Chechen rebels say they blew up Russian dam

reply to post by Miraj


I suppose Russia prefers to be outwarding friendly with Iran; the Caspian Sea depends on this; war may cause a Caviar shortage. However, beneath the surface there is a lot of sexual tension between the two countries and a long history of conflict.

A way to change all of that is to get the Russians to go pound on the Chechens. Those antagonistic emotions would quickly rise to the surface. I saw some Russian legislative ideas to deal with the perpetrators of the Moscow Theater situation...there was one suggestion that they should wrap the bodies of the hostage takers in pigskins.

I suppose that is because Muslims prefer to not be in contact with Pigs and to be wrapped and buried in a dead Pig's skin would be especially offensive to a Muslim.

The Russian's were enslaved for 72 years and are only now just nearing their 20 years anniversary of freedom. Before they get used to this, something is antagonizing them, so as to pull them into a trap so that they can possess their wealth once again. It probably the same people this time as last time...the Shah clique...more specifically the old Ottoman house would get Russia; they really like Russia, always have.

reply to post by ChemBreather


Why would they bomb a dam you ask? The same reason super powers drop bombs on countries. The same reason why an atom bomb was droped on Hirushima (how ever you spell it).

Not that I'm defending the rebels, but does anyone remember the war that took place there? It was incredibly brutal. Russia shelled and carpet bombed Grozny to the ground.

Both sides of that conflict have civilian blood on their hands.

Originally posted by milesp

Both sides of that conflict have civilian blood on their hands.

This is what i'm trying to say: it's called "escalation" and the result is some uncontrolled increase of brutality on both sides.

The war was disastrous for both sides. Most estimates give figures of between 3,500 and 7,500 Russian military dead, between 3,000 and 15,000 Chechen militants dead, and no fewer than 35,000 civilian deaths—a total of at least 41,500 dead. Others have cited figures in the range of 80,000 to 100,000

The rebels have the major fault though, because they started the hostilities without even trying to discuss in some civil manner about their alleged rights. Why did they never asked to UN about their alleged RIGHTS? Because there's an AGREEMENT signed on 1996 by Boris Eltsin and Aslan Maskhadov, following Eltsin's himself's promises of warrant some fiscal autonomy to the region: and Russia honored that promise. But the rise of people like Shamil Basayev put the word end to the validity of the agreement, and all got worse, and worse and worse. Do you think that Russia is happy to bomb Grozny, to kill his own sons? Of course it's NOT. But there were no alternatives, there weren't. Who started bombing apartments in Moscow? Of course it was not ME.
In the region in question, there were some dudes that actually replaced the authority, and VIOLENCE was the only parameter ruling: would you accept that in North Carolina some dude decides to RULE and no one has to move even just a finger towards him just because he's brutal and violent? Or just because he does NOT care to kill 186 children because of his will of autonomy? Russia has been wrong many times, but this time, sadly, had no choice


[edit on 22/8/2009 by internos]

Originally posted by oozyism
reply to post by ChemBreather

 

Why would they bomb a dam you ask? The same reason super powers drop bombs on countries. The same reason why an atom bomb was droped on Hirushima (how ever you spell it).

I do understand there are reason in their mind as to why they bomb the dam, but, I wonder if the plan was to rapture the dam, or just cut the power..?

This is a load of bullshat. First, the Chechen propaganda website Kavkaz Center is known for outrageous claims and taking responsibility for random accidents which have no proven connection to terrorism. The main goal of Kavkaz Center is to make the terrorists appear to be more numerous and more powerful than they really are.

Second, there is absolutely no way an anti-tank grenade caused a catastrophic failure and explosion of a generator which is the size of a house. These hydro power plant generators are made to withstand tremendous force and pressure. Russian investigators made a statement that there is absolutely nothing proving that there was any kind of sabotage or terrorist attack. The idea was ruled out fairly quickly.

It is true, that of course the incident took place on the same date as the attack in Nazran, which is known to have been a terrorist act. But Nazran was hardly surprising given its location in Ingushetia, while this hydro power plant is thousands of miles away from the region.



