The New Grämlins

[Hiro Nakara]

[quote name='majorddf' date='14 April 2010 - 12:20 PM' timestamp='1271244038' post='2259968']
Listen To Hiro... He talks sense. Well not grammatically but you get the gist
[/quote]

Sorry, I'm not a natural English speaking/typing person.

[Cormalek]

[quote name='Methrage' date='14 April 2010 - 11:49 AM' timestamp='1271238542' post='2259907']
I don't think its a cases of IRON wishing to do their thing and have fun continuing this as they don't want to unconditionally surrender, also observing isn't a clear position on what would happen if it escalated more, unless you're saying you would just continue observing in that case as well. Observing is usually what you do as you're still deciding on something.[/quote]
We are not entering now. If there will be new facts in this matter to be considered - we will have to consider them. How many times does that need to be rephrased to get through?

[quote name='Methrage' date='14 April 2010 - 12:21 PM' timestamp='1271240463' post='2259931']
So its an agreement with you guys keeping IRON from bringing anyone in and you guys don't know what you would do if something out of IRON's control happened. Now it seems more clear.[/quote]
Sort of, yes. We don't enter now, and since IRON said they won't bring more allies in - we don't have anything more to clarify at this moment.
I'd hoped my definite answer would explain a lot, but apparently Douglas-made literature is not as popular outside of MHA ;-)

So maybe an Italian mobsters metaphor?
"So you know about the thing?" "What, the one with the guy with the hat?" "No man, I mean the fella with a whoohoo. You know. The bippabob on the..." "Yeah, forget about it. He did that thing though" "He's a friend?" "Friend of Johnny's, but he's a good kid. Heard good things" "So can he... you know?" "Wha', a... bombapop?" "Well you said it." "And does the pope wear a hat?"

And we're asked to provide a yes/no question to the above.

BTW: We all post here for some reasons. What are yours, Methrage? Your alliance entered this conflict, and MHA didn't counter. What do you wish to accomplish with your posts?

[President Hardin]

[quote name='The Big Bad' date='14 April 2010 - 07:00 AM' timestamp='1271242784' post='2259954']
I think you are mistaking this being about IRON, it is not. It is about Gramlins. If they are allowed to demand unconditional surrender it will set a precedent that is a direct threat to every single alliance on Planet Bob. As I said before, this not about morals this is about the security of every alliance on Bob. So it is not just IRONs allies or alliances that have anything to do with them that may me involved. Gramlins has placed us all under threat by its actions.
[/quote]

i agree with this 100% and I have taken one step extra by placing GDA tech sanctions against Gramlins. Our members will not buy or sell tech to Gramlins until they come to their senses. I firmly believe this has a potentially game-changing effect on the way peace deals are struck in the future. If one alliance is allowed to go back on their word eventually other alliances will take this as status quo and repeat the same offense without thought.

[shilo]

[quote name='President Hardin' date='14 April 2010 - 01:43 PM' timestamp='1271245419' post='2259984']
i agree with this 100% and I have taken one step extra by placing GDA tech sanctions against Gramlins. Our members will not buy or sell tech to Gramlins until they come to their senses. I firmly believe this has a potentially game-changing effect on the way peace deals are struck in the future. If one alliance is allowed to go back on their word eventually other alliances will take this as status quo and repeat the same offense without thought.
[/quote]
Thank you for not only talking the talk, but also walking the walk. I hope many will follow your example.

[Sephiroth]

[quote name='Cormalek' date='14 April 2010 - 07:39 AM' timestamp='1271245161' post='2259981']
We are not entering now. If there will be new facts in this matter to be considered - we will have to consider them. How many times does that need to be rephrased to get through?


Sort of, yes. We don't enter now, and since IRON said they won't bring more allies in - we don't have anything more to clarify at this moment.
I'd hoped my definite answer would explain a lot, but apparently Douglas-made literature is not as popular outside of MHA ;-)

So maybe an Italian mobsters metaphor?
"So you know about the thing?" "What, the one with the guy with the hat?" "No man, I mean the fella with a whoohoo. You know. The bippabob on the..." "Yeah, forget about it. He did that thing though" "He's a friend?" "Friend of Johnny's, but he's a good kid. Heard good things" "So can he... you know?" "Wha', a... bombapop?" "Well you said it." "And does the pope wear a hat?"

