Raffaello Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 All I have to say is that VEs tears are delicious. [img]http://img827.imageshack.us/img827/4696/tearss.jpg[/img] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jessebelle Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 [quote name='USMC123' timestamp='1295505528' post='2585693'] I couldn't help post more than once here. I am extremely disappointed in you RoK. You declared war in favor of Polar, an alliance whom you have literally never fought alongside of, opposing alliances who have been your friends for years. You betrayed VE here, the ones who are truly defending (espionage is an offensive action no?), as well as going against SF. It seems to me there was a part of the SF treaty that stated you put it before all else... Why are you on this side again? For shame Ragnarok. I hope VE cancels on you and Superfriends kick you out. [/quote] If you need more than two posts to get your point across you're clearly doing things wrong. Next time we choose to defend an ally we'll come ask you first, how does that sound? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arrnea Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 [quote name='Bob Ilyani' timestamp='1295505855' post='2585710']You should tell that to GOD and RnR... they were given plenty warning of our intentions, wheras we were not told a word of what was done today. It's kid of hard to "go against" someone when they've turned their back on you already.[/quote] Oh wow. If this is true... poor form GOD/RnR. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midkn1ght Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 Seems to me folks should stop talking about what SF should do, or what SF feels, when the only SF folks in this thread have been well wishers. Handle your own business, RoK's gonna handle theirs, and at the end of the day we're gonna have a beer summit and chill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragashingo Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 [quote name='Beefspari' timestamp='1295505530' post='2585694'] You're really off your game tonight Schat. Is the tension getting go you? Normally you have a lot more to say. Political mumbo jumbo and some wildly disconnected theory on how things are working. Since the decs tonight you've pretty much just been mumbling insults. [/quote] More like Truths. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sigrun Vapneir Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 [quote name='foxfire99' timestamp='1295505689' post='2585701'] Clearly we are at fault for being spied upon by their allies[/sarcasm] [/quote] Looks to me more like you spied on their allies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Razgriz90 Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 Good show, Rok. Give 'em hell! o/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Power Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 Saw this coming, but regardless, the right choice for RoK. When you have to do something, you have to do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
montypython Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 [quote name='Midkn1ght' timestamp='1295505975' post='2585721'] Seems to me folks should stop talking about what SF should do, or what SF feels, when the only SF folks in this thread have been well wishers. Handle your own business, RoK's gonna handle theirs, and at the end of the day we're gonna have a beer summit and chill. [/quote] I doubt that this will be discussed in the leisurely way you described. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TypoNinja Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 [quote name='Arrnea' timestamp='1295505575' post='2585697'] Well, Ragnarok. You've made a liar out of me. Congratulations on growing a pair. To all the people criticising RoK's decision on the basis that they're stabbing VE in the back: Maybe VE should have thought of that before attacking a mutual defense ally of Ragnarok and telling them where to shove said treaty. Just cancel on them (VE) Ragnarok, they've shown they aren't worth it. [/quote] Hate us on all you want, but you can't possible believe we were stupid enough to declare on an allies treaty partner without clearing it when them first? RoK was ok with this, then changed their mind after we rolled. They .... Holy !@#$. It just hit me. Rok just quite literally pulled the same stunt on us that Polar did to TOP and IRON. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Izuzu Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 Much respect for making an honorable decision. Also respect to those on the other side who have expressed understanding and empathy for the difficult position in which you found yourselves. As for all the whiners who are criticizing you....bleh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haflinger Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 [quote name='TypoNinja' timestamp='1295505383' post='2585684'] Polar made a very big deal about their being their own side and siding with neither that war. I'd almost call it neutrality but it wasn't quite. [/quote] Yeah that's bull. They declared on Molon Labe and DOOM, both fighting on Hegemony's side. They were on the same side as Superfriends. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guffey Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 (edited) So let me get this straight. Polar gets hit, thereby invoking the mutual defense clause with Rok. Rok knows they are going in, must tell the rest of SF. GOD/RnR decides they don't want to support polar, so they declare based on a declaration which came AFTER the one on polar. Shouldn't SF be bound to support RoK first and for-most. Seeing how most other treaties have non-chaining clause. (I don't know all the SF treaties, so this may be incorrect) In my opinion. Good show Rok, bad show GOD/RnR. Edited January 20, 2011 by Guffey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feanor Noldorin Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 [quote name='TypoNinja' timestamp='1295506132' post='2585735'] Holy !@#$. It just hit me. Rok just quite literally pulled the same stunt on us that Polar did to TOP and IRON. [/quote] Kinda sucks, don't it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KainIIIC Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 [quote name='Arrnea' timestamp='1295505939' post='2585719'] Oh wow. If this is true... poor form GOD/RnR. [/quote] gonna have to agree with this right here. They told you of their intentions, you should've told them of yours. