[MEOW] Is eSpain despicable? [eHistory]

Day 2,244, 09:23 • Published in Poland Spain • by Minino.

Firstly, I would like to thank El Yass for publishing his article, which made this one to be possible. He exercised his right to critique and freedom of speechus based on respect, which is always welcome in order to see different points of views.







They are to blame those who encouraged me. Take some popcorns and relax! I will try to be as objective as possible. You are free to add further information in the comments if that’s your wish: just, respect people! So, I think it’ll be fair to start with what CTRL alliance supposed to Spain.

CTRL (Came To Rock, Literally) was the result of ONE’s disappearance. Although CTRL was initially designed -among other things- so that Spain got rid of Brazil’s and the US’s presence over its territories and push them away of TEDEN’s influence (TERRA +EDEN, ONE’s opponents), it finally ended up in being temporarily perpetuated.

Ergo, the first thing did work: USA, Brazil, Spain and Poland brought relations closer and smoothed rough feelings between them. However, Spain suffered from intense instability. I still remember when we could not make Portugal not to have Congress: Poland sent its army, which did the incredible amount of 1kk damage. No results.

CTRL was characterised by taking a stand against the game’s balcanic inclination: continued fights without an apparent end due to real life relationed issues. It was something that kept the attention and pleasure of many people… In the member countries.

Spain was constantly asking for help. If it was not to Poland, Brazil so that they could take care of nighttime. USA so so, but they more or less helped. Brazil did force themselves to assist Spain: they helped Spain quite a lot. Nor Serbia nor Hungary seemed to come to assist us.


(it should be taken into consideration Spain’s flag lion has not got the appropriate colour)

Why? Basically, we came along with countries which we rarely had any relation with e-historically and which were not in friendly terms with these. In fact, Serbia and the US vied, and so they do nowadays.

Which made CTRL to end was USA’s ultimatum to Polan😛 ``stop signing MPP with Hungary and Serbia’’. Then, it change😛 ``stop signing, for now, with Serbia, as we’re suffering a TO by their side’’.

USA got into Europe and reached Hungary’s border. Spain, in line with Poland, said they would support the US if Hungary attacked them. Hungary finally attacked the US and Spoland was loyal to its old friendship with Hungary and Serbia, issue which did not result strange enough due to the US’s bizarre attitude, swaggering and provocative acts.

Spoland’s foreign policy suffered an attempt of being modified by USA and CTRL crumbled, fulfilling its objective to what ONE initial plans referred to.


Now it comes TWO (The World is Ours). Spoland and SerHun built its bases, being Slovenia and the UK incorporated as founding members too. Its objective: dominating the e-world, as indicates its name. Still, Spain waited for Brazil to go in, being this a requirement of extreme importance.

Much has been said about this topic, as Brazil never took a stance. I was MoFA at that time and part of my team, together with me, were aware of why we affirmed Brazil would follow.

As we all know, Brazil was and is still divided into two: CAT, pro-Argentina and associated allies, and the charismatic faction made up by players such as BIG GIL, Vigoncalves, Leviii… Thing is, a player related to this last faction said he’d try Brazil to be there, side by side with Spain. It was not a matter of concern their continuity on power, which kept administering and governing Brazil.



Unfortunately, CAT got strong and it was not possible. It is worth mentioning beloved US made a mockery of Brazil (monkeys, was not it?), in addition to the fact the US was automatically positioned in the losing side. Brazil had a chance of, lets say, ``survive’’, but they did not want or did not know how to take advantage of it.

Still, an encouraging panorama was more than assured regarding Spain, as time has proven.

TWO was in conformity with Brazil’s entrance in TWO, and it was insisted on it during several months from both HQ and member countries. Brazil, against all odds, followed an incredibly harmless strategy: sitting on two chairs, term which has been recently used to describe Spain (we will talk about it later).

Brazil maintained its friendship with USA, as well as with Spain. It kept a neutral position towards TWO, signing MPPs with Spoland but ignoring SerHun due to internal and external pressures (USA+CAT). This perpetual situation did nothing but to force TWO to intervene, being Spain’s efforts in order to convince Brazil useless because of them not wanting to act.
.
All was not lost yet, but a point in which TWO had to move on reached.. It was known CoTWO (name which received collaboration between CoT and TWO) was not going to last much when rumours about USA’s entrance took place.

Spain last try was the following. After laborious talks between Spanish and Brazilian representatives, these accepted to sign a MPP with Hungary. Hungary, on the contrary, presided at that time by GregoryG, rejected signing the MPP. It was logic: real approach after all this time or just a mere strategy to gain more time?

Too late.




In times of CoTWO, Spain was comfortable enough. It had its South American allies (Chile and Brazil), countries like-minded like Bulgaria (no MKD), Mexico… Tranquility and constant battles against the evil and yet existent EDEN.

Some of you might have asked yourselves about what broke CoTWO. It is important to know about it to avoid misunderstandings. What was it?

Commonly accepted pro-CoT argument establishes all started as from TWO’s attack on Russia, though Russia was not inside CoT at that time, yet it could be said they were friendly to Bulgaria: outstanding founding member which dragged CoT to be neutral in the conflict. Certainly, various opinions existed -included in Chile- in favour of standing with TWO, but they were or ignored or silenced. It was kind of impressive to see how Russia switched MPPs with EDEN relationed countries after the attack while they were supposed to be pro-CoT.

What really affected CoTWO relations is that CoT never wanted to help TWO against China, being this its main objective. Time has demonstrated how mean Bulgaria was, just like MKD. They went against Iran, conquering all it regions, and they did not even have the minor intention of help TWO to achieve its objective, taking into considerations its proximity to the Asian
Moreover, Hungary even reached and attacked Iran before and lost, passing through Turkey with Poland’s direct help for doing so. It was a total ‘’surprise’’ MKD decided afterwards to establish on that zone… Maybe not.

All comes from the few enthusiasm CoT showed when time to help TWO arrived. TWO helped CoT in every single campaign: CoT was the axe and TWO, the woodcutter. It is said CoT never prepared itself towards a possible war, but that is totally questionable.

What was, then, USA’s trial member membership inside CoT? Conversely, and denying the theory which indicates that when CoTWO started TWO had initially the support of countries such as Romania, Greece or Taiwan, I must say Romania’s support was the result of Serbian, Hungarian and in part Polish diplomacy (including TWO’s HQ). Regarding Taiwan and Greece, they decided to go in because it was beneficial for both, as it was proven:

Greece did not wait too much and conquered nearly everything in its way throughout Middle East and maintained -up to nowadays- MKD occupied. Likewise, Taiwan knew that if they went in they would avoid being afraid more about its original territories. They got rid of USA, conquered South Korea and they even joined the multiple attack against USA when the war started.

It was, therefore, a matter of who offered more, and not a race whose main objective was to screw the other, yet all these events were of great utility.

If CoT’s HQ would have been different, things would have changed. It is not true TWO first attacked CoT: at Saxony resistance war, even though many romanians participated, they were not alone.

Many Chileans and Bulgarians were fighting against Poland, and I still remember screenshots from the Mexican CP doing so. It should not be forgotten US-AIM, an American confederation of military units made publicly their aversion towards Spain and hit against these.

The US’s entrance in CoT broke everything. CoT was essentially a defensive alliance and dared to change without a proper base nor strategy to follow. Although the US was inside CTRL, we all know how it ended and the little esteem this country still causes between TWO’s community, even if Spoland has got a NAP with them.


I will now focus on the polemic country of Argentina and its nearby circle. There is something we cannot put in doubt: Argentina did well in openly declaring themselves anti-CoT/pro-TWO and, little by little, demonstrating to every TWO country which accepted to bring relations closer how useful could they be if they wanted, in contradistinction to their Brazilian neighbours.

Opportunism, indeed, but they went from being erased to erase. A huge difference. They created and made of their situation a reality: fight against whole CoT -no matter what- and get close to TWO in order to depend on them in the short-term, but being this vice versa in the long one. To sum up, turning into a great player internationally because of a series of several strokes of luck, rather unlucky strategies by their adversaries.

Argentina and Spain do not get along with each other. This is something that comes from the e-past, but that’s how it is. I must admit Argentina tried to improve relations with Spain, but there is nothing you can do when the population is against you: the result will always be the same.

