USA and Sirius - the third perspective

Day 2,385, 13:33 Published in Finland Finland by TheJuliusCaesar

Lately we've witnessed some intense drama: Sirius and the US decided to take different paths leading to a stormy encounter and a heated debate in the latest Sirius HQ meeting . We've been offered two different stories regarding the event: the American perspective provided by WildOwl and Derphoof, and the perspective of Secretary General of the Sirius alliance, Iain Keers. As both perspectives efficiently take into account only the aspects which suit their motives and discard any information against their own theory, we need to widen the spectrum and look at the situation as a whole.

Let's inspect the Keers' perspective first. The Sirius SG (obviously) labels USA as the villain of this story, them being the ones who agreed to help the wiped nation of Spain by attacking their conqueror Argentina, but only a day after that signing an NAP with them. According to Keers, the government of the US claimed that they didn’t have the full support of the alliance for the attack and that there wasn’t even a concrete plan to liberate Spain. Based on these arguments the US tries at least indirectly justify the NAP with Argentina. Later it was even claimed that the NAP was a first step to liberate Spain. Keers (along with a number of other Sirius HQ-members) maintains his position that the US backstabbed Spain, and backstabbed harshly. Most of the blame falls over the current president of the US, MollyEmma. Keers' perspective also includes the SPoland-Asteria NAP. The NAP which would have efficiently left the US out in the cold (at least almost) alone. However, as the charter of Sirius states, all NAP's conducted by its member nations has to be approved by the HQ. This NAP didn't pass the vote. The article also mentions the situation of Brazil, a former member of the alliane. Brazil practically did almost the same as the US did. Brazil had been wiped by Argentina for 9 long months, before they got help from Spain, who "kamikaze'd" and attacked Argentina. Shortly after this, Brazil left Sirius, signed a NAP and a MPP with Argentina, who then proceeded to the Iberian Peninsula and still wipes Spain. This was played down by the alliance; it didn't raise much debate back then.


How about the American perspective, then? It highlights that the alliance "sold them out". It emphasizes that the US was continuously left out, treated badly and pushed around. The SPoland-NAP with Asteria was brought up as an example of this. Another thing clearly bothering the American representatives was that Brazil and Spain along others had made NAP’s which were not approved by the HQ - therefore breaking the charter of the alliance. USA was asked on May 21st to attack Argentina in order to help Spain to get a congress. It is mentioned, that the US closed the Canada-war because of the plan. The American perspective however ignores the fact that the big NAP between SPoland and Asteria was voted within the alliance HQ - exactly as the charter states. Furthermore the time elapsed from the American approval to attack Argentina to the NAP with Argentina was mere 12 hours. Hence, the NAP was already being negotiated on the other channel, while at the same time in HQ meeting the US approved the plan to attack Argentina.

“Third perspective”, you asked? Needless to say, none of the mentioned articles are objective, far from it. Frankly, this one is neither objective, but I hope that it tries to be one. Now while I truly detest the way Sirius has been treating the US, signing a NAP (for the second time during a short period of time) with a conqueror of your ally because you want "payback" and "justice" is just simply wrong and childish on so many levels. Yes, I do know your motives, I do understand why you did it, but damn, I can't, I won't and I don't accept that kind of actions. If I were in Keers' position, I would've acted the same way. The fact that you were lying to your alliance about the matter saddens me even more. What comes to Sirius, their actions were at least as malicious. Once you are in an alliance, you treat all the members of the alliance equally, as brothers. I don't know if that's the case in the south, but that definitely is what we do here in the north. The way Sirius treated the US was utterly despicable, therefore I easily understand why the US did what it did. Don't know why this isn't obvious, but as Sirius and the US share a common enemy, downgrading yourselves to a level of a child and stabbing each other only helps your common enemy. Pretty simple.


Enough ranting for this article, I guess. Now don't get me wrong, this has truly been an entertaining matter to follow, and still develops day by day. From a perspective of an outsider, this whole event has presented itself as a sandbox where few ego-driven kids shout to and beat each other, while a third kid has taken their toys and is walking away. Certainly these events won’t enhance the image of neither USA or Sirius, nor will it contribute towards their success in the battlefield.

What's it in the future for USA, then? As the US claims to stay pro-Sirius, the situation will most likely develop similarly to the Hungarian question, who are still actively cooperating with Asteria, just having a bit more independence what comes to the military and some political decisions. Another possibility is that all the major alliances take advantage from the situation and attack USA together. Apart from the Serbian-led Asteria, at least Aurora has been showing signs supporting this.

- Caesar