As to the happenings in Russia: The Russian authorities were very quick at telling the media that there have been 10 Arabs among the terrorists with links to Al-Quaida. Of course such news brings more acceptance among the western states for Putin's war in Chechnya, since it would be the same enemy. This news has been repeated innumerable times on Russian (Putin-controlled) television for a few days now.
Other news was that one of the terrorists was even black, but some reasearch showed that it was just someone with a burned face....
Instead of providing information on what actually happened (because nobody knows until now), the authorities provide information on the origings of the terrorists involved.
But in an interview with an FSB-agent who was participating in the strom of the
school I learned that the order to storm the building came after a big explosion in the building itself. So not even the special forces knew about an upcoming storm. It really seems that it wasn't planned at all, thus there was so much chaos and it lasted so long. But nobody will know for sure until Putin is going to publically analyze the happenings. Which he won't.
Total casualties so far: <span style='color:gray'><i>*from second link*</i></span>
Russia--As of March, 2002, Russia admitted to 2,331 killed in action, while 5,898 were wounded. Independent media sources however, report Russian losses at closer to <b><span style='color:red'>3,000 </span></b>dead.
Chechnya-- Unknown, but civilian deaths are thought to exceed <span style='color:red'><b>50,000</b></span>.
...uh, oh ya and add <span style='color:red'><b>300</b></span> more Russians <b><span style='color:red'>150</span></b> of which were school children.
<span style='color:gray'><i>Read this first. It was gathered from my second link down below and describes the roots of this conflict:</i></span>
"In order to understand the roots of the conflict in Russia's South Caucasus region (Chechnya, Dagestan, Ossetia, Ingushetia), an examination of the historical conflicts in that part of Russia in general, and Chechnya in particular, is necessary. The area in southern Russia known as the Caucasus Region is home to a large variety of non-Russian ethnic groups, many of whom follow the Islamic faith and want little to do with the government of Russia. After the communist Soviet Union disintegrated in 1991, the three southernmost Soviet Republics declared independence: Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia. The areas immediately north of these new nations remained part of the new Russian Republic, though their populations largely were not Russian. Several of these ethnic groups began agitating for more autonomy from Moscow or for outright independence. "
"Perestroika is Russian for “restructuring.” This was the term used to describe the end of authoritarian Communist rule in the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union was composed of 15 republics, all centrally controlled from Moscow, Russia. As the practice and atmosphere of perestroika gradually grew, Moscow’s grip on the outlying republics loosened as Russian politicians and the Russian people focused on the economy and political reforms. Chechen resentment at Russian control was easily fanned into nationalist resistance. In 1988, a Russian proposal to build a biochemical plant sparked widespread opposition based on environmental concerns. The Chechen-Ingush Popular Front was formed and quickly progressed from ecological to political protest"
<span style='color:gray'><i>This makes me go hmm. Lets see, a state trying to gain its independence because its population is mostly non-Russian. Russia wants to make a biochemical plant and decides to build it in the area that has the least Russians in it. Sure they have claimed that land... but if you were the Chechens in this situation how would you feel? I'd want some independence too. After all, a move like that shows that the Russians are favoring their own race rather than treating all races and cultures under their rule as equals. This could have stayed a political argument but no the Russians had to build a biochemical plant in the backyard of a people whose relationship is already strained. Not very thoughtful, or perhaps very much so.
Reading further a group called the Chechen National Congress (CNC) overthrew the Communist Party in Chechnya and Russia has been trying to gain back control ever since.</i></span>
"As the weeks passed, their attitudes hardened; Russian Commanding General Rutskoi likened the CNC to a “gang” that was terrorizing the moderate Chechens. Furthermore, he stated that the majority of Chechens preferred to remain in the Russian Federation. Elections held on October 27, 1991, however, suggested otherwise; Dudaev received 90 per cent of the ballots cast.
Russian authorities refused to recognize the results."
<span style='color:gray'><i>Boris Yeltsin sent in Russian Troops but they were resisted by the Chechen National Guard. For political reasons Yeltsin withdraws.</i></span>
Phase Two: 1994-1996 "From 1992 to 1994 an uneasy stalemate existed. Russia behaved as if Chechnya was still a part of the Russian Federation and therefore subject to its laws. The Chechens increasingly attempted to affirm their sovereignty. Russia steadfastly opposed any foreign recognition of the crisis, since it maintained that this was a Russian domestic problem. Dudaev exacerbated tensions by promoting a trans-Caucasus alliance and by sending Chechen volunteers to assist Abkhazians in their fight for independence from Georgia. This meddling prompted Russia to move against Chechnya."
"Amazingly, despite the Chechens’ lack of heavy weapons or surface-to-air missiles, the Russians were incapable of pressing their advantage.
This was not for lack of effort though. Russian air raids and artillery barrages were intense. Frederick Cuny, a reporter for the New York Review, provided this comparison: “To put the intensity of firing in perspective, the highest level of firing recorded in Sarajevo [the Bosnian-Serbian conflict] was 3,500 heavy detonations per day. In Grozny in early February, a colleague of mine counted 4,000 detonations per hour. Only in early March did the Russians diminish their shelling and adopt a strategy of starving out the local population.”
