An MHAnnouncement

[delendum]

[quote name='Alterego' date='20 March 2010 - 10:11 AM' timestamp='1269079867' post='2231176']
People drift all the time, but cancelling during a war after watching them being taking apart and doing nothing is lame. Oh yeah they drifted apart, one has 11m NS and the other is passing 4m NS on the way down. One alliance put their infra before friends and one didnt MHA are the new ODN.


The only people who think TOP started this war is MK and its puppets. If there was no war raging the attack wouldnt have happened unless you are saying MK was going to do what MHA did and sit back and watch their friends burn without lifting a finger. It wouldnt be the 1st time they did but I dont think it was the case this time.
[/quote]

Kind sir, you clearly forgot to mention that MK was gunning for TOP to begin with - a very important piece of the evil saga. This whole thing was a giant ploy if you ask me, an alliance such as MK would never get involved if they weren't 100% they were going to win, and it was obvious they would get involved when they virtually encouraged their numerous meatshields to start a global war.

Please, tell the whole story.

[Cormalek]

[quote name='aboooe' date='20 March 2010 - 12:34 PM' timestamp='1269084865' post='2231205']
Or they were just super nukes.
[/quote]

LoL, I meant that I+my flightmates destroyed over 42kNS of nations Deliria was at war with. 46kNS, to be more exact, but I like 42 better . Thus "participated in burning of" as in: "I lost X, I destroyed Y" 42 being Y.
Hey, what's he gonna do with them? Can't recycle those babies, they need to fly ;-)

[edit ooc: awesome face doesn't like letters close to it. + added some love while at it.]

Edited March 20, 2010 by Cormalek

[aboooe]

[quote name='Cormalek' date='20 March 2010 - 11:54 AM' timestamp='1269086056' post='2231211']
LoL, I meant that I+my flightmates destroyed over 42kNS of nations Deliria was at war with. 46kNS, to be more exact, but I like 42 better . Thus "participated in burning of" as in: "I lost X, I destroyed Y" 42 being Y.
Hey, what's he gonna do with them? Can't recycle those babies, they need to fly ;-)

[edit ooc: awesome face doesn't like letters close to it. + added some love while at it.]
[/quote]
Haha, thanks for clearing that up, it confused me.
Got to share out the radiation evenly haven't you.

ooc: The smilie is awesome.
Edit: Grammaz.

Edited March 20, 2010 by aboooe

[WarriorConcept]

Perfectly reasonable reason to cancel. Also I'm still impressed by most MHA posters, even in this thread. I wish you luck in the future.

[flak attack]

[quote name='delendum' date='20 March 2010 - 07:38 AM' timestamp='1269085068' post='2231206']
Kind sir, you clearly forgot to mention that MK was gunning for TOP to begin with - a very important piece of the evil saga. This whole thing was a giant ploy if you ask me, an alliance such as MK would never get involved if they weren't 100% they were going to win, and it was obvious they would get involved when they virtually encouraged their numerous meatshields to start a global war.

Please, tell the whole story.
[/quote]
You forgot the part where Archon used his mind control waves to get TOP, IRON and co to attack us, since he knew that unless he did that, there was no way they would be stupid enough to attack the only people negotiating peace.

[MCRABT]

[quote name='Working_Class_Ruler' date='20 March 2010 - 09:34 AM' timestamp='1269077660' post='2231167']
I think you might need to read it mate. TOP wanted to attack Fark, who is our direct ally. When that wouldn't fly, they stopped talking to us and attacked CnG. That was our "main objection", seeing as we declared on IRON and all.

I think our reaction ranges between "Take responsibility for your actions" and "Don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining". Both of which apply here.
[/quote]

Lets cut through the nonsense FARK was prepared to counter IRON 2 days prior to our DOW, MHA had IRON target lists drawn up in preparation for IRON's attack on FARK. When news was leaked that IRON and TOP would hit CnG, your coalition scrambled for an in on IRON that would bring in you guys and Sparta, this took the form of a treaty-less DOW on IRON by Gremlins. The fact is you guys would have attacked IRON regardless of what we did and we would still be in the current situation. The only thing you guys can be aggrieved over is the fact that TOP picked IRON over MHA, but then it would be pretty hypocritical of you to complain about that since you were planning to hit their ally very early on in this war and like them you also choose to honour alternative treaty obligations.