Spain, Brazil and Chile allies. CoTWO time: these three nations did get along with each other. War started but relations between them remained stable as far as possible. Hungary and Serbia were the first countries which tested Argentina, which resulted on them being satisfied. They saw in Argentina a loyal country which proved to have similar interests and provided damage at European nighttime.

Let's remember Argentina launched an AS (Airstrike) against United Kingdom in order to get a babyboom because of Malvinas’ stuff. Argentina tried it to be a TW in the last moment, but it was not accepted by British representatives. The Spanish CP at that time, poggo, launched immediately another AS against Argentina. Spain kept being loyal to Chile and Brazil, from which they expected the same: loyalty. We are about to deeply analyze Spain.

The United Kingdom ended up in following Serbia’s, Hungary’s and other ACT (Associated Countries of TWO) countries’ steps. Spain, however, remained impassive and firm regarding Argentina, strengthening bonds with Chile and Brazil: countries considered allied by Spain.

Tritius arrives to Spain’s presidency. The decline of nearly every single aspect begins here. April 2013. MEKday: Guayana is lost, Venezuelan original territory in possession of Spain due to the traditional, monthly renting of regions. No more Spanish regions in Argentina.

TWO’s HQ wanted to solve this problem, as it represented a loss of bonus and therefore, Spain’s and TWO’s detriment economically. I was the SoFA, and I contacted Colombia in order to sign a treaty with both Venezuela and Colombia: Colombia attacked Venezuela (Guayana), and Spain attacked Colombia in order to get Guayana back.



For those of you who are just beginning to play: if you attack an ally who you share MPP with (Spain would have had to attack Venezuela under normal circumstances), you lose all the common MPPs, so later on it costs a lot of money to sign them again: every MPP (Mutual Protection Pact) costs 10k cc.


Spain obtains Guayana for free thanks to the treaty with Colombia. The pact between both Venezuela and Colombia also included a swap of regions which benefited them. In exchange, Venezuela agrees on helping and admitting Colombia to get into ACT. A question to every CP is sent, asking about Colombia in ACT and stating Venezuela accepts. ‘’Yes’’ they say.

The Spanish CP was away: TWO’s SG, Talon, talks with Maryoky, vCP, who says there is no problem (Venezuela, which was supposed to be the only main problem, clearly accepted).

Colombia is officially an ACT member… Not for long. Spain regrets it and vetoes Colombia, after they had contributed to the recovery of Guayana. Considered by many treason, we will now explain what would have happened to Spain with Colombia’s entrance plus other factors.

1. Colombia’s entrance in ACT officially broke CUA, but it ended up being naturally formed again. Spain managed to save CUA’s future by vetoing Colombia: it strengthened CUA when it was passing through an unstable period.

2. In the long term, Spain could have gained Colombia’s friendship, giving them the important role they deserve in the zone for them not to be a mere follower of Argentina. Independence: Colombia would have had to follow the alliance’s orders together with Venezuela, the nearest ACT country and a loyal ally to Spain. In addition, Spain would have been interfering in Portugal’s partners, being Colombia one of them.

3. A possible formation of a network of relations between Spain (+Portugal), Mexico (finished CoT, opened to new opportunities), Colombia, Venezuela and Brazil. Being an alternative to ROLA, it would have assured Spain’s position towards South America, having these countries European damage through Spoland.

4. Yes to Colombia, no to Argentina. As easy as that: keep it up with it. Spain is actually doing so and nothing occurs due to the fall of those Serbians and Slovenians that were pressing Spain. Right to veto is established in the charter.

5. We cannot omit the fact that if relations with Portugal had not been destroyed and some Spanish government had dared to take a step further with Portugal and got allies, the Iberian Peninsula would be a secure bunker built by delicate diplomatic moves.

6. Furthermore, with the arrival of this new game mechanism called ``determination´´, Spain and Portugal could have avoided the sign of a MPP so Portugal could attack Venezuela every so often in order to reset the level of determination in the Spanish rented regions.

Spain could, then, enjoy a comfortable position with bonus and campaigns in Canada, Ireland, France or try to reach border with countries unrelated to TWO in order to demonstrate its true commitment to the alliance, which of course would not have been questioned if other strategy had been followed, either result of governments’conformity or ignorance.


We have not finished yet, but let’s go back to what happened. After Tritius, new elections arrive. Akashapeke, is elected, and I am the MoFA. An attack over the US is imminent, and Spain needed to stay neutral as far as possible not to relapse into previous errors: the US as Spain’s enemy, being the US a country Spain shares borders with.

