It depresses me to see the general chat forum being used for such topics as "Slappers bring you joy" and "Britain's Fattest City". While I appreciate the need to lighten the mood from time to time... it depresses me that not many people want to discuss more mature/serious topics.

For example, did anyone see the footage of the storming of the Russian school at lunch time? This was horrific, seeing children pouring water on each other's badly burnt backs. It would appear that the whole thing is yet another chaotic 'storm' by Russia's apparent 'special' forces. At the moment the death toll from the raid stands at around 10, but there is a whopping 150 injured children so far.

Perhaps some of the forum's less mature users could take a break for a day or two and allow more serious items to take some of the lime light. This is a 'general' forum after all, which means both serious and fun... and it's all be the latter recently.

I agree with your sentiments,i haven't been able to watch all of it but i have been kept updated by the radio and the Reuters website.About 5 hostage takers have been killed and 13 escaped,there were believed to be at least 800 people taken as hostages,the children had no food or water and were drinking their own urine.32 were allowed out then another 30 escaped.The rescue attempt seems to have been unprofessional according to a former SAS man on the radio.Russian forces went in to take away dead bodies and some of the older people tried to escape,this caused confusion and the Russians blew a hole in the schoolwall to let more escape,this confused the hostages so then it turned into a gun battle,considering only 10 died so far Putin has been very lucky,especially considering the Moscow theatre fiasco of two years ago.

I'm actually suprised that it hasn't been posted as a topic for discussion before you did the honours Geoff.

I haven't seen the footage on TV, just the press reports. I think this is a headline that has touched more people than the 'Posh expects 3rd Child' headlines.

Latest 'ticker' news on BBC news online suggests that they've found 'dozens' of bodies inside the school. I have a really bad feeling that this is going to be a major catastrophe.

On a more general note. It's rather disturbing that modern terrorists seem to consider women and children a target, rather than as a group that has traditionally be released in favour of keeping men as hostages. If this is the start of a trend then it should be sending shock-waves around the world - after all, a lot of terrorists groups tend to copy each other's tactics.

I haven't seen/heard the news today, I have been working. Out of the two jobs and one quote I have done, two of those customers have mentioned the hostage situation to me, so there are concerned people 'out there' at least.

I remember watching '9/11' on the TV then going to do a job. I could not get the enormity of the situation over to the customer I was dealing with (he had not seen it) I remember as leaving saying 'you will be putting the tele on now, then? and he just sort of looked at me as if to say 'why?'

TBH I think Al Queda (spelling?) are in a league of their own in Terrorism acts (Especially considering the death count and scale of the destruction in 9/11)

The Russian Army are simply not trained well enough to deal with has happened in the School attack. I though the death count in this Russian Attack would be greater than what has been reported as I remember reading that they would kill 50 children for every one of their men killed and 20 for every one of them injured. Until reports are confirmed you can only fear the worse. I agree Geoff, from reports so far this has the potential to be a catastrophe!

The BBC seems to have better coverage than Reuters which is very surprising. It says on the BBC that they don't know what brought the wall down but all the articles i've seen on Reuters say that it was the Russian forces who knew about all the bodies and were bringing them out,i don't understand what babies were doing in there though.What makes it worse is that the kids who have survived are going to remember this forever and for many it will ruin their whole future.

Do you think Chechnya should be allowed to be independent?The bloodshed will end but terrorist actions will have won.Putin won't back down,i think,because when he came to power he vowed to end the struggle by force if necessary,to give in will look like a failure.However if he doesn't more Russian planes will get blown up,the Black Widows won't stop and more women and children will be captured.

Originally posted by sarah_d
What makes it worse is that the kids who have survived are going to remember this forever and for many it will ruin their whole future.
One girl interviewed by the BBC as she was leaving the school said a Chechen women had blown herself up in front of them. Just hearing (and imaging) this made me feel sick. I dread to think what the result will be on the children.

We are all guilty (from time to time) of not worrying too much about things not happening on our own 'turf', but I think that no matter how far away or how removed from our day to day lives it is - terrorists shooting scores of children in cold-blood should make us all sit-up and take notice.

The Chechnyan terrorists methods are so completley horrific, I am suprised there has not been more media attention given to the situation- when the story first broke it was the 3rd story in on the bulletin I heard.
I know bombing is terrible and causes huge distress and grief, but to be held hostage with your child by people who have explosives strapped to them is just terror beyond my imagining.

Sky news was even better. They had a reporter actually in the gym whilst a fire fight was taking place..amazing footage then it was reported that they had captured one of the rebels and he needed hospital treatment but the crowd of parents got to him first and dealt out some justice of their own.
Would this ever happen in this country?? Surely we are better equipped to deal with this sort of thing. There were a lot of ex-SAS specialists commenting on the chaos and poor way the Russian special forces handled it all.

