...probably suffering from anger management issues, too.
Insofar as neutrality is concerned, I would say the correct argument to be made is to do with sustainability, and not invulnerability by virtue of preclusion from combat. A truly successful neutral alliance would work nonstop to make sure its safety net included actors from different corners and somehow maintain that bipartisan connection without being dragged into one part of the political spectrum needlessly. Even if you were to be hit, having friends in high places would allow you to maintain momentum to some degree or the other.
I personally would argue that true neutrality is ultimately meaningless given the subconscious effect apparent “friendships” have on decision making. People have long memories, and it would be a truly monumental undertaking to maintain such a clean record (on both the alliance and individual level) that you’d never attract predatory attention.
Also, hello. Haven’t posted properly in quite some time.