Spaniards do not want to accept Argentina as a friend, which is understandable from a historical point of view and taking into account Chile’s and Brazil’s influence on Spain.

ROLA is created. A suballiance: let me highlight ``sub´´ because some players doubted who to be loyal to, from both sides. Spain’s entrance to ROLA assured a perfect balance when USA was attacked, being friendship among its members maintained. It was, in fact, approved by TWO’s HQ.

Spain’s entrance to ROLA was not, as some people suggest, the beginning of Spain’s position decline in TWO: this occurred because of neglect and, again, ignorance of a wide range of governments whose experience in these cases of mixed interests was low, rather null.

ROLA was a smokescreen, that’s all. Lovely, but all but efficient. For some Spanish players it represented an alternative just in case TWO exploited (as I see it, that view was quite stupid), but it was also a try of avoiding bipolarity: this fight against CoT and TWO that did not benefited Chile, Brazil nor Spain. Obviously, it was useless and it ended up badly.

It is true: anyone could have foreseen what would happen with every member trying to impose its desires and taken into consideration countries from CoT + Brazil + Spain were inside. It finished bad, but if something can not be blamed to Spain is their loyalty to those it considered its allies.

Look out! Being loyal does not mean being intelligent: we have already seen what happened with Colombia. I was surprised to see Spanish congressmen asking questions like: ``What does Brazil and Chile thinks about it?´´ when it was being discussed a growth in TWO’s area of influence (ie, Australia’s and New Zealand entry).

National sovereignty, term which needs to be reviewed by some. One thing is pretty clear: you have to take into consideration your allies, but basing your opinion on them without looking at your alliance and implying these (Chile and Brazil) did not help TWO at all… If I had to criticise something would be the low common sense level of several individuals and the little desire of these to improve the overall situation of the country.

Chile was pulling to its side, so does Brazil, Mexico: same, Paraguay to Chile’s, and there was Spain. And the time arrived -in another month, obviously- where Spain had to intervene.

Firstly, due to Mexico, which NEed Poland knowing about its consequences (Spoland) while USA was invaded. Spain reacted by NEing Mexico.

Later on, Mexico NEed Spain, and the law passed. Chile’s role in this was crucial: they declared themselves neutral and they cooperated with Spain: the attack was turned into a TW. Mexico had to attack the Canary Islands without conquering it. CoT organised a gangbang against Spain and Mexico failed to comply by hitting with all they could against Spain in the Canary Islands and bringing down any possibility of reaching peace.

Fortunately, TWO was there and assisted Spain: there were no problems, but Chile then decided to support Mexico because ‘’they were CoT’’.

As it was obvious, Mexico tried to defend its ally. ¿Were they loyal to their alliance? Yes, but that costed them several wipes, besides having broken ROLA and destroying its credibility and trustability on it from Spain. Sooner or later it was going to happen. Some called it as ‘’sitting on two chairs’’: just what Brazil did.


ROLA came unstuck, and when Spain finally attacked the US, Chileans defended the US with all they had, as well as they fought against Spain in favour of Mexico, again. Relations between Chile and Brazil died.

Spain’s fault? Let’s deny certain arguments used by chilean players.

1. Spain is the one who does not signs with Chile and Brazil, and not the wrong way round.

Firstly, Spain has got MPP with Brazil. Secondly, it was approved a new law in TWO’s charter which automatically kicks out any country if it signs a MPP with an enemy. Of course, it was not supported by Spain and Spain voted against it. Moreover, Chile is considered an enemy by the alliance: it has got two ACT countries wiped: Australia and New Zealand, due to the NAP with Argentina.

Spain did not tell Chile they did not want to sign a MPP: they explained to them what happened and they kept friendly terms with Chile.

Slovenia was not expelled when they signed a MPP with Portugal when they were at war with Spain because the HQ was controlled by people who were pro-Slovenia’s policies.

2. ``We are tired of doing everything: it is not our fault.You guys are ungrategul´´.

False. The first ones in dropping MPPs was Chile, following CoT’s HQ orders. We have seen in Chile’s press lots of articles written by Chilean politics regarding the inclusion of Spain in the crossed MPPs’ strategy, which obeyed to selfish interests towards bipolarisation.