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USMC123 Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 [quote name='Earogema' timestamp='1295505768' post='2585705'] I am not getting this line at all. You people do realize that in Karma you warred against NPO, who you were with in pretty much every engagement since GWII right? Things change. [/quote] And NPO was then much like NpO is now. Ragnarok never received support from either. [quote name='Bob Ilyani' timestamp='1295505855' post='2585710'] You should tell that to GOD and RnR... they were given plenty warning of our intentions, wheras we were not told a word of what was done today. It's kid of hard to "go against" someone when they've turned their back on you already. [/quote] Well let's see, alliance A and B get told alliance C is going to attack A and B's side, why would you tell C your intentions. IDK, it just seems weird that two alliances (the majority of SF in the war thus far) are being accused of turning their back on the one alliance on the opposing side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Scipio Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 [quote name='Raffaello' timestamp='1295505897' post='2585716'] All I have to say is that VEs tears are delicious. [img]http://img827.imageshack.us/img827/4696/tearss.jpg[/img] [/quote] I can't wait until NPO ends up in this war. Or is the reason Legion hasn't jumped in yet because you guys didn't want to fight? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Van Hoo III Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 [quote name='Guffey' timestamp='1295506245' post='2585742'] So let me get this straight. Polar gets hit, thereby invoking the mutual defense clause with Rok. Rok knows they are going in, must tell the rest of SF. the rest of SF decides they don't want to support polar, so they declare based on a declaration which came AFTER the one on polar. Shouldn't SF be bound to support RoK first and for-most. Seeing how most other treaties have non-chaining clause. (I don't know all the SF treaties, so this may be incorrect) In my opinion. Good show Rok, bad show rest of SF. [/quote] Based on Delta's comments in the GOD DoW, I am assuming that some of SF will defend RoK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stilgar Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 [quote name='Guffey' timestamp='1295506245' post='2585742'] So let me get this straight. Polar gets hit, thereby invoking the mutual defense clause with Rok. Rok knows they are going in, must tell the rest of SF. the rest of SF decides they don't want to support polar, so they declare based on a declaration which came AFTER the one on polar. Shouldn't SF be bound to support RoK first and for-most. Seeing how most other treaties have non-chaining clause. (I don't know all the SF treaties, so this may be incorrect) In my opinion. Good show Rok, bad show rest of SF. [/quote] The Aggression part of the SF treaty has to be activated by a 2/3 majority of the bloc for it to be mandatory. As far as I know this vote was not called for. Thus, our SF friends were not bound to roll with us (and vice versa). They supported their allies, we defended ours, so a good show all around I think! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omfghi2u2 Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 [quote name='Guffey' timestamp='1295506245' post='2585742'] So let me get this straight. Polar gets hit, thereby invoking the mutual defense clause with Rok. Rok knows they are going in, must tell the rest of SF. the rest of SF decides they don't want to support polar, so they declare based on a declaration which came AFTER the one on polar. Shouldn't SF be bound to support RoK first and for-most. Seeing how most other treaties have non-chaining clause. (I don't know all the SF treaties, so this may be incorrect) In my opinion. Good show Rok, bad show rest of SF. [/quote] Dont you know the VE counter argument? By Polar "greenlighting" the spy attack, Polar is the AGGRESSORS. Glad to see RoK trolling the PB side. -omfg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guffey Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 [quote name='Stilgar' timestamp='1295506729' post='2585761'] The Aggression part of the SF treaty has to be activated by a 2/3 majority of the bloc for it to be mandatory. As far as I know this vote was not called for. Thus, our SF friends were not bound to roll with us (and vice versa). They supported their allies, we defended ours, so a good show all around I think! [/quote] thanks for that clarificatoin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Conrad Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 [quote name='Raffaello' timestamp='1295505897' post='2585716'] All I have to say is that VEs tears are delicious. [img]http://img827.imageshack.us/img827/4696/tearss.jpg[/img] [/quote] I have a feeling this will be ironic soon. Here's to hoping! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USMC123 Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 [quote name='Jessebelle' timestamp='1295505910' post='2585717'] If you need more than two posts to get your point across you're clearly doing things wrong. Next time we choose to defend an ally we'll come ask you first, how does that sound? [/quote] Tsk Tsk Jessebelle. The first point had a different point. Nice try though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midkn1ght Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 [quote name='Arrnea' timestamp='1295505939' post='2585719'] Oh wow. If this is true... poor form GOD/RnR. [/quote] Really? Is that all it takes to start a stupid rumor is one quick bs cast off statement? No wonder we usually avoid this place, good lord. Bunch of bitter people in this thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Van Hoo III Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 [quote name='Midkn1ght' timestamp='1295506961' post='2585772'] Really? Is that all it takes to start a stupid rumor is one quick bs cast off statement? No wonder we usually avoid this place, good lord. Bunch of bitter people in this thread. [/quote] To be fair, the rumor comes from RoK gov. 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.