It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

At least 16 dead in Russian republic after suicide car bombing

page: 2
21
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 06:45 PM
link   
May those who died rest in peace, and may those who are behind this attack be hunted down and butchered mercilessly.



There seems to be a lot of confusion about what is currently going on in the Caucasus and Chechnya.

This is undoubtably the work of Islamist terrorists. You can't even call them Chechens anymore. Chechnya is now quiter than ever thanks to strict rule by pro-Russian Kadyrov and his powerful militia, and the vast majority of Chechens want to leave the violent past behind them.

The terrorists who continue to fight in the Caucasus region can best be described as Islamists. They are mix of Muslims from around the Caucasus (Chechnya, Ingushetia, Dagestan), as well as some from the Middle East. Where these groups are most active is actually in regions neighboring Chechnya, like Dagestan, Ingushetia, and North Ossetia where this attack happened. The majority are radicalists driven by religion, brainwashed by the Islamist idealogy. A minority are criminals driven by money - either hired as mercinaries or making money through criminal activity and fund raising in Arab countries.

One hint that religion is underlying attacks like this is Russia, is that most of them are targeted against mainly Christian regions, such as North Ossetia, or major Russian cities. North Ossetians have suffered more than a fair share from the Islamist scum, since they are pretty much a small Christian enclave in a mostly Muslim North Caucasus. And it is well known that the Caucasus Islamists have long had ties with the likes of Al-Quida.



While there was a surge of attacks recently, the Islamist terrorists in Russia have actually been mostly irradicated. Their numbers are in the hundreds, down from tens of thousands less than a decade ago. This summer a good number of the terrorist leaders and warlords have been eliminated, and this attack is likely a last ditch effort to try and show that they are still capable of inflicting mass casualties

As for Russian strategy - the attack won't change anything significantly. The Russian strategy of the last ten years has been working fairly successfully so far, and progress is being made each year. Russia will not try anything radical because it could ignite a larger conflict.

What is certain, is that those responsible for the attack will be found and eliminated, and until then they will be forced to hide in dirt. The terrorist leader who claimed responsibility for the Moscow attack earlier this year, has been eliminated a couple of weeks ago. What Russia is doing right is that it does not hold drawn-out court trials for these scumbags - they are promptly executed by whatever means, wherever they are found. Their bodies are never turned over to their relatives, but dumped somewhere - no funerals, no memory.

Now if only the sh-t that sponsors them from Middle East met the same fate....




posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 07:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by InvisibleAlbatross
I completely disagree with your last statement. Over the past 10-15 years terrorist attacks have often been carried out by religious extremists (within the US and Middle East). However looking at a history of Europe in the 20th century, we can see that most terrorism was based on politics and right/left ideology, not religion.


Those who mastermind the attacks and those who are at the very top of the foodchain in terrorist groups do typically have political inclinations. Radical Islamic idealogy has become a convenient way for them to facilitate the fight to achieve their goals. It allows them to brainwash idiots who can't think for themselves, and to recruit large numbers who are ready to do anything. There are two quick ways to raise an army - money, or religion and the human weakness of gullibility that it preys on. So in the end, religious extemism does act as fuel for terrorism, much more so than any other non-religious idealogy/politics of the past. Now that the terrorist masterminds have figured out how easy it is to use a religion like Islam and its loyal followers to facilitate their personal struggles, there is no end in sight.

In short it is being used a very efficient weapon, and its scale will only grow. The senior religious zealots in the heart of the Middle East, the senior Imams in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere, were only too happy to follow along with this sham, and to steer a significant part of Islamic faith in a direction of Radicalism. Only they can steer it back and truly eliminate Radical Islamism.



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 07:23 PM
link   
reply to post by maloy
 



STAR.

Very well written and thought out reply.
However this part here bugs me a bit.


While there was a surge of attacks recently, the Islamist terrorists in Russia have actually been mostly irradicated. Their numbers are in the hundreds, down from tens of thousands less than a decade ago.


