We Have a Grievance...

[Duke Nukem]

Hell even if LOST is our enemies this time they are still one great alliance.

o/ LOST
o/ Legion

Here's to a clean fight.

[Goldie]

[quote name='silentkiller' timestamp='1297008504' post='2622179']
Do you agree that =LOST= entered on a oA?
[/quote]

They went in on a chained MD treaty. Basically whenever someone decides to chain in a war, it can be construed as oA, because that is what a chain is. You make a commitment to defend an ally when attacked. The only way a war is truly defensive is if the ally gets hit without having done an aggressive action first to bring the war on them, or without being hit because of activating their own treaty with someone else. So in that case, it can be viewed as an oA, but it technically is just choosing to chain their defense treaty, in the same way that NV defended STA because of a chained defense treaty.

[Sandwich Controversy]

[quote name='D34th' timestamp='1297013515' post='2622260']
Yeah very different situation...


NEW attacks DF without any [b]RATIONAL[/b] reason.
DF's allies attack NEW in defense.
PC and iFOK claims it is an agressive move and don't activate their [b]oA[/b] treaty clause with NEW
You:



[b]Now: [/b]

DH attacks NPO without any [b]RATIONAL[/b] reason.
NPO's allies attack GOONS in defense of NPO
=LOST= active oA treaty clause with GOONS and attacks Legion
You:



And you guys still be mad when I call you hypocrites, I really can't understand.
[/quote]
This sounds like the foundation of a great propaganda piece, get to it!

[ChimpMasterFlash]

[quote name='silentkiller' timestamp='1297013914' post='2622267']
I take it Cortath told you NPO was getting involved in the war?
[/quote]
I take it Cortath told you npo was not getting involved in the war?


There was a CB, you might not agree with it but it is there. The fact you don't agree with it, was even addressed in the DoW. The fact won't be argued-- so you will continue to see it your way. This is okay and acceptable by us. The outcome will not change.

Edited February 6, 2011 by ChimpMasterFlash

[silentkiller]

[quote name='goldielax25' timestamp='1297014178' post='2622276']
They went in on a chained MD treaty. Basically whenever someone decides to chain in a war, it can be construed as oA, because that is what a chain is. You make a commitment to defend an ally when attacked. The only way a war is truly defensive is if the ally gets hit without having done an aggressive action first to bring the war on them, or without being hit because of activating their own treaty with someone else. So in that case, it can be viewed as an oA, but it technically is just choosing to chain their defense treaty, in the same way that NV defended STA because of a chained defense treaty.
[/quote]

So it was oA and =LOST='s treaty did not demand that they absolutely have to enter. Again =LOST= has full right to enter this war, they just can't say they were forced to do so by a treaty.


[quote]I take it Cortath told you npo was not getting involved in the war?[/quote]

Funnily enough he did. Well he said it about NPO anyway.

And onto to yours "CB", it doesn't matter whether there was a CB or not. NPO was attacked aggressively and that is what this MDoAP tangent is about not whether the war is just.

Edited February 6, 2011 by silentkiller

[ChimpMasterFlash]

[quote name='silentkiller' timestamp='1297014438' post='2622282']
So it was oA and =LOST='s treaty did not demand that they absolutely have to enter. Again =LOST= has full right to enter this war, they just can't say they were forced to do so by a treaty.




Funnily enough he did. Well he said it about NPO anyway.
[/quote]

Yeah, Sardonic told me we were not getting involved either. I guess the only way to know what [b]REALLY[/b] is in our leaders head is our leaders.

[Goldie]

[quote name='silentkiller' timestamp='1297014438' post='2622282']
So it was oA and =LOST='s treaty did not demand that they absolutely have to enter. Again =LOST= has full right to enter this war, they just can't say they were forced to do so by a treaty.
[/quote]

Forced is a touchy word in this case. No, if leaving your allies hanging out to dry isn't an issue with you, then they weren't forced to enter. If they don't want to leave their allies hanging out to dry, then they were forced to enter.

As soon as Legion hit GOONS they should have expected the counters to come. That people are surprised by this is surprising in itself.

[silentkiller]

[quote name='ChimpMasterFlash' timestamp='1297014687' post='2622293']
Yeah, Sardonic told me we were not getting involved either. I guess the only way to know what [b]REALLY[/b] is in our leaders head is our leaders.
[/quote]

So you knew what was in Cortath's head and thus you attacked us. It all makes sense now

Also read my edit.

[quote]Forced is a touchy word in this case. No, if leaving your allies hanging out to dry isn't an issue with you, then they weren't forced to enter. If they don't want to leave their allies hanging out to dry, then they were forced to enter.

