Marginali Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 (edited) Considering this as a "right" decision from our "allies".. Edited December 20, 2010 by Marginali Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abdur Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 [quote name='SpiderJerusalem' timestamp='1292852398' post='2546475'] Wait... It's [i]their[/i] right? Didn't [i]you[/i] ask them not to intervene? *cough* [/quote] Ah... the plot thickens. I have not dealt with PC or iFOK before. But I do expect FEAR or WFF to come and defend NEW. We will see how it goes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirWilliam Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 [quote name='SpiderJerusalem' timestamp='1292852398' post='2546475'] Wait... It's [i]their[/i] right? Didn't [i]you[/i] ask them not to intervene? *cough* [/quote] sigelopisan isn't GantanX. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dochartaigh Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 [quote name='Banksy' timestamp='1292845095' post='2546377'] No actually I was saying you told your allies not to defend you against Athens/RoK this time last year despite everyone clamouring for you to do so. [/quote] and i remember them receiving hell for it by you guys. so if your side is gonna be calling them cowards for not activating their treaties then, PC and iFOK are also cowards for not activating their treaties now. ahhhh the double standard of CN. [quote name='Arrnea' timestamp='1292846544' post='2546394'] Actually, you're called that for posting a topic many hours after NPO was hit where 6+ of you instantly cancelled your MADP-level (might want to look up the definition of "mutual aggression" here) treaties with the NPO and failed to respect the cancellation clauses in them that you had agreed to. You earned the moniker, regardless of whether or not a certain MCXA person was able to convince you that you'd be even more $%&@ed if you didn't go into the war. [/quote] i would have to say that stating 3 guys can beat up your friend and coming to a mutual agreement with those other 3 guys is actually worse. i mean PC and iFOK literally told 3 alliances they can hit NEW. how awesome of allies are those 2? i sure as heck would not want allies like that. Nor allies who told me i could not defend another ally because they might have to hit someone they like. boofrigginhoo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpiderJerusalem Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 [quote name='SirWilliam' timestamp='1292852788' post='2546483'] sigelopisan isn't GantanX. [/quote] And GantanX isn't the leader of the alliance either (according to their wiki at least) It's a democratic alliance, and I assumed that the members of the alliance were consulted or at least informed about the whole situation Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashoka the Great Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 [quote name='sigelopisan' timestamp='1292851810' post='2546467'] Well, personally I dont feel abandoned by our allies. In fact when we consider to sign a treaty, we always consider "how far will we sacrifice to our allies" instead of the other way around. So, there must be a reason why PC and iFOK declare this stance. Its their right and we must respect it. [/quote] [quote name='Marginali' timestamp='1292852486' post='2546477'] Considering this as a "right" decision from our "allies".. [/quote] These two statements, one of which is from a NEW government member, would seem to indicate that NEW didn't ask PC/iFOK to stay out, but rather that PC/iFOK said, "Sorry, we're not helping you." No matter, I suppose. I said at the end of the last war that alliances were going to have to decide whether to be in blocs or have individual treaties, since the two were ultimately incompatible. And here we have a fine example of why this is so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirWilliam Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 (edited) [quote name='SpiderJerusalem' timestamp='1292853863' post='2546494'] And GantanX isn't the leader of the alliance either (according to their wiki at least) It's a democratic alliance, and I assumed that the members of the alliance were consulted or at least informed about the whole situation [/quote] My point was just that, regardless of what sigelopisan was implying (if anything), such a desire was communicated by a different party. I'm not well-versed on the government of NEW, and I wasn't party to recent discussions, but I do know such a desire was communicated by NEW government. Edited December 20, 2010 by SirWilliam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R3nowned Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 I can understand iFOK sitting out. They have a genuine reason. PC have no excuse. No. Excuse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpiderJerusalem Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 [quote name='SirWilliam' timestamp='1292853961' post='2546497'] My point was just that, regardless of what sigelopisan was implying (if anything), such a desire was communicated by a different party. I'm not well-versed on the government of NEW, and I wasn't party to recent discussions, but I do know such a desire was communicated by NEW government. [/quote] Well... According to the now edited comment by Marginali, which I have here: [quote=marginali]i do respect PC and iFOK position[/quote] It doesn't seem that he knew about it either... Are you sure that they weren't at least a bit pressured into this decision? I mean, if you take a look at NEW's history, that's the most logical solution Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Apocalypse Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 (edited) [quote name='abdur' timestamp='1292852593' post='2546479'] Ah... the plot thickens. I have not dealt with PC or iFOK before. But I do expect FEAR or WFF to come and defend NEW. We will see how it goes. [/quote] Prepare to be disappointed. [quote name='R3nowned' timestamp='1292854055' post='2546499'] I can understand iFOK sitting out. They have a genuine reason. PC have no excuse. No. Excuse. [/quote] Sorry, I really don't understand that. Why do PC have no excuse and why iFOK do? Edited December 20, 2010 by Johnny