Attack on the Moscow metro

[Megas Methuselah]

From what little I can gather, I still think they're freedom fighters. If a people want the right to govern themselves, they should have it. The fact that not all Chechens don't want independance complicates matters, but some do, and their views should not be cast aside because a member on this board revels in obselete ideas such as the victor's judgement. Nowadays, I like to imagine that brute force is certainly not the sole answer to situations like this.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

From what little I can gather, I still think they're freedom fighters. If a people want the right to govern themselves, they should have it. The fact that not all Chechens don't want independance complicates matters, but some do, and their views should not be cast aside because some fascist member on this board revels in obselete ideas such as the victor's judgement. Nowadays, I like to imagine that brute force is certainly not the sole answer to situations like this.

You realize that this attitude, writ large, provides for an incredible level of "balkanization" throughout the world? Self-governance is a worthwhile goal, but incumbent on that idea is that a small minority does not have the right to veto by violence any and all decisions/modus vivendi with which they disagree.

[Megas Methuselah]

You realize that this attitude, writ large, provides for an incredible level of "balkanization" throughout the world? Self-governance is a worthwhile goal, but incumbent on that idea is that a small minority does not have the right to veto by violence any and all decisions/modus vivendi with which they disagree.

That's what I was worried about, though. This is the first time I've ever bothered to squint in Chechnya's general direction, and I'm unsure as to exactly how much the population is divided between seperatism and their current place with Russia.

[Strike For The South]

So clearly the answer is violence, and not only violence but the murder of innocent civilians

[Megas Methuselah]

So clearly the answer is violence, and not only violence but the murder of innocent civilians

Not really, no. But if I were in their position, I'd be pretty pissed at the Russians, too.

[Strike For The South]

Not really, no. But if I were in their position, I'd be pretty pissed at the Russians, too.

Which would be a fair emotion, however killing civillians always backfries in the end

[naut]

however killing civillians always backfries in the end

Really? Tell that to the IRA.

[PanzerJaeger]

Are you serious? Do you only know who are Kadyrov and his clique? Do you remember the circumstances of his "election" and have you heard of the level of corruption in Chechnya?

Yes. The situation, as in all of Russia, is rife with corruption. Did anyone expect anything other than a Kadyrov type strongman to be installed after such a war? I'm surprised the Russians even went to the trouble of having an "election". It doesn't change the fact that the Chechens fought and lost. Past tense. The time for violence ended last August, as Zakayev stated. Russian troops are gone and Grozny is being rebuilt. The economy and standard of living have rebounded in the region, and they are even considering a tourism industry. Certainly there is bad blood left over, but the world, including the Chechen people, has moved on, and these Muslim extremists need to find some way of dealing with that fact other than blowing people up.

Vendetta needs no viable strategic justifications, and ten years is still a short delay for the achievement of vengeance.

Exactly. Blowing innocent people up over personal vendettas and vengeance is the ultimate petty, selfish act. Further, these people are not even real Chechen nationalists. They are radical Muslims, the same radical Muslims that bombed the Chechen government when it was independent, and one of the main causes of the instability that led to Russia retaking control of the region in the second war. They will not stop until Chechnya is an Islamic theocracy.

But things are much more complex that you seem to believe.

I never said that Chechnya was a great place, only that the time for violence is over.

Ahahahahahahahahahahaha

What did I say that was inaccurate?

In short - you are advocating to Nuke the Middle East?

No.

[Strike For The South]

Really? Tell that to the IRA.

Ok, true but the Uk =/= Russia.

Something tells me someone is going to pay and pay dearly

[naut]

Ok, true but the Uk =/= Russia.

Something tells me someone is going to pay and pay dearly

I unlike PJ don't see it as the same as Al Queda terrorists. I see it largely as similar to Palestinian bombers. And if that is the case, most will gladly pay with their lives, and the violence will only perpetuate itself. Violence isn't necessarily bad for the Chechens, because it advances the seperatist's cause and drags Russian resources and builds weariness among the Russian population. It also musn't be forgotten that Russia is an incredibly racist country. There is more at hand than is publically available.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Actually, you could make a pretty good argument that the Provos accomplished relatively little. The independence movement of the teens and twenties -- using open conflict, guerilla tactics, and assassination of government officials -- gained far more than did the Provisional Wing's antics following The Troubles. They even ended up killing enough civilians to shake quite a few Irish-descent yanks out of their "free the six counties" selective perception haze and drying up the money quite a bit.

If your guerilla movement very clearly goes after the occupying/ruling military, government officials etc., then you will be able to broaden your base of support and possibly use that as a springboard to power (Red Chinese, Am Revolution). Relentlessly targeting the innocent simply cannot generate support -- only fear. Despite Machiavelli's preference for feared v loved, even Nicolo felt the best answer was both -- fear only has some inherent weaknesses.

[Banquo's Ghost]

Actually, you could make a pretty good argument that the Provos accomplished relatively little. The independence movement of the teens and twenties -- using open conflict, guerilla tactics, and assassination of government officials -- gained far more than did the Provisional Wing's antics following The Troubles. They even ended up killing enough civilians to shake quite a few Irish-descent yanks out of their "free the six counties" selective perception haze and drying up the money quite a bit.

