dev0win Posted December 22, 2010 Author Report Share Posted December 22, 2010 Actually we passed it before the war, but stuck around to aid you afterwards. Cheers... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Locke Posted December 22, 2010 Report Share Posted December 22, 2010 [quote name='dev0win' timestamp='1293007261' post='2549760'] Actually we passed it before the war, but stuck around to aid you afterwards. Cheers... [/quote] And that, my friends, is what you call a [i]burn[/i]. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confusion Posted December 22, 2010 Report Share Posted December 22, 2010 NATO - Doing it right since 2010~. Congratz! Confusion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elorian Posted December 22, 2010 Report Share Posted December 22, 2010 (edited) I know neutrality is often frowned upon in CN politics but... Good show *nod* Edit: missed a WHOLE word there. *doh!* Edited December 22, 2010 by Elorian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rugby Posted December 22, 2010 Report Share Posted December 22, 2010 Enjoy the popcorn NATO, all the best to our long-lost friends. o/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griff Posted December 22, 2010 Report Share Posted December 22, 2010 [quote name='dev0win' timestamp='1293007261' post='2549760'] Actually we passed it before the war, but stuck around to aid you afterwards. Cheers... [/quote] *Looks at the OP again* Heh. Merry Christmas... (personal opinion, etc, etc.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LetsHunt Posted December 22, 2010 Report Share Posted December 22, 2010 NATO may be our closest treaty, but it should be noted we care about all our allies very equally. That said, most of us disagree with this conflict entirely. Fighting for the obviously wronged is one thing, but fighting for the abuser is another. While I understand this decision was not easy for NATO, I am no judge over whether it's the right one. All I can say is NATO made their stand, and if need be we will come to a point where we make ours. In which case I know NATO will be behind us, and so will everyone else, which is all we need at the end of the day. Pleasing the puppet theater is probably the last of anyone's concerns. NATO is no worse an ally than they ever were, they chose to disagree with the catalyst that started the conflict. Knowing that it's not their fault they refuse to fight an unjust cause. Being an ally means knowing when to help, and when to back off. NEW picked a fight they shouldn't have, and like it or not, anyone choosing to defend them has to make peace with that. Even more importantly, they need to make peace with the fact some people won't blindly follow in for unjust causes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mongol-Swedes Posted December 22, 2010 Report Share Posted December 22, 2010 Not an easy statement to make these days, what with this here peanut gallery. As your allies, we here of the Black Guards respect your decision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Politician Posted December 22, 2010 Report Share Posted December 22, 2010 Understandable move. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndrewHG Posted December 22, 2010 Report Share Posted December 22, 2010 [quote name='pezstar' timestamp='1292996796' post='2549400'] I see nothing wrong with the use of non-chaining clauses to refrain from entry into a war you think is pathetic and stupid. It's one thing to say no when your allies are getting beaten down for a reasonable reason. In this case? Well. NEW deserves it, and the side beating on them doesn't look like they're going to need much help. I think that this was a good move for NATO. [/quote] Absolutely right. Where the hell is NEWs honour? They should be keeping this ridiculous raid gone wrong to themselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ImperialCubanacan Posted December 22, 2010 Report Share Posted December 22, 2010 I applaud this. It's good to see chaining clauses in action for a senseless war. I swear if more alliances join this war from this point forward, they are only doing it because their members want war. Nothing more. But... that's inevitably going to happen anyway. So, I await for next update. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crushtania Posted December 22, 2010 Report Share Posted December 22, 2010 This was a very good move for NATO. All their nations stay in tact and they upset everybody they intended to. Well done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bolak Posted December 22, 2010 Report Share Posted December 22, 2010 [quote name='Thom98' timestamp='1292996854' post='2549407'] Standing by your morals is quite admirable just not quite as much as leaving your friends behind. [/quote] You have that completely backwards. NATO made a good decision and they made it for the right reasons. That may be hard for you to understand, seeing that you count your friends more important than your morals. If your friends expect you to blindly sacrifice your morals and follow them, then I am truly sorry for you, because those are not friends. