Jump to content

The Return of Los Accuerdos de Gatos de Naranja!

Style #386
 Share

Recommended Posts

Style #386 Newbie

Style #386

Posted
  • Author
Posted

[quote name='GearHead' date='13 April 2010 - 01:58 AM' timestamp='1271138310' post='2258434']
That treaty looks incredibly similar to the TPE treaty you guys just signed. Copy/Paste ftw? :ph34r:
[/quote]
I know, right? I stop writing our treaties, and look what happens!

[quote name='Mathias' date='13 April 2010 - 06:47 AM' timestamp='1271155641' post='2258584']
Flags aren't the same size.

Poor show GATO and ODN.
[/quote]
I knew it! They appear different for me, too, but no fewer than six other people said that they were the same size. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MCRABT Newbie

MCRABT

Posted
Posted

[quote name='Sunstar' date='13 April 2010 - 06:33 AM' timestamp='1271136801' post='2258410']
Excellent. Orange and Brown look awesome together.

Also, I suppose GATO's cool 'n stuff too.
[/quote]

I think I'll have to take your word on that one, congrats on the treaty nonetheless :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Denial Newbie

Denial

Posted
Posted (edited)

This is a pleasure to see. Congratulations to our allies in ODN and friends in GATO.

[quote name='SiCkO' date='14 April 2010 - 10:05 AM' timestamp='1271201711' post='2259292']
when does GATO join CnG?[/quote]
They are already a member [img]http://thecastlehall.com/boards/Smileys/kickass/ms.gif[/img]

Edited by Denial
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Omniscient1 Newbie

Omniscient1

Posted
Posted

[quote name='SiCkO' date='14 April 2010 - 12:35 AM' timestamp='1271201711' post='2259292']
when does GATO join CnG?


that said, congrats on the treaty
[/quote]

The real question is when is CnG joining GATO. ;)


[quote name='Mr Damsky' date='14 April 2010 - 01:54 AM' timestamp='1271206443' post='2259391']
Your charter never allowed oA agreements? :blink:


Congrats on this though :v:
[/quote]
How some people read into the charter they said oA agreements were illegal. We cleared that up though. Thanks for the congrats :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cataduanes Explorer

Cataduanes

Posted
Posted

[quote name='Rush Sykes' date='14 April 2010 - 02:01 PM' timestamp='1271250044' post='2260037']
Horrible treaty, between two horrible alliances. Why would ANYONE sign with either of these two?[/quote]
No doubt many people are asking that very question :smug:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
magicninja Newbie

magicninja

Posted
Posted

[quote name='Omniscient1' date='13 April 2010 - 07:08 PM' timestamp='1271210883' post='2259509']
The real question is when is CnG joining GATO. ;)



How some people read into the charter they said oA agreements were illegal. We cleared that up though. Thanks for the congrats :D
[/quote]

First....BURNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN. :smug:


Also, yeah our charter reads a little funny in the war section. Since I'm bored I will now show you all why.

It all stems from this line really:

[quote]The Global Alliance and Treaty Organization will not commit unprovoked acts of aggression and shall only commit to war in response to acts of aggression, real or threatened, or the financial facilitation thereof, against the Global Alliance and Treaty Organization, or her allies.[/quote]

So you see it says GATO is a "defensive" alliance that won't go "aggressive" under any circumstance. Now what we need to apply here is Bob's definitions of "defensive" and "aggressive" as they apply to both wars and treaties. As war goes the "defensive" usually applies to the alliance that was "wronged" and it's allies who support it's position. "Aggressive" during war usually applies to the alliance that "is in the wrong" and it's allies that support it's position. Fairly easy to comprehend and some alliances determines which side it determines to be "defensive" and "aggressive" before deciding what course of action to take when war rears it's ugly head. Usually, this is where a lot of our political debate derives from. Who is right and who is wrong.

Where treaties are concerned things get a bit weird. When you have an MDP it means, as I take it, that you defend that alliance from those who attack as we did for Athens and ODN in this last war. TSO attacked them and the "defense" part of our treaty activated and we declared war. Pretty cut and dry. "Aggression" however seems to diverge from it's meaning in war however. People on the "defensive" side of a war can activate "aggressive" pacts to declare war alongside an ally. It's really a misnomer as far as our convoluted definitions go.

So let's take a look at that line from our charter again. We will not commit unprovoked actions of aggression. Some would say this would only allow us to sign MDP's because it would mean we would always need to be attacked or our allies attacked before we could go to war. However, since "aggression" as far as treaties go is defined a bit different in our world there is nothing stopping us from signing oA because an ally such as ODN in this case may be provoked into declaring war and if we agree they were provoked we should be able to roll alongside them by our charter's wording. Some people, including myself would say "Meh, you can use an MDP in that case". Sure, but there are also those who would ask where the aggression clause was. It's easier this way than to have to deal with that. Wouldn't you agree?

All that said GATO can never commit to mandatory aggression. If an AP partner when on a bender and decided to declare war with no reason we would have to either crap on the treaty or crap on our charter and that is not a position we will ever put ourselves in see? So GATO joining CnG is out but we'll buddy up with them a little.

If you read all this you were more bored than I was and you are a sad little person. :smug:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...