Let's not romanticise, please. Throughout Ireland's struggle for independence, civilians have been the target as well as the occupying forces. I'm afraid it's rather fanciful to consider those that won independence as "using open conflict, guerilla tactics, and assassination of government officials" but the Provos were "beastly terrorists". Irish nationalists used terrorist tactics for centuries (for the usual reasons, the odd standing armies we brought were usually heavily defeated - which by PJ's measure, means the Irish should have stayed quiet and subjugated after O'Connor signed his peace treaty with Henry II) and after an orgy of terrorist violence in the early 1920's, brought the British Empire to the negotiating table. Much as they did in the late 1990's, though this was more effective because the targets changed to economic ones.

There are also some who continue to use terrorism to further the aim of a united Ireland. They are very few, very deluded, but cling to an ancient tradition that appeals to the deluded few. However, we do not seem to demonise the entire Republic of Ireland nor the Roman Catholic faith for their actions. Given the historical crimes, one wonders why?

[al Roumi]

If your guerilla movement very clearly goes after the occupying/ruling military, government officials etc., then you will be able to broaden your base of support and possibly use that as a springboard to power (Red Chinese, Am Revolution). Relentlessly targeting the innocent simply cannot generate support -- only fear. Despite Machiavelli's preference for feared v loved, even Nicolo felt the best answer was both -- fear only has some inherent weaknesses.

The weaker the group/faction, the more likely they are to "terrorise". Civilian deaths provoke a reaction. If anything, the Chechen separatists are trying to re-ignite the conflict on a broader scale - Russia's inevitably heavy handed and bloody response ("destroy", "exterminate") will only add more fuel to the fire of Chechen grievances against Russia. Feeding the cycle of violence and recrimination will polarise opinion and thusly bring the separatists more supporters.

[gaelic cowboy]

There are also some who continue to use terrorism to further the aim of a united Ireland. They are very few, very deluded, but cling to an ancient tradition that appeals to the deluded few. However, we do not seem to demonise the entire Republic of Ireland nor the Roman Catholic faith for their actions. Given the historical crimes, one wonders why?

It is because we prefer to forget than to pick at our scabs best leave them to heal. That is the way the Irish deal with a horror so great it spilt the country both litteraly and metaphorically leave it for three or four generations to heal it is the Irish way it always has.

[al Roumi]

It is because we prefer to forget than to pick at our scabs best leave them to heal. That is the way the Irish deal with a horror so great it spilt the country both litteraly and metaphorically leave it for three or four generations to heal it is the Irish way it always has.

...as one ostrich said to another.

[Rhyfelwyr]

However, we do not seem to demonise the entire Republic of Ireland

Every country has a bloody history, but the Republic of Ireland can't be blamed for the campaigns of the PIRA. Especially when the PIRA refuses to recognise the current Irish state as legitimate.

nor the Roman Catholic faith for their actions.

You can't blame the Catholic Church for the atrocities of Republicans. Heck, the Vatican is the most hardcore loyalist institution in the world. The Popes blessed the original plantations in Ireland, a Te Deum was sung at the Vatican when William's victory at the Boyne was announced, and Pius X even blessed the guns that went to the UVF through the Larne gun running (they were smuggled from Italy).

[The Wizard]

Yes. The situation, as in all of Russia, is rife with corruption. Did anyone expect anything other than a Kadyrov type strongman to be installed after such a war? I'm surprised the Russians even went to the trouble of having an "election". It doesn't change the fact that the Chechens fought and lost. Past tense. The time for violence ended last August, as Zakayev stated. Russian troops are gone and Grozny is being rebuilt. The economy and standard of living have rebounded in the region, and they are even considering a tourism industry. Certainly there is bad blood left over, but the world, including the Chechen people, has moved on, and these Muslim extremists need to find some way of dealing with that fact other than blowing people up.

Well then, why don't you send this in an e-mail to the Russian security forces and cops, who are clearly unaware that the time for extrajudicial killings, heavy-handed operations resulting in the deaths of loads of innocents (the killing of 22 misidentified civilians by the Russians a couple months ago was the reason Umarov reported for carrying out the attack), extreme repression and clear and open racism is over?

I know you probably don't know this, but despite there never being anything about it in the Western media unless something big happens (like Beslan or this latest attack), there are attacks and reprisals and firefights in the Russian Caucasus almost every day. Sure you can accept Putin's propaganda at face value, but why would anyone?

[PanzerJaeger]

Well then, why don't you send this in an e-mail to the Russian security forces and cops, who are clearly unaware that the time for extrajudicial killings, heavy-handed operations resulting in the deaths of loads of innocents (the killing of 22 misidentified civilians by the Russians a couple months ago was the reason Umarov reported for carrying out the attack), extreme repression and clear and open racism is over?

I know you probably don't know this, but despite there never being anything about it in the Western media unless something big happens (like Beslan or this latest attack), there are attacks and reprisals and firefights in the Russian Caucasus almost every day. Sure you can accept Putin's propaganda at face value, but why would anyone?

The sanctimonious nature of your posts quickly becomes taxing. What did I write that was inaccurate? Further, how much support, in your estimation, does Umarov have among the Chechen people?

[The Wizard]

What was incorrect is the assumption that the Chechen War is "over". It's not. It's only slightly less bloody, which in the scheme of things means it's still as bloody as the A-stan War if not more so (in a country five or more times smaller than Afghanistan, population-wise). And a lot of that bloodshed is done by Russian security forces. Sure the troops are gone, but OMON, the Militsiya and the MVD are all still present and doing their arbitrary and bloody job.

Which is not to say that the "Islamic Emirate" of the Caucasus is any better. Just that the Russians have made it a very, very bloody affair, in a relatively short amount of time, and that the cycle of violence is far from over.