<i><span style='color:gray'>This whole bloody escapade got out to the rest of the world. It was becoming expensive for the Russians to keep fighting. The Russian people did not like it because their children were dying in the war as soldiers.</span></i>
"A ceasefire was arranged in August 1996, which Russia used to quickly remove its forces and Chechnya used to declare a de facto autonomy. In May 1997, Boris Yeltsin signed a peace treaty in which he pledged that Russia would never use force or threaten to use it in relations with the Chechen Republic. While Russia formally maintained that Chechnya was still part of the Russian Federation, this gave the Chechens unprecedented control over their economy."
<i><span style='color:gray'>After reading this, the term terrorist sounds like a sweeping judgement that is not completely true.</span></i>
The Second Chechen War - check this out, especially the causes for conflicts section.
"One of the more vocal groups were the Chechens; a group with a long and bloody history of opposition to Moscow's rule. During World War 2, the Communist Soviet government deported the whole Chechen population to Central Asia out of fear they were going to aid the invading Germans. Though they were allowed to return to their homeland decades later, the Chechen populace maintained their dislike of the Russian-dominated Soviet government."
"As the rural guerrilla war continues to simmer, the Chechen resistance has begun a bloody campaign in Russia's heartland. Continual bombings have struck terror in Moscow and other Russian cities as the Chechens target subways, concerts, commercial aircraft, theaters and, in September of 2004, the middle school in the town of Beslan, where hundreds of children and parents were killed."
"One of the allegations that Putin's government claims is that the Chechens hold ties to al-Qaida, the Islamic terror network founded by Osama bin Laden. Evidence exists to support this claim, which aids Moscow in its assertion that they, too are part of the world-wide War on Terror proclaimed by American President George W. Bush."
The videos released yesterday of the siege were quite disturbing. But the terrorists do it for one thing. Attention. The more stuff they do like that or even more radical, the more attention they'll get.
But now children, you can see how serious these terrorist organisations want to be noticed.
SpoogeThunderbolt missile in your cheeriosJoin Date: 2002-01-25Member: 67Members
Excellent work Relsan. There seems to be a distinction between the Chechen populace as a whole and what's called the extremist movement. Based on these past votes and the heavy resistance to the Russian military involvement, it's fairly clear that the vast majority of people in that region want to seperate from Russia. What isn't clear to me yet is whether or not the majority of the populace supports these bombings. Similarly, do we know (or can we know) what the average Russian citizen thinks about the Russian political control of Chechnya?
Russia would leave Chechnya alone but the land contains a large geo-ecological value. They refuse to give that away just because the majority of the populace there aren't Russians.
And then you get people who see the end result of a problem that has spanned a decade, they ignore the history, only consider the current destruction, and make a sweeping judgement.
Ooh what a terrible explosion! Ohh all those children dead! But they don't see the whole picture!
Its like walking into an arguement and seeing Guy A punch Guy B brutally in the face. But you didn't see the part where Guy B killed Guy A's dog and burned down his house.
<!--QuoteBegin-Handman+Sep 8 2004, 05:08 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Handman @ Sep 8 2004, 05:08 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Jim has Skillz+Sep 8 2004, 01:05 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Jim has Skillz @ Sep 8 2004, 01:05 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-reasa+Sep 7 2004, 04:02 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (reasa @ Sep 7 2004, 04:02 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Jim has Skillz+Sep 7 2004, 05:41 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Jim has Skillz @ Sep 7 2004, 05:41 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Most Muslim's believe that the majority of terrorists are Americans.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Really? Can I see something backing this up?
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->But this really isn't about Muslims, this was about Russia wanting to keep this state as part of Russia specifically for its surplus in oil and natural gas. That region specifically is an economic goldmine for Russia and they would be insane to easily give it up. Terrorism on both sides is wrong but your not going to stop it unless you understand what each side of the terrorists want.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well the Russians know exactly what the Chechens want, and we know exactly what Al Qaeda wants, unfortunately for them it doesn’t matter because nether of them are going to get what they want. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Yeah, you can go over to an Islamic state and ask a bunch of random civilians what they think of America. Seriously, why did you even ask that. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Not liking us, and thinking we are terrorists are two different things. Whiles its probably true that a majority of the muslim world doesn't like the US, not all of them believe us to be terrorists. Just because the news only covers a few extremist groups. does not mean that muslims as a whole think their way. But if you are so sure, why don't you go over and ask for us. Reasa asked for proof, because you are making a strong claim with no proof to back you up.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Calling people terrorists works both ways. You may think most of the Muslims are terrorists but the same goes for us.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I dont think it works that way. Yes it is unfortunate that children get killed in our bombing raids. We, however, do not take children hostage; force them to drink their own ****; bayonette small children through the chest for asking for water in 100 degree weather; then shoot the kids in the back when they run for their parents. So whats the difference? We try to avoid civilian casualties, aiming for military (terrorist) structures. If the Chechyans were attacking Russian military targets, then they would qualify as rebels and not terrorists. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I shouldn't really have to back myself up, its common knowledge that the USA has stepped over so many foots all over the world that most of the world hates us.
I never said all the muslims hated us, I am sure there is one out there that doesn't. But one reason alone that has created a lot of this hate is basically our support for Israel. We send Israel over 1 Billion dollars a month to support them that alone is enough to **** off a lot of Muslims over there. If we were to completely remove ourselves from the Middle East alot of Muslims would probably change their mind.
