The status quo isn't supposed to be disturbed - indeed, it's supposed to be maintained at all costs. Changing the status quo can reduce stability, and that's a bad thing! Or is it?
Jules Crittenden � Concerns About StabilityIt looks like people in that region are slowly realizing the stability of the thugocracy isn't a healthy one. Instead, the long-term consequences are a rising level of sheer misery - much like the supposed benefits of Communism turned out to be a scam, with the tiny number of folks at the top getting the gravy, and everyone else getting enough to barely subsist.This is interesting. Concerns about stability in the region stalled attack on Syrian nuke facility.
I’m not sure which stability they’re talking about. There’s the stability enforced by dictatorial regimes in places as Syria, Iran and Saudi Arabia. There’s the stability places like Lebanon and Iraq are barely managing to maintain … no thanks to Syria, Iran, al-Qaeda, Hezbollah, the Palestinians, etc., but thanks in large part to the Lebanese Army, the Israeli Defense Forces and the United States military. There’s the stability of Gaza, accomplished in part when one group of Palestinian terrorists decided to throw the other group of Palestinian terrorists off rooftops, but really thanks to the Israeli Defense Forces, which make it impossible for either group to be much more than a nuisance. There’s the stability of the West Bank, where they’ve had enough.
Anyway, so Israel gets the nod, blows up the Syrian nukes, and what happens? Nothing. Syria is hardly likely to want another humiliating ass-kicking. That leaves terrorism. … That’d be different.
Just kidding. Except that ever since Israel introduced some stability to Lebanon, Hezbollah hasn’t been quite on its game. The Lebs, meanwhile, appear to have watched and learned from the Israelis. Blowing the crap out of terrorists and those who harbor them works. It can actually introduce stability to places where stability had been wanting. So the Lebs have been taking care of business in the camps.
In the ME, the 'stability' is starting to crack. For too long we supported terrible leaders and regimes, figuring the devil we knew was better than the devil we didn't. Time to dismantle that thinking, and start something new.
J.
Comments (1)
Jerry:
When trying to understand the State Department's position on anything you have to remember one thing, if negotiations break down their job is over. It doesn't matter why the negotiations stopped; the problem was solved, the people doing the negotiations are no longer in power, or war broke out, the only thing that matters to the ambassadors is, if there there's no negotiations there's no need for ambassadors.
Anything that threatens the status quo is something that might cause one side or the other to pull its negotiators away from the negotiating table. And anything that threatens the sanctity of the negotiating table is a deadly threat to the reason that ambassadors exist and must be opposed.
Hope this clears up the confusion.
otpu
Posted by otpu | October 7, 2007 2:14 PM
Posted on October 7, 2007 14:14