The fact is that you both had different priorities at the time that led you in different directions. That is just the way it goes sometimes, trying to get one over on each other is completely ridiculous, I see no reason for the animosity shown by either party in this thread.

[Timeline]

[quote name='Carlton the Great' date='20 March 2010 - 10:08 AM' timestamp='1269079683' post='2231175']
Grub personally approved our entry into the war that was then being waged. We were to target C&G and ensure that they would not interfere with Polar's operations. He neglected to tell us about the white peace arrangement.
[/quote]


Sorry I did not know Grub runs plant bob, i will have to look in to this.

Also I did not know that TOP, IRON, DAWN, TORN, TSO or FEAR had a treaty with NpO so forgive me when I ask, what has NpO got to do with you attacking CnG who was not part of the war ?, Also NpO had treaties with GR & MK that makes up 28.5% of CnG (not in terms of size, just number of alliances) also CnG did not partake (military action) in this war of \M/ vs NpO, So i ask again, what has NpO got to do with you attacking CnG.

[Carlton the Great]

[quote name='Timeline' date='20 March 2010 - 09:28 AM' timestamp='1269091695' post='2231247']
Sorry I did not know Grub runs plant bob, i will have to look in to this.

Also I did not know that TOP, IRON, DAWN, TORN, TSO or FEAR had a treaty with NpO so forgive me when I ask, what has NpO got to do with you attacking CnG who was not part of the war ?, Also NpO had treaties with GR & MK that makes up 28.5% of CnG (not in terms of size, just number of alliances) also CnG did not partake (military action) in this war of \M/ vs NpO, So i ask again, what has NpO got to do with you attacking CnG.
[/quote]
C&G was eventually going to enter the war on the Superfriends side. That is beyond debate. TOP and its allies viewed this as strategically undesirable and approached Grub, who supported our attack on C&G, with the understanding that he would not honor the MDPs that NpO held with either GR or MK.

I am not attempting to push responsibility for our attack away from my alliance, but the reality is that the TOP-C&G conflict would not have occurred without the involvement and approval of NpO. The argument that this is a completely separate war is erroneous.

Edited March 20, 2010 by Carlton the Great

[Timeline]

[quote name='MCRABT' date='20 March 2010 - 01:25 PM' timestamp='1269091491' post='2231245']
Lets cut through the nonsense FARK was prepared to counter IRON 2 days prior to our DOW, MHA had IRON target lists drawn up in preparation for IRON's attack on FARK. When news was leaked that IRON and TOP would hit CnG, your coalition scrambled for an in on IRON that would bring in you guys and Sparta, this took the form of a treaty-less DOW on IRON by Gremlins. The fact is you guys would have attacked IRON regardless of what we did and we would still be in the current situation. [b]The only thing you guys can be aggrieved over is the fact that TOP picked IRON over MHA[/b], but then it would be pretty hypocritical of you to complain about that since you were planning to hit their ally very early on in this war and like them you also choose to honour alternative treaty obligations.

The fact is that you both had different priorities at the time that led you in different directions. That is just the way it goes sometimes, trying to get one over on each other is completely ridiculous, I see no reason for the animosity shown by either party in this thread.
[/quote]

out of this whole statement something jumped out at me, i have made it bold for you, this did bring a smile to my face, you see IRON is well known for siding with who ever is at number one, first NPO, now TOP (I am sure it would have been many more, but lets face it NPO held power for a long time), I am just asking when this war is done and IRON comes begging at the feet of MHA, will you act as if these statements was nothing more then misinformation given to you from TOP ?

apart from the part i made bold, the rest of your statement is nothing but crap, you have no idea what was going on, UNLESS you are admitting to having a spy within MHA you do not know that MHA had target lists for IRON two days before you attacked CnG.

[Pudge1975]

[quote name='MCRABT' date='20 March 2010 - 08:25 AM' timestamp='1269091491' post='2231245']
Lets cut through the nonsense FARK was prepared to counter IRON 2 days prior to our DOW, MHA had IRON target lists drawn up in preparation for IRON's attack on FARK. When news was leaked that IRON and TOP would hit CnG, your coalition scrambled for an in on IRON that would bring in you guys and Sparta, this took the form of a treaty-less DOW on IRON by Gremlins. The fact is you guys would have attacked IRON regardless of what we did and we would still be in the current situation. The only thing you guys can be aggrieved over is the fact that TOP picked IRON over MHA, but then it would be pretty hypocritical of you to complain about that since you were planning to hit their ally very early on in this war and like them you also choose to honour alternative treaty obligations.