People in my office aren't bothered,they said "oh,that's sad" but then were more shocked by a cat killer who is out and about in Sussex.

...but if it had happened in America it would be on the TV 24/7

:( At least a hundred bodies reported on BBC radio at 3pm.

I wonder how many were killed by those 'troops' in civilian clothing who appeared to be randomly shooting at the building. The Russians really need to learn from this. I mean, we all thought they would have learnt from the theatre attack, but it would appear that they are disorganised as ever. At one point (as someone above mentioned) the parents (who were waiting outside!!) managed to get hold of one of the terrorists and pretty much beat him to death. How on earth did the police enable the parents in to the school during the siege?

People will say "Oh well, they're Russians. Poorly paid, bad infrastructure/equipment etc." but in fact Russia has some of the most highly trained elite special forces in the world. It would appear the whole sorry mess was down to a bad command structure and organisation as opposed to a lack of good soldiers/equipment.

What can one discuss about this, other than to acknowledge sympathy and maybe even an iota of empathy for the hostages and their relatives.

I have stopped watching the tv news altogether. In fact I seem to have stopped watching the tv altogether for some reason.

So I would love to comment, but I can't.

Originally posted by Phanerothyme
So I would love to comment, but I can't.

You posted but you can't comment... ;)

If you read up, there are several major topics that come out of this crisis. For example the possibility of a new trend of targeting women and children, the quality of the Russian's tactics, the politics of whether Chechnya should be made independent... etc. etc. I think there is plenty to discuss here and while not everyone wants to... we don't all want to discuss 'slappers' either.

I've not been up long but it looks and sounds horrific. Details are sketchy at the moment about what caused the storming but after what happened at the theatre seige a couple of years ago, the Russians are very gung ho with this sort of thing.

I heard that some children were getting away and the terrorists opened fire on them, prompting the Russian Army to open fire back.

Is this growing trend in targetting women and children perhaps a reflection of the profile of the new breed of terrorists? In one of the earlier posts mention was made of a women blowing herself up, we also have reports in the middle east of children carrying bombs and not being afraid to use them. Many of the armies in Central Africa are made up of children as young as 8 or 9.

I expect the rationale behind targetting women and children is that if the terorists themselves recruit from these ranks are they not then valid targets?

Call them what you will, revolutionaries, terrorists or freedom-fighters at the end of the day these deluded people are just pawns in a game to determine who controls the wealth of the region.

Ok, I'll get 'serious'.

Firstly I find it a little unsettling when people either say or imply that an event which harms children is somehow more serious than if only adults were involved. Surley, the age of the victims is not an issue but rather it should be condemned whoever were the hostages. This is a general point and not just specific to this story. As an adult myself I find it rather unnerving.

The second point is that this is another example of militant Islam killing incoent people. Sadly, this seems to be a growing trend and the brutality of such people appears to know no bounds. These people are fanatics and seem to think that just because they hold particular religious beliefs it entitles them to kill whoever they please. Russia is only the latest of many examples. I have no objection to militant Muslims being suicide bombers and blowing themselves up, as long as they do it either away from everyone else or amongst like minded nutters. Then they can go to their paradise (as they seem to believe) and good ridence to them. Serious enough?

Originally posted by max
Is this growing trend in targetting women and children perhaps a reflection of the profile of the new breed of terrorists? In one of the earlier posts mention was made of a women blowing herself up, we also have reports in the middle east of children carrying bombs and not being afraid to use them. Many of the armies in Central Africa are made up of children as young as 8 or 9.

I expect the rationale behind targetting women and children is that if the terorists themselves recruit from these ranks are they not then valid targets?

Call them what you will, revolutionaries, terrorists or freedom-fighters at the end of the day these deluded people are just pawns in a game to determine who controls the wealth of the region.
I totally get what you are saying and condemn how they operate as much as I can but if I had to try and explain why they operate in this way I would say that in their minds they are fighting for a proper cause usually fuelled by religious beliefs. Not having the financial clout to purchase modern weapons and tanks they have to use other ways of attack and this is it. It was the same with 9/11. The planes were their missiles.

Originally posted by slimsid2000
Ok, I'll get 'serious'. [...] this is another example of militant Islam killing innocent people. These people are fanatics and seem to think that just because they hold particular religious beliefs it entitles them to kill whoever they please.
Sorry, but if you're going to get serious, then you might perhaps first learn slightly more about the background of this latest attack. Your comments (quoted above) show very little understanding of whose these terrorists were and their reasons for attacking the school.

