The New Grämlins

[shilo]

I want to see those who would criticize you, or if there were others, any alliance that cancels a treaty with the gRAMlins. Distancing yourself from a group like them is simply and only entirely a positive thing, no matter how you look at it.

[Coursca]

[quote name='Iamrecognized' date='18 May 2010 - 10:10 PM' timestamp='1274234999' post='2302744']
Quite true. While I personally don't support the current situation (like many in MHA), we still have that treaty, and as long as it is active, it's active.

And (and this is directed to people in general) don't tell us to cancel it, you'd complain if we did that too.
[/quote]

Cancel it. Nobody would complain about it. You'd be doing everyone a great public service.

I somehow doubt MHA would maintain a treaty with a 5-man AA composed of Ramirus, Ertyy, Matthew PK, and two ghosts. I just can't envision that scenario fleshing out.

[Bilrow]

[quote name='Coursca' date='18 May 2010 - 09:49 PM' timestamp='1274237323' post='2302826']
Cancel it. Nobody would complain about it. You'd be doing everyone a great public service.

I somehow doubt MHA would maintain a treaty with a 5-man AA composed of Ramirus, Ertyy, Matthew PK, and two ghosts. I just can't envision that scenario fleshing out.
[/quote]

Unless MHA is desperate for allies.

[Gamemaster1]

[quote name='Iamrecognized' date='18 May 2010 - 10:10 PM' timestamp='1274234999' post='2302744']
Quite true. While I personally don't support the current situation (like many in MHA), we still have that treaty, and as long as it is active, it's active.

And (and this is directed to people in general) don't tell us to cancel it, you'd complain if we did that too.
[/quote]
Since it can't be canceled (right?), yeah, I would. A treaty obligation is a treaty obligation, and you are bound to it.

[Shodemofi-NPO]

Treaties without cancellation clauses have a long history of being canceled anyways.

[Mixoux]

[quote name='shilo' date='18 May 2010 - 10:27 PM' timestamp='1274236049' post='2302785']
I want to see those who would criticize you, or if there were others, any alliance that cancels a treaty with the gRAMlins. Distancing yourself from a group like them is simply and only entirely a positive thing, no matter how you look at it.
[/quote]

"Wow, you canceled an ETERNAL TREATY? *inserts vast amounts of sarcasm at the shock and awe before throwing in a 'told you so' comment*"

That would go on for years too, I'm sure.

[Kim Jaym Il]

I wasn't aware that alliances dictated their FA decisions based on what the peanut gallery might think of it.

[Mussolandia]

[quote name='Jaymjaym' date='19 May 2010 - 03:22 AM' timestamp='1274239357' post='2302882']
I wasn't aware that alliances dictated their FA decisions based on what the peanut gallery might think of it.
[/quote]

The crappy ones do.

[Geoffron X]

[quote name='Gamemaster1' date='18 May 2010 - 11:09 PM' timestamp='1274238535' post='2302855']
Since it can't be canceled (right?), yeah, I would. A treaty obligation is a treaty obligation, and you are bound to it.
[/quote]
Because MHA has always followed their treaties?

[Aeternos Astramora]

You know, you can amend the treaty and take out that "eternal" part. I'm sure Ram will be happy to do that, being "paperless" and all.

[Iamrecognized]

[quote name='Jaymjaym' date='18 May 2010 - 08:22 PM' timestamp='1274239357' post='2302882']
I wasn't aware that alliances dictated their FA decisions based on what the peanut gallery might think of it.
[/quote]

We don't.

[Ashoka the Great]

[quote name='Iamrecognized' date='18 May 2010 - 10:10 PM' timestamp='1274234999' post='2302744']
Quite true. While I personally don't support the current situation (like many in MHA), we still have that treaty, and as long as it is active, it's active.

And (and this is directed to people in general) don't tell us to cancel it, you'd complain if we did that too.
[/quote]

I doubt that, frankly. I do believe there is a broad international consensus that your patience has been tested quite enough.

Keep it or don't. But don't blame everyone else for whichever decision you make.

[quote name='Geoffron X' date='19 May 2010 - 12:28 AM' timestamp='1274243288' post='2302962']Because MHA has always followed their treaties?[/quote]

*Zing!*

Edited May 19, 2010 by Ashoka the Great

[Zangmonkey]

[quote name='Dochartaigh' date='18 May 2010 - 06:20 PM' timestamp='1274232012' post='2302655']
not true. The Härmlin Accords is still active.
[/quote]

We consider the Harmlin accords less a treaty and more a statement of internal philosophy.

I will fight for MHA because I consider myself one and the same as them; the paper is irrelevant.

[Stetson76]

Matthew, I realize I may have posted this during your time of limited access, but I would like to hear your thoughts:

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='13 May 2010 - 11:28 AM' timestamp='1273768082' post='2297005']
The Gremlins declared war to defend against IRON's unwarranted attack.

On the other hand, like I asked of Gamemaster, find me [b]specific[/b] examples and I'll be happy to read them.
[/quote]

Okay, I'm going to try again. Matthew, please look at the quotes up above, and notice the missing words in the first line: [url=http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=79441]TOP[/url], [url=http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=79444&st=0&p=2138894&hl=declare&fromsearch=1&#entry2138894]TORN[/url] declared war in the same manner and at the same time IRON/DAWN did. In fact, TOP declared first. (Not to discount FEAR and TSO who are pretty universally added to this list, their DOW's came much later.) I've also conveniently added the links to their DOW's to satisfy your request for specific examples so you can "read them."

