TIVIUM and EAGLES

So basically in six pages I get this.... the thread started as a war declaration from one alliance whos confed was being militarily harassed by another alliance. in defense I see the following paraphrased of course:

"We were in an alliance that was at war, didn't like how it was handled and quit to start up an alliance to avoid hostilities"

"We do not deny being militarily involved in hostilities against an alliance that is confed with the alliance that declared war"

"We feel that we could attack one individual member of an alliance, but since we did not intend to attack other members, we would expect a well established alliance to turn a blind eye on our actions"

What I get out of this as a whole is it's quite a miracle it took this long for someone to declare!

abstractdream wrote: Rill wrote: Let's note here that Bonfyr Verboo of TVM and Wilberforce of N are alts.  There is nothing secret about this.  Wilberforce was involved in the war through N.  Bonfyr Verboo and Abraxox, who are friends in real life, dragged their former alliance, TLR, into a war on behalf of an alt.  (Through for example sieges on Dwarven Druids.) The Duke of Shade objected to this behavior, and their alliance leader, Eternal Fire, did not support it.   In response, Bonfyr Verboo and Abraxox took a group of their followers from TLR to form Trivium, leaving their former TLR alliance mates to face the consequences of their actions.  Which, to his credit, Eternal Fire did, and has earned my respect in so doing. Trivium has been at war with Consone since before it was even formed.  They have reinforced sieges on Consone members and launched their own sieges at times.  EE has decided to recognize these actions with a declaration of war. In describing the flow of history as I understand it, I am not making judgments (except for my increased respect for Eternal Fire, as noted).  But let's call a spade a spade. All true except: Eternal Fire declared War on Shade. Shade simply launched feints and blockades assuming EF would contact them and they could talk (EF had ignored The Duke's messages, thus an escallation ensued.) EF acted on impulse and "dragged" TLR into a war in which it was clearly outmatched. I had no idea The Duke was trying to talk to and being ignored by EF. THAT was the last in a long line of poor decisions that forced me out. The members followed me. They did not remain behind to "face the consequences." EDIT: Oh, and by the way, I did not launch without authorization while in TLR, ever.

This is about the most accurate recount of what happened in the war. Spot on actually. Shade had a vested interest in a few things at the time and I repeatedly tried to contact EF but to no avail. I then sent approx 5 members (picked at random) who were active(confirmed via illy tools) a mail stating if they left TLR then they would not be targeted. Bonfyr and I then began side negotiations in which I showed him my efforts to end this before it escalated to an all out war even after war had been declared. This had all been given a deaf ear. The seige and attacks from TLR came after war was declared- so I would venture to say it was given the consent of the leadership whom declared the war. After those that chose to leave left we proceeded with seiges and attacks that had already been sent, and formed a new game plan. There were even seiges on trivium that were landed and not recalled by Shade. 

Constant? About 48 hours worth. Anything like the constant stream of attacks without declaration that you mention in your second paragraph? I guess we just have to agree that the definition of constant is not a constant.

Someone else said we sent a siege at you in their post. I want everyone to understand that that did not happen.

No one in TVM has ever said we "had never done anything to deserve an attack on (our) seige." Show me where we said that and I will accept the truth of it. Saying it, don't make it so.

I never stated your troops did not die in the field before this declaration. You are obviously seeing what you want to see, not actually reading my statements. Here is what I said: "I am criticizing the fact that the same sort of actions we took previously did not warrant a declaration. Only WHEN YOUR TROOPS DIED IN THE FIELD IN AN ATTACK FROM US did you do that." (Caps for highlight)

How is a declaration of war, publicly posted on Global Chat by the System (every one of them is) "under the radar?"

My replies are in bold type.

Elmindra said: Hath made a statement as to why we declared upon Trivium. And included misleading statements and a joke. Your alliance responded with a "Haller attacked us first!" we are the victim statement. Abraxox's post clarified the hypocrisy. If that is not a denial perhaps I don't understand the definition. Denial: an assertion that something said, believed, alleged, etc., is false. No one ever denied we had been involved in attacks on the siege in question or against two Druid players. I am denying that we "constantly" attacked your siege(s.) I am denying that we sent a siege or sieges against EE. Nothing else has ever been denied. What exactly have you read to show otherwise? When pressed you finally admitted that you were involved in attacks from the beginning. Pressed? I guess that's a decent spin on someone finally asking. I have never denied -that word again- sieging the Druid players, the VALAR player or attacking your camps around a city owned by Fromfrak. I also did not question whether or not you declared on Druids, but criticized us for not declaring on you sooner because of your aggression on Druids. I am criticizing the fact that the same sort of actions we took previously did not warrant a declaration. Only when your troops died in the field in an attack from us did you do that. In my time in Illy, almost every war declaration has followed with a forum post explaining the reasons. Really? I've read a dozen, maybe...just a guess but closer to reality than "almost every." How many wars are declared just at this moment, not to mention all the previous ones? I don't see a 2 sentence declaration as starting a PR campaign. Well, of course you don't. And yes I asked that you admit that you started attacks against our allies long before your current siege was hit by EE simply because your alliance spent 2 pages attempting to state that they didn't do anything of the sort. Again, show it. Simply stating it does not make it fact.

As for clarity, judging by the comments from outside factions you have done a good job of providing it. That we can agree on. "Outside factions" would not be squawking as they were if a nerve had not been exposed...

Hath made a statement as to why we declared upon Trivium.  Your alliance responded with a "Haller attacked us first!" we are the victim statement.  If that is not a denial perhaps I don't understand the definition.  When pressed you finally admitted that you were involved in attacks from the beginning.  I also did not question whether or not you declared on Druids, but criticized us for not declaring on you sooner because of your aggression on Druids.  In my time in Illy, almost every war declaration has followed with a forum post explaining the reasons.  I don't see a 2 sentence declaration as starting a PR campaign.  And yes I asked that you admit that you started attacks against our allies long before your current siege was hit by EE simply because your alliance spent 2 pages attempting to state that they didn't do anything of the sort.