And in regard to people saying that Russia wants to blame this incident on the terrorists - that is not true. In fact Russia is trying to do the opposite - discount the terrorists' power and make it seem as if the conflict in Chechnya is over for good. The Russian authorities stated that they firmly believe that the explosion at the dam was not a terrorist act.

Originally posted by IDK88
All the movements that seek to establish an Islamic state where one doesn't currently exist are getting support from Iran...it's what they do. They help Hezbollah, they help Hamas and they help the Chechens.

I don't really get your preoccupation with Iran. If you know anything about the Chechen conflict, it is very hard to make a connection with Iran. Yes - the Chechen terrorists had numerous insurgents from all over Middle East fighting for them - but there was never anything linking the Iranian government, which was friendly with Russia, to the conflict.

In fact the countries that helped Chechens the most were those which are allied with the US and are more or less enemies of Iran: Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Oman, Arab Emirates.

Originally posted by IDK88
Besides their are ancient familial ties between those particular Russians and the Iranians. I think they are descendants of Xerxes troops when they ventured into the area chasing after the Scythians.

Huh? Sorry but that is a pretty obsurd theory. Chechen tribes were in the Caucasus before Persians, and if anything perceived the Persians to be invaders. In times since, they had more ties to Turkic Muslims and Ottomans than Persians.

Originally posted by IDK88
I also remember a New York Times photo from 2002 that showed a pair of Chechen rebels along with a woman dressed in the traditional outfit of the Iranian woman.

You do realize that that is the traditional outfit of MUSLIM women, not Iranian, right?

Originally posted by IDK88
Anyway...the Iranians are doing all of this...I suppose it would be more appropriate to say that Reza Pahlavi is doing it.

Using a loose and unclear connection you made, I could just as well tie the blame for this incident to Michael Jackson or the President of New Zealand.

[edit on 22-8-2009 by maloy]

Originally posted by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
By my definition, a rebel is somebody who fights their national government so their own home territory can achieve independence. That is what I see from the Chechens.

But what if the said rebels degenerate into a group of fanatic maniacs who long ago lost track of their independence goals and instead resorted to spreading chaos and waging terror on civilian population?

The Chechens started out as rebels in the early 90's. They even had their own governed state from 1992 to 1994, and again from 1996 to 1999, at which they failed. Instead they turned their attention to ethnical cleansing and spreading militant Islamism and terror to neighboring republics like Ingushetia and Dagestan. They have stopped being rebels a long time ago. Now they continue to wage conflict for nothing more than money.

Basayev's and Hattab's attacks on Dagestan and Ingushetia prove that the terrorists' goals were no longer an independent state of Chechnya. They themselved proclaimed their intentions of creating an Islamic Halifat throughout the Caucasus, and spreading war all around the region and ethnically cleansing it from non-Muslims.

Originally posted by milesp
Russia shelled and carpet bombed Grozny to the ground.

In matters like this, precision of words counts. Russians did shell parts of Grozny, and I bet in some cases it was not justified. However, there was never a "carpet bombing" of Grozny. If there were, it'd be a very, very flat desert.

Another thing:

People, pay attention to what user "maloy" has to say. His observations are astute, his knowledge of the region considerable. Take it from a former Soviet


[edit on 22-8-2009 by buddhasystem]

reply to post by maloy


Iran's Supreme Council, President, Revolutionary Guard and the Shah are Evil manifest. This is my preoccupation with Iran. If I am wrong then Reza Pahlavi is Christ and trying to save the whole planet behind the scene. But I am probably not, so my counter confusion is I don't get your pre-occupation with thinking that all things are exactly as they appear.

Either the Chechens who claimed to have blown up the dam did it or someone who really hates Russia, the Chechen people and their cause blew it up and blamed them for it or the explosion was an accident just as the Russians continue to assert despite Chechen willingness to accept criminal responsibility.