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mythicknight Posted December 22, 2010 Report Share Posted December 22, 2010 [quote name='dev0win' timestamp='1293007261' post='2549760'] Actually we passed it before the war, but stuck around to aid you afterwards. Cheers... [/quote] Ouch. Well, at least you didn't declare on allies this time Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griff Posted December 22, 2010 Report Share Posted December 22, 2010 [quote name='ImperialCubanacan' timestamp='1293012910' post='2549816'] I swear if more alliances join this war from this point forward, they are only doing it because their members want war. Nothing more. But... that's inevitably going to happen anyway. So, I await for next update. [/quote] That's quite the assumption. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Flinders Posted December 22, 2010 Report Share Posted December 22, 2010 Personally, I'm not a big fan of this, essentially, declaring neutrality because you could possibly have allies on both fronts in the near future. You currently have an ally that is, as it stands, looking to take a beating. But if that's what you feel is best then so be it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RePePe Posted December 22, 2010 Report Share Posted December 22, 2010 All things considered, I find this to be a respectable move at this point in the escalating conflict. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ying Yang Mafia Posted December 22, 2010 Report Share Posted December 22, 2010 Oh NATO, yet another example of why you are a terrible alliance. On the bright side, you were a little quicker about things this time around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timmmehhh Posted December 22, 2010 Report Share Posted December 22, 2010 Reasonable stance but might a little bit premature. Who are the possible allies on the FARK side? Just LSF? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leet Guy Posted December 22, 2010 Report Share Posted December 22, 2010 [quote name='Timmehhh' timestamp='1293027402' post='2549943'] Reasonable stance but might a little bit premature. Who are the possible allies on the FARK side? Just LSF? [/quote] I'm wondering precisely the same thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike717 Posted December 22, 2010 Report Share Posted December 22, 2010 (edited) [quote name='Captain Flinders' timestamp='1293020079' post='2549873'] Personally, I'm not a big fan of this, essentially, declaring neutrality because you could possibly have allies on both fronts in the near future. You currently have an ally that is, as it stands, looking to take a beating. But if that's what you feel is best then so be it. [/quote] That's one interpretation, or it could be that NATO wrote non-chaining clauses into each of their treaties specifically for this instance. They felt like they didn't want to get dragged into a war because a friend of a friend of a friend acted like an idiot. Their allies understood this, which is why they all agreed to these non chaining clauses in the first place. I haven't seen NATO back out of anything, every single one of these treaties becomes optional at this point. I see nothing wrong with exercising the clause since this is the exact reason it was there in the first place. Edited December 22, 2010 by mike717 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lusitan Posted December 22, 2010 Report Share Posted December 22, 2010 [quote name='Timmehhh' timestamp='1293027402' post='2549943'] Reasonable stance but might a little bit premature. Who are the possible allies on the FARK side? Just LSF? [/quote] It's not premature. The stance is because they do not agree with NEW's cause and FEAR's blind support. Mentioning other allies is in case LSF calls them too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlkAK47_002 Posted December 22, 2010 Report Share Posted December 22, 2010 A lot of people out there feel the exact same way that you do NATO, o/ lmao at ODN members accusing people of being pixel huggers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hogosha Posted December 22, 2010 Report Share Posted December 22, 2010 A smart move, NATO, and nothing to care about what the haters and the peanut gallery think. o/ NATO [quote]Just LSF?[/quote] So if you have one ally on one side and a bunch of allies on the other you would consider it okay to ignore the concerns of that one ally (who presumably holds an equivalent treaty with you) because it's just one treaty? I smell a self-serving argument somewhere... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duncan King Posted December 22, 2010 Report Share Posted December 22, 2010 (edited) A very nice Xmas present. I do have to say that fighting over a tech raid really wasn't on my list of things I wanted to do this week. Edited December 22, 2010 by Duncan King 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.