These terrorists, while indeed Muslims, were not targeting the Russians because they have different religious beliefs, in fact that whole area (around the school) is heavily populated with some of Russia's 19 million Muslims (they are the 2nd largest religious group in the country). This act of terrorism was to cause outrage and focus international attention on their fight for independence of Chechnya.

Hope that clears up your confusion.

On to your other point...

Originally posted by slimsid2000
Firstly I find it a little unsettling when people either say or imply that an event which harms children is somehow more serious than if only adults were involved.
Perhaps it's because children, by their nature, are naive and their brains are far more impressionable than adults. Therefore they are likely to be more psychologically damaged than an adult might be. Or perhaps it's because while the death of an adult is very sad, at least they have lived (and in theory enjoyed) some of what life has to offer. A 45 year old man as no doubt had some good times in his life. A 5 year old child is just starting their life and it's snatched away. Perhaps it's because when children are involved it's horrendous for the parents who have watched them grow up and are now completely helpless to protect them. Perhaps this poor 5 year old girl lying dead was their only ever chance to have a child, perhaps it's because children are weaker and more prone to die from smoke inhalation during a raid, perhaps it's because children don't understand what's going on and therefore may jeopardise their lives, perhaps ... you want more?! :mad:

The latest does seem to be that it started when some children escaped and the terrorists shot them in the back. The Special Forces had to go in earlier than they intended and before they were fully prepared.

I can't see what the Russians could have done differently under the circumstances. They were in a terrible position. It could only ever end up in lots of deaths.

The whole thing has really upset me today. :(

Taken from the BBC news:

1 - At 0850GMT a vehicle from the Emergencies Ministry is sent in to retrieve the bodies of those killed at the start of the siege
2 - A small number of the children being held hostage escape from the building. The attackers start firing at the children to try to block their escape. In response the Russian troops surrounding the school fire at the attackers
3 - A series of explosions rock the school gymnasium, bringing the roof of the building down

Would appear to me that the gunfire lead to the women blowing themselves up. This was no doubt the cause of many of the 100+ reported deaths. It was a lose-lose situation from the start - they were never going to walk out peacefully...

Having said that, I still think the Russians handled the whole thing very badly, allowing all the parents to be within 100 metres of the killing and explosions and then allowing them to wonder around while the attack was still happening!

Originally posted by Geoff
Sorry, but if you're going to get serious, then you might perhaps first learn slightly more about the background of this latest attack. Your comments (quoted above) show very little understanding of whose these terrorists were and their reasons for attacking the school.

These terrorists, while indeed Muslims, were not targeting the Russians because they have different religious beliefs, in fact that whole area (around the school) is heavily populated with some of Russia's 19 million Muslims (they are the 2nd largest religious group in the country). This act of terrorism was to cause outrage and focus international attention on their fight for independence of Chechnya.

Hope that clears up your confusion.

On to your other point...


Perhaps it's because children, by their nature, are naive and their brains are far more impressionable than adults. Therefore they are likely to be more psychologically damaged than an adult might be. Or perhaps it's because while the death of an adult is very sad, at least they have lived (and in theory enjoyed) some of what life has to offer. A 45 year old man as no doubt had some good times in his life. A 5 year old child is just starting their life and it's snatched away. Perhaps it's because when children are involved it's horrendous for the parents who have watched them grow up and are now completely helpless to protect them. Perhaps this poor 5 year old girl lying dead was their only ever chance to have a child, perhaps it's because children are weaker and more prone to die from smoke inhalation during a raid, perhaps it's because children don't understand what's going on and therefore may jeopardise their lives, perhaps ... you want more?! :mad:

With respect I disagree. As an adult I do not like the implication that my own life is less important than that of a child.

It's not that an adults life is worth less than a childs, it is that children are innocents with no comprehension of what is going on - while an adult may be able to understand a situation a child will only feel complete and utter terror.
Can you see the difference?

Originally posted by slimsid2000
With respect I disagree. As an adult I do not like the implication that my own life is less important than that of a child.
If you really meant "with respect" you would grace me by quoting a few of my points and giving me something slightly more substantial to back up your thoughts. Personally, if I had to choose between the life of myself or my child, I would give my life. A lot of parents would have the same attitude I think. Therefore when you hear about 100s of children being shot in cold blood - most normal people consider it horrific beyond imagination for all the reasons I mentioned above (i.e. children a naive, more impressionable, weaker, etc.) which you seemed to have ignored... :rolleyes:

Originally posted by max

Call them what you will, revolutionaries, terrorists or freedom-fighters at the end of the day these deluded people are just pawns in a game to determine who controls the wealth of the region.