It only took one fanatic suicide bomber to kill 17 [ possibly more] and seriously injure over 100.





edit on 9-9-2010 by SLAYER69 because: I felt like mashing the keyboard some more with my fat hairy knuckles to correct a typo



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 07:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69
It only took one fanatic suicide bomber to kill 17 [ possibly more] and seriously injure over 100.


You are right that even a small number of these scumbags can spill a lot of blood, which is why I do not see an end to this problem anytime soon.


However, the fact that most of the recent attacks in Russia have been suicide bombings hints at the weakened terrorist groups being low on manpower. In the past, the Chechen and Islamist terrorists in Russia preferred large hostage-taking attacks to suicide bombings (Theater in Moscow, School in Beslan, etc.). This demonstrated their power to attack outside of their regular region of operations, as well as created a lot of publicity and attention from foreign media - which is what they thrive on. This was also their main political weapon against Russia - because ultimately there would be those who are naive enough to blame the inevitable casualties on reckless hostage resolution by Russia. In fact, in every hostage-taking scenerio in Russia, the Islamists' intent was not to reach a resolution through negotiations, but to kill as many as possible and draw as much attention as possible. Their negotiation demands were always completely outlandish and unattainable.

Suicide attacks definitely can result in many casualties, and respresent a tremendous problem for Russia. But they lack the political attention edge that hostage-takings had. The case is such that much of Chechen/Islamist Terrorism in Russia is rooted in the money stream coming from Arab sponsors. The sponsors' funds are correlated with international media attention - the more attention, the higher the funding. It is a business for the warlords who run it. Lately attention has been waning, and one might expect that the funding is diminishing as well. Hopefully this is a trend that will continue, and eventually they will have trouble recruiting even suicide bombers.



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 08:16 PM
link   
reply to post by maloy
 



May those who died rest in peace, and may those who are behind this attack be hunted down and butchered mercilessly.


And I am sure if Russia gets them this is exactly what will happen.

Prayers to those affected by this cowardly act.



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 08:24 PM
link   
reply to post by maloy
 


ODD how all the empires act the same, and also call those resistance fighters terrorists to please other empires lol..

See how resistance movement in the middle east are called terrorists by USSR also to please the US, that way the US can call the Russian resistance fighters, so that USSR may call the resistance against US terrorists.

What a fine loop they created


I for one stand for freedom, in all sides. When people want freedom, give it to them, don't bomb them, or imprison them, when you do, they will bomb you, and take hostages from your population.

It is called the resistance movement, and it exists all across the world.



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 08:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by oozyism
ODD how all the empires act the same, and also call those resistance fighters terrorists to please other empires lol..


The thread topic revolves around murder of innocent people and you wish to discuss linguistics? Call them resistance fighters, saintly angels, or noble knights for all I care, and LOL all you want - this isn't your home or your people being subjected attacks after all. Will that change the fact that they are violent zealots who long ago lost their fight but still want to remain relevant by killing innocent people? No. What are they resisting? Law and civility?

What's odd is how some people are so blinded by their self-perceived liberal righteousness that they advocate the cause of those who carry out the most inhumane actions.



Originally posted by oozyism
See how resistance movement in the middle east are called terrorists by USSR also to please the US, that way the US can call the Russian resistance fighters, so that USSR may call the resistance against US terrorists.


When is the last time you heard USSR call anyone anything? It hasn't existed for almost 20 years.

Personally I call a murderer a murderer, and a terrorist a terrorist. Can a resistance fighter be a terrorist? Certainly. Does that change the fact that he is a terrorist and must pay for crimes commited?



Originally posted by oozyism
I for one stand for freedom, in all sides. When people want freedom, give it to them, don't bomb them, or imprison them, when you do, they will bomb you, and take hostages from your population.