A lot seems to be happening to the Russians lately and since I subscribe to the idea that there are no such things as accidents and coincidences it appears that something is attacking Russia within its borders and elsewhere. In 2007, Putin kept refering to some group being sexually attracted to Russias wealth and I assume that this group is the one behind the attacks.

And I suspect that group is headed by Reza Pahlevi the wannabe Shah of Iran, with tactical assistance from his Revolutionary Guard. Its just that the people we are all dealing with tell lies about the most ridiculous things...its just the way the are. Look at the Pakistani Taliban...their leader died but they say he is alive...even after choosing a new leader to replace him. They are just awful liars and anything is possible with them. Pahlavi is definately the man with the plan in Pakistan.

[edit on 22-8-2009 by IDK88]

reply to post by maloy


WOW there is actually a Russian supporter in ATS ooo, they call their enemies terrorists too. Amazing how the world super powers with their super propaganda machine can intoxicate their victims in to believing freedom fighters are terrorists.

Yes when the Mujahideen were fighting you guys, one super power with their super propaganda machine were calling them freedom fighters and the other terrorists. hence the other was Russia. The Chechens are fighting just like the Afghans, you can call them terrorists but they are freedom fighters in the eyes of many others. And Russia is the terrorists in the eyes of many others.

Keep in mind that Russia is not the only entity with supporters.

Originally posted by oozyism
you can call them terrorists but they are freedom fighters in the eyes of many others.

Oh sorry, was I politically incorrect in referring to them as terrorists? Was that offense to anyone who considers them to be anything but. Hence forth I should refer to all rebels, freedom fighters, separatists and genuine scumbags as the "politically disadvantaged and morally handicapped degenerates".


Honestly I don't give too much of a crap about those who consider the perpetrators of Beslan school siege to be freedom fighters. They are the lowest denomination of scum.

[edit on 22-8-2009 by maloy]

I wouldn't be surprised if they tried to claim credit for the Tunguska Event as well... and said it was accomplished with a landmine and three gallons of grain alcohol.

Originally posted by maloy


The Afghan mujaheden (which were sponsored by the CIA by the way), were no more freedom fighters than warlords cashing in on the bloodshed. Do you honestly think that the freedom they had gotten for their foresaken dump of a country was worth it? They turned a shathole into a bigger shathole.

The Afghan mujaheden were normal people who fought against an occupying force hence Russia. Yes I know their were warlords who cashed in money but that is like saying Russian companies cashed in money from the war. Ofcurse a negative argument is easy to make when it is directed towards the opposition. The forsaken dump of a country rid the super power of the world, that is all that is needed to say. Those brave men, who wooped Russian soldiers. The russians thought they could win with money and technology, that is what America is thinking right now.

They willingly ruined their land and spread chaos throughout the region, and many of the "freedom fighters" got mighty rich doing it. The only freedom the scumbags are fighting for, is the freedom to line their pockets with blood money.

But I digress...

You seem to think that people who die for freedom die because they willingly want to ruin their land and want to willingly spread chaos in their land, wow, when I talked about super propaganda machine I meant it.

Can you give us some name of who got rich ? What is the point of getting rich when you can't do much with that money due to the fact that you are fighting a world super power. Can you dig that?

Honestly I don't give too much of a crap about those who consider the perpetrators of Beslan school siege to be freedom fighters. They are the lowest denomination of scum. If those were your freedom fighters, then I don't think too many want a piece of what you perceive freedom to be.

Ohh no you didn't, not the school siege. The propaganda has made you believe that huge acts of terrorism which are commited by countries such as Russia are not that big of a deal () but the school incident is very big act of terrorism. The reason why the media can make you think this way is because they don't compare the two forces in battle.

Spokesmen at Russian military headquarters in Mozdok on 20 December rejected as " a lie" a BBC report giving details of the killing by Russian soldiers of 41 Chechen civilians in the town of Alkhan-Yurt in early December, dpa reported. The report was based on interviews conducted by Human Rights Watch with eye-witnesses ...

