[DrPraetorious]

That's mostly accurate, and I see no point in quibbling over details or slight changes in phrasing, even if they are purposefully inflammatory or (known by both of us to be) untrue.

Firstly, did I not warn you to muster your forces on your border? If I *really* wanted him to hurt you as much as possible, I would hardly have told you to muster against such a contingency, would I?

If he does turn north, you are in position to intercept him - I cannot be accused of ignoring such contingencies.

Given the choice of seeing him send that army to my capital or to yours, I'd certainly rather he send it to yours. I'll still do my best to destroy it, but to defeat your enemy, you must think like your enemy: he wants to hurt those who attacked him, since he's basically lost, and you publically called for the attack against him, and your capital is closer to his army with less impressive defenses in the way. Obviously I'm going to point this out, and make a case why he should revenge himself on you, rather than on me. Nothing personal.

One need only look at the case of Marverni to see how powerful and dire vengeance can be! Midgard is flailing around, looking for a target, and there really are only three choices.

If you want to start a fight between us over it - well, that won't save him, but it would, I suppose, serve his purposes by weakening both of us.