Freedom is as relative of a term as terrorism or resistance fighter. One may want the freedom to sell heroin, to enslave people, to take property of others, or to marry women against their wishes. If there are no lines between what one perceives as freedom and law and order, then it becomes anarchy - and then everyone is free to do what they want including interfere with freedom of others.

It is certainly easy to use cliche terms like "freedom" when referring to conflicts like Chechnya, or any other conflict in the world for that matter. But the problem is that it is far more complex than freedom or the lack thereoff. You can't use a blancket statement like that and be taken seriously.



Originally posted by oozyism
It is called the resistance movement, and it exists all across the world.


So if someone kills a police officer while robbing a bank, and in doing so resists authority - they are justified in their actions? One can proclaim virtually anything to be a resistance movement. Unfortunately for them societies and laws exist for a reason.



edit on 9-9-2010 by maloy because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 09:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by maloy


The thread topic revolves around murder of innocent people and you wish to discuss linguistics? Call them resistance fighters, saintly angels, or noble knights for all I care, and LOL all you want - this isn't your home or your people being subjected attacks after all. Will that change the fact that they are violent zealots who long ago lost their fight but still want to remain relevant by killing innocent people? No. What are they resisting? Law and civility?

They can resist what ever they like, they have the right to, "no one should be forced to live in a way they don't want to live".



What's odd is how some people are so blinded by their self-perceived liberal righteousness that they advocate the cause of those who carry out the most inhumane actions.

Well they have cause, and their cause is much more just than the empire's causes of world domination and forceful occupation. If some people don't want to be occupied, it is just that, usually resistance starts without any violence, but we all know it turns to violence, and seen it all around the world..





When is the last time you heard USSR call anyone anything? It hasn't existed for almost 20 years.

Yeah, but Russia has, then again you knew exactly what I was talking about right
.. Anyways, when the US collapses like USSR, it will also have to change its name for the sake of survival.



Personally I call a murderer a murderer, and a terrorist a terrorist. Can a resistance fighter be a terrorist? Certainly. Does that change the fact that he is a terrorist and must pay for crimes commited?

Nope, anyone who murder innocent people for what ever cause, must be punished, but that doesn't give you the right to demean their cause.



Freedom is as relative of a term as terrorism or resistance fighter. One may want the freedom to sell heroin, to enslave people, to take property of others, or to marry women against their wishes. If there are no lines between what one perceives as freedom and law and order, then it becomes anarchy - and then everyone is free to do what they want including interfere with freedom of others.

Nope, I am talking about freedom to choose how ever you like, but that doesn't mean against other people's wishes. That being said, everyone must come with agreements, if some people come with agreements, and other disagree, all those who disagree should be allowed to live the way they want to (once again based on agreements of their own). I for one don't support majority/minority Democracy the West is trying to shove down the world's throat.



It is certainly easy to use cliche terms like "freedom" when referring to conflicts like Chechnya, or any other conflict in the world for that matter. But the problem is that it is far more complex than freedom or the lack thereoff. You can't use a blancket statement like that and be taken seriously.

It isn't complicated, they should be allowed to live the way they want to, that is the choice everyone human beings should have, but obviously goes against the empire's world domination agenda.




So if someone kills a police officer while robbing a bank, and in doing so resists authority - they are justified in their actions? One can proclaim virtually anything to be a resistance movement. Unfortunately for them societies and laws exist for a reason.



edit on 9-9-2010 by maloy because: (no reason given)


Robing a bank also has a cause, the cause is as important as the result (once again, it doesn't give the authorities the right to ignore, or hide their causes and call them name to demonize them).

Then again if the Bank Robers agreed with the land's laws then they have no right to rob the bank in the first place (because they are in agreement). If the Bank Robers don't want to agree with the land's laws, then they should be given a chance to live according to their own laws where people go around robing each other (based on agreements). That means there has to be people who agree with those robbers in the first place (therefore create a law which will allow everyone who agreed with that law, to be robbed, and allow them to rob, without any punishment). It is called the freedom to choose, those who are committing these horrible acts against humanity are not given those chances, and most likely started their resistance against control freaks peacefully..



