Jabah Wrote:My opinion is that SINCE the MDP was made PUBLIC, if Spulla would be declaring on HRE, they would be de facto declaring on Whosit (kind of SP play) so THEY would be the one breaking the NAP (if they have one).
I am not going to argue with them about it since it will be useless and even if they (hopefully) secretly agree with this view, they are definitly not going to publicly agree.
This is just twisted logic.
Scenario:
A signs a NAP with B, and then, without consulting with A, B signs an MDP with C.
A attacks C.
B attacks A, referring to the MDP as justification.
In this scenario, A never promised not to attack C, so he did not break his word. B did promise not to attack A, so he did break his word. Saying that A was the one to break the NAP is ludicrous.