As soon as Legion hit GOONS they should have expected the counters to come. That people are surprised by this is surprising in itself.[/quote]

Then we are in agreement. And by them being forced I am mainly referring to =LOST= using MD as the reason for attack on Legion and not the oA

Edited February 6, 2011 by silentkiller

[The Crimson King]

[quote name='Sardonic' timestamp='1297010466' post='2622211']
Please do not be putting the words in my mouth. That was an entirely different situation.

Also you and all the others criticizing C&G's view on their treaties should just stop. [b]There is nothing quite as pathetic as somebody trying to tell two alliances why their view of their treaty is wrong.[/b]
[/quote]

Wait....what is this exactly....


[quote name='TheNeverender' timestamp='1295928088' post='2597854']
[center][img]http://imgur.com/iVphG.jpg[/img][/center]

The New Polar Order and her myriad allies have gone to great lengths to protect a single alliance from damage in this latest global calamity. Rather than putting forth a maximal effort in what was perceived to be a losing effort from the onset, these alliances have conspired to take the beating so that their flagship alliance can remain strong and resolute. [b]Of particular note is the valorious Legion, whose mutual defense pact with the New Polar Order remains untapped........ [/b]


For the Goon Order of Oppression, Negligence and Sadism:
Sardonic, GOONS Pilot
[/quote]


Seems you had no problem not only telling Legion and Polar exactly how their treaty should have been viewed, you went a declared war over it as well.

[Branimir]

Ignoring the usual empty political rhetorics that DoWs more often then not contain, only thing other that can be said is it was time, I suppose, for this stage of the war.

Good luck to Legion and all the worst of luck to CnG.

[Goldie]

[quote name='The Crimson King' timestamp='1297015093' post='2622306']
Wait....what is this exactly....





Seems you had no problem not only telling Legion and Polar exactly how their treaty should have been viewed, you went a declared war over it as well.
[/quote]

You can interpret chains and oA's however you want it seems, but there is nothing as concrete as deciding not to activate when your MDoAP ally is hit. Unless, of course, Legion fully accepts VE's rationale that VE is fighting the defensive war, in which case we agree with them for not oA'ing in with Polar like their other allies did.

[Hombre de Murcielago]

[quote name='silentkiller' timestamp='1297014438' post='2622282']
So it was oA and =LOST='s treaty did not demand that they absolutely have to enter. Again =LOST= has full right to enter this war, they just can't say they were forced to do so by a treaty.
[/quote]

[url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=71319"]Read the treaty[/url]

There are almost 5 years of precedent for how MDP chaining works. There are also several posts in this thread that lay it out nicely.

But, for the slow learners in the class:

GOONS attacked NPO <- =LOST= could activate oA here
Legion attacked GOONS <- Our MD was activated here

Now, if you want us to activate the oA clause of our treaty so you can see how it works, perhaps that can be arranged...

[adzzz]

Poor Legion

o/ CnG

[Tiggah]

[quote name='Letum' timestamp='1297010728' post='2622217']
I assure you, we [b]always[/b] think of the children. Babies do compose the primary material of our diet after all.
[/quote]

With that in mind, I would imagine a very large baby cake is in order. Happy Birthday, assuming it's accurate on our boards.

[Mirreille]

[quote name='Mandellav' timestamp='1296985922' post='2621922']
Perhaps the characteristic that prevents what you call an "honest war" from happening when CnG wins is that our bond is unbreakable and unlike many other blocs, that characteristic remains eternally true.
[/quote]

So why is MK not in C&G anymore?

[Comrade Craig]

[quote name='Hellbilly' timestamp='1297006115' post='2622138']
Congrats, I guess, on doing your part to insure that anyone can attack anyone they want in the future with no reason or valid CB needed. I certainly look forward to THAT future.[/quote]

After four years as a ruler of nation on Planet Bob, forgive me if I seem puzzled. Regardless of how you view the DH declaration, it was not precedent-setting. In fact, if you believe it ushers in a new era, it just shows you haven't paid attention to the entire history of Bob prior to this unremarkable event.

[quote]* The preceeding statement was made by someone with absolutely no relevance in this game, a leader of a micro alliance. The opinions of said person does not reflect the thoughts or opinions of all micro alliances, but it dam well should.[/quote]

Self deprecation has it's place, but, speaking as a person who has lived his entire life on the fringes of CN, my advice to you is not to let a victim's mentality guide your thoughts and actions. Small in size does not equate to small in influence.

-Craig

[lamuella]

love the fact that silentkiller was arguing with me about that treaty when I wrote it. I mean, literally, I wrote it. That's my handwriting.

[Believland]

You defend your friend even if they're in the wrong or right. That's the point of being an ally.

[Venizelos]

[quote name='Mirreille' timestamp='1297016156' post='2622345']
So why is MK not in C&G anymore?
[/quote]

because they went paperless to redefine their ties, and they did not rejoin. the basic premise of CnG is that its members roll together in all wars, not that they remain members forever.

