Simple question - but a simple answer? We all know this phrase: "The enemy of your enemy is your friend". But is this statement correct? Your opinions please!
Yes; anyone at all who will fight alongside us is a friend.
No; we are too discerning in our friendships
I don't know
Other (specify, please)
Simple question - but a simple answer? We all know this phrase: "The enemy of your enemy is your friend". But is this statement correct? Your opinions please!
Lík börn leika best.
I think on a principled level that we should never take sides with one of our own natural enemies in order to fight another of our enemies.
This is what the USA did with the USSR in WWII, of course. Also it seems that the USA cultivated Muslim terrorists as allies against the USSR too.
In both cases, once their immediate foes had been defeated, their 'allies' became an enemy in that foe's place, rather defeating the object.
So principles must come first. No alliances with enemies, even if they may be covenient at the time.
However, we can take sides with a neutral against an enemy.
By neutral I mean someone who may have different views to us, but is not opposed to us in anyway - i.e., is not an enemy.
So only in the latter case is 'my enemy's enemy' excusable.
Of course, in all alliances there is always an element of payback.
Why are there beings at all, & why not rather nothing?
[Leibniz/Heidegger]
I would have posed selection number 2 as
"No, we are not discerning enough in our friendships".
That farce of NPD members wearing Iranian football shirts at the world cup exemplifies my thoughts on this.
Iran, not to mention the whole host of other parties struggling against Israel/America in the Middle East wouldn't bat an eyelid if the relatively small number of European 'right radicals' condemned or condoned what they were doing.
They are fighting for their miserable survival and dying in thousands. What the hell do they care if a few thousand middle-class internet nerds are cheering them on from their sofas?
We're not on the streets in open revolt against our judeo-loving Governments, risking injury and death. If I was a muslim fighting tanks and aircraft in the back streets of Baghdad or the Gaza Strip I wouldn't care what the comfy Europeans thought.
They are in a personal turf war with Israel. That's their problem, I hope they win, but I care as much about them as they do about me.
The only time you will see muslim fighters entering Europe to fight judeo-Yankee tyranny is when fellow brother-muslims are in danger. i.e. Bosnia.
Do you believe in the saying "the enemy of my enemy is my friend"? Why or why not?
The phrase, The enemy of my enemy is my friend is usually considered a foreign policy doctrine that is commonly used to confront a significant enemy through an intermediary in order to undermine the enemy and in a "cold" manner, as opposed to a "hot", direct confrontation. It's an ancient proverb that means that solely because two parties have a common enemy, they are friends. Often described as an Arab proverb, there is also an identical Chinese proverb and both may be an extension of another Chinese proverb that says, "It is good to strike the serpent's head with your enemy's hand." A historical example of this policy occurred when the Greeks were attacked by the Persians at Thermopylae; the Greek city states put aside their differences and fought the common enemy.
Criticisms
Using a common enemy as the basis for an allegiance is problematic because there are probably very few other areas for common ground, and absent the common enemy, the friends might otherwise be enemies themselves. If the common enemy disappears, the friends might turn on each other. This has been shown before, such as when US - backed militia in Afghanistan fighting the occupying Soviet Union are now one of its greatest enemies. Going further back the same situation happened at the end of the Second World War: without a common enemy, the differences between the USA, the United Kingdom and France and their ally the USSR were no longer accepted because the threat they shared was absent. In many respects, the USSR and the USA posed far greater threats to each other than Nazi Germany ever did. Cartoonist Howard Taylor, using humor toward social critique, condenses the concept into 'Rule 29', "The enemy of my enemy is my enemy's enemy. No more. No less."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_ene...y_is_my_friend
Die Sonne scheint noch.
I believe it is flawed to say the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Alliances between foes may be useful to oppose a greater danger. But you should always be prepared for conflict with your "friend" when the greater danger has been vanquished.
“Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country to one united people, a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs-Jon Jay, Federalist Papers
We have a saying in Sweden, ensam är stark, alone is strong, and I think it is better to fight your own battles without having to depend on people you barely know or have few things in common with. To rely on strangers to back you up in a potentially critical situation is not a sound strategy. In that case, it is better to go the extra mile yourself and eliminating the element of chance.
It also depends on whether this "friendship" will result in your side having to make any consessions on your part, to satisfy your temporary ally. If there are any such consessions to be made, and they are deemed too great a sacrifice compared to the benefits gained from uniting under the same banner, then the answer is of course no, the enemy of my enemy is not my friend. On the other hand, if you cannot go at it alone and if this cooperation is founded solemnly on a basis of fighting the common enemy, without any catches or demands attached, then the answer is yes.
I believe that the enemy of my enemy is my friend, otherwise I wouldn't be at this site..![]()
I wish I could remember who said this, but all I can recall is that he was French. "There will never be peace on Earth until we find someone on Mars to fight."eyes:
Bookmarks