Chechnya

Nofuture

Newbie
Joined
Jan 18, 2005
Messages
176
Reaction score
0
Recently I´ve seen on CNN some extracts from a speech of Basayev. There was said, that The UK’s Channel 4 News has aired an interview with a Chechen rebel leader who masterminded the Beslan school siege, despite Russian protests that the broadcast helped terrorists.

Basayev insists that while Russia continues to occupy Chechnya, this is a justified war. His reason are hundreds of thousands of Chechen civilians killed in the conflict.

Speaking about the school hostage siege in Beslan, he said among other things that Russians aren´t innocent (similar as Churchill in his essay about 9/11):

"You must understand us correctly. We are at war. Russians approve of Putin's policies. They pay their taxes for this war, send their soldiers to this war, their priests sprinkle holy water on the soldiers, and bless their 'holy duty', calling them heroic defenders of the fatherland.

We are planning Beslan-type operations in the future because we are forced to do so. Today our citizens are disappearing. Our girls disappear without a trace. They can take anyone. In order to stop this chaos we have to respond in the same way.

Cynical though it may seem, we are planning these operations, and we will conduct them, if only to show the world again and again the true face of the Russian regime, the true face of Putin with his Satanic horns, so that the world sees his true face. In order to stop the genocide we will stop at nothing.”

Three years after the first war ended, Putin launched the second.


But having already said that there were more Beslans planned, Basayev also argued, too many had already died.

"That is why we are ready to stop the war, and as Maskhadov says to start negotiations without preconditions. But there is one condition. That is the non-negotiable and full withdrawal of the occupying Russian troops from our territory.
If the Russians withdraw their troops and cease the genocide of our people, I am ready to stand before a court, and I will accept any decision of the court with due deference.
"


Basayev said also: "To be honest I didn't originally plan for this to happen in Beslan, we planned the operation for Moscow or St Petersburg, or both simultaneously but we ran out of money.

Basayev said he had not anticipated the Beslan siege would end with quite the bloodshed that accompanied it and blamed the Russian response for that.

"We're not exactly delighted by what happened in Beslan. To be honest, I am even shocked by what happened there, and am still in a state of shock. I didn't expect such cruelty."

But Basayev is not talking about what his people did, he is talking about the Russians. He blames them for storming the school and killing the children.

He said: "I never thought they'd do it."

In one of his earlier statements, Basayev blamed President Vladimir Putin for the tragedy which he said had been brought about by Russian special forces storming the school after two days on September 3 in an operation that had been planned from the beginning.
He said the group, who held more than 1,100 people hostage inside the school, had been demanding the withdrawal of Russian forces from Chechnya and, in the absence of this, the resignation of Putin.
Basayev said the group had told intermediaries who came to the school that the hostages would be given food and water and the youngest children released if the Russian side began to meet their demands.

Putin has ordered a security clampdown throughout the Caucasus region in the aftermath of the Beslan tragedy, but has steadfastly refused to negotiate over Chechen independence with rebel leaders.


The Beslan operation was an horrible act. On the other hand, injustice breeds injustice.

On one hand nearly 165 (?) children died in Beslan (mainly by Russian storming the building), on the other hand about 42,000 children were killed by 2004 by Russian forces in War on Chechnya. What an hypocrisy, Putin saying: "We will never deal with these bastards. No-one has the moral right to tell us to talk to child-killers".

Think also about, what a horrible evil Russia has done to Chechen nation since 18th century ...



Oh, I see, Putin is wanted too :p :

Russian-Chechen War Turns into Bounty Race

“The rebels accused Putin of launching a war against Chechnya and organizing mass murders, kidnappings, torture and overall genocide of the Chechen people. They also claimed that he was responsible for the recent school siege in the south Russian city of Beslan. Leaving the technicalities of apprehending “the war criminal Putin” to the imagination of potential bounty-hunters, the separatists basically offered the money to anyone able to pull it off.”
 
they both are acting terrorist-like to achieve thier goals.
this could go on and on..

just like the middle eastern situation.
things keep going on like this, humans are going to end up blowing eachother up, especially with NK in our world. :(
 
Russia, which sadly looked to be on the road to democracy a decade ago, once again appears to be headed towards autocratic rule.

I will point out one minor difference in the struggle. Chechnya dliberately targetted children in Beslan, Russia just doesn't seem to care at all about collateral damage/encourages it. Clearly preventing as many civillian deaths as possible should be a priority.
 
everyone sees the chechans as the baddies becuase they blew up 1 SCHOOL,

Just how many CITIES have russia blown up.

I do not support the tatics of killing the civilians, but russia has kille dmore than the chechans have.
 
solaris152000 said:
everyone sees the chechans as the baddies becuase they blew up 1 SCHOOL,

Just how many CITIES have russia blown up.

I do not support the tatics of killing the civilians, but russia has kille dmore than the chechans have.

I'm going to play Devil's Advocate and say "Why does everyone think Al-Qaeda are the bad guys because they blew up two large office towers?
How many nations have USA destroyed since?
I do not support bin Laden, but US has killed more more citizens than him"

I don't agree with you, I think Russia could handle things in a better manner, but I think they are no less (or no more) justified than USA in their effort.

Forgive the analogy, it was just the easiest way to get the point across (I'm not trying to descend yet another thread into anti-american rhetoric, honest!)
 
kirovman said:
I don't agree with you, I think Russia could handle things in a better manner, but I think they are no less (or no more) justified than USA in their effort.


Are you saying, Russia is justified in their effort?

If yes, how?
 
Nofuture said:
Are you saying, Russia is justified in their effort?

If yes, how?

I am not saying they are justified in their effort. I just think they are no less justified than the US.
Russia has been meddling in these ex-soviet or borderline areas, and funny to see how a lot of nations became independent of Russia, but as a key oil producer, Chechnya's ambitions were shattered. Now they are using the "we need to fight terrorists" sentiment.
And looking at the current republican administration, they are very keen to get a stake in middle east oil.

So the situation is very analogous.

Pity oil is worth so much, but I guess if there wasn't war over oil, it would be over something else.
 
In some ways they are justified in their efforts.

However, you cannot deny (well you can, but everyone will ignore you) that the US does everything it can to minimize civillian casualties. Russia doesn't seem to care. That is a huge difference.
 
GhostFox said:
In some ways they are justified in their efforts.

However, you cannot deny (well you can, but everyone will ignore you) that the US does everything it can to minimize civillian casualties. Russia doesn't seem to care. That is a huge difference.

In Soviet Russia civilian casualties minimise you.

I couldn't resist, sorry :)
 
Russia is just as evil as america.
Im sorry if my post looked like i supported russias war.

I dont.
 
Nofuture said:
Are you saying, Russia is justified in their effort?

If yes, how?

I say they are justified much in the same way that the North was justified in fighting the south in the US civil war.
 
GhostFox said:
In some ways they are justified in their efforts.

So tell me, with what you justify Russia´s war on Chechnya?



GhostFox said:
However, you cannot deny (well you can, but everyone will ignore you) that the US does everything it can to minimize civillian casualties.

You statement doesn´t tell anything concrete. So it could be that you will be ignored.
If the US cared about civilians, they woudn´t been performing so many invasions etc.
 
So tell me, with what you justify Russia´s war on Chechnya?

I belive the Chechyan's deserve and rightly should recieve independance. However once they resorted to having terrorist extremists do their dirty work for them, they lost most of their claim to that right.

If the US cared about civilians, they woudn´t been performing so many invasions etc.

Whether or not you agree with the war, you cannot deny that the US does everything it can to avoid civillian casualties. It doesn't mean that they don't happen, only that they are avoided as much as humanly possible.
 
GhostFox said:
However once they resorted to having terrorist extremists do their dirty work for them, they lost most of their claim to that right.