And we're asked to provide a yes/no question to the above.

BTW: We all post here for some reasons. What are yours, Methrage? Your alliance entered this conflict, and MHA didn't counter. What do you wish to accomplish with your posts?
[/quote]
I was seeing where you guys stood on the issue, I think I've accomplished that. Scutterbug and majorddf gave a clear enough view of the current situation with you guys in my opinion.

Edit: I still think you should cancel Harmlins if that is how MHA feels about Gremlins currently and Gremlin gov doesn't care about MHA opinions like it would seem. I think holding onto treaties past the time they will be honored is a bad trait and you guys should cancel it rather than pretend it isn't there when convenient. That's just some advice though, up to you guys how you want to deal with your treaties.

Edited April 14, 2010 by Methrage

[MCRABT]

[quote name='scutterbug' date='14 April 2010 - 08:58 AM' timestamp='1271231905' post='2259855']
Coming from the man whos decisions saw TOP go down in flames, thats rich to say the least.
[/quote]

And that has exactly what to do with eternal treaties? Did I miss the causation implied there or something?

[quote name='shilo' date='14 April 2010 - 11:05 AM' timestamp='1271239506' post='2259917']
No offense, but someone who has Cormalek in his ranks, the master of reading between the lines, you should check that one more time:
obviously no one cares to ignite this war beyond gRAMlins, but surely no one will mind getting more manpower onto the field to beat them back to their senses sooner. Right now what's stopping this is MHA threatening if we get help they will escalate it.

So, us getting help is still very much appreciated, we still are completely outmatched in the top ranks, and without support have a very long battle ahead of us until we can deliver the hurt to the last remaining gRAMlin. What we don't want is that those that come to our help then get beatdown by MHA and a coalition of their friends. We wouldn't do that to our friends.
[/quote]

DAWN are our Harmlins and when they speak on this matter since they are in exactly the same position as us they are going to be pretty close on the matter, I think you probably realise that though.

As for me I do speak for IRON and can confirm Shilo's post is bang on the mark.

Edited April 14, 2010 by MCRABT

[Starfox101]

[quote name='Baden-Württemberg' date='14 April 2010 - 10:02 AM' timestamp='1271235719' post='2259877']
Well, at least TOP's making decisions.
[/quote]
That's rich coming from a former MXCA leader.

[janax]

[quote name='scutterbug' date='14 April 2010 - 06:03 AM' timestamp='1271242994' post='2259955']
Are we even on the same planet BoB?

The same bob where TOP declared a whole new war on a completly uninvolved block endangering all of its allies because of its own paranoia?

Guess not eh?
[/quote]

Learn your history. MHA was all about ""pre-emptive strikes" during WoTC. Ask Genesis and Nueva Vida. And no, BLEU wasn't involved in the war yet (although likely to be due to the treaties...just...like...C&G)

Basically, what I get out of this is
A) MHA isn't DIRECTLY supporting RAMlins militarily.
B) If no one else jumps in, they won't either.

So...they are just indirectly supporting their move by implying they will get involved if someone else jumps in. Support is support. "We don't support Ramlins in this..." just means that as long as no one is helping the alliance fresh from a two month war against the ridiculous demands of a egomaniac, they'll sit on the sidelines and finger waggle. As soon as someone not under terms nuts up and ends this militarily, THEN they support Ramlins.


Gotcha. Supporting them through threats of action or direct action, same is same.

Edited April 14, 2010 by janax

[Baden-Württemberg]

[quote name='Starfox101' date='14 April 2010 - 02:42 PM' timestamp='1271248926' post='2260024']
That's rich coming from a former MXCA leader.
[/quote]

huh?

I think this is the second time you come up with some old history argument, and the best thing is I don't even get it.

"At least TOP is making decisions"

Have I not made any decisions during my time in MCXA? Because that's what your ironic statement is implying....
No matter what you could possibly mean with this statement it must be something that is over a year.

