Is the enemy of my enemy always my friend?

[Anarcho Nihilist]

Is it justified in politics to use all kinds of tools against your enemy, even if you have to do something that goes against your position?
Example: The US sponsored anti-Soviet dictators, armed radical Islam, and helped other communists, even if they were more genocidal than the post-Stalin USSR (Mao's China and Pol Pot's Cambodia).
Would you use all possible tools to fight your enemy in politics?

 

[SickWeakCoward]

"The enemy of my enemy is always my friend, since me, my enemy and his enemy all serve the jews anyway, so fuck it, man, whatever! Lets PAR-TAY!!!"

 

[Anarcho Nihilist]

The USSR did the same by flirting with Nasser, who was not a communist, who actually banned the Communist Party in Egypt and was a nationalist. Or by flirting with the Indian National Congress, who were also not communist. Or by flirting with many dictators who were not communist, but simply wanted to receive weapons and money from the Soviets.

 

[Julius1]

Realpolitik is more practical than over fixating on idealism

 

[Anarcho Nihilist]

Realpolitik is more practical than over fixating on idealism

Realpolitik can take you to the brink. Today's friend in common enemy can deliver a painful blow. Osama fought the USSR with US money and American weapons, only to make a boom in the Twin Towers in 2001.

 

[SickWeakCoward]

There are no enemies in the modern world of politics. They all play the same game by the same jewish rules. If there were enemies, nukes would fly and both sides would be waging brutal extermination campaigns on eachother, like WWII, the last true war. It's all theatrics, it's all jewshit. Kikes are just doing a muppet show for us retards.

 

[Julius1]

Realpolitik can take you to the brink. Today's friend in common enemy can deliver a painful blow. Osama fought the USSR with US money and American weapons, only to make a boom in the Twin Towers in 2001.

true, being thoughtful of the consequences is necessary but locking yourself in ideological dogma is foolish too

 

[Anarcho Nihilist]

View attachment 1474361

There are no enemies in the modern world of politics. They all play the same game by the same jewish rules. If there were enemies, nukes would fly and both sides would be waging brutal extermination campaigns on eachother, like WWII, the last true war. It's all theatrics, it's all jewshit. Kikes are just doing a muppet show for us retards.

I agree, but if we consider all the conflicts after World War II as a performance, then the Cold War was a better performance in terms of passion and emotion than the shitshow that followed in after 1991.

 

[Anarcho Nihilist]

true, being thoughtful of the consequences is necessary but locking yourself in ideological dogma is foolish too

Imagine that if it weren't for Realpolitik, China wouldn't be the world's second-largest economy today. After all, the alliance between the United States and China against the Soviet Union in the 1970s made trade possible, leading to China's economic miracle.

 

[Julius1]

Imagine that if it weren't for Realpolitik, China wouldn't be the world's second-largest economy today. After all, the alliance between the United States and China against the Soviet Union in the 1970s made trade possible, leading to China's economic miracle.

They are kind of epitome of it, nothing ideologically looking makes sense about China

 

[SickWeakCoward]

Osama fought the USSR with US money and American weapons, only to make a boom in the Twin Towers in 2001.

Respect dropped 200 points. Dude, seriously.



View: https://odysee.com/@I-Rabbi-T:3/Goyim-Goddess---Mossad-Job:2

 

[Julius1]

Respect dropped 200 points. Dude, seriously.



View: https://odysee.com/@I-Rabbi-T:3/Goyim-Goddess---Mossad-Job:2

Cuckropean union banned this based site

 

[Anarcho Nihilist]

They are kind of epitome of it, nothing ideologically looking makes sense about China

China has never abandoned communism, and the CCP's sole rule has never been challenged, even by the most liberal Chinese leader, Deng Xiaoping, who literally sent the army and tanks against the students when they challenged the CCP's monopoly on power.

 

[Xul]

No, your enemy is always that, no matter how you lie to them or yourself.

 

[Julius1]

China has never abandoned communism, and the CCP's sole rule has never been challenged, even by the most liberal Chinese leader, Deng Xiaoping, who literally sent the army and tanks against the students when they challenged the CCP's monopoly on power.

It's merely veneer at this point to maintain the oligarchy

 

[Anarcho Nihilist]

It's merely veneer at this point to maintain the oligarchy

Rich Chinese people are fleeing the PRC, as money doesn't matter in front of the party, and even a billionaire can be sent to prison if they're suspected of anything.

 

[Anarcho Nihilist]

No, your enemy is always that, no matter how you lie to them or yourself.

It was just a simple philosophical question. Should you team up with someone against a common enemy, even if your situational ally may be repulsive?

 

[Xul]

It was just a simple philosophical question. Should you team up with someone against a common enemy, even if your situational ally may be repulsive?

No, it will cause more problems later on. Situational ally will become a more powerful enemy.

 

[Anarcho Nihilist]

No, it will cause more problems later on. Situational ally will become a more powerful enemy.

If you were making policy in a confrontation like the Cold War, and you were defending freedom and democracy against communism, would you support anti-communist dictators if they were corrupt and cruel, but they were stopping your enemy?

 

[SickWeakCoward]

Cuckropean union banned this based siteView attachment 1474364

 

[Anarcho Nihilist]

No, it will cause more problems later on. Situational ally will become a more powerful enemy.

Or if your country is being attacked and could be taken over, and the only way to win is to join an alliance of woke, left-wing liberal, feminist, and multicultural countries, provided that you adapt them to your own country after the victory?

 

[Xul]

If you were making policy in a confrontation like the Cold War, and you were defending freedom and democracy against communism, would you support anti-communist dictators if they were corrupt and cruel, but they were stopping your enemy?

No, I would glass them both with nukes, if i was policy maker things would either be very good, or nothing would exist at all hah.

 

[Xul]

Or if your country is being attacked and could be taken over, and the only way to win is to join an alliance of woke, left-wing liberal, feminist, and multicultural countries, provided that you adapt them to your own country after the victory?

This I could see more likely happening. If nazis start dropping from the sky everybody is on the same page.

 

[Julius1]

No, I would glass them both with nukes, if i was policy maker things would either be very good, or nothing would exist at all hah.

Just nuke the shit out of your enemies theory

 

[Xul]

Just nuke the shit out of your enemies theory

2 birds