Also someone above posted a link with more details of how the US has basically played international police for the past 100 years and not really caring about the reprecussions afterwards.
<!--QuoteBegin-Jim has Skillz+Sep 9 2004, 02:07 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Jim has Skillz @ Sep 9 2004, 02:07 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I never said all the muslims hated us, I am sure there is one out there that doesn't. But one reason alone that has created a lot of this hate is basically our support for Israel. We send Israel over 1 Billion dollars a month to support them that alone is enough to **** off a lot of Muslims over there. If we were to completely remove ourselves from the Middle East alot of Muslims would probably change their mind.
Also someone above posted a link with more details of how the US has basically played international police for the past 100 years and not really caring about the reprecussions afterwards. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Well is doesn’t quite work that way, if we roll over and give them what they want it only serves to show them two things:
1. That we're weak. 2. Their methods of terrorism work against us.
Bin Laden and his terrorist organization and all the ones affiliated with him have stated that they <b>will not</b> stop their war (jihad) against us until we are ether "all dead" or they have "converted America into a nation of Islam and stopped the moral corruption". Should we do that for them to?
Offence is the only way to win this war, we can not give into what they want, it will only inspire them to try again.
SpoogeThunderbolt missile in your cheeriosJoin Date: 2002-01-25Member: 67Members
If this thread is no longer used as a discussion of conflict between Russia and Chechnya, I will send a direct request that the thread be locked. This is not a sandbox.
I haven't had any time lately to search for new information but I did hear that Putin held a press conference. Does anyone know the hightlights? Did he specify who the perpetrators were yet? Did he mention a course of action?
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->"As for carrying out preventive strikes against terrorist bases, we will take all measures to liquidate terrorist bases in any region of the world," Col.-Gen. Yuri Baluyevsky, chief of the Russian General Staff, told reporters.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> The demonstration, organized by a pro-government trade union, was heavily advertised on state-controlled television for two days, with prominent actors appealing to citizens to turn out. Banners bore the white, blue and red of Russia's flag, and speakers echoed Putin's statements that terrorists must be destroyed.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->ASTANA (Reuters) - Russian President Vladimir Putin (news - web sites) on Thursday ruled out negotiations with Chechen rebels after the Beslan school bloodbath, further straining ties with Western leaders who are pressing for a political solution to Chechnya (news - web sites).
The Kremlin leader put the gunmen who staged the school mass hostage-taking on the same footing as Osama bin Laden (news - web sites) whose overtures he said had been rejected by all civilised societies because of his methods.
"The atrocities we encountered in Beslan give us the full moral right to insist that the people who are opposing Russia are part of the 'terrorist internationale'," Putin told a news conference in the Kazakh capital during a meeting of leaders of ex-Soviet states.
"Legality and toughness" were the only course to follow.
His uncompromising stand two weeks after the Beslan siege, in which more than 320 died, half of them children, is certain to ruffle relations with Russia's Western partners.
Many Western leaders have urged Moscow to put more emphasis on a political solution to Chechen separatism while expressing understanding for concerns on keeping post-Soviet Russia intact.
But Putin rejects any notion of talks with separatists, even relatively moderate activists like fugitive Chechen president Aslan Maskhadov, who denounced the seizure of the Beslan school.
And this week Putin proposed political changes that will boost Kremlin power. He says they are a key part of his drive against terrorism but senior U.S. and European officials have warned he could also be undermining Russia's fragile democracy.
Putin's predecessor, Boris Yeltsin, was quoted as saying that whatever changes came in response to the siege were certain to uphold laws underpinning democracy and leaders should act in a tough and quick fashion.
"I am certain the measures the country's leaders will take after Beslan will be within the realm of the democratic freedoms constituting Russia's most treasured achievement in decades," he told liberal weekly Moskovskiye Novosti in an interview, received ahead of Friday's publication.
"We cannot live with the laxity, irresponsibility and carelessness which has led us to these terrible events."
Some commentators say the Russian leadership's truculent mood is reflected in this week's tough message to foreign investors in the huge oil sector.
On Wednesday, it said Russia was prepared to withdraw the production license for the British oil giant BP's project in the Kovytka gas field because the TNK-BP joint venture had failed to invest in the field's infrastructure.
EU CRITICISM
Though the European Union (news - web sites) and the United States condemned the Beslan violence, they infuriated Moscow by pressing it to deal with the root causes of the decade-long Chechnya conflict.
The 25-nation bloc, Russia's biggest single trading partner, said on Wednesday that a settlement could be reached only through "far-sighted, humane and resolute" policies.
"I hope they (the solutions) are forthcoming and that the government of the Russian Federation will not conclude that the only answer to terrorism is to increase the power of the Kremlin," said EU External Relations Commissioner Chris Patten.
But Putin, a one-time KGB spy who was first elected in 2000 on tough talk of crushing the Chechnya rebellion, refuses to take a line which could be seen as showing weakness in the eyes of the powerful security and military establishment.
Moscow has instead threatened strikes on militant bases outside Russia, alarming neighboring Georgia, and set a $10 million bounty for Chechen leaders, including Maskhadov.