That's fair. But Russia never termed itself to be any type of freedom fighter. Russia was pulled into a dirty war, that was brutal and messy on both sides. It put an end to that war the only way it could.

Firstly it wasen't a dirty war, it was a war between the people of Afghanistan and the puppet government set by Russia(people didn't want communism). The violent regime which USSR helped keep in power was the soul cause of the fall of the USSR.

And why do you think that I am unaware of that or that I should be preoccupied with that fact? As I said - I don't give too much of a crap about those who consider the perpetrators of Beslan school siege to be freedom fighters.

Because of your bias. It is easy to claim the enemy has commited acts of terrorism but harder to hold yourself responsible. When Russia left Afghanistan they scattered mines all across the country, many people still walk around with one leg, or one hand, or no fingers etc..

Removed insults and warned
Semper

[edit on 8/22/2009 by semperfortis]

[edit on 22-8-2009 by oozyism]

Originally posted by IDK88
Iran's Supreme Council, President, Revolutionary Guard and the Shah are Evil manifest.

Heck yeah - they are genuine badasses. Evil to the core! They got to be responsible for at least 40% of all evil stuff that happens in the world. They also outsource some evil to North Korea.

Originally posted by IDK88
or the explosion was an accident just as the Russians continue to assert despite Chechen willingness to accept criminal responsibility.

The Chechens made a similar claim when Kursk submarine sank. How the heck do you suppose they did that? Did they highjack the Russian ship Arctic Sea and cause the collision of Russian jets during MAKS airshow as well?

Originally posted by IDK88
A lot seems to be happening to the Russians lately and since I subscribe to the idea that there are no such things as accidents and coincidences it appears that something is attacking Russia within its borders and elsewhere.

It could be bad karma thats attacking Russia. Or a bad case of hangover. Of course we can't discount that it is Iran's Ayatollah waving a majic stick.

Originally posted by IDK88
In 2007, Putin kept refering to some group being sexually attracted to Russias wealth and I assume that this group is the one behind the attacks.

Russian wealth does have many potential suitors, but it's too sexy for all of them. So instead it hangs out with Putin.

Seriously, where did you get that referrence from? It is too hilarious to be true, but knowing Putin...

Originally posted by IDK88
And I suspect that group is headed by Reza Pahlevi the wannabe Shah of Iran, with tactical assistance from his Revolutionary Guard.

So how did you make a connection between Pahlevi/Iran and Russia having some bad luck?

Originally posted by IDK88
Pahlavi is definately the man with the plan in Pakistan.

I am not following. Pahlavi in Pakistan?

Originally posted by oozyism
The forsaken dump of a country rid the super power of the world, that is all that is needed to say. Those brave men, who wooped Russian soldiers. The russians thought they could win with money and technology, that is what America is thinking right now.

The Soviets didn't technically lose, but rather gave up because there was no point in dragging the war out, and the Soviet Union was already starting to crumble so priorities were elsewhere. And since the mujehedeed "won", look at what they have done to their country. Do you honestly think that Afghans living under the Taliban are better off than they would have been under Karmal or other pro-Soviet leaders?

So what was the freedom that the mujahedeed won for Afghanistan and its people?

Originally posted by oozyism
people who die for freedom die because they willingly want to ruin their land and want to willingly spread chaos in their land, wow, when I talked about super propaganda machine I meant it.

Where are you getting that they died for freedom? They died mostly for money. A majority of Chechen fighters were hired insurgents and mercenaries from the Middle East. Most Chechen rebel leaders made money through drug trafficking and kidnapping.

Originally posted by oozyism
Can you give us some name of who got rich ? What is the point of getting rich when you can't do much with that money due to the fact that you are fighting a world super power. Can you dig that?

Look up Chechen mafia, and their extensive connections with the rebels. It is one of the wealthiest and most widespread organized crime groups in Europe. The money were funneled out from the warlords to the mafia, and sometimes the other way around. Besides drug trafficking, kidnapping, and racketeering, the Chechen rebels also received huge donations from Arab countries.