No, not at all.
What you are saying, it´s Putin´s strategy. He calls it "international terrorism", although up to date it has only to do with domestic issue, i.e. with war on Chechnya.

Further more, as I know, Chechen in generally aren´t keen on Basayev.



GhostFox said:
Whether or not you agree with the war, you cannot deny that the US does everything it can to avoid civillian casualties.

What a rhetoric you are using here!

You know, I have to disappoint you, I really do not know nothing special about it. What makes you so sure? Please inform me.

Btw, it is a normal effort to avoid civillian casualties, isn´t it?
So acting this way doesn´t makes anybody to heros.

Yes, Russia and especially Putin seem not much to care about civillians.
On the other hand, if US care a bit more about civillian casualties, it´s only normal and doesn´t makes them special.

I also think we have allready had somewhere here some bad examples regarding civillian casualties of US actions.
 
Btw, it is a normal effort to avoid civillian casualties, isn´t it?
So acting this way doesn´t makes anybody to heros.

Yes, Russia and especially Putin seem not much to care about civillians.
On the other hand, if US care a bit more about civillian casualties, it´s only normal and doesn´t makes them special.

Which is why I criticized Russia for not taking the appropriate action to avoid Civillian casualties. Did I say that what Russia does is ok? No. Did I say the US deserves a medal for trying to avoid civillian loss of life? No I did not.

Why do you need to spin everything?
 
GhostFox said:
Which is why I criticized Russia for not taking the appropriate action to avoid Civillian casualties. Did I say that what Russia does is ok? No. Did I say the US deserves a medal for trying to avoid civillian loss of life? No I did not.

Why do you need to spin everything?

You are the one who spins everything.

I didn´t said that you said, what Russia does is ok.

You pointed out several times (watch your rhetoric: You cannot denny (2 times!)...) US efforts to save civilians despite this thread is not about USA:

GhostFox said:
you cannot deny (well you can, but everyone will ignore you) that the US does everything it can to minimize civillian casualties?


OK, as I said:

You know, I have to disappoint you, I really do not know nothing special about it. What makes you so sure? Please inform me.


Btw, what is a reason that you are so focused on US?
 
Nofuture, I pointed out the US becuase people were comparing their efforts to Russia. So I simply stated while the US goes out of their way to not harm civillians, it doesn't seem to bother Russia, so therefore any anology is false. I didn't focus this thread on the US, I only tried to prevent from becoming like every other thread on here where everyone blames the US for everything that has ever gone wrong anywhere.

If others had kept it on topic and not brought the US into it, I wouldn't have needed to point out that the Russia/US analogy was falacious.
 
Of course, noone wants to touch Chechnya ... because they're were more important things like ... uh ... like uh ...
 
Sadly, I think the topic title and topic starter's name have a commonality.

Chechnya -> Nofuture :(
 
Why doesn't Russia just let them seperate or whatever it is they are wanting to do?

It would probally help stop the terrorism.
 
Why doesn't Russia just let them seperate or whatever it is they are wanting to do?

It would probally help stop the terrorism.

Good question Tron. The most obvious is that Russia does not want to be viewed as giving into terrorists. You know the whole "We do not negotiate with terrorists" thing? It has a purpose. If you give in once, they will figure you will give in every time. So Russia is afriad to give Chechnya independace, becuase it will be viewed as a victory for terrorism and everytime someone gets mad at Russia in the future, they will go kill 200 schoolkids.

As much as I think the Chechnya should be an independant country, from a geo-political standpoint Russia has to crush them now. They cannot afford to back down.

Sadly, if Chechnya had avoided the terrorist route, they quite possibly could have achieved independace peacfully by now. Just when they start to get the weight of the world on their side, they go and blow it.

As I see it, there are now two roads to peace.

1) Russia crushes Chechnya completely.