In his comments in Kazakhstan, Putin added: "There is only one way to deal with these people: with legality and toughness."
Terrorists, he said, were bandits using political, religious or nationalist slogans "to try to resolve questions that have nothing to do with what they publicly state." <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What this means: Putin is taking actions to increase his authority and power in Russia. What this has to do with terrorism: Nothing. Putin is an ex-KGB man and one of the first things he did in office was put his own people into power. Bottom line: Putin is using terrorism and the deaths of Russian citizens as an excuse to bring back a police state in Russia. Many citizens are openly concerned about their loss in Democratic freedom and some have even admited fears of another Soviet Union.
I'm sorry if I'm slightly derailing the topic, but has anyone else seen the movie Brazil?
When the US geared up for its "war on terror", which actually is the second war on terror it has declared in the past 20 or so years, I thought of Brazil's message. When I learned that Putin, in a very unsurprising move, has decided to use the school tragedy to fuel his grab for more and stricter authority, plus potentially mobilize russian forces for wars in other countries, I remembered Brazil again.
*If you haven't seen Brazil, read no further. Go watch the movie (the 134min. version, not the studio butchered first release) now and then come back. I warned you.*
In the movie, the authoritarian state is fighting a constant war on terrorists who are elusive, nearly invisible. The slogan of the war is "suspicion breeds confidence". The state leads people to believe that the terrorists are everywhere, while the reality is that there are only a few of them, and most of the actions related to the war on terror are publicity stunts aimed to divert attention from other matters.
I find it sad that Mr. Putin has chosen such a way to lead his country. If one takes a look at the history of the United States, one can see that deliberately escalating conflicts leads only to retaliatory violence. Like Gandhi said, what is gained by violence can only be held by violence. Mr. Putin has chosen to disregard this lesson and seems intent on trying and retrying the only solution to the chechen question he has come up with, despite being provent time and again that it does not, and will never, work. He follows now in the footsteps of the western nations, spreading fear among his subjects by intimidating them with a threat his policy is responsible for.
One "fun" little detail to be considered is how fast the Black Widows were given new "identity" by Russian officials - instead of Chechen women who had lost their husbands, sons etc. by the oppression (incl. their hope), they were now told to be Muslim women who had conducted marital infidelity and then had been driven/pushed to terrorism. Easier to think that the killers were "bad people" in the first place, eh.
In any case, the first thing to be forgotten when dealing with terrorism is always the amount of pain and despair that has led the terrorists to their extreme decisions. If you constantly get kicked in the face with nothing you can do about it, you kinda might start lashing out at anything/anyone having remotely anything to do with the one kicking you.
Of course, the forementioned is not always the case - some join a terrorist strike for money. And in the Islamic world, where religion has a big foothold, I would imagine charismatic terrorist recruiters also have a big influence in who joins up and who doesn't.
Edit: Oh, and for those who didn't still know (I read some posts wondering about it on the last page), the cause for things going to hell at Beslan was quite probably one of the terrorists' bombs, that had been duct-taped to the ceiling, falling down and exploding.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->One "fun" little detail to be considered is how fast the Black Widows were given new "identity" by Russian officials - instead of Chechen women who had lost their husbands, sons etc. by the oppression (incl. their hope), they were now told to be Muslim women who had conducted marital infidelity and then had been driven/pushed to terrorism. Easier to think that the killers were "bad people" in the first place, eh.
In any case, the first thing to be forgotten when dealing with terrorism is always the amount of pain and despair that has led the terrorists to their extreme decisions. If you constantly get kicked in the face with nothing you can do about it, you kinda might start lashing out at anything/anyone having remotely anything to do with the one kicking you.
Of course, the forementioned is not always the case - some join a terrorist strike for money. And in the Islamic world, where religion has a big foothold, I would imagine charismatic terrorist recruiters also have a big influence in who joins up and who doesn't.
Edit: Oh, and for those who didn't still know (I read some posts wondering about it on the last page), the cause for things going to hell at Beslan was quite probably one of the terrorists' bombs, that had been duct-taped to the ceiling, falling down and exploding. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm sorry, but whatever sob story they have for doing what they did, it in no way justifies it at all.
<!--QuoteBegin-Burncycle+Sep 23 2004, 12:25 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Burncycle @ Sep 23 2004, 12:25 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I'm sorry, but whatever sob story they have for doing what they did, it in no way justifies it at all. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> OK, I've said it before in this forum and I'll say it again: If you're going to write a one-liner response, don't quote the whole post you're replying to, it's just plain silly.
And on to your reply: Did I, at any point, say that killing of other people was justified? I'm just saying that if your country was being held by force because of oil, tactical location or similar reason and your people were oppressed, killed and raped, it probably wouldn't take you long to seriously want to get back at the one doing so yourself, one way or the other. And at that point you probably wouldn't care much about if the world sees your actions as justified, since you'd probably feel quite a lot that the world had abandoned you in your little hell.
<!--QuoteBegin-KarriN+Sep 23 2004, 05:15 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (KarriN @ Sep 23 2004, 05:15 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Burncycle+Sep 23 2004, 12:25 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Burncycle @ Sep 23 2004, 12:25 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I'm sorry, but whatever sob story they have for doing what they did, it in no way justifies it at all. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> OK, I've said it before in this forum and I'll say it again: If you're going to write a one-liner response, don't quote the whole post you're replying to, it's just plain silly.
