The New Grämlins

[Sandwich Controversy]

No comment.

[Jyrinx]

[quote name='Rush Sykes' date='18 April 2010 - 10:18 PM' timestamp='1271643509' post='2265692']
I love how you continue to try to speak for myself, and for my allies. You must enjoy trotting out that nonsense. Its factually quite simple. Had IRON not attacked a defensive partner of CnG, IRON would not have been attacked. More to the point, NSO had entered that war in defense of the aggressors, IRON had zero obligation to hit anyone. There is a reason their treaty was oA and and MADP. Presumable its to keep IRON out of a war that shouldnt be fought, and was only being fought because of massive egos on the side of the aggressors. That IRON decided to issue a blanket DoW on a group of alliances whos defensive treaties encompass 65% of the planet, speaks to either temporary insanity, or a death wish. Your constant postulating that CnG was headed in a beeline towards IRON, sir, is quite simply not true.
[/quote]

While you might be correct in that they may not have had a literal requirement to defend NSO (I have not, and don't care enough to, actually read their MDP/MDoAP), that's a pretty weak argument. Treaties are supposed to represent genuine friendships and you can hardly call out an alliance for attacking in defense of a treaty partner. Even if CnG was just an MDoAP, I'm almost certain that Athens would jump into an aggressive war with MK because you guys are close friends. And you know what? That's understandable. I and others may not [i]like[/i] it, but I can at least understand it. Yet your post seems to think that IRON could've just ignored NSO completely. I mean, they could've and, again, it would've been understandable especially if there's a non-chaining clause. But the peanut gallery would almost certainly have called IRON out for that. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Just for the record, I think the preemptive attacks on CnG were really stupid. But surly you can see that IRON had a pretty damn good reason, if not an outright obligation, to defend NSO. Ditto TOP, TORN, etc. for IRON. Once they hit NSO's attackers in SF, CnG would probably come in after them. So yeah, I suppose technically CnG wasn't going to do anything to IRON et al as long as they didn't declare on people linked to you, but... they were going to. Justifiably in my opinion too.

Of course, I think they should've gone the normal route of declaration/redeclaration and so won't condone the preemptive strike, but do you really think that IRON defending NSO isn't an acceptable or justifiable course of action? I don't think you actually believe that.

[Heft]

[quote name='Rush Sykes' date='18 April 2010 - 09:13 PM' timestamp='1271643169' post='2265684']
Your play on words... rogue vs sovereign... is kind of my point. As to GRE's reasonings for not really caring about the peace reached between IRON and everyone else. Their perspective is that IRON committed a rogue criminal act. You may disagree with it. 24000 out of 25000 nations on Bob might disagree with it. That alone, does not make it fact. You cited that IRON entered to assist NSO, of all the facts that have gone up between our 2 posts, that is the only patently falsse, and patently absurd fact. Everything else, is debatable, which was my point. Everyone condemns GRE as if their own opinions were fact, and anything not in agreement with them, is false. Its simply not the way things work. It is a fact the IRON declared on alliances that they had no treaty obligation to declare on, and who they had no real reason to want to fight. Everything that happens AFTER that fact, is left to the interpretation of those who defended. GREs interpretation differs greatly from ours, it does not however, make their beliefs wrong.
[/quote]
Most people have conceded that the "pre-emptive" maneuver !@#$%^&* was not the best or most thought out. But you seem to be taking that to some absurd extremes yourself.

IRON's actions were motivated by a desire to assist the NSO, their allies, and support us in a war.

Also, calling the actions of any alliance "criminal" is just dumb and makes no sense at all.

[northstars]

I've got no problem watching IRON burn. Maybe this will teach them to be careful who they pick fights with.

Keep it up until NPO is out of terms and this might [i]really[/i] get interesting.

[Jesse End]

[quote name='Rush Sykes' date='18 April 2010 - 08:18 PM' timestamp='1271643509' post='2265692']
I love how you continue to try to speak for myself, and for my allies. You must enjoy trotting out that nonsense. Its factually quite simple. Had IRON not attacked a defensive partner of CnG, IRON would not have been attacked. More to the point, NSO had entered that war in defense of the aggressors, IRON had zero obligation to hit anyone. There is a reason their treaty was oA and and MADP. Presumable its to keep IRON out of a war that shouldnt be fought, and was only being fought because of massive egos on the side of the aggressors. That IRON decided to issue a blanket DoW on a group of alliances whos defensive treaties encompass 65% of the planet, speaks to either temporary insanity, or a death wish. Your constant postulating that CnG was headed in a beeline towards IRON, sir, is quite simply not true.
[/quote]

As you are arguing that IRON's DoW was a criminal act without a direct treaty link, do you feel the same way about Gramlins DoW on IRON without a direct treaty link?