Apocalypse Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greenacres Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 [quote name='SpiderJerusalem' timestamp='1292854361' post='2546502'] Well... According to the now edited comment by Marginali, which I have here: It doesn't seem that he knew about it either... Are you sure that they weren't at least a bit pressured into this decision? I mean, if you take a look at NEW's history, that's the most logical solution [/quote] The sad truth is, NEW has been dicked around since their inception by their allies. They're probably the only alliance out there that has continuously and without fail put their infrastructure on the line no matter what. They've never, from what I can remember, backed down from a fight, they've never even thought about it, and in return they simply ask either their allies to defend them or to understand their position of putting everything on the line for an ally, no matter what. They just don't get the same respect in return, and they never have, and I don't think they ever will. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abdur Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 [quote name='Johnny Apocalypse' timestamp='1292854548' post='2546505'] Prepare to be disappointed. Sorry, I really don't understand that. Why do PC have no excuse and why iFOK do? [/quote] Heh, I sincerely hope I am not disappointed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpiderJerusalem Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 [quote name='greenacres' timestamp='1292854568' post='2546506'] The sad truth is, NEW has been dicked around since their inception by their allies. They're probably the only alliance out there that has continuously and without fail put their infrastructure on the line no matter what. They've never, from what I can remember, backed down from a fight, they've never even thought about it, and in return they simply ask either their allies to defend them or to understand their position of putting everything on the line for an ally, no matter what. They just don't get the same respect in return, and they never have, and I don't think they ever will. [/quote] I know, and that's why I'm pissed off. NEW is one of the very few alliances I have nothing but respect for, and they deserve the protection they are entitled to through their treaties Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirWilliam Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 [quote name='SpiderJerusalem' timestamp='1292854361' post='2546502'] Well... According to the now edited comment by Marginali, which I have here: It doesn't seem that he knew about it either... Are you sure that they weren't at least a bit pressured into this decision? I mean, if you take a look at NEW's history, that's the most logical solution [/quote] "i do respect PC and iFOK position" hardly communicates not knowing about it (I'm not sure how you got that out of that, to be honest). That said, I have no reason to suspect NEW was pressured into this decision, or to question the integrity of my closest allies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greenacres Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 (edited) [quote name='SpiderJerusalem' timestamp='1292854847' post='2546510'] I know, and that's why I'm pissed off. NEW is one of the very few alliances I have nothing but respect for, and they deserve the protection they are entitled to through their treaties [/quote] I was in PC when we tried to get a treaty with them originally, but they stuck with TPF through thick and thin, I would honestly say they were stubborn about it, too, but they stuck by their side and were destroyed in I think two straight wars because of it. They deserve better, they really do. They deserve allies who are as blindingly loyal as they are. I'm disappointed in PC, all the !@#$ I've said in this thread is nothing more than me trying to show that disappointment, because even if NEW said "hey, don't defend us" PC should have said "$%&@ that, you don't get to decide what we're going to do" and defended them. [edit:] and for how long PC and NEW were friends, for how much PC and NEW respected each other, even when for most of their lives they were on different sides of the treaty web, then to finally be able to formalize that friendship in a no-brainer treaty that was quite literally years in the making, all for them to NOT be defended when they needed it? That's just .. !@#$@#$ disappointing. I really do feel bad for NEW, from PC, this really should have been a no-brainer. Edited December 20, 2010 by greenacres Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AirMe Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 [quote name='BlkAK47_002' timestamp='1292836208' post='2546294'] Next time why don't you just use "Do Something About It" Now implying that someone is a hypocrite is considered complaining by your standards? Good to know. Also, we did take measures to deal with the Red Raiding Safari. We just didn't use military force to do it. You and I both know that would've been suicide and the raids would have continued. [/quote] So it is ok for you to back down in the face of insurmountable odds ignoring the words of your own doctrine. But NEW, who knew full well that the remnants of DF were protected by multiple alliances and they went and raided anyways...and then when diplomacy was tried, well they didn't even really try other than posting a statement that was counter productive. My sources tell me there was a massive attempt at a diplomatic solution except NEW was being exceptionally uncooperative. NEW deserves this. Every ounce of it and more. You and the other NPO's trying to compare this to the safari are only in here to score some cheap PR victory. Don't you have a mustache to twirl? Since we are playing that game, next time don't implement a policy that you can't enforce. If you release a doctrine stating you will protect all nations on red, stand by it and do it instead of backing down. You make sure you can back up your own words. NEW took AGGRESSIVE action against a protected group of nations. And now they are getting stomped by the people who were protecting them. Much like anyone who would have raided GGA when they disbanded would have gotten stomped by Ronin and