In Response to Recent Drama

[agafaba]

[quote name='SpacingOutMan' timestamp='1281544433' post='2411189']
There have been greater examples of cowardice, and this is not one of them. Take your QQing elsewhere.
[/quote]

Not to mention the fact that NSO didnt want them to join, so in the end cancellation or not GATO wasnt getting into the fight.

I dont like how GATO did it in particular, but they are not cowards for it.

[SpacingOutMan]

[quote name='agafaba' timestamp='1281545317' post='2411205']
Not to mention the fact that NSO didnt want them to join, so in the end cancellation or not GATO wasnt getting into the fight.

I dont like how GATO did it in particular, but they are not cowards for it.
[/quote]

GATO got off easy in that regard; had NSO not given that request, GATO would [i]truly[/i] be a skimping coward. However, given their stroke with luck, they remain bereft of that otherwise blatant and due scorn.

[magicninja]

[quote name='ChairmanHal' timestamp='1281530767' post='2411057']
An interesting point, but no other ally canceled on NSO. Perhaps others will when this is over, but that would be when it is more appropriate. Canceling now, rightly or wrongly, [i]gives the public perception of cowardice[/i], fairly or unfairly.

Let's go back to the eve of the Karma War for a moment. IRON, MCXA, OG, NATO, GGA, Valhalla, TPF, and Echelon all canceled their direct treaties with NPO following the OV Incident. People here and even on web radio immediately labeled the act cowardice of the highest order--despite the fact that other treaties ensured that each of those alliances would be drawn into the conflict regardless and the cancellation was almost entirely symbolic. Were all those alliances cowards? Hell no. But the propaganda of the time and public perception outside of those alliances was that they were.

Is there ever grounds for canceling a treaty on the eve of or in the early stages of a war? Yes of course. The question is does this GATO cancellation pass the very high requirements for doing so? I'm not seeing it.
[/quote]

Canceling and fighting was brought up as an option and for awhile it was the leading option from the logs I've seen. However, when looking at the situation and our charter I don't think we could have helped NSO even if we all wanted to. We are only allowed to defend unprovoked attacks. NSO clearly provoked this situation. Everyone should know by now that GATO is a defensive alliance in that regard.

You're right about the timing. If we couldn't help NSO and they were not going to ask for help anyway the best time to cancel if we felt communication wasn't up to snuff would have been after NSO got peace. Everyone who has been around for a decent amount of time should know the consequences of canceling on an ally right before or right after a DoW. I don't know how our leadership failed to remember this. I will give them the benefit of the doubt and let them plead temporary insanity because someone should have been shouting "For $%&@s sake don't cancel right now!". Hey what can we say? The timing was !@#$. We admit it. We've said we are sorry to the folks at NSO. We'll have to live with it and I'm sure many of our detractors will try to never let us live it down. Our friends will see it for what it was. A mistake in timing. It happens sometimes. We'll live with it and everyone else should get over it.

[Merrie Melodies]

[quote name='magicninja' timestamp='1281545529' post='2411210']
Canceling and fighting was brought up as an option and for awhile it was the leading option from the logs I've seen. However, when looking at the situation and our charter I don't think we could have helped NSO even if we all wanted to. We are only allowed to defend unprovoked attacks. NSO clearly provoked this situation. Everyone should know by now that GATO is a defensive alliance in that regard.

You're right about the timing. If we couldn't help NSO and they were not going to ask for help anyway the best time to cancel if we felt communication wasn't up to snuff would have been after NSO got peace. Everyone who has been around for a decent amount of time should know the consequences of canceling on an ally right before or right after a DoW. I don't know how our leadership failed to remember this. I will give them the benefit of the doubt and let them plead temporary insanity because someone should have been shouting "For $%&@s sake don't cancel right now!". Hey what can we say? The timing was !@#$. We admit it. We've said we are sorry to the folks at NSO. We'll have to live with it and I'm sure many of our detractors will try to never let us live it down. Our friends will see it for what it was. A mistake in timing. It happens sometimes. We'll live with it and everyone else should get over it.
[/quote]

Man, GATO is damn lucky to have you. Very nice PR work here. Do you hire out

[New Frontier]

That's like shooting your friend square in the face, and calling it a "mistake in timing" because he happened to be in front of you when the bullet exited the chamber.