[Rush Sykes]

[quote name='bigwoody' date='18 April 2010 - 11:11 PM' timestamp='1271646658' post='2265753']
Winners write history, so you can say that now, but others have admitted already that CnG was coming in. That's rather beside the main point though.
[/quote]


Im not sure who you got your information that CnG was "coming in." It is not rocket science, however, to say, "hmmm, if someone hits one of our allies, yeah, we will be there." That is no different than me planning a war, say, against DAWN, knowing the whole while that you will come to their defense. Its just common sense. What is being lost here, specifically in reference to IRON, is they chose to start an aggressive war. Their war was not in support of NSO, as you claimed earlier. Their war, was in fact, as has been admitted by TOP, IRON, allies, etc... an attempt to take down CnG, with no CB, with no recognized hostilities... and to do so while taking advantage of Polar and her allies guns being pointed the other way. It was, in fact, absolute destructive opportunism. Opportunism which GRE has chosen to view as criminal. Like I said, we agree, you and I, that it would be best for everyone if GRE would just let it end. That being said, however, it simply is not blatantly false, or incorrect, that IRONs entire DoW against GRE's friends, was in fact, tantamount to a crime.

[Rush Sykes]

[quote name='Jesse End' date='19 April 2010 - 12:47 AM' timestamp='1271652429' post='2265882']
As you are arguing that IRON's DoW was a criminal act without a direct treaty link, do you feel the same way about Gramlins DoW on IRON without a direct treaty link?
[/quote]

First of all, I am not arguing that IRONs DoW was a criminal act. I am , in fact, arguing, that it at least has some basis in fact, and therein, it is debatable, as I said earlier. I categorically feel that GRE is making a huge mistake at present. At the same time, I caregorically oppose those who want to paint GRE's view of IRONs DoW as a criminal act, to be matter-of-factly a lie, an absurdity, and a falsehood. The facts do not support that. It is cause for debate, but it not clear-cut one way or another.

To your second point, it IS completely wrong, beyond any matter of debate, that GREs relationship with MK was at a HIGH treaty-type level. GRE was VERY clear when they made their announcement going paperless. Their friendships and bonds would determine their military course in conflicts. Anyone who doubted the level of the relationship between those two prior to this war, is either willfully ignorant or specifically in denial of facts.

[Booter]

Amirite?

[img]http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u11/ironchef_GGA/gramPR.jpg[/img]

[Geoffron X]

[quote name='Arcturus Jefferson' date='18 April 2010 - 05:13 PM' timestamp='1271625186' post='2265308']
I mean, who says that about themselves? Come on.
[/quote]
Um... we do?

[The Warrior]

[quote name='Booter' date='19 April 2010 - 06:14 AM' timestamp='1271654036' post='2265934']
Amirite?

[img]http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u11/ironchef_GGA/gramPR.jpg[/img]
[/quote]

Looks about right.

[northstars]

[quote name='The Warrior' date='19 April 2010 - 12:20 AM' timestamp='1271654396' post='2265944']
Looks about right.
[/quote]

I'm willing to bet that GRE is less interested in the whining from the peanut gallery than it is in seeing to it that your terrible alliance is finally put out of its misery.

[dvdcchn]

[quote name='MNNorthStars' date='19 April 2010 - 12:50 AM' timestamp='1271656194' post='2265978']
I'm willing to bet that GRE is less interested in the whining from the peanut gallery than it is in seeing to it that your terrible alliance is finally put out of its misery.
[/quote]

i would think the same thing, but so many seem to be leaving...

[Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz]

[quote name='MNNorthStars' date='19 April 2010 - 03:47 PM' timestamp='1271652402' post='2265881']
Keep it up until NPO is out of terms and this might [i]really[/i] get interesting.
[/quote]
Why is that?

[northstars]

[quote name='Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz' date='19 April 2010 - 12:58 AM' timestamp='1271656689' post='2265988']
Why is that?
[/quote]
Well if they were to sign with IRON and be obligated to hit GRE...

[Jesse End]

[quote name='Rush Sykes' date='18 April 2010 - 11:05 PM' timestamp='1271653504' post='2265919']
First of all, I am not arguing that IRONs DoW was a criminal act. I am , in fact, arguing, that it at least has some basis in fact, and therein, it is debatable, as I said earlier. I categorically feel that GRE is making a huge mistake at present. At the same time, I caregorically oppose those who want to paint GRE's view of IRONs DoW as a criminal act, to be matter-of-factly a lie, an absurdity, and a falsehood. The facts do not support that. It is cause for debate, but it not clear-cut one way or another.