My name for them?.......MURDERING SCUM!

Anyone who targets kids as a political lever and then fires on them when things go wrong is little more than a coward.

And yes slimsid, a child's life IS more precious than an adult's. A child is innocent of political matters, is innocent of criminal actions and has no control over the situation in the country. They are completely at the mercy of us adults. WE are the ones who get states/religions fighting against each other, so it's only right that WE should be the ones to suffer when the brown stuff hits the fan. Anyone who intentially targets kids is below contempt IMO!!

I just saw the feed on ITV news, and then switched to their digital channel. It's absolutely heart wrenching - my sister started crying earlier.

The ITV cameraman claimed to have seen roughly 100 dead bodies (he didn't know whether they were children or not) in the gym after the collapse.

I really don't know a lot about the history of the Russia - Chechnya thing. I know the basics, but it seems to me that they should just be given their own territory to prevent further events like this. Is it just Putin's pride at stake? i'd be really glad if someone could fill me in.

Yet another 'boundary' crossed.

I would say to Phan that he should perhaps include a smattering of condemnation to his sympathy and empathy.

Originally posted by Mo
Yet another 'boundary' crossed.

What do you mean?

Originally posted by noseyrosie
The ITV cameraman claimed to have seen roughly 100 dead bodies (he didn't know whether they were children or not) in the gym after the collapse.

The last count I heard is over 150 :(

I really don't know a lot about the history of the Russia - Chechnya thing. I know the basics

Me neither - theres a bit of info on the country and history here - http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/world/A0857260.html

but it seems to me that they should just be given their own territory to prevent further events like this. Is it just Putin's pride at stake? i'd be really glad if someone could fill me in.

Part of it is almost certainly Putin's pride ( he has set himself up as the tough man of Russia who will keep the population safe - hmmm seems to be alot of that going around) but whatever the ins and outs of the situation giving them teritory of their own is problematic in itself - its basically sends out the message that terrorism works which is something you REALLY don't want to do...

Rosie: you' can't just give into terrorists' requests. That is just going to create more and more trouble in the long-run.

When you get a tense situation like this, it is almost inevitable that people are going to die. When you have two sides pointing guns at each other, someone's nerve is going to crack eventually.

The terrorists have little or no regard for life and therefore much less to lose than the Russian authorities.

It is such a difficult predicament to be in, it really is.

As for Putin, he has an extemely difficult domestic task to perform in a country so large and diverse as Russia. Internationally, after Yeltsin's last few pathetic, drunken statements - some of which he only just stopped short of declaring war on The West - it is comforting to know that they have a more stable leadership and I applaud his diplomacy in international politics.

He has brought stability back into line a little.

It brings to mind the crisis in Kosovo, a group of people without their own country using violence, etc etc. Or Palestine. Oh dear. The world has seriously gone to pot.

I think there's oil in Chechnya which is why Russia wants to reatin the terrrority and also, imo, why someone is bankrolling the terrorists in order to gain control of the oilfields for themselves.

Originally posted by Mo
Yet another 'boundary' crossed.

I would say to Phan that he should perhaps include a smattering of condemnation to his sympathy and empathy.

So are you going to, or what?
[edit]
forgive me, hit the send button before thinking.

The reason I said iota, is because I really can only empathise to a infitesimal degree what it must be like for anyone involved, particularly the children and the parents. I have a child, but I cannot put myself in their shoes and not stray into the realms of total fantasy on my part.

All the old empires have broken down and the world is now fragmenting back to it's old tribal factions.

Originally posted by noseyrosie
but it seems to me that they should just be given their own territory to prevent further events like this. Is it just Putin's pride at stake? i'd be really glad if someone could fill me in.

Giving into demands is likely to have the complete opposite effect of preventing further events like this. If terrorists start to believe acts like this enable them to get their own way, they'll only be encouraged.

Terrorists from chechenya aren't a new phenomenon. The Chechens been resisting russia since tsarist times, and they finally succeeded in seceding in 94. Russia then went in - guns literally blazing.

Anyone genuinely interested in the subject of the story of Chechenya and the chechen/russian conflict that has been burining since the 20s, not to mention a dispassionate eye witness account from a journalist who spent quite some time in the caucasus, Chechnya Diary: A War Correspondent's Story of Surviving the War in Chechnya by Thomas Goltz is a good place to start.