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 09:41 PM
link   
Things seem to be escalating in Caucasus Region? Just another feeble attempt to show the world that they are still relevant? These cowards need to be hunted down with extreme prejudice! There is no reasoning behind these dastardly acts of barbarity. The people being attacked are not government officials or military personnel. Detonating a bomb at market? Aimlessly assaulting civilians, and some would call these scum freedom fighters? Ha! Cowards and rats is what those responsible are!

The people of the North Caucus ought to turn these thugs and mass murderers in to the authorities. That is only wishful thinking, because they are living under the same terror and intimidation as others who are the victims of these acts. They even attempted to blow up a hydro power plant in the Republic of Dagestan on the same day as this market attack, but bomb disposal teams where able to deactivate the device.



This how the Russian government ought to deal with them as former President, Vladimir Putin, once said about this issue.



"We will pursue the terrorists everywhere," he said. "You will forgive me, but if we catch them in the toilet, we will wet them even in the outhouse."

www.esquire.com...

Hopefully, the security forces can go into this region and track these people down without causing any undue misfortune on the people living there. I hope those who are responsible are apprehended or given a lead shower by the security forces. I apologize if if my wording is callous, but these monsters can't continue to carry out these dastardly acts without equitable retribution. The terrorists and those who support them have welcomed a ruthless response, because of ruthless acts like the one from today and others.They deserve no sympathy, compassion, or understanding!



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 09:52 PM
link   
reply to post by maloy
 


Ooozii needs to learn about the collapse of the USSR.
On topic.

Jake as usual that's fine well thought out reply.



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 09:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by maloy
 


Ooozii needs to learn about the collapse of the USSR.
On topic.

Jake as usual that's fine well thought out reply.


My family, both my mom and dad's side was in the resistance movement against USSR, so I know much, excluding the Western propaganda


I should post a picture of my mom on Kabul roof top with an AK47, but that might offend the ATS Russian community



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 10:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by oozyism
I should post a picture of my mom on Kabul roof top with an AK47, but that might offend the ATS Russian community



I'm just curious OOZ.
Do you think an Afghanistan under Taliban rule would let your mom carry that AK-47?



edit on 9-9-2010 by SLAYER69 because: I wasnt finished mashing the keyboard with my hair knuckles.



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 10:06 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 





I'm just curious OOZ.
Do you think a Afghanistan under Taliban rule would let your mom carry that AK-47?

I think you have asked that question a little too many times there
I know it irretates you every time I take a jab at the US


And I will counter it like I always do, "are you suggesting I like the way Taliban governed Afghanistan"?



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 10:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by oozyism
They can resist what ever they like, they have the right to, "no one should be forced to live in a way they don't want to live".


...and we are back to anarchy. Laws and organized societies exist for a reason, and if they force people to do anything it is to cohabitate with other people.



Originally posted by oozyism
Well they have cause, and their cause is much more just than the empire's causes of world domination and forceful occupation.


Please educate us as to the cause of the Islamists currently operating in North Caucasus? And how do you measure cause, to say one is more than the other? Do you realize that the whole conflict and "separatism movement" in the Chechnya originated as a business proposition between organized crime/oligarchy groups and self-proclaimed regional warlords seeking a method to transport oil and illegal drugs without being subject customs or laws, and to launder money through unmonitored access to Middle Eastern banks?

And here you thought it was about freedom for the poor people of Chechnya. They were pawns used and discarded by both sides. It was never about anyone's freedom, and it still isn't. Are you aware of the actions of the first Chechen "President" Dudayev and his militias after he came to power? Take some time to research "the cause".




Originally posted by oozyism
Nope, anyone who murder innocent people for what ever cause, must be punished, but that doesn't give you the right to demean their cause.


Actually, if they murder in the name of their "cause", then yes it does give me the right to demean it.

And how do you know that their cause is what they say it is?



