, there wasn't.
[/quote]

We did not create the coalition that was fighting against \m/ and allies. Also, your government was well aware that it existed. So was everyone else who was paying attention. It was very obvious and nobody made any attempt to keep it hidden.

[quote]
It's also nice to finally see you admit that you thought our relationship was dead from that point, while MHA Gov tried every day to talk to you and to understand your position, and rectify the problems.
[/quote]

Having been government at the time, I can tell you that this statement of yours is 100% false. I am not sure why you have made it. Your government did no such thing. In the two weeks during which I was still in government after the attack, they did not---so far as I know---even once attempt speak to us on the matter after the night that they attacked IRON. Further, our own attempts to speak with them on the subject were rebuffed.

You are entirely wrong, and the falseness of your claim is staggering. What you have claimed here is utterly false.

[quote]
Completely justifies all the crap you pulled after the war started, like aiding our enemy. Because we were dead to you, right? Yet on our side, the movement to cancel actually came from the membership, who'd had enough of TOP's treaty violations. They were sick of their enemies being aided by our supposed ally, and only after this occurred far, far too times.
[/quote]

Like I said, I wasn't attempting to justify our aiding of GGA. That did violate the treaty. However, you've still not told me of the other violations of the treaty.

As for why we did not cancel the treaty ourselves, discussion within TOP's membership had produced the consensus that we should cancel the treaty after the war ended.

[quote]
You wonder why other people here have been saying this is long over due? That's why.
[/quote]

It was long overdue because of 20 aid offers that spanned one week? I don't understand.


[quote]
No? I don't know why you're trying to make demands of me, it never works for anyone. Well, that and because as I've said it's clearly pointless because you will not have a reasonable argument about this, you are making false claims of MHA Government lying to you and deceiving you. So I'm not going to respond to that nonsense.
[/quote]

I have presented evidence for my claims. I can easily produce further evidence that will demonstrate your government telling us that they would only enter the war to defend FARK.

That said, I do not understand from whence you are drawing your assumption that I will not have a reasonable discussion on this matter. I will also point out that you yourself are proclaiming my allegations false before any discussion and that you're ignoring the evidence that I have presented.

[quote]
Feel free to explain it in a way that doesn't say "We were convinced that CnG were going to attack us so we attacked them first" because that's what you did. The fact that CnG were not going to attack you is apparently irrelevant because you convinced yourselves they would. Paranoia. Self-fulfilling prophecy.
[/quote]

I don't understand how this response is relevant to what I wrote. If you cannot stay on-topic, then this discussion will likely become pointless.

Edited March 20, 2010 by Crymson

[Derwood1]

[quote name='Crymson' date='20 March 2010 - 03:02 PM' timestamp='1269111727' post='2231435']
I don't understand how this response is relevant to what I wrote. If you cannot stay on-topic, [b]then this discussion will likely become pointless[/b].
[/quote]


Too late, that happened somewhere around 12 pages ago

[scutterbug]

I was gonna try and stay classy but hey who am i kidding.

Crymson you're an absolute joke and i really pray TOP dont re elect you anytime soon. After personally dealing with you on a couple of occasions during the war you are the worst elected government official i have ever dealt with.

To the general membership of TOP, i am saddened this had to happen. It was not so long ago we were doing so well together i do hope that can happen once again in the future when a decent Gov gets to work (No thats not a mocking of the current gov as they havn't long started and i wish them all the best)

On another funner note.

Dear FARK,

Lets get the party started

<3 ScutterBug

[Heft]

Congratulations MHA on reaching almost 15 pages. I can't for the life of me figure out why anyone would take even this much of an interest in what you do, but I'm probably just out of touch or something.

[fallin]

[quote name='Heft' date='20 March 2010 - 07:28 PM' timestamp='1269113267' post='2231443']
Congratulations MHA on reaching almost 15 pages. I can't for the life of me figure out why anyone would take even this much of an interest in what you do, but I'm probably just out of touch or something.
[/quote]

Thanks for giving us the attention you think we don't deserve. You sir, are a walking contradiction.