I think everyone on this foum can answer the above question on wether or not this thread is worthy of serious comment, the answer has to be YES.
I may be accused of looking at this through monochromatic glasses and if so I will gladly raise my hand to the charge.
Once you embark on an overt armed mission targetting women and children, you have the lost the right to be taken alive!
In an ideal scenario, the kidnappers would have been eliminated, the hostages freed and one or two of the kidnappers would have been acquired for intelligence.
However, Nirvana doesn't exist in Russia and If I'm totally honest I would dread to think what would have happened if this scenario was played out in this country.
And don't think for one moment that this couldn't happen here, none of us knbow how many of our so called fellow citizens have gone through mujahaddin traing camps over the past couple of decades or so.

I have no words to describe how i am feeling for the innocents lost in Russia.
Instead i will leave a x

Please leave a x or a comment



God bless.

I watched the news on it last night and two points struck me.
Firstly why are there reports trying to link this with Al Qaeda? There may have been arabs in the group of terrorists but this was a Chechen attack and they have been doing it for years, why are they trying to use the situation to turn it into an Al Qaeda thing?
Secondly the critcism which the special services and Russian authorities are getting for the way they dealt with the situation seems totally unfair, this was an unprecedented situation and who knows which way it would have gone if it had happened here or in America. Russia is a different culture which deals with things differently, I am sure they did the best that they could in such a difficult situation.

Originally posted by elf
Firstly why are there reports trying to link this with Al Qaeda? There may have been arabs in the group of terrorists but this was a Chechen attack and they have been doing it for years, why are they trying to use the situation to turn it into an Al Qaeda thing?

I have to agree with you here - unless Al Queda have started issuing membership cards I don't see how they can possibly know that there is any involvment with them. It seems to have all the hallmarks of a witch hunt in the same vein as the 'satanic child abuse' or 'internet perverts' ones we have had. Once an idea permeates the media they don't seem to be able to put it down.

Secondly the critcism which the special services and Russian authorities are getting for the way they dealt with the situation seems totally unfair, this was an unprecedented situation and who knows which way it would have gone if it had happened here or in America. Russia is a different culture which deals with things differently, I am sure they did the best that they could in such a difficult situation.

The Russian special services did seem badly organised and seemed to be taking a direct military action (lots of people running round with GPMGs and RPG launchers - not really the sort of things you want flying in a hostage situation). However bitching about how well or badly they handled the situation helps no-one. What would be rather more helpfull is to share knowledge and tactics. We have possibly the best anti-terrorist group in the world here in the UK - perhaps we should be looning a few of them out to help train up some specialist anti terrorist services either in specific countries or as a mobile UN/EU service?

Originally posted by elf
the critcism which the special services and Russian authorities are getting for the way they dealt with the situation seems totally unfair, this was an unprecedented situation and who knows which way it would have gone if it had happened here or in America. Waco.

'The right to self determination' - one of Woodrow Wilson's 14 points after WW1 - shouldn't be extended with the words 'by any means necessary'.

The Chechen separatists have proven again that they're a bunch of barbarians - something that they've proved in the past by beheading a group of engineers, amongst other atrocities.

At the risk of getting a bucket full of approbation on my head about how I shouldn't judge the actions of these people in Western terms, you might argue that people who fight for independence like this are quite possibly incapable of building a civilised nation if they ever get independence.

Perhaps one thing that we should do is send a bunch of SAS folks to Russia to teach the Russian Special Forces how to handle these things - they're clearly not up to the job, which is to be expected in some ways - we built our anti-terrorism forces up over years of terrorist activity whereas the Russians traditionally dealt with problems by sending in tanks, troops and helicopter gunships.

It's been a ****ty two or three days. I need a Dandelion Break.... (one for all you Bloom County fans out there)

Joe

Originally posted by JoePritchard
'The right to self determination' - one of Woodrow Wilson's 14 points after WW1 - shouldn't be extended with the words 'by any means necessary'.

The Chechen separatists have proven again that they're a bunch of barbarians - something that they've proved in the past by beheading a group of engineers, amongst other atrocities.

At the risk of getting a bucket full of approbation on my head about how I shouldn't judge the actions of these people in Western terms, you might argue that people who fight for independence like this are quite possibly incapable of building a civilised nation if they ever get independence.

Perhaps one thing that we should do is send a bunch of SAS folks to Russia to teach the Russian Special Forces how to handle these things - they're clearly not up to the job, which is to be expected in some ways - we built our anti-terrorism forces up over years of terrorist activity whereas the Russians traditionally dealt with problems by sending in tanks, troops and helicopter gunships.

It's been a ****ty two or three days. I need a Dandelion Break.... (one for all you Bloom County fans out there)

Joe

It is, as Max has pointed out, not about the Chechens fighting for freedom so much as the Russians trying not to lose a major oil producing region.

To condemn the Chechen terrorists is appropriate. In the same breath I would equally condemn the successive Russian regimes for their treatment of the region since the twenties.