And on to your reply: Did I, at any point, say that killing of other people was justified? I'm just saying that if your country was being held by force because of oil, tactical location or similar reason and your people were oppressed, killed and raped, it probably wouldn't take you long to seriously want to get back at the one doing so yourself, one way or the other. And at that point you probably wouldn't care much about if the world sees your actions as justified, since you'd probably feel quite a lot that the world had abandoned you in your little hell. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Roger that
j/p, anyway: Yes, I know you didn't say it was justified. However some people bring up the past and use it as an excuse for what the terrorists did, and I disagree with using it that way. I think most of us know what happened in the past, and while I don't agree with some of the things russia did, I don't think it should be used as a "Well, they had it coming, they did it to themselves" and that sorta thing. I understand you're not doing that, and just reminding people of how this whole thing got headed down this path.
Sarisel.::' ( O ) ';:-. .-.:;' ( O ) '::.Join Date: 2003-07-30Member: 18557Members, Constellation
With almost all terrorist attacks, they hit people who in no way could have possibly conceived the fact that they had it coming for them all along.
When you say "I don't agree with some of the things russia did", you refer to the political decisions made by those in power, not by the civilians who make up Russia's population. There is a major tendency to generalize and it is not fair.
As the civilian casualties rise, the leadership gets questioned.. not because of what spurred the terrorist attacks, but why they were allowed to happen to innocent bystanders.
Comments
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Really? Can I see something backing this up?
<!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
<a href='http://www.zmag.org/terrorwars/tw/TerrorInterventions.htm' target='_blank'>State terrorism anyone?</a>
As to the happenings in Russia: The Russian authorities were very quick at telling the media that there have been 10 Arabs among the terrorists with links to Al-Quaida. Of course such news brings more acceptance among the western states for Putin's war in Chechnya, since it would be the same enemy. This news has been repeated innumerable times on Russian (Putin-controlled) television for a few days now.
Other news was that one of the terrorists was even black, but some reasearch showed that it was just someone with a burned face....
Instead of providing information on what actually happened (because nobody knows until now), the authorities provide information on the origings of the terrorists involved.
But in an interview with an FSB-agent who was participating in the strom of the
school I learned that the order to storm the building came after a big explosion in the building itself. So not even the special forces knew about an upcoming storm. It really seems that it wasn't planned at all, thus there was so much chaos and it lasted so long.
But nobody will know for sure until Putin is going to publically analyze the happenings. Which he won't.
Russia--As of March, 2002, Russia admitted to 2,331 killed in action, while 5,898 were wounded. Independent media sources however, report Russian losses at closer to <b><span style='color:red'>3,000 </span></b>dead.
Chechnya-- Unknown, but civilian deaths are thought to exceed <span style='color:red'><b>50,000</b></span>.
...uh, oh ya and add <span style='color:red'><b>300</b></span> more Russians <b><span style='color:red'>150</span></b> of which were school children.
<span style='color:gray'><i>Read this first. It was gathered from my second link down below and describes the roots of this conflict:</i></span>
"In order to understand the roots of the conflict in Russia's South Caucasus region (Chechnya, Dagestan, Ossetia, Ingushetia), an examination of the historical conflicts in that part of Russia in general, and Chechnya in particular, is necessary. The area in southern Russia known as the Caucasus Region is home to a large variety of non-Russian ethnic groups, many of whom follow the Islamic faith and want little to do with the government of Russia. After the communist Soviet Union disintegrated in 1991, the three southernmost Soviet Republics declared independence: Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia. The areas immediately north of these new nations remained part of the new Russian Republic, though their populations largely were not Russian. Several of these ethnic groups began agitating for more autonomy from Moscow or for outright independence. "
First Chechen War
<a href='http://www.tv.cbc.ca/newsinreview/Nov%2099/Crisis%20in%20Russia/Chechen.html' target='_blank'>http://www.tv.cbc.ca/newsinreview/Nov%2099...ia/Chechen.html</a>
Some snippets:
Phase One: 1987-1991
"Perestroika is Russian for “restructuring.” This was the term used to describe the end of authoritarian Communist rule in the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union was composed of 15 republics, all centrally controlled from Moscow, Russia. As the practice and atmosphere of perestroika gradually grew, Moscow’s grip on the outlying republics loosened as Russian politicians and the Russian people focused on the economy and political reforms. Chechen resentment at Russian control was easily fanned into nationalist resistance. In 1988, a Russian proposal to build a biochemical plant sparked widespread opposition based on environmental concerns. The Chechen-Ingush Popular Front was formed and quickly progressed from ecological to political protest"
<span style='color:gray'><i>This makes me go hmm. Lets see, a state trying to gain its independence because its population is mostly non-Russian. Russia wants to make a biochemical plant and decides to build it in the area that has the least Russians in it. Sure they have claimed that land... but if you were the Chechens in this situation how would you feel? I'd want some independence too. After all, a move like that shows that the Russians are favoring their own race rather than treating all races and cultures under their rule as equals. This could have stayed a political argument but no the Russians had to build a biochemical plant in the backyard of a people whose relationship is already strained. Not very thoughtful, or perhaps very much so.