Almost all of rebel leadership made large sums of money through these actions: Yandarbiyev, Gelayev, Maskhadov, Khattab, Zakayev, Barayev, Raduyev...

Originally posted by oozyism
Ohh no you didn't, not the school siege.

Oh yes I did. Care to dispute the terrorist act that happened in Beslan, other than turning the arguement back on Russia?

Originally posted by oozyism
The propaganda has made you believe that huge acts of terrorism which are commited by countries such as Russia are not that big of a deal

When did I say that? There was extensive civilian deathtoll in Chechnya, for which the blame lies on Russian generals and careless tactics, as well as "human shields" used by the rebels. As I said - it was a dirty war with dirty tactics on all sides, no compromise and no excuses.

And how do bad actions by Russia give an excuse to what Chechen terrorists did in Beslan? How was that not a terrorist act, and the perpetrators no terrorists?

Originally posted by oozyism
Firstly it wasen't a dirty war, it was a war between the people of Afghanistan and the puppet government set by Russia(people didn't want communism). The violent regime which USSR helped keep in power was the soul cause of the fall of the USSR.

I wasn't talking about Afghanistan but Chechnya.

As for Afghanistan, it was not just between the people of Afghanistan and Soviet Union - it was a proxy war fueled by USA through Pakistan. And who said that all Afghans didn't want communism? It amounted to a Civil War, with people on both sides. And how the hell was that the cause of demise of the USSR? USSR fell apart for social, economic, and political reasons, among which the Afghan War played a very minor role.

Originally posted by oozyism
Because of your bias. It is easy to claim the enemy has commited acts of terrorism but harder to hold yourself responsible.

My bias - what about yourself?

When did I say that Russia is no responsible for high deathtoll during the Chechen War? You are making assumptions, which is itself a form of bias.

Originally posted by oozyism
When Russia left Afghanistan they scattered mines all across the country, many people still walk around with one leg, or one hand, or no fingers etc.

Oh, and the freedom loving Taliban who replaced the pro-Russian regime is so humane and caring right? The Taliban didn't murder thousands upon thousands of people and spread chaos throughout the region long after the Soviets left? How can you call the Taliban freedom fighters? Tell me - what freedom would one find in Afghanistan in the 90's?

reply to post by maloy

The Soviets didn't technically lose, but rather gave up because there was no point in dragging the war out, and the Soviet Union was already starting to crumble so priorities were elsewhere. And since the mujehedeed "won", look at what they have done to their country. Do you honestly think that Afghans living under the Taliban are better off than they would have been under Karmal or other pro-Soviet leaders?

When you don't achieve your objectives it is called loosing. Did you know USA said the same exact thing in Russia when they tried to impose their ideas on others. You seem to think that every one wants to live like the Russian, and Americans seem to think that everyone wants to live like Americans. People who think like that have narrow minds, they can't seem to understan how a person wouldn't want to live the same life they love to live. Muslims want to live Muslim lives, under Islamic law. They don't believe in communism, they never did.

So what was the freedom that the mujahedeed won for Afghanistan and its people?

One super power after another, don't worry America is next.

Where are you getting that they died for freedom? They died mostly for money. A majority of Chechen fighters were hired insurgents and mercenaries from the Middle East. Most Chechen rebel leaders made money through drug trafficking and kidnapping.

Yea sure like most Afghan fighters were paid from middle east to fight against Russia. People paid from their pocket moneys to fight against USSR. And I'm sure it is the same in Chechnia, ofcurse criminals exists, just like in Russia, you can't deny that, and I don't deny that, but I do mention it and you don't.

Look up Chechen mafia, and their extensive connections with the rebels. It is one of the wealthiest and most widespread organized crime groups in Europe. The money were funneled out from the warlords to the mafia, and sometimes the other way around. Besides drug trafficking, kidnapping, and racketeering, the Chechen rebels also received huge donations from Arab countries.