There are no innocent parties here other than the blameless lives lost both at the school, at the theatre, in the air, and by the tens of thousands in Grozny.

Fair enough, but no doubt the Chechens won't bitch too much about getting the oil either, if they get independence.

Yes, the Russian government has behaved badly in the two Chechen Wars. But we're talking about this particular incident - and to be frank starving kids of food and water, mining the place and then using them as bargaining counters isn't on. This isn't collateral damage, this is deliberately planned barbarism.

The Russian case is not strong for hanging on to the region, but to be frank the way forward is not for the Chechens to act like animals.

Joe

Originally posted by Phanerothyme
What can one discuss about this, other than to acknowledge sympathy and maybe even an iota of empathy for the hostages and their relatives.

I have stopped watching the tv news altogether. In fact I seem to have stopped watching the tv altogether for some reason.

So I would love to comment, but I can't.

I have to agree with Phan.

I heard of this news in the middle of a lecture about protecting the spirit of children. It upset me greatly and moved me to tears. I have not and actively do not keep up with the news. Some will say that we should seek to be aware of things like this. I myself do not wish to be aware of tradgedies like this.

It leaves me saddened, frustrated, and shocked. Short of me getting on a plane and standing in the path of the terrorists there is no way for me to vent the frustrations I felt at this news.

Of course there are small things that we can all do to try and prevent or help these disasters, but nothing we can do directly to help at the time. Only in the aftermath.

Originally posted by bonny
Some will say that we should seek to be aware of things like this. I myself do not wish to be aware of tradgedies like this.


Yeah...what you don't know can't hurt you, ey?

I'll say that again, in case you missed the emphasis. What you don't know can't hurt you.

Dear me. Would you rather we had just turned a blind eye to, for example, the holocaust? I mean, if it's a bit upsetting for you, that's got to be 100 times worse than the suffering of the Jews, ey?
:loopy:

Originally posted by noseyrosie
Yeah...what you don't know can't hurt you, ey?

I'll say that again, in case you missed the emphasis. What you don't know can't hurt you.

Dear me. Would you rather we had just turned a blind eye to, for example, the holocaust? I mean, if it's a bit upsetting for you, that's got to be 100 times worse than the suffering of the Jews, ey?
:loopy:

You've missed bonny's point entirely and there is no need to suddenly impute that she somehow wants to deny the holocaust. That's a pretty big leap even by your standards. The holocaust has absolutely naff all to do with discussion (hint: emphasise something if you are going to emphasise it :) )

The thing is there is a difference between knowing of an event, as one might listen to a radio news broadcast, and immersing oneself in a pornography of newsjunkiedom and detailed accounts of violent death.

On the one hand we are to be informed. On the other hand we do so easily become obsessed with a single incident, with as you point out, a relatively small number of fatalaties.

I am avoiding the endless post mortem by television that follows an event like this, and the orgiastic zeal with which some television (and it is nearly always television) networks pursue purely the most televisual angle (bombs, excitement, blood, death, usual hollywood fare that we are so inured to).

Also, to try and actively comment on something that seems to have been so chaotic before the smoke even clears seems to me to be speaking from a deliberately misinformed veiwpoint.

It's a fine balance that the press and radio seems to be able to judge but that TV just misses altogether.

Originally posted by JoePritchard
Fair enough, but no doubt the Chechens won't bitch too much about getting the oil either, if they get independence.

Yes, the Russian government has behaved badly in the two Chechen Wars. But we're talking about this particular incident - and to be frank starving kids of food and water, mining the place and then using them as bargaining counters isn't on. This isn't collateral damage, this is deliberately planned barbarism.

The Russian case is not strong for hanging on to the region, but to be frank the way forward is not for the Chechens to act like animals.

Joe

It is utterly insane in my opinion. What differentiates the two parties here is that the Chechen guerrillas and their willing new comrades are personally insane as evidenced by their methods. Their psychotic lack of empathy and misanthropic zeal are hard to combat without recourse to overpowering violence.

Similiary the incumbent Russian regimes since 1992 have behaved in an institutionally insane fashion, bombarding a city of civilians and killing tens of thousands of Russians, let alone Chechens, let alone Chechen rebels. The dehumanization of the sides has lead to a war characterised by atrocity upon atrocity. People are waking up and paying more attention now that the atrocities are moving out of Chechnya however.

Originally posted by JoePritchard

The Chechen separatists have proven again that they're a bunch of barbarians -




That's not surprising really. It is of course no excuse, but the Chechens have had decades of instruction in the art of barbarism by some of the world's best practitioners.