Reading further a group called the Chechen National Congress (CNC) overthrew the Communist Party in Chechnya and Russia has been trying to gain back control ever since.</i></span>
"As the weeks passed, their attitudes hardened; Russian Commanding General Rutskoi likened the CNC to a “gang” that was terrorizing the moderate Chechens. Furthermore, he stated that the majority of Chechens preferred to remain in the Russian Federation. Elections held on October 27, 1991, however, suggested otherwise; Dudaev received 90 per cent of the ballots cast.
Russian authorities refused to recognize the results."
<span style='color:gray'><i>Boris Yeltsin sent in Russian Troops but they were resisted by the Chechen National Guard. For political reasons Yeltsin withdraws.</i></span>
Phase Two: 1994-1996
"From 1992 to 1994 an uneasy stalemate existed. Russia behaved as if Chechnya was still a part of the Russian Federation and therefore subject to its laws. The Chechens increasingly attempted to affirm their sovereignty. Russia steadfastly opposed any foreign recognition of the crisis, since it maintained that this was a Russian domestic problem. Dudaev exacerbated tensions by promoting a trans-Caucasus alliance and by sending Chechen volunteers to assist Abkhazians in their fight for independence from Georgia. This meddling prompted Russia to move against Chechnya."
"Amazingly, despite the Chechens’ lack of heavy weapons or surface-to-air missiles, the Russians were incapable of pressing their advantage.
This was not for lack of effort though. Russian air raids and artillery barrages were intense. Frederick Cuny, a reporter for the New York Review, provided this comparison: “To put the intensity of firing in perspective, the highest level of firing recorded in Sarajevo [the Bosnian-Serbian conflict] was 3,500 heavy detonations per day. In Grozny in early February, a colleague of mine counted 4,000 detonations per hour. Only in early March did the Russians diminish their shelling and adopt a strategy of starving out the local population.”
<i><span style='color:gray'>This whole bloody escapade got out to the rest of the world. It was becoming expensive for the Russians to keep fighting. The Russian people did not like it because their children were dying in the war as soldiers.</span></i>
"A ceasefire was arranged in August 1996, which Russia used to quickly remove its forces and Chechnya used to declare a de facto autonomy. In May 1997, Boris Yeltsin signed a peace treaty in which he pledged that Russia would never use force or threaten to use it in relations with the Chechen Republic. While Russia formally maintained that Chechnya was still part of the Russian Federation, this gave the Chechens unprecedented control over their economy."
<i><span style='color:gray'>After reading this, the term terrorist sounds like a sweeping judgement that is not completely true.</span></i>
The Second Chechen War - check this out, especially the causes for conflicts section.
<a href='http://www.historyguy.com/chechen_war_two.html' target='_blank'>http://www.historyguy.com/chechen_war_two.html</a>
Some snippets:
"One of the more vocal groups were the Chechens; a group with a long and bloody history of opposition to Moscow's rule. During World War 2, the Communist Soviet government deported the whole Chechen population to Central Asia out of fear they were going to aid the invading Germans. Though they were allowed to return to their homeland decades later, the Chechen populace maintained their dislike of the Russian-dominated Soviet government."
"As the rural guerrilla war continues to simmer, the Chechen resistance has begun a bloody campaign in Russia's heartland. Continual bombings have struck terror in Moscow and other Russian cities as the Chechens target subways, concerts, commercial aircraft, theaters and, in September of 2004, the middle school in the town of Beslan, where hundreds of children and parents were killed."
"One of the allegations that Putin's government claims is that the Chechens hold ties to al-Qaida, the Islamic terror network founded by Osama bin Laden. Evidence exists to support this claim, which aids Moscow in its assertion that they, too are part of the world-wide War on Terror proclaimed by American President George W. Bush."
But now children, you can see how serious these terrorist organisations want to be noticed.
Russia would leave Chechnya alone but the land contains a large geo-ecological value. They refuse to give that away just because the majority of the populace there aren't Russians.
And then you get people who see the end result of a problem that has spanned a decade, they ignore the history, only consider the current destruction, and make a sweeping judgement.
Ooh what a terrible explosion! Ohh all those children dead! But they don't see the whole picture!
Its like walking into an arguement and seeing Guy A punch Guy B brutally in the face. But you didn't see the part where Guy B killed Guy A's dog and burned down his house.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Really? Can I see something backing this up?
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->But this really isn't about Muslims, this was about Russia wanting to keep this state as part of Russia specifically for its surplus in oil and natural gas. That region specifically is an economic goldmine for Russia and they would be insane to easily give it up. Terrorism on both sides is wrong but your not going to stop it unless you understand what each side of the terrorists want.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well the Russians know exactly what the Chechens want, and we know exactly what Al Qaeda wants, unfortunately for them it doesn’t matter because nether of them are going to get what they want. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yeah, you can go over to an Islamic state and ask a bunch of random civilians what they think of America. Seriously, why did you even ask that.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not liking us, and thinking we are terrorists are two different things. Whiles its probably true that a majority of the muslim world doesn't like the US, not all of them believe us to be terrorists. Just because the news only covers a few extremist groups. does not mean that muslims as a whole think their way. But if you are so sure, why don't you go over and ask for us. Reasa asked for proof, because you are making a strong claim with no proof to back you up.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Calling people terrorists works both ways. You may think most of the Muslims are terrorists but the same goes for us.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I dont think it works that way. Yes it is unfortunate that children get killed in our bombing raids. We, however, do not take children hostage; force them to drink their own ****; bayonette small children through the chest for asking for water in 100 degree weather; then shoot the kids in the back when they run for their parents. So whats the difference? We try to avoid civilian casualties, aiming for military (terrorist) structures. If the Chechyans were attacking Russian military targets, then they would qualify as rebels and not terrorists. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I shouldn't really have to back myself up, its common knowledge that the USA has stepped over so many foots all over the world that most of the world hates us.
