a Statment from Hansarius and the United Purple Nations

[Prefonteen]

Funny, because that's exactly what Mensa put it down to. And they have been direct and honest throughout, in my conversations with them.

 

You have already admitted that you attempted to go after us, so there's no need to revisit that angle. As for Rose, both tS/UPN signed with Mensa simultaneously, and that's what I was told. By this point we had already let you and Mensa know that we will not be going after you in response, and merely stay wary and cautious.

 

 

I didn't question BK-Syndicate relations. I am merely making the point that attacking an ally of an ally, is not inherently wrong when you are confident that you have good reason to. If you read my posts in context, you would of understood that. i used the example of BK being a mutual ally of the two, and you going after us. Without any provocation whatsoever. So the intention was to get your guy to stop spewing that morality BS about how wrong it is to go after an ally of an ally. There's a limited amount of alliances in this game, and that's going to happen.

 

Just because you claim it's a false premise, doesn't automatically make it so. What else can we expect you to say? 

 

SK is not our concern, and we have always made that clear. And DEIC aren't the puppets you assume them to be. They have their own government, and are big enough to make these decisions for themselves. So no, we didn't place our allies in an awkward position.

 

 

I never said the SK-tS treaty did equate to you looking to roll us. However it is you further consolidating an existing sphere, with alliances that not only traditionally have disliked/made malicious moves towards us, but also have made it clear they aren't necessarily the biggest fans of ours in the present too. So that's one of the moves, amongst other things, that made us take action. I'm not able to reveal the more juicy parts to this right now, but all in due time...

 

 

Funny, because that's exactly what Mensa put it down to. And they have been direct and honest throughout, in my conversations with them.

 

 

And you repaid them by lieing to their faces about your intention to hit their ally. I can happily assure you that that is a street the Syndicate, for all its malice, has not crossed yet. Good job. I'm sure Mensa appreciates it.

 

You have already admitted that you attempted to go after us, so there's no need to revisit that angle. As for Rose, both tS/UPN signed with Mensa simultaneously, and that's what I was told. By this point we had already let you and Mensa know that we will not be going after you in response, and merely stay wary and cautious.

 

 

So let me get this straight. You are making the claim that tS signed Mensa in order to roll Rose, despite Rose-tS being the relation within Paragon that remained cordial right up until the last war, and despite us not really being in any position at the time to mount any kind of offensive coalition regardless, as the cost would lead to you gaining the opportunity to smack us down (well ho hey, here we are!). The only argument you bring forward defending this claim is that you 'were told that tS had this intention' by a third party (meaning: a party that is not UPN or tS). I understand that your 'defensive' nature forces you to justify yourself in a realpolitik war of aggression but come on man. Your attempt to frame this as tS somehow having had hostile intentions towards Rose is rather transparent. Looking for even more military backup?

 

I didn't question BK-Syndicate relations. I am merely making the point that attacking an ally of an ally, is not inherently wrong when you are confident that you have good reason to. If you read my posts in context, you would of understood that. i used the example of BK being a mutual ally of the two, and you going after us. Without any provocation whatsoever. So the intention was to get your guy to stop spewing that morality BS about how wrong it is to go after an ally of an ally. There's a limited amount of alliances in this game, and that's going to happen.

 

 

I do not dispute your point -though I think we can both agree that you have taken an enormous shit on various covenant allies with the way you handled this war, and that, given your evident advantage over us, you could have afforded your allies the courtesy of at least not !@#$ing them over.-

 

Your 'point' entailed a factual inaccuracy: The paralel which you attempt to draw between tS' *intentions* to hit an ally of BK at the time, and UPN actually hitting its allies' allies is inaccurate for the following reasons:

- tS communicated its intentions clearly to BK's leader clearly at the time, and maintained open communications about the matter. UPN on the other hand, outright lied to its allies about the reasons for its militarization. UPN then vowed to its allies that it would back off, following which it continued militarizing, and attacked.

- UPN and its allies deliberately constructed a set-up in which they could hit SK, who was allied to DEIC, and who was for all accounts and purposes, neutral. On top of ignoring that treaty tie for convenience, DEIC then actively engaged in warfare against its own ally, while the treaty had not been cancelled yet.

 

I understand that you do not like to hear my member's opinion, because it does not correlate with the false perception of the situation which you lads seem to have circlejerked together. But when you do try to relay his argument, try to use facts as opposed to suspicions and opinions.