The fact is that you both had different priorities at the time that led you in different directions. That is just the way it goes sometimes, trying to get one over on each other is completely ridiculous, I see no reason for the animosity shown by either party in this thread.
[/quote]

Truth is that the night of the attacks I was sitting with TOP in a combined Gov room. Never was leaked to us and we first found our when the attack took Place. I could not agree with you more. We both ended up on separate sides of a war for one reason or another. The treaty is gone, time to move on.

Edited March 20, 2010 by Pudge1975

[Carlton the Great]

[quote name='Timeline' date='20 March 2010 - 09:38 AM' timestamp='1269092292' post='2231251']
out of this whole statement something jumped out at me, i have made it bold for you, this did bring a smile to my face, you see IRON is well known for siding with who ever is at number one, first NPO, now TOP (I am sure it would have been many more, but lets face it NPO held power for a long time), I am just asking when this war is done and IRON comes begging at the feet of MHA, will you act as if these statements was nothing more then misinformation given to you from TOP ?

apart from the part i made bold, the rest of your statement is nothing but crap, you have no idea what was going on, UNLESS you are admitting to having a spy within MHA you do not know that MHA had target lists for IRON two days before you attacked CnG.
[/quote]
IRON's relationship with NPO and TOP go back years to the foundation of the Continuum. IRON was one of our first treaty partners back when TOP was still a small alliance.

[Timeline]

[quote name='Carlton the Great' date='20 March 2010 - 01:36 PM' timestamp='1269092167' post='2231248']
C&G was eventually going to enter the war on the Superfriends side. That is beyond debate. TOP and its allies viewed this as strategically undesirable and approached Grub, who supported our attack on C&G, with the understanding that he would not honor the MDPs that NpO held with either GR or MK.

I am not attempting to push responsibility for our attack away from my alliance, but the reality is that the TOP-C&G conflict would not have occurred without the involvement and approval of NpO. The argument that this is a completely separate war is erroneous.
[/quote]

TOP and its allies attacked CnG becuase you believe that CnG was going to enter the war with superfriends ?

What you do not understand is this, TOP and allies was not at war, CnG was not at war, you can claim what you wish the fact remains none of you was at war, IRON could have jumped in and helped NSO at anytime but they did not for the simple reason TOP asked them to stand by and wait for CnG, from start to end TOP and allies saw CnG in a weaker state, you wanted this war the of story.

also NpO has treaties with GR and MK, why would they put those to one side just for TOP and allies (NpO held no treaties with) to attack GR & MK ?

[Carlton the Great]

[quote name='Timeline' date='20 March 2010 - 09:45 AM' timestamp='1269092686' post='2231255']
also NpO has treaties with GR and MK, why would they put those to one side just for TOP and allies (NpO held no treaties with) to attack GR & MK ?
[/quote]
Given their subsequent bizarre behavior, I don't know, that's something my alliance would really like to know.

[quote][22:48] <Crymson[TOP]> Do you acknowledge that you yourself, before our attacks on MK and GR, stated all of the following: your approval of our war plans against those alliances, your intention to not honor those treaties in this instance, and your agreement that our attack was part of the greater war against \m/ and their allies?
[22:49] <AlmightyGrub> correct
[22:49] <Crymson[TOP]> You acknowledge all of the above?
[22:49] <AlmightyGrub> yes
[22:49] <Crymson[TOP]> Great.
[22:49] <AlmightyGrub> I have never said I dont
[22:49] <Crymson[TOP]> I'm sure you have no issue with me posting that segment on the OWF.
[22:49] <Crymson[TOP]> Is that correct?
[22:50] <AlmightyGrub> do whatever you feel you need to Crymson[/quote]

Edit: Though this is getting dangerously off-topic. Hopefully a TOP member with a more intimate understanding of our pre-war dealings with MHA would be able to qualify their rather one sided presentation of events.