[silentkiller]

[quote name='Hombre de Murcielago' timestamp='1297015726' post='2622330']
[url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=71319"]Read the treaty[/url]

There are almost 5 years of precedent for how MDP chaining works. There are also several posts in this thread that lay it out nicely.

But, for the slow learners in the class:

GOONS attacked NPO <- =LOST= could activate oA here
Legion attacked GOONS <- Our MD was activated here

Now, if you want us to activate the oA clause of our treaty so you can see how it works, perhaps that can be arranged...
[/quote]

I'll let Goldie's post explain that for you. http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=98284&view=findpost&p=2622276
You are still [i]tecnically[/i] on an oA. That is how MDoAPs work. Sure you can enter but you are under no obligation by your treaty to do so.
And If you want to go by your logic, Legion and GOONS were in a state of war when GOONS along with DH attacked NPO due to our MDP.

[quote name='Lamuella' timestamp='1297016186' post='2622348']
love the fact that silentkiller was arguing with me about that treaty when I wrote it. I mean, literally, I wrote it. That's my handwriting.
[/quote]

Nice handwriting.

Edited February 6, 2011 by silentkiller

[Hombre de Murcielago]

[quote name='silentkiller' timestamp='1297016921' post='2622366']
That is how MDoAPs work..
[/quote]

You seem unable to get beyond your fundamental misunderstanding of how treaties work.

We were quite obligated to help GOONS when they were attacked. Perhaps your wrongly assume that there is a "non-chaining" clause on this treaty?

Your whole "forced" argument is ridiculous. I'll agree with your steadfast commitment to free will in that no one can "force" you to do anything.

However, under the wording of our treaty, and the mutual understanding of intent with which it was signed, =LOST= was very much required by the laws of that treaty to enter on this front.

[silentkiller]

[quote name='Hombre de Murcielago' timestamp='1297017446' post='2622374']
You seem unable to get beyond your fundamental misunderstanding of how treaties work.

We were quite obligated to help GOONS when they were attacked. [b]Perhaps your wrongly assume that there is a "non-chaining" clause on this treaty?[/b]

Your whole "forced" argument is ridiculous. I'll agree with your steadfast commitment to free will in that no one can "force" you to do anything.

However, under the wording of our treaty, and the mutual understanding of intent with which it was signed, =LOST= was very much required by the laws of that treaty to enter on this front.
[/quote]

Chaining has nothing to do with this. Chaining would be a concern if say GOONS was defending/attacking someone due to one of their treaties.

But eh whatever you think you were obligated to enter then so be it. Have fun with the war I am sure the Legion members will.

[Hellbilly]

[quote name='Comrade Craig' timestamp='1297016168' post='2622347']
After four years as a ruler of nation on Planet Bob, forgive me if I seem puzzled. Regardless of how you view the DH declaration, it was not precedent-setting. In fact, if you believe it ushers in a new era, it just shows you haven't paid attention to the entire history of Bob prior to this unremarkable event.



Self deprecation has it's place, but, speaking as a person who has lived his entire life on the fringes of CN, my advice to you is not to let a victim's mentality guide your thoughts and actions. Small in size does not equate to small in influence.

-Craig
[/quote]

Well. As I said earlier. I stated my opinion. And while I havent studied the entire history of BOB, much less pay a lot of attention to it, I can only comment on what I see in front of me. My opinion is based solely on the way I see things, not how things have happened in the past. Sure this could be just another page or two in BOB history that no one sees as relevant, but, this could also be the turning point for all the LOL-igans and Lulz-icrats to start declaring wars for little or no reason. I hope you are right, and I am wrong.

As far as the self-depreciation goes.. it was meant to be more sarcastic than serious.

[Locke]

[quote name='Haflinger' timestamp='1296992471' post='2621973']
Suddenly I remember a great pile of horse!@#$ from a year and a half ago.


Let's see where Legion's path took them after ODN dissolved Orrple.

Oh that's interesting; it took them to a war defending their allies against an unprovoked attack, only to be attacked by the ODN.

Congratulations, Arsenal. You finally got the war you wanted.
[/quote]
I'm sure he's not the only one who's overjoyed at this.

[Tiggah]

[quote name='silentkiller' timestamp='1297017734' post='2622379']
Chaining has nothing to do with this. Chaining would be a concern if say GOONS was defending/attacking someone due to one of their treaties.

But eh whatever you think you were obligated to enter then so be it. Have fun with the war I am sure the Legion members will.
[/quote]

The chain is Legion's treaty brings them in to attack GOONS, which causes the chain reaction of LOST coming in to attack Legion. Chaining doesn't require the initial war to start with a treaty obligation. I don't like it. I think it's actually pretty stupid from a logic standpoint, but we're well past any level of sanity here on Planet Bob and have been for some time.