Thibaud

So it’s stability uber alles, eh? That sure reminds me of Bush the Elder who also had a false fixation on stability. Nope, wouldn’t be prudent to do anything about the Vilnius massacre , gotta support Gorbachev, can’t risk instability.

If only America had put it’s foot down instead of tsk tsking when Russia first plowed into Chechnya ten years ago we wouldn’t be dealing with the Chechnyan terrorist mess we are dealing with today. Those very means that Russia used to enforce ‘stability’ is what gave Islamic terrorists the opportunity to gain a foothold in Chechnya in the first place.

Compare what happened in Bosnia and Chechnya. Two different states, with Islamic histories fighting for independence.

The insane initial Clinton Balkan policy of negotiation and arms embargo permitted the slaughter of the Bosnians at the hands of the Serbs. Into this void creeped Iranian and other muslim extremists to fill the gap, providing arms and support to the Bosnians. If Clinton hadn’t finally reversed policy Bosnia would have turned out just like Chechnya has.

Poor Chechnya never got the kind of concern that the Balkans got. The Balkans were on “Europe’s doorstep”, Chechnya was far away.

It was Western indifference to Chechnya and clinging to preserving the “stability” of Russia that brought us to the point we are at today.

If Russian stability is so great, was the world better off with the Soviet Empire? They sure kept good internal stability didn’t they? Those commies sure knew a thing or two about controlling borders!