> You know, you don't fill your user name very well. First, start by assuming everything, especially anything that helps us, is actually enemy action is disguise. Purely pragmatism. Any positivity is pragmatic or coincidental. > As far as I'm concerned he is doing exactly what they said they needed him for. Regardless, if it were not true, the internationalist set would still claim this. The status of his loyalty is irrelevant, because you never assume anyone is fully on our side. And then you work things so that if they're not, it doesn't change much on your end. Thats security 101. People fail, people turncoat. People infiltrate, and people have divided loyalty. Thats ancillary, because *all* these things should be accounted for from the beginning, and managed so that the net outcome works in our favor. And when we go beyond needing allies, go beyond needing supporters, to learning to *benefit* from opposition action, then and only then will we be on the path to victory. Its not sufficient to fight an enemy. Really winning means making them *work for you*, making them *defeat themselves* without needing to drag out a fight. And of course sometimes you don't need any of this. Sometimes you just gotta have balls.