Originally posted by oozyism
Nope, I am talking about freedom to choose how ever you like, but that doesn't mean against other people's wishes.


Chechnya was not a homogeneous society in 1992 when a bunch of armed thugs decided to proclaim independence. Many people, including Russians who lived in Chechnya (about 30-35% of population) were against it. Do you wish to hear the ethnical cleansing methods that Dudayev and his militants employed against the said Russians in the early 90's? Thousands were killed and tortured, and tens of thousands were forced to flee their homes leaving everything behind. Is that considered "taking freedom against other people's wishes"?

I realize that many Westerners have no idea about what actually took place in North Caucasus in the 90's. All they know are bits and pieces gathered from the 30 second snippets in the 5 o'clock news. The reality was much different from your cliche "freedom fighters" scenerio.

The armed gangs composed of Chechens and criminals from Russia created an "independent" anarchy state, meant to facilitate criminal activities within Russia's de-facto borders, but not subject to its laws. They envisioned a sort of wealthy "Dubai" turned gangster paradise. They rallied under radical Islamic Wahhabism in order to brainwash certain local factions to support them, and then proceeded to cleanse their new "republic" of anyone who voiced opposition. If Russia was guilty of anything, it was inaction when the local Russians and Chechen opposition pleaded with the federal government to intervene since 1991. By 1994, when Russia mobilized its forces it was already too late. Chechnya was full of Arab mercenaries and mujaheedeen veterants from the Soviet Afghan War, who were well versed in guerilla warfare and terror tactics. Some factions in the Russian government at the time also purposely turned a bling eye or even faciliated the criminal activities in Chechnya, further aggravating the situation.


I lived in North Caucasus in those years, and it was all too close for comfort. The so called "Chechen independence" was a huge mess from its very start. "Freedom" was not anyone's cause in a sense that you envision it. The thugs calling themselved separatists were absolutely ruthless, and for years they had a virtually free reign to do what they wanted. They turned a once calm region with decent standard of living into a nightmare, at least for the regular civilians, long before any Russian troops arived.



Originally posted by oozyism
It is called the freedom to choose, those who are committing these horrible acts against humanity are not given those chances, and most likely started their resistance against control freaks peacefully..


There was nothing peaceful about Dudayev and his henchmen coming to power. But again - the conflict is so unknown in the West that you can't blame one for not knowing the course of events. Chechnya was virtually free and "independent" from Russia from 1991 to 1994, and again from 1996-1999. The attrocities committed during those times by the so called "resistance fighters" make quite an impressive archive. A simple search among unbiased sources would lead to lots of good educational reading on the matter,



I do not wish to argue "resistance fighters" and "terrorist" linguistics with you. A background on the Chechen crisis is necessary to understand where the current attacks stem from.



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 10:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by oozyism
My family, both my mom and dad's side was in the resistance movement against USSR, so I know much, excluding the Western propaganda


And what makes you think that events in Chechnya have any parallel with the resistance movement that you are referring to? Not every foe of USSR or Russia was fighting for the same cause or under the same set of circumstances. A blanket statement cannot be used for everyone, and if "an enemy of my enemy is my friend" is your path to logic, then your naiveness would preclude any logical discussions.

Russia in 1991 was a much different place than in 1981. It was run by a completely new group of people, with a completely new set of goals. Predatory capitalism and oligarchy took hold quick and hard. If your notions of Russia and its politics is still stuck in "1980's mode", then again one cannot expect a logical discussion about events in Chechnya. Those who help true power in Russia in the early 90's couldn't care less about empire-building, at least not in the national sense. They were building their personal empires of wealth, at the expense of everyone around them. And this included Dudayev and his merry band of "freedom fighters".



Sorry to disappoint you, but Chechnyan militants were not the resistance movement you had in mind. You have grudges against USSR, and that's fine. I have grudges against most everyone who commanded any authority in either the Russia or Chechnya in the 90's. What I know is that elimination of the Islamists fighting in North Caucasus is best hope for freedom and peace for the people of the region. Those who carry out the attacks right now do not rally behind any cause other than a deeply troubled idealogy and personal greed.



