Jump to content

Viridian Entente Declaration of War


Goldie

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 129
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

[quote name='Voytek' timestamp='1295588025' post='2588342']
Show me one iota of intellect in that post and I'll show you a liar (it's you you're the liar)
[/quote]
Other than the fact that he is correct? Hence he *intelligently* surmised the correct series of events? The only thing you could try to do is rag on his misspelling of approached and a few grammatical errors, but this is Planet Bob. When did such things ever matter?

I wouldn't call yourself a liar though, just sadly deluded. Perhaps a puppet for VE propaganda.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Feanor Noldorin' timestamp='1295590559' post='2588588']
This ally of my ally of my ally business just has to stop. It's ridiculous.
[/quote]
Agreed completely.

I wouldn't be offended, in a situation where two allies of mine are already engaged on opposite sides, that either declared war on the other or didn't tell me they were going to do so. There needs to be some room for common sense when it comes to sharing intelligence and such after two allies have decided to enter on opposite sides. The most important point is which coalition you support, not which alliances you engage or are engaged by.

As for this specific declaration: Go kill some tigers VE!

Edited by Azaghul
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know when I read the VE and NV treaty I see this

[quote]Article III – COMMUNICATION
In signing these protocols, both signatory alliances recognize that full and frank communication is the foundation for a strong and enduring relationship and that there is mutual benefit for both alliances when open communication between them is maintained. To that end, both signatory alliances agree to productive two-way inter-alliance communication:

a.) The signatory alliances agree that whenever a situation arises which involves provisions within these protocols [b]or other issues of mutual concern[/b]; there shall be full and frank communication between the signatory alliances.
b.) The signatory alliances shall encourage and promote effective methods of dispute resolution between the signatory alliances and their respective member nations.
c.) The signatory alliances commit to frequent and recurring dialog on each others forums and IRC channels. This commitment is based on the view that open access to each others communication channels is essential to the rapid and efficient inter-alliance communication. This shall include communication at the alliance leadership level where on an as needed basis, representatives of the highest decision making bodies of the signatory alliances will jointly meet to discuss issues of mutual concern. This shall be in addition to routine diplomatic communications and the regular communication between normal member nations.
[/quote]

Now typically I would consider it mutually concerning if my ally was going to attack my other ally. You see because that puts me in an unfavorable position of picking an ally, which is unfair to me and disrespectful to a decent degree.

Maybe I am just old fashioned, you know, liking my ally's and treating them with a modicum of respect, who knows. :/

I guess we'll just call those traits "undesirable" and remember friendships really are just a piece of paper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='LetsHunt' timestamp='1295602402' post='2588929']
You know when I read the VE and NV treaty I see this



Now typically I would consider it mutually concerning if my ally was going to attack my other ally. You see because that puts me in an unfavorable position of picking an ally, which is unfair to me and disrespectful to a decent degree.

Maybe I am just old fashioned, you know, liking my ally's and treating them with a modicum of respect, who knows. :/

I guess we'll just call those traits "undesirable" and remember friendships really are just a piece of paper.
[/quote]

Do you have any reason to believe or proof that VE hasn't maintained full and frank communication with NV during this entire conflict? I bet they have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Alterego' timestamp='1295603655' post='2588937']
If you are going to start a war based on a lie you might as well go all the way seeing as you will never have the level of trust you had at the start of this war again.
[/quote]

Its a LIE, NOES it's NOT a lie. YES urs are LYING! NOES we ARENT...

Stop this stupid CB discussions, or start a seperate OWF thread.... As I've said before, discussing CB's is never going to work out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Enjoy the war and good luck, but I don't want to see any complaints if NV and TPF come to STA's defense. Although you guys probably chose to be the ones to counter STA for that exact reason. I think your way of looking at treaties and thinking that when deciding who should declare on which alliance, that you can prevent any alliances who have a treaty with both the attacking and defending alliance from honoring their mutual defense agreements with the other side is very flawed. Except maybe if their treaties have a clause which make the defense portion void when an Outside Treaty Partner of either signatory is the one attacking, which is usually not included in treaties.

Edited by Methrage
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Il Impero Romano' timestamp='1295586002' post='2588136']
Have a chat with cent.
[/quote]

Just as an update here, I did speak to Cent. In fact, I'm speaking with him right now. He's assured me that, not only are you lying here and you didn't tell them in advance, Goldie went to them and discussed it after and admitted you made a mistake here.

So way to straight up lie!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Azaghul' timestamp='1295594315' post='2588752']
Agreed completely.

I wouldn't be offended, in a situation where two allies of mine are already engaged on opposite sides, that either declared war on the other or didn't tell me they were going to do so. There needs to be some room for common sense when it comes to sharing intelligence and such after two allies have decided to enter on opposite sides. The most important point is which coalition you support, not which alliances you engage or are engaged by.

As for this specific declaration: Go kill some tigers VE!
[/quote]
If they don't have a choice of targets, that's one thing. If they have plenty of targets and happen to choose my ally (or worse, do it on purpose to try to get me to stay neutral), I don't think that's cool. To each his own though.

-Bama

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='pezstar' timestamp='1295616665' post='2589065']
Just as an update here, I did speak to Cent. In fact, I'm speaking with him right now. He's assured me that, not only are you lying here and you didn't tell them in advance, Goldie went to them and discussed it after and admitted you made a mistake here.

So way to straight up lie!
[/quote]
Ouch. Does it not hurt to always be wrong? And to be exposed as a liar again and again and again?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...