SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: TimF who wrote (45619)2/25/2006 9:45:23 PM
From: Solon  Read Replies (1) of 90947
 
"I agree but I don't think that is enough to qualify as an ally."

A lot of people think that cooperating to defeat a mutual enemy and cooperating through the sharing of intelligence, weaponry, and strategic planning to bring about events of mutual benefit characterizes a relationship of alliance. Over and over in books, articles, speeches, and commentary this relationship of alliance is recognized. You can rub your eyes and say that you just don't believe it.

You have not told me why you object to the word "ally". I spoke it as a matter of course in speaking to another issue. There was no special intent in using the word. After all, it is used in books and magazines, and newspapers to describe a relationship that you have agreed existed as I have described it. But the word pisses you off for some reason you will not explain. Well, I am not going to mollycoddle you. We were allies during the years in question. That is a fact. It does not matter that Saddam is/was despised by his allies. The fact is that there was a strategic alliance for personal (by which I mean U.S. strategic interests) and mutual benefit. I am sorry you are so bothered by this fact. I am absolutely at sea here as to what your problem is with these facts.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext