This is not creative  Those are the dictionary definitions of the terms insurance and ensurance as properly applied to destruction  If you dont understand that fine legitimate criticism Ill write up three man cell and bounty hunter and then it will be easy to understand why ensured and insured are different  and why both differ from assured  The sentence you quote is absolutely neutral  You just arent familiar with the underlying theory of strikeback eg submarines as employed in nuclear warfare guiding the insurance nor likely the three man cell structure that kept the IRA from being broken by the British  If thats my fault fine I can fix that to explain  But theres nothing personal or creative about it  Im tired of arguing with you  Re the other article multiparty turns up plenty and there is more use of mutually than mutual  If I were to apply your standard Id be moving Mutual Assured Destruction to talk for not appealing to a Reagan voters biases about its effectiveness and for dropping the ly  There is a double standard in your edits  If it comes from some US history book like peace movement or MAD as defined in  you like it even if the definition is totally useless in  and only of historical interest    If it makes any evenobvious connection or implication from the language chosen in multiple professionspecific terms you consider it somehow nonneutral  Gandhi thinks eye for an eye describes riots death penalty and war all at once but you dont  What do you know that Gandhi doesnt  Guess what  reality is not neutral  Current use of terms is slightly more controversial  Neutrality requires negotiation and some willingness to learn  This is your problem not mine  You may dislike the writing fine that can be fixed  But disregarding fundamental axioms of philosphy with names that recur in multiple phrases or failing to make critical distinctions like insurance versus assurance versus ensurance which are made in one quote by an Air Force general in an incontext quote is just a disservice to the reader  If someone comes here to research a topic like MAD they want some context beyond history  If this is a history book fine its a history book  But that wasnt what it was claimed to be