I told you about super propaganda machines but you don't believe me:

Organized crime experts in Russia say the Obshina is the most dominant minority criminal organization operating in the Russian Federation. Many in the Chechen community feel that they are unfairly portrayed as criminals by the Russian government and media to 'demonize' rebel elements fighting in Chechnya and legitimize Russia's policy in the Caucasus. Valery Tishkov, director of the Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, said,

Why else did Russians believe the Mujahideen were terrorists while the rest believed they were freedom fighters, so who is right, ofcurse your side.

I'm going somewhere now, I'll reply regarding the rest of your post later.

[edit on 23-8-2009 by oozyism]

Oh yes I did. Care to dispute the terrorist act that happened in Beslan, other than turning the arguement back on Russia?

I am not here to dispute, I'm here to say that if you are going to call the freedom fighters terrorists be a little fair and call Russia terrorist also, they have killed enough innocent civilians haven't they (not to mention thousands of little kids). Or in your barby world terrorism doesn't apply to super powers.

When did I say that? There was extensive civilian deathtoll in Chechnya, for which the blame lies on Russian generals and careless tactics, as well as "human shields" used by the rebels. As I said - it was a dirty war with dirty tactics on all sides, no compromise and no excuses.

Russia is not holy after all, yaaay great to hear that, why is it so hard to call those responsible terrorists? (hence Russia) It is a legitimate question.

And how do bad actions by Russia give an excuse to what Chechen terrorists did in Beslan? How was that not a terrorist act, and the perpetrators no terrorists?

Well the Chechen can't fight back so they take it out on the civilians. 'no justice, no peace.' When there is no justice for the Chechens then the Chechens can out of anger commit acts of terrorism against Russia. You seem to think that I support terrorism, no not at all sir, I just don't like biased individuals who call one small desperate group terrorist and do not label a more powerful and organized group the same due to propaganda.

As for Afghanistan, it was not just between the people of Afghanistan and Soviet Union - it was a proxy war fueled by USA through Pakistan. And who said that all Afghans didn't want communism? It amounted to a Civil War, with people on both sides. And how the hell was that the cause of demise of the USSR? USSR fell apart for social, economic, and political reasons, among which the Afghan War played a very minor role.

A proxy war, ha.
Define proxy war:
"a war instigated by a major power that does not itself participate "
America didn't stir up the war, it was the Afghan themselves who didn't want communism in Afghanistan. Yes America helped indirectly through the ISI of Pakistan but that was later when they realized that the Mujaheddin could actually win against a super power. It is all documented, visit Google for once and do some research.

My bias

Your bias, you are the one who call the Mujaheddin and the Chechen separatists terrorists but not Russia, that is enough to clearly point out your bias.

Originally posted by internos
But Chechnya is DIFFERENT. The people who are leading them are extremely dangerous ones, Russia has been even too much nice towards them. You CANNOT wake up one morning and claim to be some sovereign nation, and of course you can't do that by KILLING CHILDRENS.
What is paradoxical, is that if you ask to Chechens, no one of them is interested to become independent. So, what i meant is that they are NOT "rebels" in the nice meaning of tyhe term: they are less than animals, but much less. Sorry if it came out the wrong way.

I agree with you. Russia is a superpower, and in order to be a superpower it must wage wars. The Chechen problem was more or less born out of Russia's failed land grab of Afghanistan. Ever since then Islamic militants had it out for the Russians.

Chechen rebels are too incompetent to run a functional government of their own anyways, but they still choose to fight an aimless war. But is it aimless? To them, they are in a on and off war with the Russian government who will gladly blow them all to hell and in order to fight them, the rebels turned to Islamic militant tactics and lifestyle.

I believe the Chechens are fighting just to fight Russians. I see them as ghosts of war who represent an ideal over territory, Russia's very own creation from the sins of the Red Army. They cannot be defeated and they can only grow. I also believe the exact thing exists against the US (real elements of Al Queda/taliban) and to some extent, China.

However with all of that said, I think I have to agree with Maloy about the rebels taking credit for an accident.