To your second point, it IS completely wrong, beyond any matter of debate, that GREs relationship with MK was at a HIGH treaty-type level. GRE was VERY clear when they made their announcement going paperless. Their friendships and bonds would determine their military course in conflicts. Anyone who doubted the level of the relationship between those two prior to this war, is either willfully ignorant or specifically in denial of facts.
[/quote]

Is it your view that it is acceptable to declare war without a treaty link (aka to help friends), or do you believe it's wrong to declare war without a treaty link?

[Feanor Noldorin]

[quote name='Rush Sykes' date='18 April 2010 - 11:59 PM' timestamp='1271653139' post='2265907']
Their war, was in fact, as has been admitted by TOP, IRON, allies, etc... an attempt to take down CnG, with no CB, with no recognized hostilities... and to do so while taking advantage of Polar and her allies guns being pointed the other way.
[/quote]
I laughed out loud.

I know that this is/was the party line for some on the other side when the war was occurring but we've never admitted to such a thing. If that is your opinion then that's all fine and dandy but please don't say we ever admitted to that. It's just not true.

Edited April 19, 2010 by Feanor Noldorin

[Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz]

[quote name='MNNorthStars' date='19 April 2010 - 05:09 PM' timestamp='1271657379' post='2265997']
Well if they were to sign with IRON and be obligated to hit GRE...
[/quote]
Ah, I understand. I suppose that they could possibly be silly enough to do something like that, but then again, I doubt that the NPO will so readily provide reasons to get curbstomped all over again.

Edited April 19, 2010 by Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz

[The Warrior]

[quote name='MNNorthStars' date='19 April 2010 - 06:50 AM' timestamp='1271656194' post='2265978']
I'm willing to bet that GRE is less interested in the whining from the peanut gallery than it is in seeing to it that your terrible alliance is finally put out of its misery.
[/quote]

I'm willing to bet that you don't speak for GRE. Let them speak to their intentions. Maybe the record will quit skipping some day and planet bob will get a real answer about what they are doing.

[Crymson]

[quote name='Heft' date='18 April 2010 - 10:43 PM' timestamp='1271652216' post='2265877']
IRON's actions were motivated by a desire to assist the NSO, their allies, and support us in a war.
[/quote]

I can confirm that this is the truth.

[quote name='Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz' date='18 April 2010 - 06:40 PM' timestamp='1271637600' post='2265543']
That post right there's quite revealing as to how Gre gov operates. No consultation with membership outside of elections? Open, participative and transparent governance right there
[/quote]

It's especially funny when one remembers the constant---and baseless---accusations from Ertyy and Ram that TOP's government was totally unaccountable and opaque to its electorate.

[quote name='MNNorthStars' date='19 April 2010 - 12:09 AM' timestamp='1271657379' post='2265997']
Well if they were to sign with IRON and be obligated to hit GRE...
[/quote]

Treaties do not apply retroactively. Were NPO to sign an MDP with IRON, they'd have no CB against the Gramlins.

The next time you decide to come in and act smartassed, try not to say something stupid in the next sentence.

Edited April 19, 2010 by Crymson

[ojiras ajeridas]

[quote name='Rush Sykes' date='18 April 2010 - 11:23 PM' timestamp='1271625772' post='2265316']
At the VERY least, the notion that IRONs war was a rogue or criminal act, is debatable. It is not outwardly false. Their war against CnG was NOT in any way, shape, or form, a defense of, or an assistance to, NSO. That entire notion is patently absurd. On planet Bob, the definition of criminal is always evolving. There is no widely prevailing definition. Support what they are doing, or not, they are fully entitled to view IRONs acts as criminal in relationship to accepted standards on Bob (much like the world rallied to paint Athens raid on Ni! as criminal due to the standards of the planet) for entry into wars. IRON faced no imminent threat, held no treaty obligating them to attack GRE's friends. Yet they did.

It is fine to not support their war. I too, would like to see them just let it end. It is not, however, wrong for them to view the act as criminal, and for them to determine what they themselves deem to be a just punishment. It is, in fact, blatant hypocrisy on MANY of IRONs allies to now claim that GRE has no place to dole out whatever punishment they see fit to IRON, because the aggrieved parties (CnG) have already agreed to a satisfactory end. It was not that long ago, that you all posted your declarations of war, based partly on tacitly "supporting NpO's war on \m/ in defense of community standards, stemming MOSTLY from the \m/, GOONs, and PC raids. Despite the fact that aggrieved party in THAT case(FOA, I believe it was?) had already been afforded acceptable compensation. I suppose its yet another double-standard played in the political arena, to further your cause.
[/quote]
We should however not forget that the war of IRON was against CnG. So, if we consider the attack on CnG a crime, it is a crime committed against CnG, not against RAMlins. Because of this it is CnG's exlusive right to fix how much of "punishment" the single alliances in war with them should take. At this point I want to remember that the reparations of TTIDT in favour of CnG & friends are fixed for quite some time now, that also reparations towards RAMlins were included in that packet, that CnG obviously found those reparation as adequate to make TTIDT pay for the attack against them. Only, RAMlins retracted themselves from these terms already agreed upon.