Edited March 20, 2010 by Carlton the Great

[Cormalek]

[quote name='MCRABT' date='20 March 2010 - 02:25 PM' timestamp='1269091491' post='2231245']
Lets cut through the nonsense FARK was prepared to counter IRON 2 days prior to our DOW, [b]MHA had IRON target lists drawn up in preparation for IRON's attack on FARK[/b]. When news was leaked that IRON and TOP would hit CnG, your coalition scrambled for an in on IRON that would bring in you guys and Sparta, this took the form of a treaty-less DOW on IRON by Gremlins. The fact is you guys would have attacked IRON regardless of what we did and we would still be in the current situation. The only thing you guys can be aggrieved over is the fact that TOP picked IRON over MHA, but then it would be pretty hypocritical of you to complain about that since [b]you were planning to hit their ally very early on in this war[/b] and like them you also choose to honour alternative treaty obligations.[/quote]

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.

[Timeline]

[quote name='Carlton the Great' date='20 March 2010 - 01:50 PM' timestamp='1269093012' post='2231259']
Given their subsequent bizarre behavior, I don't know, that's something my alliance would really like to know.



Edit: Though this is getting dangerously off-topic. Hopefully a TOP member with a more intimate understanding of our pre-war dealings with MHA would be able to qualify their rather one sided presentation of events.
[/quote]

I still do not understand how NpO agreeing they will not enact on there MDP with MK and GR gives you the right to just attacked CnG ? did you even have a CB, or was it just a case of, well we knew you would come in so why wait ?

[unpronounced]

To those who are NOT in MHA or TOP: What would you have us do? Keep the treaty which not only has lost the spirit but also has been breached?

To TOP: Regardless of the reason of this cancellation, I think both parties agreed to part ways. Let's leave it at that.

[Carlton the Great]

[quote name='Timeline' date='20 March 2010 - 10:01 AM' timestamp='1269093654' post='2231267']
I still do not understand how NpO agreeing they will not enact on there MDP with MK and GR gives you the right to just attacked CnG ? did you even have a CB, or was it just a case of, well we knew you would come in so why wait ?
[/quote]
We wanted to ensure the survival of NpO and its allies as a power bloc, and we felt that C&G had a hostile intent towards us. If you don't think that's justification for our actions, you're entitled to your opinion. It's not like C&G has ever had a very high threshold of what they can roll someone for.

Edited March 20, 2010 by Carlton the Great

[The Ultimate 747]

This is not the time to argue about this; regardless of who you believe is to blame, for one reason or another the relationship between MHA and TOP has deteriorated to levels far below those necessary to practically sustain a military treaty. This is ultimately why we have canceled. Of course there is going to be animosity in this situation, but we all need to realize that it's time to move on. Allies rise and fall, and sometimes from the ashes a stronger bond may be forged, but thus far no friendship has ever lasted for eternity.

Though we have cut our ties, I wish TOP good luck in their future endeavors.

[ChairmanHal]

[quote name='unpronounced' date='20 March 2010 - 09:20 AM' timestamp='1269094825' post='2231273']
To those who are NOT in MHA or TOP: What would you have us do? Keep the treaty which not only has lost the spirit but also has been breached?

To TOP: Regardless of the reason of this cancellation, I think both parties agreed to part ways. Let's leave it at that.
[/quote]

I agree that the treaty was lost and breached a very long time ago. This cancellation is WAY overdue, to the point that the stated reasons for it are at best meaningless.

Speaking of meaningless...this destructive, now pointless war should end. "We want to make sure they never do this again" is no longer a justification. Or perhaps you think that neutral nations/alliances should suffer the continuing affects of your collective stubbornness?

[DaveII]

I refuse to address anyone specifically, seeing as that only leads to personal attacks which I condemn. But here are three topics brought up that I want to touch on, respectively.

[b]The Classlessness of MHA:
[/b]
This is based on one's own subjectivity, really. I only hope that people don't disregard the respect MHA has shown in this thread because a couple of people, in your opinion, have displayed classlessness. Otherwise you'd be demanding perfection.

[b]TOP's aid chains:
[/b]
It's understood that TOP aided members of their coalition but the fact is GGA was only in conflict with MHA during the time aid was sent to them by TOP. This was seen as an act of war or simply a carelessness towards the TOP-MHA relationship by many within MHA.