[Heft]

[quote name='fallin' date='20 March 2010 - 02:32 PM' timestamp='1269113536' post='2231447']
Thanks for giving us the attention you think we don't deserve. You sir, are a walking contradiction.
[/quote]
That's such a dumb phrase.

But still, you're wrong. Yay.

[AndyDe]

[quote name='Believland' date='21 March 2010 - 06:59 AM' timestamp='1269111544' post='2231434']
MHA, you share as much of the blame you're putting on TOP.
[/quote]

Where did we say that we are completely blameless in this?

[quote] and the fact that both parties have made decisions that led to the deterioration of the relationship, [/quote]

From the OP. We admit that we have done some things that have led up to this point. So please stop trying to say we are completely blaming TOP for this.

[fallin]

[quote name='Heft' date='20 March 2010 - 07:35 PM' timestamp='1269113718' post='2231448']
That's such a dumb phrase.

But still, you're wrong. Yay.
[/quote]

I'm wrong and dumb just because Heft says so?

You're not everybody's prophet.

[The Ultimate 747]

[quote name='AndyDe' date='20 March 2010 - 03:36 PM' timestamp='1269113796' post='2231450']
Where did we say that we are completely blameless in this?



From the OP. We admit that we have done some things that have led up to this point. So please stop trying to say we are completely blaming TOP for this.
[/quote]

This. We were not trying to ride in on a high horse here. We know that the blame for the deterioration of our relationship with TOP is shared among both alliances. The ratio is insignificant; all that matters at this point is that the relationship has taken far too great a hit for this treaty not to be canceled. The posting of this thread was just us doing what needed to be done, and if you think you can blame us for the cancellation itself then you are mistaken. Blame whoever you like for the things that led up to it, but that's over and done with and not what this thread was supposed to be about.

[pigsticker]

Simple fact, We made mistakes so did TOP. Whoever made the first misstep is irrelevant because both side believes that the other party made the first misstep.

Did we lie? I don't know as I'm not in Gov. Did the manner of TOP's entry into the war and its DoW made any difference? I would say yes. Therein lies the crucial difference in opinion. I'm sorry but no matter how i read it, I don't see it as TOP coming in on behalf of NpO but rather to take advantage of the current chaos to launch an attempt to devastate CnG. Events might have proven this view wrong later, but you can't deny that this was a valid viewpoint [b]at that time[/b] (bold for emphasis).
Considering that most or all of the official OPs by Gov would be vetted before being posted, would there be any doubts that this wan't TOP's official position?

From my perspective, if TOP had entered the usual way, e.g. attacked some alliance currently involved in the war except Fark, got countered by CnG, I will definitely admit that we were solely at fault if we attacked IRON.
But with you DoW, I consider an entirely new war with TOP declaring aggressively on CnG, which Gremlin is [b]honour-bound[/b] (i didn't say by treaty, but please don't start the argument on their lack of treaty again. If you do, this bring us again to the issue of perspective) to support MK. Which will in turn bring us into the war.

Is Harmlins a monolithic entity? I would say no as both alliances have their own FA. But do Harmlins act in accordance with each other? The answer is yes.

Every argument on both sides inevitably goes back to the fundamental question of how TOP declared. Top is seeing it as an action to enter on behlaf of NpO. I see from their DoW as an entirely separate issue from the NpO war.

In a nutshell, this is how I see it : TOP declares aggressively on CnG with no CB, an attack made on an alliance with a MDP-level of relationship of our sister alliance. Gremlins enter on behalf of MK and MHA follows Gre in accordance with Harmlins Accords. I consider this the breaking of the spirit but not he letter of the treaty because Gremlins did not have an official MDP with MK (Really, please don't bring up the issue of their paperless FA again).