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 11:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by maloy

...and we are back to anarchy. Laws and organized societies exist for a reason, and if they force people to do anything it is to cohabitate with other people.

You can't force someone to do anything, war and violence is the result of forcing people to live in a way they don't want. Look at Afghanistan.





Please educate us as to the cause of the Islamists currently operating in North Caucasus? And how do you measure cause, to say one is more than the other? Do you realize that the whole conflict and "separatism movement" in the Chechnya originated as a business proposition between organized crime/oligarchy groups and self-proclaimed regional warlords seeking a method to transport oil and illegal drugs without being subject customs or laws, and to launder money through unmonitored access to Middle Eastern banks?

Is that what your empire tells you? The Western empire says the freedom fighters of the middle east want to forcefully convert everyone to Islam, and want to blow us up for no reason
then again you know what I mean right.

People don't blow themselves up because they want money, they seen something you haven't seen, and it is not the 72 virgins, because they haven't seem them either. The point is, if they want to live under radical Islamic law, then let them, if they want to chop each other's hands for stealing then let them, but if they have the same expansionist ideas as you, the problem will never be solved, because two control freaks will never be able to live in the same house, one has to go, or one has to change.

Once again, if they want to live the life of drugs, anarchy blablabla, let them. You have no excuse, no matter how bad people they're, they will only realize they are wrong when they live in wrong manner, with their own kind, not with the rest who don't agree.



And here you thought it was about freedom for the poor people of Chechnya. They were pawns used and discarded by both sides. It was never about anyone's freedom, and it still isn't. Are you aware of the actions of the first Chechen "President" Dudayev and his militias after he came to power? Take some time to research "the cause".

Once again, they are freedom fighters, because you force them to live the way they don't want to, what other kind of person would blow himself up? Then again, the 72 virgin of US empire PR works as good in your empire
Use it, don't fear it, that is why they created those propagandas, so it can help people like you sleep better at night after running out of arguments.

Plus, from what I know, these fighters are very handsome, so they shouldn't struggle to find women in Russia lol from what I know here in NZ, the average women (thingied) by a man is increasing, and very rapidly.




Actually, if they murder in the name of their "cause", then yes it does give me the right to demean it.

And how do you know that their cause is what they say it is?

You're demeaning my right to live how ever I want by demeaning their right, that is what propaganda is, and there is a reason why empire's spend billions of dollars, because sooner or later, you will accept totalitarianism. It looks like we are headed that way, welcome to the NWO.

How do we know>? By letting them live how every they want, that means everyone, every darn Russia, every darn Afghan, every darn Georgian. The government's job is to take care of citizen affairs, that means when I make an agreement with you based on Quran, that if you have sex with my wife, you should get 90 lashes, and vice versa, the government should enforce that law between me and you.

Once again, I don't agree with majority minority Democracy.


[


Chechnya was not a homogeneous society in 1992 when a bunch of armed thugs decided to proclaim independence. Many people, including Russians who lived in Chechnya (about 30-35% of population) were against it. Do you wish to hear the ethnical cleansing methods that Dudayev and his militants employed against the said Russians in the early 90's? Thousands were killed and tortured, and tens of thousands were forced to flee their homes leaving everything behind. Is that considered "taking freedom against other people's wishes"?

Once again, take my point in to consideration, OK there is Russians there, I'm not gonna deny that, Jeez, Russians should live the way they want to also, that means Christians, Jews and Muslims, and Hindus, and insane psychos. It should all be done based on agreements, I gave you an example of that agreement above, that is true freedom, the propaganda you have been fed has motives behind it, the motive of world domination.



I realize that many Westerners have no idea about what actually took place in North Caucasus in the 90's. All they know are bits and pieces gathered from the 30 second snippets in the 5 o'clock news. The reality was much different from your cliche "freedom fighters" scenerio.