Not "a bucket full of approbation " Joe, but I'm not sure what you mean by "Western terms"....perhaps the difference between carpet bombing and suicide bombing. People wage war with the means at their disposal.

Originally posted by Phanerothyme


Similiary the incumbent Russian regimes since 1992 have behaved in an institutionally insane fashion, bombarding a city of civilians and killing tens of thousands of Russians, let alone Chechens, let alone Chechen rebels. The dehumanization of the sides has lead to a war characterised by atrocity upon atrocity. People are waking up and paying more attention now that the atrocities are moving out of Chechnya however.


But it seems to go much deeper than that. Who knows why Stalin wanted the Chechens out ? His story about their collaboration with the Germans was just a lie, yet whilst the war was still raging on the western front he could spare thousands of troops to mercilessly slaughter thousands of Chechen women, children and old people, and oversee the deportation of hundreds of thousands of Chechens to remoter parts of the USSR.

Too many thousands in there, but the enormity of the Russian atrocities against the Chechens (and many other ethnic groups) is difficult to express, and largely overlooked in the West.

Well it seems that even in Tsarist times the Chechen people, with a strong sense if identity, culture and language, were being mercilessly persecuted. And that was way before oil was important. There is a cultural aspect here of which we are simply not aware, but an ancient anitpathy certainly exists withe both sides intent on dehumanising the enemy.

This is a classic dillema for President Putin. if he fights the killers from Chechnia, there will be more outrages, if he doesn't there will still be more and I don't see how he can negotiate either, because then he will be seen to be weak.

These killers, are learning from each other worldwide, each atrocity leads to another one somewhere else, it is a modern phenomenon, which will carry on for centuries and will never be eradicated in our lifetime.

Originally posted by halevan
These killers, are learning from each other worldwide, each atrocity leads to another one somewhere else, it is a modern phenomenon, which will carry on for centuries and will never be eradicated in our lifetime.

The use of terror as a weapon of war is I'm afraid not a modern invention - its been used by armies in a military situation (see Genghis Khan and his barbarian buddies or Vlad The Impaler) or as a tool in and of itself (e.g. the Hashishim). What is a new is the impact terror atrocities can have due to the pervesive media who will disect and redisect events, presenting them in an almost voyeuristic way in an attempt to grab ratings or newspaper sales. To the mind of the desperate people who carry out these acts who may well feel not only agrieved but ignored by the world at large isn't this oxygen of publicity is something thay may feel vindicates their actions?

P.S. no this isn't a position I agree with - but its one to a certain extent that I can understand.

Originally posted by noseyrosie
Yeah...what you don't know can't hurt you, ey?

I'll say that again, in case you missed the emphasis. What you don't know can't hurt you.

Dear me. Would you rather we had just turned a blind eye to, for example, the holocaust? I mean, if it's a bit upsetting for you, that's got to be 100 times worse than the suffering of the Jews, ey?
:loopy:

So, what did YOU do when you heard the news?

What could YOU have done?

What are YOU now going to do?

Originally posted by bonny
So, what did YOU do when you heard the news?

What could YOU have done?

What are YOU now going to do?

There's not a lot I can DO, but one thing I won't be doing is pretending that it didn't happen! Or wishing I'd never heard about it. I just feel like it's disrespectful to those who've died. In terms of what can I do about it physically, nothing, but I do engage in a lot of political discussion in certain youth groups and things to try and understand the situation better.

I really think we shouldn't get into this argument, even if I started it, or whatever. It's trivial compared to what the thread was originally about.

Originally posted by noseyrosie
There's not a lot I can DO, but one thing I won't be doing is pretending that it didn't happen! Or wishing I'd never heard about it. I just feel like it's disrespectful to those who've died. In terms of what can I do about it physically, nothing, but I do engage in a lot of political discussion in certain youth groups and things to try and understand the situation better.

I really think we shouldn't get into this argument, even if I started it, or whatever. It's trivial compared to what the thread was originally about.

I think that you totally missed the point of my post. No one is pretending that it did not happen. I just don't care to see things like this sensationalised !!

It isn't a trivial argument at all. I think you brought up a good point.

You can sit and debate or engage in political discussions as much as you care to. You can sit and cry endlessly about tradgedies such as this too.

How do those things help??? They don't !

It may further YOU intellectually. Do you think that the families of the victims are going to give you a round of applause for that?

There is no point in pointing out the misery of these situations as it is blatantly obvious.

So now what do WE do?

I don't care to be a voyeur as that is all I am unless I can do something.

So now that you have discussed and tried to understand it what will you do?

