United Purple Nations Announcement

[Xiphosis]

[quote name='Ejayrazz' timestamp='1286769173' post='2481129']
In reference to those treaty whoring. Which..I am pointing at nearly everyone. Even those in here.

Lol though.
[/quote]

I know, the link is just to point out that they've never really deserved any of their allies. If the world had any standards they'd be the weird kid that sits in the corner while the rest of the class pretends it doesn't exist.

[Matthew Conrad]

[quote name='Ejayrazz' timestamp='1286768906' post='2481107']
If two alliances no longer see eye to eye and simply have had enough, there is no reason for a treaty to continue. Some people are prancing along stating this is a terrible move. No. It, isn't. If it were, it'd be for the numbers, not the bond.

I think a few people need to be reminded what a real treaty is suppose to mean (Not in reference to you or MK by the way). I miss 06 sometimes.
[/quote]

I was referring to you saying UPN was being used as a meat shield by ODN. The terrible move is along the lines of UPN dropping an alliance who liked them enough to save them while the majority of ODN's friends were licking their chops. I'm guessing this was a knee jerk reaction by UPN thinking ODN was going to drop them (thus leading further PR loss) and them not realizing how terrible of a plan they had while trying to manufacture a CB with WCE.

[KingEd]

This was definitely surprising, and like many, I expected it to be the other way around. Nonetheless, the Purple folks will someday realize this was a mistake. Today, they lost a great ally in ODN. Make no mistake UPN'ers this is your lost, not ODN's. And I for one can't wait to see where this will lead UPN---I'm guessing: nowhere good, a bad bad place, all of the above.

To UPN; Good riddance.
To ODN; You are better off my friends.

[Steve Buscemi]

[quote name='GeoffronXNPO']
I think UPN would be doing much better, with many more allies and much more respect, if they had never allied with ODN.
[/quote]
The grudges go deep with this one, my son.

[Chickenzilla]

Oh Jesus this is delicious.

[Earogema]

Well that certainly is something.

[Kalasin]

[quote name='Mr Damsky' timestamp='1286766254' post='2480979']
I would agree with you on any other occasion but ODN did the exact same thing before Karma.

That said, the past is the past and UPN you should be ashamed of yourselves.
[/quote]

IRON saved us from destruction? Hahahahaha.

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1286766879' post='2481016']
I'll tell you what, snibb, you point me to ODN's last big accomplishment, and then I'll start paying attention to your jabs.
[/quote]

Give us a break, Schatt, you didn't have an issue with ODN until this UPN incident. Don't suddenly turn around and decide you dislike ODN's entire history for the past year and a half.

Edited October 11, 2010 by Kalasin

[Sephiroth]

[quote name='Voytek' timestamp='1286765353' post='2480942']
UPN is cancelling with ODN? Not the other way round?

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
[/quote]
I don't see how that is surprising, good luck to both alliances.

[Emphix]

I personally think this is a bad move by UPN.

But still, good luck to everyone!

[Reptyler]

This pains me. I read 20 pages of blogging about people making bad decisions, and this one final straw just gives me that sinking feeling inside.

[Schattenmann]

[quote name='goldielax25' timestamp='1286769169' post='2481128']
I think Aurion said it best. ODN valued UPN enough to step in and help them get out of this situation, whereas the people in that coalition clearly just saw UPN as, at best, a way to get at GOONS, and at worst, a simple meatshield to soak damage. I don't recall anyone there saying they valued UPN for its opinions/abilities, even as the channel was based on using UPN's position to win a war and further their goals.

Ejay it is never black and white, but I don't think anyone could rationalize calling ODN a bad ally to UPN. I think they were clearly better than UPN deserved. If it were black and white, we would have been able to find a middle ground between you and GOONS and find a way for both of you to get what you want, but it isn't, and so this silly war has to continue.
[/quote]

The unfortunate thing is that everyone loves to get their rocks off with heir "X alliance totally sucks lol" groupthink. If you had gone to NPO and paid them X-dollars on behalf of Ordo Verde to stop them from getting attacked, yes, you would have stopped war, but you would also have made them look like fools, undermined them, and sidestepped your entire relationship in doing so. Neither situation is ideal--war or undermining--but one took a big step on OsRavan's part to go behind Peggy's back and make deals for her. If OsRavan didn't think that UPN was in a defensive position, he didn't have to opt in to their treaty, anyway.

[quote name='Kalasin' timestamp='1286769793' post='2481153']Give us a break, Schatt, you didn't have an issue with ODN until this UPN incident. Don't suddenly turn around and decide you dislike ODN's entire history for the past year and a half.
[/quote]
I didn't know OsRavan undercuts his allies until this incident.

Edited October 11, 2010 by Schattenmann

[AAAAAAAAAAGGGG]

Congrats to ODN for a great weight being lifted off their shoulders.

[Biazt]

Disgusting. Congratulations ODN.

[Pingu]

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1286770148' post='2481164']
I didn't know OsRavan undercuts his allies until this incident.
[/quote]

It seems that most of the planet, apart from you, Peggy, and apparently Kalasin, see OsR's actions as being those of a good ally, intervening diplomatically to prevent a futile and probably disastrous war. I'm sorry your plan didn't work out, Herr Schattenmann, but I don't think its failure should lead anyone to conclude that our Secretary General is anything other than a staunch ally to his allies and a good friend to his friends.*






*Diplomatic translation clause: I'm not actually sorry your plan failed.