[i]"But we have evidence that MHA aided alliances in conflict with TOP!"
[/i]
While I would argue this is different seeing as the alliance(s) we aided weren't in conflict with TOP ONLY, I have to say this should provide more reason for the cancellation of this treaty. For a treaty to be upheld the actions of both sides must be reflective of a treaty symbolic to friendship, trust, and togetherness.

[b]MHA's Government:
[/b]
Just so you all know, the Triumvirate was a little reluctant when it came to cancelling the treaty. It's safe to say that this treaty was cancelled because of pressure by average hitchhickers who displayed dissatisfaction with TOP aiding nations they were fighting. Even if the treaty wasn't cancelled it would've been one that wasn't reflective of the relationship that existed between the two alliances.

I appreciate that the lot of you agree that the relationship just wasn't there and although you may not agree with the reasons for cancellations there is an understanding. While I do not agree that this was a wrong move, I sincerely understand those of you against it.

Understanding is key to moving forward.

Edited March 20, 2010 by DaveII

[Timeline]

[quote name='Carlton the Great' date='20 March 2010 - 01:43 PM' timestamp='1269092562' post='2231253']
IRON's relationship with NPO and TOP go back years to the foundation of the Continuum. IRON was one of our first treaty partners back when TOP was still a small alliance.
[/quote]


I never said you was not friends, the point remains, IRON like to follow who ever is in number one spot, this is just how they have been, i guess this is how they will always be, when you live a way for such a long time, you forget how to live on your own, I mean who will feed IRON, let them out when they need to pee, tell them off when they do wrong ?

[Timeline]

[quote name='Carlton the Great' date='20 March 2010 - 02:34 PM' timestamp='1269095672' post='2231278']
We wanted to ensure the survival of NpO and its allies as a power bloc, and we felt that C&G had a hostile intent towards us. If you don't think that's justification for our actions, you're entitled to your opinion. It's not like C&G has ever had a very high threshold of what they can roll someone for.
[/quote]

Carlton, do not get me wrong, i think the whole "you must have a CB" it total crap., if you do not like someone so be it, but you attacked C&G for one reason, you felt they was at their weakest, that was your only reason behind it.

What bugs me is how you still claim you did not start this war, well in fact you did.

[Scorn]

[quote name='ChairmanHal' date='20 March 2010 - 08:11 AM' timestamp='1269097860' post='2231291']
I agree that the treaty was lost and breached a very long time ago. This cancellation is WAY overdue, to the point that the stated reasons for it are at best meaningless.

Speaking of meaningless...this destructive, now pointless war should end. "We want to make sure they never do this again" is no longer a justification. Or perhaps you think that neutral nations/alliances should suffer the continuing affects of your collective stubbornness?
[/quote]

These wars generally end when both sides agree to terms. When that happens I suspect we will all be reading a different announcement. At the moment both sides have presented terms that were subsequently rejected by the other. Also, out of curiosity, do you consider Valhalla one of these innocent neutral alliances after participating in an earlier portion of the ongoing conflict or was your statement made on behalf of the silent masses that are suffering the economic hardships of elevated GRL? We could advocate a ban on nuclear exchanges, but that would put a severe hardship on the alliances that are currently losing this war. So, I have to ask what is your expectation here and is it directed at TOP or MHA?

[Vladimir Stukov II]

[quote name='Timeline' date='20 March 2010 - 04:44 PM' timestamp='1269099836' post='2231297']
I never said you was not friends, the point remains, IRON like to follow who ever is in number one spot, this is just how they have been, i guess this is how they will always be, when you live a way for such a long time, you forget how to live on your own, I mean who will feed IRON, let them out when they need to pee, tell them off when they do wrong ?
[/quote]

IRON did not "follow" TOP into this. If we had let things play out, TOP would have had to come in to defend IRON. So we decided to act jointly and do a pre-emptive attack.

[neneko]

[quote name='Vladimir Stukov II' date='20 March 2010 - 05:03 PM' timestamp='1269100981' post='2231309']
IRON did not "follow" TOP into this. If we had let things play out, TOP would have had to come in to defend IRON. So we decided to act jointly and do a pre-emptive attack.
[/quote]
The 'masterminds' behind the preemptive strike was TOP gov. Eventhough IRON was the ones that was first in the treaty chain you claim to have used they still managed to be the followers. Quite a feat if you ask me.