It is not about what took place, it seems you are getting defensive now, I liked you much better when you were on the offence. Once again, I'm not denying the current murder of innocent people in the market, this is a horrific act, if I'm not gonna deny this, why should I deny what happened in the 90's? My point is the cause, that these people have a cause, and the age of (I don't negotiate with terrorist) is over, it has proven not to work.

This is how Einstein labeled insanity as:


doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results

www.quotationspage.com/quote/26032.html



The armed gangs composed of Chechens and criminals from Russia created an "independent" anarchy state, meant to facilitate criminal activities within Russia's de-facto borders, but not subject to its laws.

I don't care, how do you know that is not propaganda? I'll repeat myself on that, because it seems you are trying to give me a history lessons about thugs and criminals when it is not relevant, hence I want thugs and criminals to live the way they want also.

Come NZ and checkout the GANG culture. It is spiraling out of control, I wouldn't be surprised if couple of decades from now a civil war between GANGS and NZ army sparks, ending with a long resistance movement of its own.



They envisioned a sort of wealthy "Dubai" turned gangster paradise. They rallied under radical Islamic Wahhabism in order to brainwash certain local factions to support them, and then proceeded to cleanse their new "republic" of anyone who voiced opposition.

Read the above, I will repeat, I don't care. Could be propaganda, go estimate how much is spent yearly, in US over a billion is used. Plus it doesn't effect my point.



If Russia was guilty of anything, it was inaction when the local Russians and Chechen opposition pleaded with the federal government to intervene since 1991.

Sorry mate, you guys intervened in Afghanistan also, I know much about empires, and I know much about their propaganda, because I made it a duty to expose it. I like the way you tell stories though.



By 1994, when Russia mobilized its forces it was already too late. Chechnya was full of Arab mercenaries and mujaheedeen veterants from the Soviet Afghan War, who were well versed in guerilla warfare and terror tactics. Some factions in the Russian government at the time also purposely turned a bling eye or even faciliated the criminal activities in Chechnya, further aggravating the situation.

Freedom, I stand for it, the story sounds nice though, I wonder who writes these




I lived in North Caucasus in those years, and it was all too close for comfort. The so called "Chechen independence" was a huge mess from its very start. "Freedom" was not anyone's cause in a sense that you envision it. The thugs calling themselved separatists were absolutely ruthless, and for years they had a virtually free reign to do what they wanted. They turned a once calm region with decent standard of living into a nightmare, at least for the regular civilians, long before any Russian troops arived.

It was still governed by Russia, that is the thing, I pointed out what the Government's duties are, and it is not to enforce Russian laws, but to enforce individual laws, and people's affairs. When you force people to do things, that is when things go wrong, and I gave you an example and I also told you why they don't want people to live the way they want, because of their world domination expansionist policy.





There was nothing peaceful about Dudayev and his henchmen coming to power. But again - the conflict is so unknown in the West that you can't blame one for not knowing the course of events. Chechnya was virtually free and "independent" from Russia from 1991 to 1994, and again from 1996-1999. The attrocities committed during those times by the so called "resistance fighters" make quite an impressive archive. A simple search among unbiased sources would lead to lots of good educational reading on the matter,

I will repeat, could be propaganda, a lot of money is spent. That being said, empires are very funny, because they have absolutely no tolerance for small independent nations, Iran spent all this time under sanctions, and under complete fear of US invasion, but since before the revolution Iran was powerful enough to have intelligence, it managed to survive long enough to repel all fears of the empires.. They tried many times to either completely destroy Iran (Iran/Iraq war), or to destabilize it (hence the support for different resistance movements against Iran).

So once again, could be propaganda, because with the attitude of empires, I think it would be impossible to stay independent (for long). Then again, how does this effect my point of freedom?




I do not wish to argue "resistance fighters" and "terrorist" linguistics with you. A background on the Chechen crisis is necessary to understand where the current attacks stem from.