[magicninja]

[quote name='Merrie Melodies' timestamp='1281545745' post='2411213']
Man, GATO is damn lucky to have you. Very nice PR work here. Do you hire out
[/quote]

Only on every third Saturday in January. Also in our charter btw.

[magicninja]

[quote name='New Frontier' timestamp='1281545780' post='2411214']
That's like shooting your friend square in the face, and calling it a "mistake in timing" because he happened to be in front of you when the bullet exited the chamber.
[/quote]

I know it's like pouring salt in a gaping wound. That is probably mostly why it is considered such a classless act. People who were very recently your friends are getting attacked and just in their worst moment you have to pile something like this on top. I know man. We were wrong. We're sorry. We'll have to live with whatever consequences abound.

[Locke]

[quote name='magicninja' timestamp='1281545529' post='2411210']
Canceling and fighting was brought up as an option and for awhile it was the leading option from the logs I've seen. However, when looking at the situation and our charter I don't think we could have helped NSO even if we all wanted to. We are only allowed to defend unprovoked attacks. NSO clearly provoked this situation. Everyone should know by now that GATO is a defensive alliance in that regard.

You're right about the timing. If we couldn't help NSO and they were not going to ask for help anyway the best time to cancel if we felt communication wasn't up to snuff would have been after NSO got peace. Everyone who has been around for a decent amount of time should know the consequences of canceling on an ally right before or right after a DoW. [i]I don't know how our leadership failed to remember this.[/i] I will give them the benefit of the doubt and let them plead temporary insanity because [i]someone should have been shouting "For $%&@s sake don't cancel right now!"[/i]. Hey what can we say? The timing was !@#$. We admit it. We've said we are sorry to the folks at NSO. We'll have to live with it and I'm sure many of our detractors will try to never let us live it down. Our friends will see it for what it was. A mistake in timing. It happens sometimes. We'll live with it and everyone else should get over it.
[/quote]
So, when does the impeachment train reach its next stop?

Seriously though, GATO's membership should keep this incident in mind come next election season; not the finest moment in GATO diplomatic history, this little fiasco.

[Auctor]

[quote name='Kalasin' timestamp='1281529081' post='2411050']
Honestly? I'd rather treaty GATO than WAPA, lol.
[/quote]
says ODN....

[magicninja]

[quote name='Locke' timestamp='1281547536' post='2411259']
So, when does the impeachment train reach its next stop?

Seriously though, GATO's membership should keep this incident in mind come next election season; not the finest moment in GATO diplomatic history, this little fiasco.
[/quote]

Oh, I wouldn't go quite that far. I yelled and typed with angry letters and everything. The people who handed down this decision will go down in GATO history as an example and for some of them it may be the only thing they will be known for. Future generations of GATO leadership will someday be faced with a similar situation and they will say "Remember when this guy did this in the same situation and GATO's PR plummeted? Yeah let's not do that again."

[Jrenster]

The best thing about this thread was probably the epic burn on kerschbs.

[Sulmar]

[quote name='magicninja' timestamp='1281545529' post='2411210']
Canceling and fighting was brought up as an option and for awhile it was the leading option from the logs I've seen. However, when looking at the situation and our charter I don't think we could have helped NSO even if we all wanted to. [b]We are only allowed to defend unprovoked attacks[/b]. NSO clearly provoked this situation. Everyone should know by now that GATO is a defensive alliance in that regard.

You're right about the timing. If we couldn't help NSO and they were not going to ask for help anyway the best time to cancel if we felt communication wasn't up to snuff would have been after NSO got peace. Everyone who has been around for a decent amount of time should know the consequences of canceling on an ally right before or right after a DoW. I don't know how our leadership failed to remember this. I will give them the benefit of the doubt and let them plead temporary insanity because someone should have been shouting "For $%&@s sake don't cancel right now!". Hey what can we say? The timing was !@#$. We admit it. We've said we are sorry to the folks at NSO. We'll have to live with it and I'm sure many of our detractors will try to never let us live it down. Our friends will see it for what it was. A mistake in timing. It happens sometimes. We'll live with it and everyone else should get over it.
[/quote]
That seems like a pretty stupid thing to put in a charter, to be honest. It clearly relies on GATO's own judgement in what is/isn't unprovoked, basically providing a "get out of war free" card.