2) A massive leadership overhaul occurs in Chechnya, declaring the terrorists criminals and announcing that they will help Russia hunt them down. That would give Russia the out they need to give Chechnya independace while still defeating the terrorists.

We should all hope for option #2,
 
Sorry, GhostFox, but I have to say this: It´s really a complete bs! (except maybe Russia crushes Chechnya completely)

You have to inform yourself at least a bit about the history before analysing like this, and about Russia.
 
I've studied the history of the conflict extensively. Perhaps you'd like to give us your "informed" analysis and explain why mine was so bad.
 
GhostFox said:
I've studied the history of the conflict extensively. Perhaps you'd like to give us your "informed" analysis and explain why mine was so bad.

To keep it shortly, it has nothing to do with terrorism. The war on terrorism, the war on "international terrorism" is for Putin just a pretense to continue the war on Chechnya.

Chechnya and terrorism are to different things.

Russians were and will never ever be willing to give independancy to any nation being oppressed by them, unless they must, i.g. they see that they can´t manage this by no means.

The analogy between Russia and US is indeed very suitable here. As it comes to oil, they both can´t resist to it, can´t give it away.
 
Nofuture -- first, bull. Chechnya's "oil" is not what Russjia was after. It was after re-expanding itself, and hopping its economy would whip back into shape with a war.

Well, it did'nt.
 
Chechnya and terrorism are to different things.

I never said the war was over terrorism. I never said terrorism started the war. All I said was that it cannot end becuase of it. Russia cannot afford to capitulate to terrorists in any fashion. Ergo, the only chance for peace is for a leadership change in Chechnya leading to an anti-terrorist govt.

Why the war started at this point is immaterial. I was explaining why it can't end.
 
If you read up on the subject the truth is the bombing on residential buildings in Moscow that reportedly started this war is suspected to have been FSB funded and FSB deployed during Putin's governance there.
So he made Yeltsin start a new war.
Then he became President.

The truth is Russians are cold. They didn't storm the damn school. I'e watched every footage out there and there was signs that the militants started firing first, so the Spetznaz just did what they had to do.

Also, the Chechens have done a lot more than blowing up a school. They've taken a hospital and did the same thing, sent commandos shoot around a small city, blowed up several bombs in cities (airliners, carbombs and residential buildings)...

I'm not saying the Russians are right on this one. Chechenya is just a basic case of You_are_a_part_of_us_and_you_can't_leave by the Russians. They've lost enough there if you ask me, they should clear it and give them semi-independence. The problem is if they gave them independence and then either Georgia or Armenia invaded they'd get in a major conflict instead of just Russian-style "peacekeeping". If they don't give them independence, they'll just keep bombing Russian cities and revolting for it.
 
GhostFox said:
I never said the war was over terrorism. I never said terrorism started the war. All I said was that it cannot end becuase of it. Russia cannot afford to capitulate to terrorists in any fashion. Ergo, the only chance for peace is for a leadership change in Chechnya leading to an anti-terrorist govt.

Why the war started at this point is immaterial. I was explaining why it can't end.

You pointed out terrorism as an important matter which troubles to end the war, right?

And I pointed out, that terrorism plays not an important roll concerning the end of the war. What matters, is that Russian doesn´t want to give independency for Chechnya at all. So the circumstances aren´t so important, with or without terrorism.

You statement that terrorism troubles to stopp the war would be important IF Russians were considering to give the independence to Chechnya at all. But they aren´t.
 
K e r b e r o s said:
Nofuture -- first, bull. Chechnya's "oil" is not what Russjia was after.

Of course it played a role.

K e r b e r o s said:
It was after re-expanding itself, and hopping its economy would whip back into shape with a war.

I´m not sure if I understand this right :eek:
Can you describe this with other words?
 
Nofuture said:
I´m not sure if I understand this right :eek:
Can you describe this with other words?

