CE's position concerning FTR.

  • Thread starter Thread starter vaia
  • Start date Start date

DeletedUser

Guest
Greetings,

Mandril has stepped down as Duke of CE and asked me to fill his position. With that said, it is my duty as Duchess to inform our Allies and NAP'd Tribes of our position concerning FTR.

Our original position in this was to war TW if they became offensively involved in this. We had been dealing with some issues of attack with TW members on our own regardless of a standing ceasefire. However, we considered out position carefully, decided that warring each other was not in our best inerests, and so as of this morning however, we have secured a true NAP with all of the TW tribes.

CE has had a long standing NAP with FTR, and has not had a problem with their tribe. Because of the newly secured NAP with TW we also intend to honor this. As such, regardless of TW's position in this war, we intend to remain entierly neutral. Any support to our allies vs. FTR and those who have joined them would mean a breach in our NAP with them.

While we respect and appreciate our alliances, but must also respect our NAP's. I sincerely hope that our allies and other NAP'd tribes can understand and respect our decision in this matter.

Thank you,

~Vaia
Duchess of CE
 
It's good to know that some people are still thinking logically. ;)

ny support to our allies vs. FTR and those who have joined them would mean a breach in our NAP with them.
Click to expand...
Also, it's good to see somebody understand this. Apparantly, Hatred thought differently when they were still NAP'd up with us...
 
At least one of these tribes in the so called "Anti-FTR" Alliance have enough sense to make their own decision rather then being puppets of someone else. You have to respect these guys for their decision as well as their true understanding of an NAP.
 
Someone could say that this is almost like choosing NAPs over alliances, but since someone will say it anyway, it's best coming from me to make it mild. There, that covers it.
 
Well nothing about an alliance implies blindly doing whatever your ally wants. Even if they had no NAP at all they dont have to jump into a war that isnt theirs.
 
Great!

*Gives thumbs up.*

Moving on!

Only six replies. That's pretty good!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
We simply have never held a grudge towards FTR, they have always been reasonable and respecful towards us, as have we been to them.

As for TW, we have thought carefully about why exactly we disliked them, we seeked the truth behind every aspect.
We did some research on all that had happened between us and TW in the past, and had to conclude some issues were simply blown out of proportions and misinterpreted from both sides.

We respect both our alliances and our NAP with FTR, and found no other solution other than remaining neutral.
 
Maybe there was an agreement between them you weren't aware of?
 
Bingo!


As mentioned, we have never encountered any problems with FTR.
 
still, the leader should have been noticed first. and don't go maybe, that's a fact, words can all be lies. if there was an agreenment and the aristocracy knew it, why wasn't that member kicked out so the NAP wouldn't be broken?
 
Agreements can be various things. How we handle them and carry them out is our own concern.
 
I fully agree.
So if that was an agreenment, sorry for interfering, just ignore my posts.
 
That village was supposedly under conversion before that member joined us. It was allowed to carry through. That's routine enough I believe. You should be getting some sleep Astor rather than trying to dig up fake dirt on FTR because you will need it for your rebuild.
 
Gareeth said:
That village was supposedly under conversion before that member joined us. It was allowed to carry through. That's routine enough I believe. You should be getting some sleep Astor rather than trying to dig up fake dirt on FTR because you will need it for your rebuild.
Click to expand...
lol, sleep? how do you know that? lol, i'm off to lunch:P
 
-- Agreements made within an NAP don't necessarily create a violation of that NAP as long as all parties are aware.

-- Sending support to an allied tribe who is knowingly under attack from an NAP'd tribe in an effort to cause more damage to the attacker is obviously a violation of an NAP agreement, as it is meant to cause harm.

I spoke at length with FTR this afternoon about our arrangement and our position here in an effort to clairify that we basically just aren't taking a position.

Our folks are encouraged to contact the NAP's and Allies in their area in order to strengthen those bonds. Doesn't mean they'll take advantage of it, but a lot do. There is no reason to disregard an NAP that has never caused us a problem, nor is there reason to place the whole of CE in jeopardy from tribes that they may have otherwise had good relations with simply because someone else is going to war with them.

There are a lot of people who jump on the War Wagon or run along beside it. War is not something to be frivilously declared, regardless of your relationship with other tribes. We have to protect our own tribe first and then our associations. I'm sure most tribes think this way, or at least I would hope so.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top