Quote:
Originally Posted by MMM
The point of having an ally is essentially, to know you are not floating alone in the ocean. I'll scratch your back, you scratch mine. You need some help, I'll do what I can. I need some help, you got my back.
If Japan is being invaded, and asks for France's help, and France declines to help them for no other reason than there is no profit in it for them, then France would be lambasted by all it's other allies. The relationship is a commitment and a promise. If you are allies you are supposed to have a degree of camaraderie, or else it is meaningless.
|
Well France would not decline simply because there is no benefit, only if there is no
net profit which factors into account the consequences of the lash back from other allies. Alliances only work when there is mutual gain in pursuit of that alliance. Once a party feels there is nothing to gain, it is as you say, meaningless, and not worth pursuing.
Anyway, I think your actual position is somewhat different to a strict interpretation of the words in your original post - which is probably why there's a bit of comment on it.
I think the comment people are making is that the commitment to allies is not
unqualified.