On the issue of aiding GGA, when we first raised the issue with TOP on TOP's IRC channel, I was around and was frankly looking to cause trouble. That was uncalled for but emotions was running high. Crymson was informed and he stated that he had no idea this was happening and promised to investigate. At that time, the official results of TOP's elections were still not announced and publicly, Crymson still had not stepped down. (This is all based on my memory but I am definite on the part that Crymson was still Gov when we first raised the issue on IRC.)
It might have blown over eventually if Crymson made clear their official stance at that time, i.e. it's coalition aid and while regretable (well probably with not too much regrets, but that's just diplomacy) that aid was rendered to enemies of the MHA, it's coalition aid and not meant to hurt the MHA. But when said denial with made by Crymson when at the same time, he was sending out aid to one of those fighting against MHA, it makes his denial wholly unbelievable.

[Azrael Alexander]

[quote name='Mr Damsky' date='20 March 2010 - 06:13 PM' timestamp='1269108763' post='2231400']
You guys said it did. I'm merely refuting that point.
[/quote]

I may have missed this but when has a hitchhiker referred to themselves as a "mighty warrior" MHA are under no illusions about military prowess.

[quote name='Heft' date='20 March 2010 - 07:28 PM' timestamp='1269113267' post='2231443']
Congratulations MHA on reaching almost 15 pages. I can't for the life of me figure out why anyone would take even this much of an interest in what you do, but I'm probably just out of touch or something.
[/quote]

My guess is people are already trying to paint in a new target.

From my time in the MHA it's always the membership who decide which direction the alliance goes in. They no longer wanted to be tied to TOP hence why the treaty was dropped. Many are sore over how TOP got involved in the conflict and it's my belief that had they have become involved the usual way things would have lined up differently.

With regards to harmlins it's an MDoAP not an MDAP. MHA and Gre have been on the opposite ends of a war before and I can imagine thm being so again.

[necAnt]

[quote name='Khrushchev' date='20 March 2010 - 07:46 PM' timestamp='1269114391' post='2231458']
This. We were not trying to ride in on a high horse here. We know that the blame for the deterioration of our relationship with TOP is shared among both alliances. The ratio is insignificant; all that matters at this point is that the relationship has taken far too great a hit for this treaty not to be canceled. The posting of this thread was just us doing what needed to be done, and if you think you can blame us for the cancellation itself then you are mistaken. Blame whoever you like for the things that led up to it, but that's over and done with and not what this thread was supposed to be about.
[/quote]

an post i personaly can fully agree with, and on situations like these, i [ooc]miss the option to just request an close of an anouncement[/ooc]. But i´m an old, bitter Ant, what do i know.

[Pudge1975]

Crymson, Second time I see the same log drop in just a few days. Kiss and I had a conversation. There is more to that log about how if this was a Polaris trap we would get out right away. We spoke on many things. In my own opinion Kiss was a great leader and the night it all broke out he was the calmest one in the room. He is the one that was taking charge and trying to figure it all out. He is also the one that was trying to keep communications open vice the "why oh why MHA" from some of your Gov. We went in with our allies AFTER you attacked. There was no pre-emptive on our part. I am also not much into the dropping of logs so if some of your gov wants them I will give them in private.

LM you may have said you would be at war with MK some day but there was nothing on our war board of possibilities that said you were going to attack the whole bloc while it was still at peace. That was unexpected and something none of us seen coming.

We do no deny the fact that we said we would enter the war if Fark or Gramlins were attacked. That changed when you attacked C&G and we were asked by our fellow allies to help in curtailing the act of aggression. At that point we did not know NpO was in a white peace deal. My logs show all that also.

I have been in TOPs embassy for the last few weeks taking questions and it just seems they cannot get over that we ended up on different sides of the war. Maybe it was silly of us to think we could have friends on both sides of the "tracks". Well you live and you learn. I still have a great amount of respect for the general population of TOP and wish them well in the future.