Russia likely does have another Afghanistan situation on their hands. How long have they been fighting in Chechnya now anyway? The Russians have the military strength to win, but they aren't fully committed to getting in there. I think they likely fear being branded as an aggressor nation. It would screw their political voice up if they were suddenly seen as the Big Russian Bear again.

Nice concept, but the reality is quite different. There is enough extremist population in Chechnya that Russia fears what it might lead to. I think the same thing can be said of Iraq today, or some of the other wars fought in the past. IF the country could be left alone knowing that they would not start aggression beyond their borders, then there is no reason not to let the people be free.

The concern is that once free, the radical elements in the society (be it Chechnya, or Iraq) would rise up, seize power and then use that to not only oppress their own society, but also use to to expand beyond their borders.

Freedom isn't just about setting someone free. It also has to be about making sure that the leaders allow EVERYONE to be free. You can't allow a nation to supress or kill off a part of the population, simply because they aren't in power.

The former Yugoslavia was mentioned in the thread. The Serbs hated just about everyone who wasn't a Serb. So, they go about killing everyone who doesn't have the same religious/ethnic background. What kind of freedom is that, if the entire population isn't free? Look at the region today, now that Milosevic isn't around. I'm sure there's still some tension in the area, but it's nothing like it was. There isn't any ethnic cleansing going on now, and there seems to be relative peace.

So, the Russians are in Chechnya because if they aren't the fear is that the radical element will spread across the border and then greater Russia would fall. The Russians just seem to be going about it quietly. It's a war of attrition, and it will likely stay that way until something major happens and elicits a major response from Russia.

That's the same type of political propoganda the Clinton administration drilled into your head - That the Serbians were the ultimate racists and made attempts to liquidate all non Serbs. The issue isn't just Black and White as you see it. Out of all the European countries, including the Balkans as well, the Serbians would be the last people to commit such horrific acts of genocide against any ethnic group. Don't you go around spreading that Saxon ideology, because it doesn't fit well with the Serbians. They always were more forthcoming to the Croats and Bosnians than they ever were. You should blame the Serbs for having blindly desired a communal relationship with the people who hated them like dirt and wanted them destroyed. And not the other way around to condemn Serbs for taking brutal acts against them because that was certainly common of the Croats and Muslims. If only you knew what horror Serbians faced against "their brothers" (which only the Serbs unfortunately saw their neighbours) from WW1 to 1990's. You have no understanding of the prejudice there was and still is against Serbs, as if they are subhuman, let alone their Slavic relatives. Such terrible treatment, mass murder, mutilation, etc would have been shocking to the infamous Nazis who were notorious for their crimes against humanity. Seeing the means in which the Serbs suffered heavy losses overshadows German crimes by a landmark. It would be unthinkable for you to believe that the issue of the common victim and victimizer is actually the reverse situation. If you think I am only telling you a fictional story, look up the "Ustash" organization. In the Balkans, they have more blood in their hands than the SS. Serbians since forever fell victim to Croat and Bosniak aggression, which caused more damage to the people than the Nazis ever did in the region. I have no doubt Milosevic is a criminal. But he should be more so labeled that way as a corrupted president who caused the most depression to his own Serb people than to other people. But factually, he is currently only in trial for alleged mass extermination of Bosnians. I don't deny there were dead bodies disinterred from the ground. But there is no one clear bad and good guy. Serbs suffered the same harsh deaths. There was no Serb policy to target non-combatants. Those who partook in killing civilians were just stray soldiers who transgressed the rules of war. That was definitely not the case for the organized military Ustash Croatian organization, which was formed with the only objective to decimate the Serb existence, whether it be a soldier or child. What the Croats and Muslims did to Serbian men, women, and children is incomprehensible. Barbaric practices of murder was so common, going as far to behead people, and mutilate children. To do such grizzly things could only be fuelled by overwhelming abhorrence against a different religion. And get this straight. You cannot say Serbs killed Bosnians and Croats because they are of a different ethnic background, when they are of the same ethnic background. Not trying to get into history, but Croats and Bosniaks stemmed from Serbs, though they hate to believe it. To put it in simple terms, Bosniaks were Serbs who were terribly influenced by Turkish occupation and assimilated into Muslim culture. The fact is, they themselves don't seem to know what they are anymore. They addressed themselves with a number of names. Before the war, they called themselves Turks, and just after independence, they were called Bosniaks. Those are just some. So it is quite stupid to make constant attemts to move the argument into some theoretical jungles, to state that Serbians are prejudice, when they knew more than anyone there it is irrational to kill your own people. Now the situation must have changed after seeing that there is no need to persuade obstinate population that they are the same people when they insist they are different. Let them lie to themselves. Now, back to Milosevic, he brought Serbs to the lowest level of distress and poverty. He has now been standing trial for 4 years at the Hague for crimes against humanity. If he was overflowing with murderer he surely would have been found guilty within a month. Watching the trial going on, you cant imagine how frustrated the judges are at not being able to hold a shred of evidence against him to lock him up forever. Now, the only reason the Serbs are censured as animals with Ak 47's is just the result of political propoganda to sway the world to its own agenda. That's all it is, to deceive people to get backing for a campaign such as in Yugoslavia, and I can see from your eyes, it has succeeded well. If the United States decided instead to turn their attention to the Bosnians and Croats and indict them as the culprits, then the world view would be very different. The truth lies not in what your government tells you, but by your own presumptuous and scrutinizing curiosity. If you rely on the naive and preliterate material which you see on CNN, you will never have a correct perspective of the world as it really is. CNN is the kind of federal source which the government needs to hold it's people in a cage to accept and bolster all the government's political ambitions. Look at George Bush. 70% of US supported American war in Iraq, and now that the Democrats have much television airtime, it has completely reversed. Now nearly everyone denies support for American invasion. You are just a typical puppet, who sways and nods to every movement of the political hand.