[brickyard]

This just in: ODN is rid of a horrible alliance

[Locke]

I don't know who to be happier for; this is truly mutually beneficial.

[Voytek]

[quote name='Locke' timestamp='1286771727' post='2481203']
I don't know who to be happier for; this is truly mutually beneficial.
[/quote]
How is it beneficial for UPN?

[Dexomega]

[quote name='Voytek' timestamp='1286771757' post='2481204']
How is it beneficial for UPN?
[/quote]
We can stand without ODN's crutch just fine methinks.

[Vol Navy]

[quote name='Voytek' timestamp='1286771757' post='2481204']
How is it beneficial for UPN?
[/quote]


Honestly, if ODN worked against UPN's wishes, even if "for their own good" then they are rid of an ally who acted more like their protector than their ally.

How would you feel if MK was set on a course of action, no matter what the cost to MK, and one of your former allies went behind your back and essentially took away the course of action you wanted to pursue?


That's pretty much what seems to have happened here. Even if it meant UPN was going to take a beating, it should have been their choice to pursue it that way if they wished and let ODN sit the war out if they thought UPN was being the aggressor.

[Schattenmann]

[quote name='Pingu' timestamp='1286771235' post='2481192']
It seems that most of the planet, apart from you, Peggy, and apparently Kalasin, see OsR's actions as being those of a good ally, intervening diplomatically to prevent a futile and probably disastrous war. I'm sorry your plan didn't work out, Herr Schattenmann, but I don't think its failure should lead anyone to conclude that our Secretary General is anything other than a staunch ally to his allies and a good friend to his friends.*
*Diplomatic translation clause: I'm not actually sorry your plan failed.
[/quote]

My feelings on sovereignty haven't got anything to do with anything that has happened this week, and I'll refer you to our embassy on that point where my feelings on the matter are laid out very clearly. It may be true that it is good for UPN not to be at war, but it is never good to have an ally that thinks they know how to handle your business better than yourself. And the "most of the planet" you're referring to are none other than the alliances that would've been at war, who have just as much stake as I you think I have. Come on, Pingu, don't be so lazy. If ODN thinks that it would lose in such a war so badly that it is "futile" they were under no obligation to have activated their treaty to begin with. You clearly would not have interpreted events as defensive on UPN's part and you sure as Hell wouldn't have opted into aggression for them, as we can see.

[Voytek]

[quote name='Vol Navy' timestamp='1286772271' post='2481219']Honestly, if ODN worked against UPN's wishes, even if "for their own good" then they are rid of an ally who acted more like their protector than their ally.[/quote]
Whereas UPN was planning to exploit their ties to ODN in order to bring CnG in on their side of the war with GOONS. Call it even?

[Schattenmann]

[quote name='Vol Navy' timestamp='1286772271' post='2481219']
Honestly, if ODN worked against UPN's wishes, even if "for their own good" then they are rid of an ally who acted more like their protector than their ally.
[/quote]
[i]Exactly![/i] Papa OsRavan saved poor Peggy from herself. It's the very opposite of what a MDoAP "partner" should be doing.

[quote name='Voytek' timestamp='1286772559' post='2481230']
Whereas UPN was planning to exploit their ties to ODN in order to bring CnG in on their side of the war with GOONS. Call it even?
[/quote]
Welcome to Compulsory Treaties 101. If you think running treaty chain situations is some kind of wild thing that we made up Friday night you should please drop this course, and enroll in Treaties 3, the remedial course.

Edited October 11, 2010 by Schattenmann

[mythicknight]

Congrats \m/!

[Vol Navy]

[quote name='Voytek' timestamp='1286772559' post='2481230']
Whereas UPN was planning to exploit their ties to ODN in order to bring CnG in on their side of the war with GOONS. Call it even?
[/quote]


How? If UPN was being the aggressor as many people seem to be saying then ODN was under no obligation. If they were in a defensive position ODN should have fought it out for them if that's what they asked. Or ODN could have just cancelled the treaty if they didn't want to fight I guess.

The behind the back usurping of soverignty was not the correct move imo.

[Pingu]

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1286772306' post='2481220']
My feelings on sovereignty haven't got anything to do with anything that has happened this week, and I'll refer you to our embassy on that point where my feelings on the matter are laid out very clearly. It may be true that it is good for UPN not to be at war, but it is never good to have an ally that thinks they know how to handle your business better than yourself. And the "most of the planet" you're referring to are none other than the alliances that would've been at war, who have just as much stake as I you think I have. Come on, Pingu, don't be so lazy. If ODN thinks that it would lose in such a war so badly that it is "futile" they were under no obligation to have activated their treaty to begin with. You clearly would not have interpreted events as defensive on UPN's part and you sure as Hell wouldn't have opted into aggression for them, as we can see.
[/quote]

The 'futility' in my statement refers to the false CB and dishonorable war aims, not any estimation of likely losses on the part of ODN in the event that your plan had worked. ODN does not make decisions on whether or not to enter a war based on whether it would lose, and you know very well if you weren't being lazy and/or dishonest yourself that such considerations were not at issue here.