Surely stems from a cause lol people obviously don't want to live under Russian rule, not saying all the people, but enough. If there was 100-200, then they would be easily hunted down and killed, obviously there is a lot of them, so give them the freedom they want.


edit on 9-9-2010 by oozyism because: Very Long Reply and Getting dizzy




posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 11:12 PM
link   
reply to post by maloy
 


If you read what I wrote you would have concluded that I regard anyone resisting control freaks, freedom fighters. Whether they bomb civilians or not, they are still freedom fighters. The cause is as important as the result.

For you to demean the freedom fighters by pointing fingers at their desperate attempts, then that won't work, murderers are murderers, but obviously murderers can be freedom fighters also, just because they are murderers doesn't mean they can't be freedom fighters.

I know you don't want to debate that issue, because you know you are wrong. Let me elaborate, both a female and a male can be a human being, in the same wordy manner a (killer of civilians) and a (killer of soldiers) can be regarded as freedom fighters.

The thing is, who writes the dictionaries
go check and see how much the word terrorism has changed, if the word was to be taken literally, law enforcement agencies are terrorizing criminals therefore they are terrorists. Politics plays a much bigger role in word plays then you think, then again the word politically correct wasn't invented for no reason lol



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 11:25 PM
link   
reply to post by oozyism
 



go check and see how much the word terrorism has changed, if the word was to be taken literally, law enforcement agencies are terrorizing criminals therefore they are terrorists


You don't see "Law Enforcement" Blowing themselves up to kill the Criminals and in the process killing innocent women and children.



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 11:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by oozyism
If you read what I wrote you would have concluded that I regard anyone resisting control freaks, freedom fighters. Whether they bomb civilians or not, they are still freedom fighters. The cause is as important as the result.


The only thing I concluded is that you like to argue semantics, and have tendency to fall back on the usual vocabulary of "freedom fighter", "cause", "empire", and "propaganda" when your arguments are lacking in actual content. You clearly do no know the details of the Chechen conflict, and you clearly have a certain disposition towards the scum that I regard as terrorists. Be they termed freedom fighters or tooth fairies, death is what they deserve - and damned be their cause if it requires killed innocent people.

There is really no point to carry this on. I lived the 90's in the Caucasus, and I personally know those who experienced the conflict first hand.



Originally posted by oozyism
For you to demean the freedom fighters by pointing fingers at their desperate attempts, then that won't work


Their deplorable actions demean them, not my finger pointing.



Originally posted by oozyism
I know you don't want to debate that issue, because you know you are wrong.


Damn you got me. If your definition of debate equates to stuffing 50 mentions of the word freedom fighter, cause, and propaganda into your posts, then I am truly in the wrong.



Originally posted by oozyism
Let me elaborate, both a female and a male can be a human being, in the same wordy manner a (killer of civilians) and a (killer of soldiers) can be regarded as freedom fighters.


A likewise arguement can be used to regard them as terrorists, or Jedi Masters for all its worth.... what is your point?



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 11:40 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 




You don't see "Law Enforcement" Blowing themselves up to kill the Criminals and in the process killing innocent women and children.

If you read what I wrote, I said literal meaning of terrorism (to terrorize). Then again you have a habit of getting pissed off and pulling one liners


Read my sentence again very carefully, they terrorize criminals.



Police shoot & kill innocent bystander during armed robbery
pe.com — Daniel Baledran, a 21-year-old resident of the unincorporated area near Riverside, was at a Papa John's Pizza restaurant in Chino during an armed robbery that turned into a gunfight between police and armed robbers. Two suspects and an officer were wounded and police believed Baledran to be a third suspect when they shot at him.

digg.com...
Police Brutality: Cop Shoots Homeowner 6 Times Then Covers Up. 911 CALL

Cops Shoot and Kill Unarmed Man on Bridge


Chicago police murder innocent man

There's more..



new topics

top topics



 
21
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join