[Locke]

[quote name='Sulmar' timestamp='1281550056' post='2411326']
That seems like a pretty stupid thing to put in a charter, to be honest. It clearly relies on GATO's own judgement in what is/isn't unprovoked, basically providing a "get out of war free" card.
[/quote]
Really, anyone with a fair bit of experience in Bobian politics can cook up some excuse that serves as a "get out of war free" card, charter stipulations or not. Happens often enough.

[Sulmar]

[quote name='Locke' timestamp='1281550448' post='2411336']
Really, anyone with a fair bit of experience in Bobian politics can cook up some excuse that serves as a "get out of war free" card, charter stipulations or not. Happens often enough.
[/quote]
Well obviously, but most alliances try and at least have the appearance of not being cowards.

[Locke]

[quote name='Sulmar' timestamp='1281550823' post='2411344']
Well obviously, but most alliances try and at least have the appearance of not being cowards.
[/quote]
Wanting to be semi-neutral isn't cowardice per se. And as, I believe it was SOM said, the fact that NSO never wanted GATO to declare anyways means that cancelling now is irrelevant as far as cowardice goes. Bad idea? Bad timing? Yes, abundantly so. But not [i]quite[/i] cowardice; GATO just wants to be left alone unless they consider a cause just. Whether people believe in morals or not, moralists will always be there.

[magicninja]

[quote name='Sulmar' timestamp='1281550823' post='2411344']
Well obviously, but most alliances try and at least have the appearance of not being cowards.
[/quote]

It's not about being cowards. It's there because we don;t even want to have the chance to condone obvious acts of stupidity. If one of our allies gets caught spying or what have you we'll help out all we can diplomatically and monetarily after their war but we cannot defend what they did if it is an obvious provocation.

[SpacingOutMan]

[quote name='Jrenster' timestamp='1281549707' post='2411319']
The best thing about this thread was probably the epic burn on kerschbs.
[/quote]

That was a long-range snipe to the face, I agree.

Also, just to put this into perspective: when we know there is a war going to happen in a few months, and someone cancels a treaty in advance because they don't like the direction their allies are going, does that make them cowards? Does it make them cowards because they don't want to stand by that distinct set of people?

I know that the timetable is vastly different, but some of you are acting like breaking a treaty at all makes you a coward.

[Sulmar]

[quote name='magicninja' timestamp='1281552592' post='2411389']
It's not about being cowards. It's there because we don;t even want to have the chance to condone obvious acts of stupidity. If one of our allies gets caught spying or what have you we'll help out all we can diplomatically and monetarily after their war but we cannot defend what they did if it is an obvious provocation.
[/quote]
If you'll believe it, I wasn't trying to suggest that GATO was a coward for cancelling. The comment was more directed toward the fact that--since Bob is driven so much by perception--it would be extremely easy to use that charter stipulation to brand GATO as cowards.

Also, the stipulation really makes every treaty an ODP, since an alliance can't be assured that GATO will always defend them, doesn't it? Not trying to bash on GATO or anything, it really just doesn't make sense to me.

Edited August 11, 2010 by Sulmar

[TypoNinja]

[quote name='shahenshah' timestamp='1281524229' post='2411024']
So basically you opted for at-least a paper victory before even that became uncertain.
[/quote]

Well it at least makes them smarter than Gre

[quote name='SpacingOutMan' timestamp='1281552617' post='2411390']
Also, just to put this into perspective: when we know there is a war going to happen in a few months, and someone cancels a treaty in advance because they don't like the direction their allies are going, does that make them cowards? Does it make them cowards because they don't want to stand by that distinct set of people?
[/quote]

The difference between separating yourself from someone on ideological grounds and cowardice is apparently only a matter of spin

[magicninja]

[quote name='Sulmar' timestamp='1281553188' post='2411401']
If you'll believe it, I wasn't trying to suggest that GATO was a coward for cancelling. The comment was more directed toward the fact that--since Bob is driven so much by perception--it would be extremely easy to use that charter stipulation to brand GATO as cowards.

