Jgoods45 Posted January 30, 2011 Report Share Posted January 30, 2011 [quote name='Malkavias' timestamp='1296367000' post='2610591'] You do realize that per Article III of the Ragnablok treaty you just DOWed Ragnarok, don't you? Emphasis mine. [/quote] orly. Stop !@#$%*ing and enjoy the war. We are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Liebenow Posted January 30, 2011 Report Share Posted January 30, 2011 Godspeed, 57th. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jraenar Posted January 30, 2011 Report Share Posted January 30, 2011 Last I checked, Athens didn't sign Ragnablok. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azaghul Posted January 30, 2011 Report Share Posted January 30, 2011 Destroy them Athens! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veneke Posted January 30, 2011 Report Share Posted January 30, 2011 [quote name='jraenar' timestamp='1296367322' post='2610604'] Last I checked, Athens didn't sign Ragnablok. [/quote] I'm largely leaving HE handle this, but Athens don't need to sign Ragnablok for Ragnarok to be bound by its terms. I dunno, something about them being an independent alliance and all that. Meanwhile, only 1 war Athens? I expected better, much better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wickedj Posted January 30, 2011 Report Share Posted January 30, 2011 [quote name='Malkavias' timestamp='1296366519' post='2610569'] We won't hit Rok. We like Rok. We will help the other people hit Rok. [/quote] Uh. i..uh... Im going to type this slowly, just for you. Poison Clan and Athens have a Mutual DEFENSE treaty. 57th Overlanders ATTACKED Poison Clan. Poison Clan asked for Athens' help using the aforementioned Mutual DEFENSE treaty. Can someone explain this using pictures? im not sure what exactly is wrong with helping an ally Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ying Yang Mafia Posted January 30, 2011 Report Share Posted January 30, 2011 [quote name='Veneke' timestamp='1296368118' post='2610622'] I'm largely leaving HE handle this, but Athens don't need to sign Ragnablok for Ragnarok to be bound by its terms. I dunno, something about them being an independent alliance and all that. Meanwhile, only 1 war Athens? I expected better, much better. [/quote] At what point are you going to get it through your head that Athens is already involved in wars against several other alliances? But, if you'd like, you can feel free to send me a list of targets around 50k ns. I'll give them a call in about three days once I can reenter the fight. Sound good? Also, if you are so concerned about the Ragnablok treaty run over to your protectors and have them do some...err...protecting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fyfe XIV Posted January 30, 2011 Report Share Posted January 30, 2011 (edited) In regards to those pointing out how few wars Athens has declared, A large number of Athens nations are in anarchy because they've been *surprise* nuked a few times. Seeing as it's quite difficult to declare wars when in anarchy (impossible), it makes it hard to declare wars. The nature of this particular front of the war that we're fighting doesn't require intricately timed blitzes and seeing as we're still at war with 3 other alliances (small as they may be) many of our offensive slots are tied up. I'm sure in the coming days [s]Athens will slip entirely into peace mode[/s] you'll be seeing more declarations. Our defensive slots on the other hand... As for the wording of the Ragnablok treaty, as Jraener said, we didn't sign Ragnablok. You may consider our attack on 57th etc. an attack on Ragnarok but we are not attacking any members of the Ragnarok AA, nor are we directly attacking Ragnarok. Now please, nobody likes e-lawyering and you just made me go there Edit: apparently half of Athens decided to say the same thing as me while I was typing this up Edited January 30, 2011 by Fyfe XIV Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veneke Posted January 30, 2011 Report Share Posted January 30, 2011 [quote name='Fyfe XIV' timestamp='1296368818' post='2610635'] In regards to those pointing out how few wars Athens has declared, A large number of Athens nations are in anarchy because they've been *surprise* nuked a few times. Seeing as it's quite difficult to declare wars when in anarchy (impossible), it makes it hard to declare wars. The nature of this particular front of the war that we're fighting doesn't require intricately timed blitzes and seeing as we're still at war with 3 other alliances (small as they may be) many of our offensive slots are tied up. I'm sure in the coming days [s]Athens will slip entirely into peace mode[/s] you'll be seeing more declarations. Our defensive slots on the other hand... As for the wording of the Ragnablok treaty, as Jraener said, we didn't sign Ragnablok. You may consider our attack on 57th etc. an attack on Ragnarok but we are not attacking any members of the Ragnarok AA, nor are we directly attacking Ragnarok. Now please, nobody likes e-lawyering and you just made me go there Edit: apparently half of Athens decided to say the same thing as me while I was typing this up [/quote] Yeah, I know. I'm mostly just poking fun at Athens more than anything else. As for the defensive slots... if we wanted to take those, we'd have declared on Athens ourselves. Unless this DoW was more an invitation to attack? Which would make it.. well, damn odd to say the least. Also, Ragnablok doesn't concern you. You don't need to sign it. Ragnablok is between the 57th and Ragnarok and a few other very fine people, who are all bound by that treaty. Ragnablok says that an attack on the 57th is an attack on Rok, an agreement to which both the 57th and Rok signed, which is what HE has been saying. I'm confused as to where Athens comes into this other than their DoW which is really an invitation to attack them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jraenar Posted January 30, 2011 Report Share Posted January 30, 2011 E-lawyering is such a pain. Athens declared upon 57th because Poison Clan asked us to, as per the MUTUAL DEFENSE clause of the treaty between Athens and PC. Athens is not a signatory to Ragnablok, and thus are not bound by the clause stating that 57th and Rok are one in the same where attacks are involved. We attacked 57th, not Rok. Also, as Athens is at war with 57th, I'm sure it's perfectly acceptable for you to, you know... counter attack. Lots of defensive slots open. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fyfe XIV Posted January 30, 2011 Report Share Posted January 30, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Veneke' timestamp='1296369206' post='2610648'] Yeah, I know. I'm mostly just poking fun at Athens more than anything else. As for the defensive slots... if we wanted to take those, we'd have declared on Athens ourselves. Unless this DoW was more an invitation to attack? Which would make it.. well, damn odd to say the least. Also, Ragnablok doesn't concern you. You don't need to sign it. Ragnablok is between the 57th and Ragnarok and a few other very fine people, who are all bound by that treaty. Ragnablok says that an attack on the 57th is an attack on Rok, an agreement to which both the 57th and Rok signed, which is what HE has been saying. I'm confused as to where Athens comes into this other than their DoW which is really an invitation to attack them. [/quote] Like I said, as we leave anarchy we'll be filling those slots back up, don't you worry Well then if it doesn't concern us, then I don't see why there's an issue. Pursuant to our treaty with Poison Clan, because you attacked them we are required, by honor and friendship, to defend them. Rather than declare on Ragnarok, whom we share allies in CSN and Sparta, we declared on you and DRAGON. We share no treaties with you and are therefore not attacking an ally of an ally. If Ragnarok wishes to attack us, that is up to them. Athens will [b]not[/b] have its foreign policy dictated by the treaties of two alliances which we share no direct ties to. Edit: Can't forget Sparta Edited January 30, 2011 by Fyfe XIV Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirBombAlot Posted January 30, 2011 Report Share Posted January 30, 2011 ROLL DRAGON! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heft Posted January 30, 2011 Report Share Posted January 30, 2011 o/ 57th! ....I feel dirty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veneke Posted January 30, 2011 Report Share Posted January 30, 2011 [quote name='jraenar' timestamp='1296369553' post='2610659'] E-lawyering is such a pain. Athens declared upon 57th because Poison Clan asked us to, as per the MUTUAL DEFENSE clause of the treaty between Athens and PC. Athens is not a signatory to Ragnablok, and thus are not bound by the clause stating that 57th and Rok are one in the same where attacks are involved. We attacked 57th, not Rok. Also, as Athens is at war with 57th, I'm sure it's perfectly acceptable for you to, you know... counter attack. Lots of defensive slots open. [/quote] Ain't nobody wondering why you attacked us. Pretty sure we can all see the why's, even the ones you won't mention. So we're cool there. Athens isn't part of Ragnablok, the agreement never concerned you and your presence or absence from it is irrelevant. In essence, the terms of Ragnablok, as they apply to Ragnarok, the 57th or other constituent elements of Ragnablok, apply only to those who signed it and none other. You attacked the 57th. Ragnablok allows for no such distinction between an attack on members of Ragnablok and an attack on Rok. Its like a MDP treaty, come to think of it. Whether you make a distinction or not is irrelevant as the agreement doesn't concern you. You're trying to argue that the terms of a treaty between Rok and the 57th don't apply because you only attacked the 57th. That's like saying the terms of the treaty between you and PC don't apply because we only attacked PC. I'm sure it is, but its usual when declaring war on someone to accompany that with, you know, attacks. I'm merely noting their general absence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veneke Posted January 30, 2011 Report Share Posted January 30, 2011 [quote name='Heft' timestamp='1296369865' post='2610667'] o/ 57th! ....I feel dirty. [/quote] You take that back right now! Also, ...? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fyfe XIV Posted January 30, 2011 Report Share Posted January 30, 2011 [quote name='Heft' timestamp='1296369865' post='2610667'] o/ 57th! ....I feel dirty. [/quote] We're not that bad once you get to know us Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lakerzz8 Posted January 30, 2011 Report Share Posted January 30, 2011 Hahahahha! Nice one, Rsox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heft Posted January 30, 2011 Report Share Posted January 30, 2011 [quote name='Veneke' timestamp='1296370102' post='2610678'] You take that back right now! Also, ...? [/quote] I'll just go with "good luck" for now. Now that we don't have Brown between us maybe we will end up getting along better, who knows? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin32891 Posted January 30, 2011 Report Share Posted January 30, 2011 [quote name='Fyfe XIV' timestamp='1296370104' post='2610679'] We're not that bad once you get to know us [/quote] Don't worry sweetie, its an inside joke between NSO and 57th. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veneke Posted January 30, 2011 Report Share Posted January 30, 2011 I dunno... maybe. Sure, we'll play it by ear and see what happens. Fun times though, and make no mistake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin32891 Posted January 30, 2011 Report Share Posted January 30, 2011 Also good luck 57th and DRAGON. o/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UberSpion Posted January 30, 2011 Report Share Posted January 30, 2011 (edited) [color="#800080"][font="Comic Sans MS"]Dear rsox, You haven't called... The e-kids are worried. Please beware of the retaliatory response that could be formed from the highly effective UPN. They have no soul and will attack without justification. Sincerely, Uber[/font][/color] Edited January 30, 2011 by UberSpion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abdur Posted January 30, 2011 Report Share Posted January 30, 2011 [quote name='UberSpion' timestamp='1296370902' post='2610710'] [color="#800080"][font="Comic Sans MS"]Dear rsox, You haven't called... The e-kids are worried. Please beware of the retaliatory response that could be formed from the highly effective UPN. Sincerely, Uber[/font][/color] [/quote] Now whats this all about? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James IV Posted January 30, 2011 Report Share Posted January 30, 2011 Best of luck to the 57th and DRAGON! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UberSpion Posted January 30, 2011 Report Share Posted January 30, 2011 [quote name='abdur' timestamp='1296370967' post='2610715'] Now whats this all about? [/quote] [color="#800080"][font="Comic Sans MS"]It would be beneficial to Athens that you know not the overwhelming effectiveness of UPN. They can only hope that you not suddenly go for a fly by night treaty with those monsters. [/font][/color] 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.