Spain was always loyal to Chile and Brazil. Spain was even in dispute with its own alliance in order to preserve its friendship with both, joined ROLA and turned out badly because of a CoT member, satellite of Chile: Mexico.

While Spain restricted its movements on a worldwide scale (poorly done, by the way), always having Chile and Brazil in mind, these signed new MPPs with hostile countries to Spain’s alliance (Croatia, Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina) , keeping their own with countries from the already extincted CoT. This, obviously, lead to the snubbed of Spain.

Spain is not despicable: it is the converse. Let me quote something:

`` The world is a dangerous place to live. Not because of the people who are evil; but because of the people who don’t do anything about it.´´

And Spanish governments, normally, do not do anything about it and does not take into consideration the course of our interests.

3. Why don’t you NE Argentina and forget about giving more excuses?

Common MPPs with TWO countries would be lost and Argentina’s condition regarding its pro-TWO stance has not been questioned yet. It would place Spain in a complex situation and it would not be a movement that would change Brazil’s situation as it would not be supported properly.


Australia and New Zealand try to free themselves, succeed and their zone stabilizes. CoT breaks into pieces: it breaks up. As time goes by, although new opportunities should be about to emerge, nothing happens. Everything is the same… Almost all. TWO fulfilled its objective long time ago: to dominate the world.

Crisis inside TWO, two factions are noticeable: Spoland and SerSlovenia, again. It is a matter of internal supremacy, and because of common interests, TWO stands.

Argentina and Chile renew their NAP: nothing new. However, something which was not expected occurs: Chile attacks Peru: treason. The so called NAP makes Brazil to have zero opportunities to come out, but it gives Chile the chance of obtain bonus from Oceania.

What’s the matter with Brazil? Why is not Chile fighting for their liberation as before? Firstly, Brazil is accused of not being organised. Many Brazilians decided to emigrate to other countries, and Brazil stands out for its D4: the rest divisions do not have any advantage over the Argentinian.

Argentina, considered pro-TWO, keeps the situation in limbo. It would not be appropriate for them to attack Chile because of their own benefit and stability, and vice versa. They are not TWO, and so they do not have the duty of helping New Zealand and Australia.

Situation has change😛 Chile and Argentina noticed they can handle the situation, without the requirement of third countries. South America is getting prepared, and Spain seems to be the first country affected: Europe’s natural entry and shares disagreements with both nations.


Thoughts of a Colombian

Chile is looking for an ABC agreement (Argentina, Brazil, Chile) in South America. The three South American super powers leading a same path: that’s the objective. Will it be compatible? Chile is allied with Bulgaria and MKD. Argentina, allied with Romania, Greece…

Will they sacrifice some of their European allies in order to preserve their well-being situation? That is the main question: how far are they willing to go.


Spain is not despicable. Spain is faithful, but it lacks of foresight. As a Spaniard, I feel I need to say Spain must follow its own path and not let others whose intentions are not clear to do so for us.

Some governors have done much damage to the country, closing its way to new alternatives. We should again become a worldwide reference and we should solve the problems certain politicians created.

We must take care of our traditional allies, being Venezuela one of them . Recently, just as an example, Venezuela needed help against Mexico and, though Spain’s government told them they would be helped, Spain ended up in attacking Brazil and losing.

We should not be swayed by people’s sensationalism and we should question our leaders’ attitude. An example of what I am saying: Portugal. [i(or even now with Aquitaine: people are bitching around when we always got our bonus from Venezuela and the previous government decided to occupy it temporarily, until Serbia recovered)[/i]



Translation:

Do you think it has been a correct decision NEing Portugal?
1. No (292 votes: 83😵
2. Yes (53 votes: 15😵
3. Don’t knows (8 votes: 2😵

It is true some Portuguese players voted ‘’Yes’’. Let’s say they were 100, an exorbitant number. ‘’No’’option would still be winning. Now, the Portuguese government has chosen to be anti-Spain and allied our traditional enemies when we had the chance of becoming allies.

The NAP we shared had a purpose: the improvement of our relations in the long term in order to be allies. Due to people’s possible reaction, this has been postponed. So much, that now there is no way back.

Spain is capable of doing it.
Let’s do so.