I never said all the muslims hated us, I am sure there is one out there that doesn't. But one reason alone that has created a lot of this hate is basically our support for Israel. We send Israel over 1 Billion dollars a month to support them that alone is enough to **** off a lot of Muslims over there. If we were to completely remove ourselves from the Middle East alot of Muslims would probably change their mind.
Also someone above posted a link with more details of how the US has basically played international police for the past 100 years and not really caring about the reprecussions afterwards.
Also someone above posted a link with more details of how the US has basically played international police for the past 100 years and not really caring about the reprecussions afterwards. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well is doesn’t quite work that way, if we roll over and give them what they want it only serves to show them two things:
1. That we're weak.
2. Their methods of terrorism work against us.
Bin Laden and his terrorist organization and all the ones affiliated with him have stated that they <b>will not</b> stop their war (jihad) against us until we are ether "all dead" or they have "converted America into a nation of Islam and stopped the moral corruption". Should we do that for them to?
Offence is the only way to win this war, we can not give into what they want, it will only inspire them to try again.
I haven't had any time lately to search for new information but I did hear that Putin held a press conference. Does anyone know the hightlights? Did he specify who the perpetrators were yet? Did he mention a course of action?
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->"As for carrying out preventive strikes against terrorist bases, we will take all measures to liquidate terrorist bases in any region of the world," Col.-Gen. Yuri Baluyevsky, chief of the Russian General Staff, told reporters.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> The demonstration, organized by a pro-government trade union, was heavily advertised on state-controlled television for two days, with prominent actors appealing to citizens to turn out. Banners bore the white, blue and red of Russia's flag, and speakers echoed Putin's statements that terrorists must be destroyed.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Looks like their gearing up for something...
The Kremlin leader put the gunmen who staged the school mass hostage-taking on the same footing as Osama bin Laden (news - web sites) whose overtures he said had been rejected by all civilised societies because of his methods.
"The atrocities we encountered in Beslan give us the full moral right to insist that the people who are opposing Russia are part of the 'terrorist internationale'," Putin told a news conference in the Kazakh capital during a meeting of leaders of ex-Soviet states.
"Legality and toughness" were the only course to follow.
His uncompromising stand two weeks after the Beslan siege, in which more than 320 died, half of them children, is certain to ruffle relations with Russia's Western partners.
Many Western leaders have urged Moscow to put more emphasis on a political solution to Chechen separatism while expressing understanding for concerns on keeping post-Soviet Russia intact.
But Putin rejects any notion of talks with separatists, even relatively moderate activists like fugitive Chechen president Aslan Maskhadov, who denounced the seizure of the Beslan school.
And this week Putin proposed political changes that will boost Kremlin power. He says they are a key part of his drive against terrorism but senior U.S. and European officials have warned he could also be undermining Russia's fragile democracy.
Putin's predecessor, Boris Yeltsin, was quoted as saying that whatever changes came in response to the siege were certain to uphold laws underpinning democracy and leaders should act in a tough and quick fashion.
"I am certain the measures the country's leaders will take after Beslan will be within the realm of the democratic freedoms constituting Russia's most treasured achievement in decades," he told liberal weekly Moskovskiye Novosti in an interview, received ahead of Friday's publication.
"We cannot live with the laxity, irresponsibility and carelessness which has led us to these terrible events."
Some commentators say the Russian leadership's truculent mood is reflected in this week's tough message to foreign investors in the huge oil sector.
On Wednesday, it said Russia was prepared to withdraw the production license for the British oil giant BP's project in the Kovytka gas field because the TNK-BP joint venture had failed to invest in the field's infrastructure.
EU CRITICISM
Though the European Union (news - web sites) and the United States condemned the Beslan violence, they infuriated Moscow by pressing it to deal with the root causes of the decade-long Chechnya conflict.
The 25-nation bloc, Russia's biggest single trading partner, said on Wednesday that a settlement could be reached only through "far-sighted, humane and resolute" policies.
"I hope they (the solutions) are forthcoming and that the government of the Russian Federation will not conclude that the only answer to terrorism is to increase the power of the Kremlin," said EU External Relations Commissioner Chris Patten.
But Putin, a one-time KGB spy who was first elected in 2000 on tough talk of crushing the Chechnya rebellion, refuses to take a line which could be seen as showing weakness in the eyes of the powerful security and military establishment.
Moscow has instead threatened strikes on militant bases outside Russia, alarming neighboring Georgia, and set a $10 million bounty for Chechen leaders, including Maskhadov.