Also, the stipulation really makes every treaty an ODP, since an alliance can't be assured that GATO will always defend them, doesn't it? Not trying to bash on GATO or anything, it really just doesn't make sense to me.
[/quote]

I can understand but this has been GATO's stance for nearly 5 years. If people don;t know we won;t help militarily if you obviously are the bad guy in a situation then I don't know what to tell people. If they want to misconstrue that as cowardice I guess we can;t stop them.

All our allies are aware of the stipulation in our charter. NSO knew it too. Most respond with "I wouldn't expect you to anyway." I think all of our treaties are non-chaining so we probably wouldn't defend an ally who is defending the obvious bad guy in a larger war. However, if you are obviously attacked without provocation, take Athens and ODN this last big war, we're with you all they way. In a way it prevents allies from making bad decisions too I would hope.

[Heft]

[quote name='magicninja' timestamp='1281553924' post='2411414']
I can understand but this has been GATO's stance for nearly 5 years. If people don;t know we won;t help militarily if you obviously are the bad guy in a situation then I don't know what to tell people. If they want to misconstrue that as cowardice I guess we can;t stop them.

All our allies are aware of the stipulation in our charter. NSO knew it too. Most respond with "I wouldn't expect you to anyway." I think all of our treaties are non-chaining so we probably wouldn't defend an ally who is defending the obvious bad guy in a larger war. However, if you are obviously attacked without provocation, take Athens and ODN this last big war, we're with you all they way. In a way it prevents allies from making bad decisions too I would hope.
[/quote]
I'm not sure publicly labeling us as the "bad guy" immediately after canceling our treaty for a completely nonsensical reason is really the best way to go here.

[D34th]

[quote name='magicninja' timestamp='1281545529' post='2411210']
Canceling and fighting was brought up as an option and for awhile it was the leading option from the logs I've seen. However, when looking at the situation and our charter I don't think we could have helped NSO even if we all wanted to. We are only allowed to defend unprovoked attacks. NSO clearly provoked this situation. Everyone should know by now that GATO is a defensive alliance in that regard.

You're right about the timing. If we couldn't help NSO and they were not going to ask for help anyway the best time to cancel if we felt communication wasn't up to snuff would have been after NSO got peace. Everyone who has been around for a decent amount of time should know the consequences of canceling on an ally right before or right after a DoW. I don't know how our leadership failed to remember this. I will give them the benefit of the doubt and let them plead temporary insanity because someone should have been shouting "For $%&@s sake don't cancel right now!". Hey what can we say? The timing was !@#$. We admit it. We've said we are sorry to the folks at NSO. We'll have to live with it and I'm sure many of our detractors will try to never let us live it down. Our friends will see it for what it was. A mistake in timing. It happens sometimes. We'll live with it and everyone else should get over it.
[/quote]

You are trying to cover one poor excuse with another one, no it isn't about "timing", it's about principles. I'm almost sure that if one of the alliances who GATO's news FA is aiming had made the same mistake, your gov would have tried to fix the mistake instead of saying "YOU MADE A MISTAKE IT'S VOID!". You don't abandon a friend in need just because they made a mistake, and a really small one since they hadn't put GATO in any risk.

[kerschbs]

[quote name='Jrenster' timestamp='1281549707' post='2411319']
The best thing about this thread was probably the epic burn on kerschbs.
[/quote]

Damnit, I thought I had read the whole thread. I must have missed it, or I would have responded.

Edited August 11, 2010 by kerschbs

[Ragashingo]

[quote name='kerschbs' timestamp='1281570612' post='2411739']
Damnit, I thought I had read the whole thread. I must have missed it, or I would have responded.
[/quote]

It was a few pages back. I'm sure someone will link you shortly.

[heggo]

[quote name='magicninja' timestamp='1281552592' post='2411389']
we'll help out all we can diplomatically and monetarily after their war
[/quote]
Which reminds me. Is GATO ever going to send us the rebuilding aid you promised us after the Bipolar war?


[quote name='magicninja' timestamp='1281553924' post='2411414'] In a way it prevents allies from making bad decisions too I would hope.
[/quote]
I'll give you that. I'd say that GATO knows quite a bit about not making decisions, what with a plurality of your congress or whatever it's called abstaining from the vote on whether or not to keep our treaty.