[Shan Revan]

My best guess, Sam, is that he is implying that NPO made all of your decisions for MCXA during your reign. Generally though his arguments and attacks are so misinformed, outdated, illogical or just outright bigoted that it's much simpler to ignore his criticism and comments. Much like the way he does everyone else.

[Haflinger]

[quote name='Methrage' date='14 April 2010 - 07:45 AM' timestamp='1271245537' post='2259988']
I think holding onto treaties past the time they will be honored is a bad trait and you guys should cancel it rather than pretend it isn't there when convenient.
[/quote]
That would pretty much reverse post-Denzin MHA policy though.

[shilo]

Currently MHA is supporting gRAMlins through inaction - and that inaction refers to not canceling their treaty with them or otherwise clearly cutting off any [u]potential[/u] support for them.
And as long as the gRAMlins still have that [u]potential[/u] support from MHA as an ace in their hand, they will require considerably more time to be beaten into reason by us.

Which is exactly why saying we don't support gRAMlins is simply not a true statement.
One cannot say this with a straight face while still waving the sword of the Harmlin Accords over everyone who wants to do more than voice displeasure about the actions of the gRAMlins. Even if 98% of the current MHA membership completely disagree with actions of the gRAMlins, even if they despise them, loath them, while publically supporting their victims.
As long as the treaty stands, that is worth nothing, sadly. I would hope that this obvious displeasure for the acts of gRAMlins will find concrete results sooner than later.

[Dochartaigh]

[quote name='Shan Revan' date='14 April 2010 - 08:31 AM' timestamp='1271251890' post='2260061']
My best guess, Sam, is that he is implying that NPO made all of your decisions for MCXA during your reign. Generally though his arguments and attacks are so misinformed, outdated, illogical or just outright bigoted that it's much simpler to ignore his criticism and comments. Much like the way he does everyone else.
[/quote]

wait, i thought the old argument from MCXA during Sam's time was that Polaris forced MCXA to do all those horrible things they did? now Polaris will be sad that Pacifica is taking their ebil from them.

[Shan Revan]

[quote name='Dochartaigh' date='14 April 2010 - 11:35 PM' timestamp='1271252137' post='2260068']
wait, i thought the old argument from MCXA during Sam's time was that Polaris forced MCXA to do all those horrible things they did? now Polaris will be sad that Pacifica is taking their ebil from them.
[/quote]
Oh right, I forgot about that. Either works really. Neither is true.

[scytale]

[quote name='The Big Bad' date='14 April 2010 - 07:00 AM' timestamp='1271242784' post='2259954']
I think you are mistaking this being about IRON, it is not. It is about Gramlins. If they are allowed to demand unconditional surrender it will set a precedent that is a direct threat to every single alliance on Planet Bob. As I said before, this not about morals this is about the security of every alliance on Bob. So it is not just IRONs allies or alliances that have anything to do with them that may me involved. Gramlins has placed us all under threat by its actions.
[/quote]
Can someone tell me the details (without the emotions or “what it will mean to CN” stuff) of this “unconditional surrender”?

Just the facts…besides not having any conditions .
i.e. IRON accepts unconditional surrender so…

Sorry if this was already covered. I just don’t have the time to go through over 50 pages to find it and everyone else seems to know the details.

Thanks.

Also, please don't read anything into this. I am really just asking.

[Booter]

[quote name='scytale' date='14 April 2010 - 08:55 AM' timestamp='1271253328' post='2260086']
Can someone tell me the details (without the emotions or “what it will mean to CN” stuff) of this “unconditional surrender”?

Just the facts…besides not having any conditions .
i.e. IRON accepts unconditional surrender so…

Sorry if this was already covered. I just don’t have the time to go through over 50 pages to find it and everyone else seems to know the details.

Thanks.

Also, please don't read anything into this. I am really just asking.
[/quote]

Gramlins want demilitarization before they even present any terms and are refusing to come to the peace table to discuss anything.

[shilo]

[quote name='scytale' date='14 April 2010 - 03:55 PM' timestamp='1271253328' post='2260086']
Can someone tell me the details (without the emotions or “what it will mean to CN” stuff) of this “unconditional surrender”?