In his comments in Kazakhstan, Putin added: "There is only one way to deal with these people: with legality and toughness."
Terrorists, he said, were bandits using political, religious or nationalist slogans "to try to resolve questions that have nothing to do with what they publicly state."
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What this means: Putin is taking actions to increase his authority and power in Russia.
What this has to do with terrorism: Nothing. Putin is an ex-KGB man and one of the first things he did in office was put his own people into power.
Bottom line: Putin is using terrorism and the deaths of Russian citizens as an excuse to bring back a police state in Russia. Many citizens are openly concerned about their loss in Democratic freedom and some have even admited fears of another Soviet Union.
When the US geared up for its "war on terror", which actually is the second war on terror it has declared in the past 20 or so years, I thought of Brazil's message. When I learned that Putin, in a very unsurprising move, has decided to use the school tragedy to fuel his grab for more and stricter authority, plus potentially mobilize russian forces for wars in other countries, I remembered Brazil again.
*If you haven't seen Brazil, read no further. Go watch the movie (the 134min. version, not the studio butchered first release) now and then come back. I warned you.*
In the movie, the authoritarian state is fighting a constant war on terrorists who are elusive, nearly invisible. The slogan of the war is "suspicion breeds confidence". The state leads people to believe that the terrorists are everywhere, while the reality is that there are only a few of them, and most of the actions related to the war on terror are publicity stunts aimed to divert attention from other matters.
I find it sad that Mr. Putin has chosen such a way to lead his country. If one takes a look at the history of the United States, one can see that deliberately escalating conflicts leads only to retaliatory violence. Like Gandhi said, what is gained by violence can only be held by violence. Mr. Putin has chosen to disregard this lesson and seems intent on trying and retrying the only solution to the chechen question he has come up with, despite being provent time and again that it does not, and will never, work. He follows now in the footsteps of the western nations, spreading fear among his subjects by intimidating them with a threat his policy is responsible for.
In any case, the first thing to be forgotten when dealing with terrorism is always the amount of pain and despair that has led the terrorists to their extreme decisions. If you constantly get kicked in the face with nothing you can do about it, you kinda might start lashing out at anything/anyone having remotely anything to do with the one kicking you.
Of course, the forementioned is not always the case - some join a terrorist strike for money. And in the Islamic world, where religion has a big foothold, I would imagine charismatic terrorist recruiters also have a big influence in who joins up and who doesn't.
Edit: Oh, and for those who didn't still know (I read some posts wondering about it on the last page), the cause for things going to hell at Beslan was quite probably one of the terrorists' bombs, that had been duct-taped to the ceiling, falling down and exploding.
In any case, the first thing to be forgotten when dealing with terrorism is always the amount of pain and despair that has led the terrorists to their extreme decisions. If you constantly get kicked in the face with nothing you can do about it, you kinda might start lashing out at anything/anyone having remotely anything to do with the one kicking you.
Of course, the forementioned is not always the case - some join a terrorist strike for money. And in the Islamic world, where religion has a big foothold, I would imagine charismatic terrorist recruiters also have a big influence in who joins up and who doesn't.
Edit: Oh, and for those who didn't still know (I read some posts wondering about it on the last page), the cause for things going to hell at Beslan was quite probably one of the terrorists' bombs, that had been duct-taped to the ceiling, falling down and exploding. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm sorry, but whatever sob story they have for doing what they did, it in no way justifies it at all.
OK, I've said it before in this forum and I'll say it again: If you're going to write a one-liner response, don't quote the whole post you're replying to, it's just plain silly.
And on to your reply: Did I, at any point, say that killing of other people was justified? I'm just saying that if your country was being held by force because of oil, tactical location or similar reason and your people were oppressed, killed and raped, it probably wouldn't take you long to seriously want to get back at the one doing so yourself, one way or the other. And at that point you probably wouldn't care much about if the world sees your actions as justified, since you'd probably feel quite a lot that the world had abandoned you in your little hell.
OK, I've said it before in this forum and I'll say it again: If you're going to write a one-liner response, don't quote the whole post you're replying to, it's just plain silly.
And on to your reply: Did I, at any point, say that killing of other people was justified? I'm just saying that if your country was being held by force because of oil, tactical location or similar reason and your people were oppressed, killed and raped, it probably wouldn't take you long to seriously want to get back at the one doing so yourself, one way or the other. And at that point you probably wouldn't care much about if the world sees your actions as justified, since you'd probably feel quite a lot that the world had abandoned you in your little hell. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Roger that
<!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/biggrin-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
j/p, anyway: Yes, I know you didn't say it was justified. However some people bring up the past and use it as an excuse for what the terrorists did, and I disagree with using it that way. I think most of us know what happened in the past, and while I don't agree with some of the things russia did, I don't think it should be used as a "Well, they had it coming, they did it to themselves" and that sorta thing. I understand you're not doing that, and just reminding people of how this whole thing got headed down this path.
When you say "I don't agree with some of the things russia did", you refer to the political decisions made by those in power, not by the civilians who make up Russia's population. There is a major tendency to generalize and it is not fair.
As the civilian casualties rise, the leadership gets questioned.. not because of what spurred the terrorist attacks, but why they were allowed to happen to innocent bystanders.