Gondor if they would have raided. Infact, we only had one nation raid GGA during the 21 day protection period. And GGA was arguably one of the most hated alliances in the world. NEW is getting everything they deserve here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ImperialCubanacan Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 Very well, I respect the wishes of NEW for your alliances to remain neutral. This is a bit confusing, but nevertheless... Regards, Cuba Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kowalski Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 [quote name='greenacres' timestamp='1292854568' post='2546506'] The sad truth is, NEW has been dicked around since their inception by their allies. They're probably the only alliance out there that has continuously and without fail put their infrastructure on the line no matter what. They've never, from what I can remember, backed down from a fight, they've never even thought about it, and in return they simply ask either their allies to defend them or to understand their position of putting everything on the line for an ally, no matter what. They just don't get the same respect in return, and they never have, and I don't think they ever will. [/quote] I like NEW, you're right about their commitment and spirit, but just because an ally doesn't give them unequivocal support when they go on a rampage doesn't mean that they're being given a rough deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marginali Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 [quote name='SpiderJerusalem' timestamp='1292854361' post='2546502'] Well... According to the now edited comment by Marginali, which I have here: It doesn't seem that he knew about it either... Are you sure that they weren't at least a bit pressured into this decision? I mean, if you take a look at NEW's history, that's the most logical solution [/quote] As far as i know, i simple knows everything behind this... and we did know that PC and iFOK are in difficult position, so we respect what their final decision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abdur Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 [quote name='greenacres' timestamp='1292854568' post='2546506'] The sad truth is, NEW has been dicked around since their inception by their allies. They're probably the only alliance out there that has continuously and without fail put their infrastructure on the line no matter what. They've never, from what I can remember, backed down from a fight, they've never even thought about it, and in return they simply ask either their allies to defend them or to understand their position of putting everything on the line for an ally, no matter what. They just don't get the same respect in return, and they never have, and I don't think they ever will. [/quote] Believe me, you. If PC (Or any other NEW ally) made the SAME EXACT mistake, NEW would be more than ready to DEFEND them, to ZI, if necessary. Allies that are not defending NEW, do not deserve to be their allies. tbh. Just my 2 cents. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ying Yang Mafia Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 Choose your friends a little more carefully next time NEW. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sigelopisan Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 @greenacres and understand that iFOK and PC is not NEW. And we respect them for that. PS: Please, no other interpretation. just as simple as statement above. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpiderJerusalem Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 [quote name='SirWilliam' timestamp='1292855134' post='2546514'] "i do respect PC and iFOK position" hardly communicates not knowing about it (I'm not sure how you got that out of that, to be honest). That said, I have no reason to suspect NEW was pressured into this decision, or to question the integrity of my closest allies. [/quote] It doesn't communicate not knowing about it. It communicates that it was PC's and iFOK's position, not NEW's [quote name='greenacres' timestamp='1292855212' post='2546516'] I'm disappointed in PC, all the !@#$ I've said in this thread is nothing more than me trying to show that disappointment, because even if NEW said "hey, don't defend us" PC should have said "$%&@ that, you don't get to decide what we're going to do" and defended them. [/quote] Yup. Because we all know what NEW would have done if the tables were turned Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greenacres Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 (edited) [quote name='Kowalski' timestamp='1292855307' post='2546519'] I like NEW, you're right about their commitment and spirit, but just because an ally doesn't give them unequivocal support when they go on a rampage doesn't mean that they're being given a rough deal. [/quote] I edited my post for clarification before you quoted it, and before I saw your reply . Anyway, what bothers me is that, the PC and NEW treaty was probably a good 2 years in the making. I don't think the PC leadership right now appreciates just how tight PC and NEW were, or how much PC wanted a treaty with NEW (out of friendship and respect) in the beginning, and how hard twist and everyone else worked to try and make that a reality. It's just something that's lost on them, which isn't really their fault, because none of them were around at the beginning. But this is highly, highly disappointing. It's like all that time and all that effort was for nothing, and NEW deserves better, especially from PC, especially after what NEW went through for TPF. NEW just deserves better from PC, I don't care about iFOK, I really don't, but just the bond that was there between NEW and PC seems to have been forgotten. edited because I said "say your reply" instead of "saw your reply" .. my bad Edited December 20, 2010 by greenacres Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schattenmann Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 [quote name='sigelopisan' timestamp='1292851810' post='2546467'] So, there must be a reason why PC and iFOK declare this stance. Its their right and we must respect it. [/quote] Ah, here's our Balloon Boy moment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.