Just the facts…besides not having any conditions .
i.e. IRON accepts unconditional surrender so…

Sorry if this was already covered. I just don’t have the time to go through over 50 pages to find it and everyone else seems to know the details.

Thanks.

Also, please don't read anything into this. I am really just asking.
[/quote]
There are no details. First demilitarize (not specified further) then surrender unconditionally (what happens then no one except ram knows).

Though really, even with details, those terms will never start looking good.

[scytale]

[quote name='Booter' date='14 April 2010 - 09:57 AM' timestamp='1271253457' post='2260087']
Gramlins want demilitarization before they even present any terms and are refusing to come to the peace table to discuss anything.
[/quote]
Thank you for saving me hours of time.

[potato]

[quote name='shilo' date='14 April 2010 - 04:11 PM' timestamp='1271254299' post='2260099']
There are no details. First demilitarize (not specified further) then surrender unconditionally (what happens then no one except ram knows).

Though really, even with details, those terms will never start looking good.
[/quote]

What if it was white peace afterwards? Would that be acceptable?

[Booter]

[quote name='potato' date='14 April 2010 - 09:18 AM' timestamp='1271254682' post='2260102']
What if it was white peace afterwards? Would that be acceptable?
[/quote]

What if it was installing Viceroys, being permanent tech farms, disbandment, etc? This is the whole conundrum.

[shilo]

[quote name='potato' date='14 April 2010 - 04:18 PM' timestamp='1271254682' post='2260102']
What if it was white peace afterwards? Would that be acceptable?
[/quote]
The problem is, no one knows what is afterwards. And since we would only find out after we have surrendered unconditionally, every and any term given to us must be accepted, or we would have to break the surrender agreement, start militarizing (of course, if let's say improvements had to be destroyed, wonders as well, that will not be possible at all, the nuke stockpiles will be gone as well, and all nations currently save in peace mode will be open for attacks by the gRAMlins) again, with the aforementioned problems.
It's exactly why we are so determined to see this fight not end like this.

[potato]

[quote name='Booter' date='14 April 2010 - 04:21 PM' timestamp='1271254885' post='2260103']
What if it was installing Viceroys, being permanent tech farms, disbandment, etc? This is the whole conundrum.
[/quote]

Yeah, I got that. And I forgot to add what I really wanted to say previously. My bad.

Regardless of the "inconditionnal surrender" part, what would IRON/DAWN find an acceptable solution?

[Diomede]

[quote name='scutterbug' date='14 April 2010 - 10:57 AM' timestamp='1271239021' post='2259911']
As for being a gramlin puppet, doubtful at best. Think the sheer amount of dislike some of us in MHA are showing over this makes it very clear we are far from being puppets. Even told Ram personally would it not be for my loyalty to MHA i would personally declare on him now and help IRON.
[/quote]
Sadly, you and MHA in general are a puppet to your own loyalty. Going off my experience of Ramirus from our time in the Citadel, I would imagine it is not that he or Gre values MHA for their friendship and history, and the loyalty to that bond, it's merely that you are "worthwhile". Much like a meatshield is worthwhile.

Edit: I'd just like to point out that this post is not intended to insult, but I can appreciate why one might be insulted by it.

Edited April 14, 2010 by Diomede

[shilo]

[quote name='potato' date='14 April 2010 - 04:30 PM' timestamp='1271255393' post='2260109']
Yeah, I got that. And I forgot to add what I really wanted to say previously. My bad.

Regardless of the "inconditionnal surrender" part, what would IRON/DAWN find an acceptable solution?
[/quote]
Can't say actually, since we haven't been involved in talks with gRAMlins since they rescinded their offer in the middle of the peace talks during the last war. Since then, demilitarization and unconditional surrender have been "communicated" to us and attempts for talks have been rejected outright.

[Cataduanes]

[quote name='shilo' date='14 April 2010 - 03:51 PM' timestamp='1271256687' post='2260118']
Can't say actually, since we haven't been involved in talks with gRAMlins since they rescinded their offer in the middle of the peace talks during the last war. Since then, demilitarization and unconditional surrender have been "communicated" to us and attempts for talks have been rejected outright.
[/quote]
well hell put it out there , what would you find acceptable?