 

 

SK is not our concern, and we have always made that clear. And DEIC aren't the puppets you assume them to be. They have their own government, and are big enough to make these decisions for themselves. So no, we didn't place our allies in an awkward position.

 

 

You and I both know how coalitions work. Have you (read, UPN. Not you individually) not signed off on the actions taken by the Covenant as a political entity? Forming a bloc means forming a centralized (political) entity when it comes to external perceptions. This means that your actions will reflect on your ally and vice-versa. I do not see how SK is *not* your concern. You collectively made the decision to hit tS, TEst and SK specifically. Or did you all simply threw a dart to determine who to hit?

 

I never said the SK-tS treaty did equate to you looking to roll us. However it is you further consolidating an existing sphere, with alliances that not only traditionally have disliked/made malicious moves towards us, but also have made it clear they aren't necessarily the biggest fans of ours in the present too. So that's one of the moves, amongst other things, that made us take action. I'm not able to reveal the more juicy parts to this right now, but all in due time...

 

 

It looks more as if the 'move' that made you take action is the tS-Paragon war. This war to me seems like a confirmation of your intentions: You deliberately stayed out of that war, talking to both both sides, and - via the threat of entry as well as backroom manipulation- diverted damage off of Mensa and onto tS. After we grinded one another down, you finally felt secure to have your war on us for our 'transgressions (leaks)'. 

 

You did not attack us outright when the leaks happened, because you lacked the physical and political power to do so. Your claims that you are somehow acting in self-defense against supposed tS coalition building are ridiculous.

[Sargun]

And lo, the Lord God said, "go forth, Partisan, and !@#$ that !@#$." And then he did.

[Alex Windsor]

This thread has been going so well, first time to take more an hour reading and rereading this. This is what politics and war made of. Regarding to all the CB's and arguements, being brave and just in actions is not thru PRE-EMPTING to preserve hegemoney and pride. You can confirm such threat or possibilities, if they lodged an attacks first, unless everybody are pixel huggers and would not want to wait if it's(so called TS plans to take an offensive and dominate the Orbis) real or just a threat in existence. All the pre-emptive that I've seen before is telling at those unbiased minds and judgments.

[Alex Windsor]

What I can say is that wars really happen from miscommunication(misunderstanding/communicationgap), different leaders with differing ideas and interests, changes in leadership and this what so called hegemoney and pride. The only miracle that will happen in politics and war is when no wars like this happen. We all go fight guys but only to pixels okay? Let's remain civil and friendly off sites

[fistofdoom]

That hurt my eyes. I'm rusty as he'll at this.

[Kurdanak]

ITT: Treaty dance all over the place

It's so great. The treaty web is quickly getting far less complicated. \o/

[Lu Xun]

All that said, Synd, Mensa, and SK are doing a really fine job at spinning the story and controlling the message. The forums PR control is not traditionally their specialty, but on the defense, tC is really showing their vulnerability here.

 

It's true that this war was probably planned and assembled on extra-short time, but this is a vulnerability that should not have been allowed to exist, #1, #2, it's high-risk, simply because S-M-7 are controlling the design of the next war and if they fail to get what they want, it will be much worse for them.

[Wayne]

All that said, Synd, Mensa, and SK are doing a really fine job at spinning the story and controlling the message. The forums PR control is not traditionally their specialty, but on the defense, tC is really showing their vulnerability here.

 

It's true that this war was probably planned and assembled on extra-short time, but this is a vulnerability that should not have been allowed to exist, #1, #2, it's high-risk, simply because S-M-7 are controlling the design of the next war and if they fail to get what they want, it will be much worse for them.

 

Mensa is stuck in the middle.  All we want is peace and quiet.

[Roy Mustang]

All that said, Synd, Mensa, and SK are doing a really fine job at spinning the story and controlling the message. The forums PR control is not traditionally their specialty, but on the defense, tC is really showing their vulnerability here.

 

It's true that this war was probably planned and assembled on extra-short time, but this is a vulnerability that should not have been allowed to exist, #1, #2, it's high-risk, simply because S-M-7 are controlling the design of the next war and if they fail to get what they want, it will be much worse for them.

 

Spin's really easy when you're telling the truth

[Crust]

Did partisan put you up to this?