Not only do I not need to dig through ancient history to come up with examples for you, this points out that your "defense of MK/friends" line is nothing but a bold faced lie. If you were indeed standing on an absolute principle you would have at minimum declared on these other two alliances.

So, yes, let's stop bandying about definitions of unconditional surrender or terms or any of the other things we've been discussing, and answer the question that many others have been asking. Why would you in defense of an [b]absolute[/b] principle in which you were [b]obligated[/b] to act for the sake of the Cyberverse not declare war on TOP or TORN?

The entire argument that you are making without any cute turns of phrase or reference to a dictionary falls on this single point. You've selectively applied your principles and are in no position to make a moral judgment at this late date.

I've watched you through this entire thread use logic as your cornerstone (despite disagreeing with your conclusions) and have come to respect your loyalty and dogged adherence to principle so please, apply that logic and recognize that your stance is incompatible with your alliance's actions.

Just to make it clear, I'm not asking you to declare on these people now, I'm asking you to explain to everyone (but especially yourself) how GRE can engage in a moral crusade that is so clearly prejudiced and narrow minded.

[nikko]

I don't know if that makes any sense, but he stated they're "opposed" to us as well

[Artigo]

[quote name='nikko' date='19 May 2010 - 01:23 AM' timestamp='1274253813' post='2303128']
I don't know if that makes any sense, but he stated they're "opposed" to us as well
[/quote]

So we're just super extra special then

[caligula]

Holy one-liners.

This is quite long.

Anyway, I don't see this continuing for much longer.
While Ramirus' decisions have been analyzed a bajillion and a half times, I would hope things are coming to a close.

I'm quite saddened. The Gramlins I knew are mostly gone. Some who have left are openly campaigning for its demise.
Times have changed. It is unfortunate that an alliance once thought to be invincible is slowly being reduced to a punchline.

As a Harmlin, I can only hope this ends well and recovery and forgiveness may occur.

I can only hope for a miracle.

[Lord Brendan]

[quote name='Iamrecognized' date='18 May 2010 - 10:10 PM' timestamp='1274234999' post='2302744']
And (and this is directed to people in general) don't tell us to cancel it, you'd complain if we did that too.
[/quote]

I'll be honest, I would mock you for canceling it.

But I mock you even more for keeping it, especially if your only reason for doing so is fear of mockery.

Edited May 19, 2010 by Lord Brendan

[Rebel Virginia]

[quote name='Lord Brendan' date='19 May 2010 - 07:24 AM' timestamp='1274268253' post='2303230']
I'll be honest, I would mock you for canceling it.

But I mock you even more for keeping it, especially if your only reason for doing so is fear of mockery.
[/quote]
[color="#0000FF"]For once we agree. It is like when ODN vowed to follow treaties, even if they didn't want to because they completely disagreed with IRON or someone, just to prove to people they had a spine. That isn't having a spine. It is cowardice. So I've come to a conclusion. Either people are born with a spine or they aren't. Clearly MHA wasn't. If they were they had canceled the uncancelable (I know this isn't a word) treaty. So what if it technically illegal based on what a piece of paper you clearly resent says. If you had a spine you'd make it happen and not care what the rest of the world says simply because that's what you wanted to do so you do it. But yes, what do I know about having a spine, and who am I to be lecturing you?[/color]

[ojiras ajeridas]

As gRAMlins don't see Harmlins Accords as a treaty, but as a statement of internal philosophy, in that moment that one of the signed alliances realize not to have a common philosophy with the other alliance any more, the whole Harmlins Accords should be void. A treaty that isn't seen as a treaty can't be uncancellable. At the other side, under these circumstances, I don't see how any alliance excepted gRAMlins themselves can blame MHA if they decide not to follow this new Ramirus' policy any more. So, for me it is easy. If MHA wants to still support gRAMlins, they have to stand at the HA. If they don't, they have to cancel them. To say not to agree with Gre in actually anything but recall that not cancellable treaty is a poor decision and will harm MHA's PR much more than cancelling it.

[Haflinger]

Matthew has made it pretty clear that he considers that IRON were the ringleaders of the horror perpetrated on C&G and TOP, TORN, DAWN and so on were all just along for the ride.

You know, because those alliances have no independent thought and have always done what IRON told them to.

[Bob Janova]

Really? I must have read over that. It's pretty clear that TOP (specifically LM and Crymson) were the ones who made that call, I thought.

[shilo]

[quote name='Bob Janova' date='19 May 2010 - 04:25 PM' timestamp='1274279108' post='2303323']
Really? I must have read over that. It's pretty clear that TOP (specifically LM and Crymson) were the ones who made that call, I thought.
[/quote]
How about we agree that TOP and IRON stand for all the evils in this world and more, and that the rest of us brainless minions just followed them along for the ride because they are so good at mind control

[Dochartaigh]

[quote name='shilo' date='19 May 2010 - 09:29 AM' timestamp='1274279332' post='2303326']
How about we agree that TOP and IRON stand for all the evils in this world and more, and that the rest of us brainless minions just followed them along for the ride because they are so good at mind control
[/quote]

but where does that put me then???????????

[The Warrior]

[quote name='Iamrecognized' date='19 May 2010 - 03:10 AM' timestamp='1274234999' post='2302744']
Quite true. While I personally don't support the current situation (like many in MHA), we still have that treaty, and as long as it is active, it's active.
[/quote]

This is really too bad. I'm curious, what is MHA getting out of that relationship anyway? It appears that you are receiving nothing except bad PR and a "friend" who doesn't even consider HA a "treaty".