Kerberos said a good point, that there is little strategic importance in Chechnya. They want to re-expand themselves (Soviet Union style, but apparently "democratically") and thought a little war would make their economy actually improve (too much was invested in Defense to drop it out)
 
Sprafa said:
Kerberos said a good point, that there is little strategic importance in Chechnya. They want to re-expand themselves (Soviet Union style, but apparently "democratically") and thought a little war would make their economy actually improve (too much was invested in Defense to drop it out)

It still makes no sense to me.

A war can improve Russians economy?
How do you mean re-expand concerning Chechnya?
 
Nofuture said:
It still makes no sense to me.

A war can improve Russians economy?
How do you mean re-expand concerning Chechnya?

You'll have to ask him, but it seems to me that they lost a bunch of money with the privateering of the economy. So by making a war in Chechnya they can justify absurd expenses with Defense again.

And if they wiped out the independentists in Chechnya other sattelites like Georgia & Armenia might get intimidated.
 
You statement that terrorism troubles to stopp the war would be important IF Russians were considering to give the independence to Chechnya at all. But they aren´t.

If Chechnya hadn't resorted to terrorism they would have had a fairly good chance of gaining independace by now. The international community was really starting to throw their weight behind them until they decided to start blowing up kids. Russia does not want to give them independance, I agree. But Chechnya could gain it if it was not cost effective for Russia to hold onto them. As long as they support terrorist actions, Russia cannot afford to let them go. If Chechnya reforms, there is a good chance Russia cannot afford to keep them.
 
Some news about Chechnya:

Strasbourg court considering over 120 Chechnya cases
http://www***ssiancourier.com/eng/news/26/2/2005/1259/

"The European Court of Human Rights is considering more than 120 cases of alleged human rights abuse in Chechnya, Russian rights groups said on Friday.
Disappearances, the killings of civilians and torture are the most common reasons for complaints the Strasbourg court receives from Chechnya, the groups said.

"Thirty-five cases on Chechnya have been handed to the Strasbourg court by the Memorial center. They are at various stages of consideration," Dina Vedernikova, a lawyer for Memorial, told a news conference in Moscow.

"The Law Initiative organization, which specializes in legal assistance to the Chechen population, is representing 75 cases on Chechnya at the European Court," said the group's Yelena Yezhova."

I also have read that the Court has allready granted three cases and Russia must pay now 140,000 Euro to 6 injured persons.

Does Russia has enough money to pay to all injured persons? :p

And does US have enough money too? If Iraqis will go to court... :eek: ;)
 
And does US have enough money too? If Iraqis will go to court

Any Iraqi's abused/deliberately targeted falsely should go to court. The US will have no problem paying damages to those people. The US should actually push for a public reparation system to show their sympathy for the situation the Iraqi people are in.
 
GhostFox said:
Any Iraqi's abused/deliberately targeted falsely should go to court. The US will have no problem paying damages to those people. The US should actually push for a public reparation system to show their sympathy for the situation the Iraqi people are in.
It's a nice idea but the amount of bogus cases would, no doubt, be ridiculous. Of course one hopes that the false ones would be spotted, but if nothing else it would tie up the whole process. Also, I'm not so sure how many American citizens would be ok with their tax dollars going to the Iraqi people in such an obvious way.
 
el Chi said:
It's a nice idea but the amount of bogus cases would, no doubt, be ridiculous. Of course one hopes that the false ones would be spotted, but if nothing else it would tie up the whole process.

To win a case in any court, I think, you have to have proofs, witnesses, testimonies etc. There woudn´t be one process I think but every time a new process for every case or some cases together.
Do you doubt that the court were able to distinguish if there are enough proofs or not etc.?? War crimes are crimes too, and crimes are normally being persecuted.

I would say, there could be a contrary problem to problem you have pointed out; the difficulty for injured persons to win their cases because of the lack of proofs.
Court and justice not always are the same.



el Chi said:
Also, I'm not so sure how many American citizens would be ok with their tax dollars going to the Iraqi people in such an obvious way.

If they finance the war, they must pay for its consequences too.
 
Back
Top