[Vincent]

@Roy. I believe what you meant was spining was easy for a bunch of people that is so profesional in scheming and plotting against others

[Eumirbago]

@Roy. I believe what you meant was spining was easy for a bunch of people that is so profesional in scheming and plotting against others

 

lolnou

[Saruman]

[Critters]

OK Saruman, the meme made me laugh out loud!

[Roy Mustang]

@Roy. I believe what you meant was spining was easy for a bunch of people that is so profesional in scheming and plotting against others

 

Okay come on now guys, either we're super good at plotting and are the evilest people ever, or we're incompetent at scheming and everyone can see our moves coming a mile away as Impero claims.

 

I don't really care which one it is, but get your insults straight

[Buorhann]

I was hoping to avoid a war and take a break from one, but it was clearly obvious that despite the assurances we got that no war would happen - that it was going to happen.  The growth rate showed that.

 

At least this will spice things up.

[Ayayay]

Again, not reading all this but while skimming I saw people !@#$ing about attacking allies of allies.

 

So goddamn what? This game is tiny as shit, everyone in this game is allies of an ally. There are only three alliances in the top 15 who are not an ally nor an ally of an ally of a TC alliance and one of those alliances is paperless and the other is !@#$ing GPA. The game is small enough where a single new treaty or cancellation can completely throw the balance of power like a boat in a hurricane. If you want to !@#$ about morality like an idiot or the justification of the war then go ahead but don't pretend allies of allies mean anything in this game.

[Boony]

Again, not reading all this but while skimming I saw people !@#$ about attacking allies of allies.

 

So goddamn what? This game is tiny as shit, everyone in this game is allies of an ally. There are only three alliances in the top 15 who are not an ally nor an ally of an ally of a TC alliance and one of those alliances is paperless and the other is !@#$ GPA. The game is small enough where a single new treaty or cancellation can completely throw the balance of power like a boat in a hurricane. If you want to !@#$ about morality like an idiot or the justification of the war then go ahead but don't pretend allies of allies mean anything in this game.

Not only did UPN attack an ally of an ally, they also lied to their allies about it. DEIC actually attacked their own ally.

[Saru]

Not only did UPN attack an ally of an ally. DEIC actually attacked their own ally.

 

Stop being purposely obtuse. The treaty was redundant, both parties knew it, and the only mistake was that it wasn't dropped earlier -- if I am right, the only thing they actually ever worked on was getting the colour bonus up. Focus on the reality of things, not the technicalities. 

[Kadin]

Stop being purposely obtuse. The treaty was redundant, both parties knew it, and the only mistake was that it wasn't dropped earlier -- if I am right, the only thing they actually ever worked on was getting the colour bonus up. Focus on the reality of things, not the technicalities. 

So you admit the treaty was never dropped, but DEIC still attacked them while holding a treaty. You don't have a leg to stand on here.

[Wayne]

It's like watching mum and dad argue!

[Vincent]

Okay come on now guys, either we're super good at plotting and are the evilest people ever, or we're incompetent at scheming and everyone can see our moves coming a mile away as Impero claims.

 

I don't really care which one it is, but get your insults straight

I am not insulting. Merely telling the fact that you are good in plotting and scheming but even better in pretending to be innocent.

[Saru]

So you admit the treaty was never dropped, but DEIC still attacked them while holding a treaty. You don't have a leg to stand on here.

 

I don't know the ins and outs of their agreement, and how the two feel about it. But from my understanding the two were never close, and both knew that the treaty was weak. My point is that trying to say that UPN is somehow dishonourable for attacking an ally of an ally, given all the things considered is silly.

[Boony]

I don't know the ins and outs of their agreement, and how the two feel about it. But from my understanding the two were never close, and both knew that the treaty was weak. My point is that trying to say that UPN is somehow dishonourable for attacking an ally of an ally, given all the things considered is silly.

You also didn't quote the whole thing. You LIED to your allies. You told them you would be backing down. You lied and withheld information that could bring them into a war.

 

Was it strategically sound? Sure. Does it arguably go against what the treaty says? Yes. Does it also go against the spirit of the treaty? Yes. Is it a shitty thing to do to your allies? Yes.

Edited October 18, 2015 by Boony

[Tali]

I don't know the ins and outs of their agreement, and how the two feel about it. But from my understanding the two were never close, and both knew that the treaty was weak. My point is that trying to say that UPN is somehow dishonourable for attacking an ally of an ally, given all the things considered is silly.

 

I highly doubt UPN, especially you, know what honor is.