We are paying reparations out of the war supporting NpO, we already committed that our attack on CnG was wrong. But this isn't comparable to the situation between IRON and RAMlins. RAMlins entered this war volountarily, as we did, and here the similarities end. All involved parts already had agreed on reparations also for RAMlins, an amount that was proposed by RAMlins. Now, if they aren't happy with them, why do they propose them? Because they are paperless? So, what has IRON to do to get peace? Won't RAMlins be paperless also after the unconditional surrender? Wouldn't agreeing to those Easter Sunday Accords without actually signing them be paperless? Or... is that paperless thingy just a bad excuse by RAMlins part for this insane behaviour?

RAMlins weren't the target of this attack. If RAMlins wanted to, they had the chance to buy some pop corn and just watch the battle. It was because of RAMlins will to support CnG in this war that they entered it. I don't see how RAMlins are trying to play the victims now. I'm tired of that aggressive/defensive discussion. Fact is, IRON didn't attack RAMlins. They attacked CnG. So, if there are victims, it's CnG. So, I really don't understand where RAMlins come from with all that danger coming out of IRON.

[shahenshah]

Can we all kindly not feed the tangents.

[quote name='Rush Sykes' date='19 April 2010 - 10:05 AM' timestamp='1271653504' post='2265919']
.... [/quote]

So Rush Sykes, what is Athens position regarding this present conflict between Gramlins and IRON? I can attest to the fact that Londo in good faith has tried to reason with Ramirus, moving beyond the talks and negotiations with Gramlins that have continually failed over last few weeks, do you think Athens would intervene to counter any possible military deterrence and/or action against Gramlins aimed towards ending the conflict in white peace for all involved parties?
Clearly the talks have not produced one positive result in last few weeks dont you think?
Can you perhaps also inform us of CnG's position regarding the above points that have been raised by several posters?

Anyone got any specific on-topic points to ask while we have a CnG members here in the thread?

Edited April 19, 2010 by shahenshah

[shilo]

[quote name='Booter' date='19 April 2010 - 07:14 AM' timestamp='1271654036' post='2265934']
Amirite?

[img]http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u11/ironchef_GGA/gramPR.jpg[/img]
[/quote]

Excellent piece of art, Booter
[quote name='shahenshah' date='19 April 2010 - 11:07 AM' timestamp='1271668025' post='2266111']
Anyone got any specific on-topic points to ask while we have a CnG members here in the thread?
[/quote]
You raised excellent questions, I do hope they find their answers soon, many are curious.

[Booter]

[quote name='shilo' date='19 April 2010 - 05:36 AM' timestamp='1271673370' post='2266141']
Excellent piece of art, Booter

You raised excellent questions, I do hope they find their answers soon, many are curious.
[/quote]

It is a great work of art, but I can't claim it as my own. Someone else made it.

[Dochartaigh]

[quote name='MNNorthStars' date='19 April 2010 - 12:50 AM' timestamp='1271656194' post='2265978']
I'm willing to bet that GRE is less interested in the whining from the peanut gallery than it is in seeing to it that your terrible alliance is finally put out of its misery.
[/quote]

man, you must really love jackboots amirite? also, Gre may not be all that interested in the whining from the peanut gallery, but it don't matter. their members are leaving and Gre is pissing off their allies. so unless Gre starts listening to someone including their own allies, they will soon be the ones put out of their misery, not IRON or DAWN. you really do need to learn the actual situation before you start spouting off at the mouth.

[lebubu]

[quote name='Dochartaigh' date='19 April 2010 - 01:53 PM' timestamp='1271677963' post='2266170']
man, you must really love jackboots amirite? also, Gre may not be all that interested in the whining from the peanut gallery, but it don't matter. their members are leaving and Gre is pissing off their allies. so unless Gre starts listening to someone including their own allies, they will soon be the ones put out of their misery, not IRON or DAWN. you really do need to learn the actual situation before you start spouting off at the mouth.
[/quote]

Do tell us more about Grämlins' allies. [img]http://thecastlehall.com/boards/Smileys/kickass/gush.gif[/img]