If your answer is nothing, then how have you helped. It doesn't take much discussion to understand that what happened was a tradgedy.

what happened was a horror beyond horror. You could even argue that it is worse than 9/11.
But we, at our peril, call these people inhuman or evil> Just as it would never help seeing the people that ushered millions of jews to their death at Belsen evil.
If we call then evil we will never understand what humans are able to do to their fellow men. We see then as other or different to us. Unfortunately it is in that difference that we find the spark for such disgusting acts. It is only when humans see thenselves or believe themselves to be other or different from the rest of us that such events are possible. Notice how our generally tollerant society tends not to breed fanaticism even amoungst groups we associte with this. The same cannot be said for the treatment of chetchens or muslims in some asian countries.
I know we can never condone such acts but it dosent mean we can never understand these actions. Russia is partly to blame for its treatment and its separatist stance towards a vast country of people. What I'm trying to say is , I think, is that we cant treat people no better than animals and then wonder, when they behave like animals.

Many people seem to ignor the recent reports that it was not only Chechen Seperatists but 'foreign Fighters' as well. In other words fundamentalist Muslims from outside who wanted to kill as many as possible. The Russian massacre should be partly seen in this light and as part of the ongoing activaties of such people. As bad as the death toll is it is still less than a tenth of their worst attack on the World trade Centre in 2001.

Originally posted by slimsid2000
Many people seem to ignor the recent reports that it was not only Chechen Seperatists but 'foreign Fighters' as well. In other words fundamentalist Muslims from outside who wanted to kill as many as possible.

The TV reports I have seen claimed Arabs - and then immediately began to bandy about claims of them being part of Al Queda / Weapons being supplied by <fill in your least favourite arab state here> with no evidence. We are currently witnessing a 'Muslim Extremist' witch hunt and these claims are not helpfull -in fact are positively harmfull. If you treat a large group of people as if they are all behave like a tiny minority and all you will do is put up social walls and harden extremist positions.

Originally posted by slimsid2000
. As bad as the death toll is it is still less than a tenth of their worst attack on the World trade Centre in 2001.

And that is still considerably less than one percent of the number of Chechen and Russian Civilians killed in Grozny by the Russian Army since 1994.

It takes a real coward to wire themselves up as a walking bomb and blow up themselves and an aircraft; but it takes a true brave heart to fire HE artillery rounds into a heavily populated city from 25 miles away eh?

Originally posted by slimsid2000
Many people seem to ignor the recent reports that it was not only Chechen Seperatists but 'foreign Fighters' as well. In other words fundamentalist Muslims from outside who wanted to kill as many as possible. The Russian massacre should be partly seen in this light and as part of the ongoing activaties of such people. As bad as the death toll is it is still less than a tenth of their worst attack on the World trade Centre in 2001.

Actually, the horror has much more to do with the way Chechens and Russians see and treat each other than it does with an over-simplified notion of fundamentalist Islam. Make no mistake: Russia has been utterly ruthless in dealing with the Chechens; something like 70% of adult women have lost their husbands while the world closed its eyes.

It doesn't in any way excuse the ruthless barbarity, of course, but it goes some way to explaining it.

Originally posted by evildrneil
The TV reports I have seen claimed Arabs - and then immediately began to bandy about claims of them being part of Al Queda / Weapons being supplied by <fill in your least favourite arab state here> with no evidence. We are currently witnessing a 'Muslim Extremist' witch hunt and these claims are not helpfull -in fact are positively harmfull. If you treat a large group of people as if they are all behave like a tiny minority and all you will do is put up social walls and harden extremist positions.

I'm sure you didn't mean to give this impression but it looks as though you are defending Muslim extremists rather than Muslims.

Originally posted by slimsid2000
Many people seem to ignor the recent reports that it was not only Chechen Seperatists but 'foreign Fighters' as well. In other words fundamentalist Muslims from outside who wanted to kill as many as possible. The Russian massacre should be partly seen in this light and as part of the ongoing activaties of such people. As bad as the death toll is it is still less than a tenth of their worst attack on the World trade Centre in 2001.


One man grieving is enough to start a war. Ten thousand men grieving isn't enough to end a war.

Its so easy to turn deaths into numbers. Next time you're in a super market and buying a can of skinned peaches, take a look at the people around you. Normal people like the women with nice legs eying up a hunk with foppish hair while her laughing children grab brightly coloured packages off the shelves. Or the old man who avidly reads the labels on cans before putting them into his basket while a couple students push themselves along on the trolleys past the spotty teenage shelf stacker with bottle bottom glasses. And there's usually a pretty little girl with a cute little jacket and matching shoes helping mummy put things onto the conveyor belt while the attractive brooding checkout girl smiles wantonly at her.

Now imagine how it must feel for the soldiers dealing with a bomb blast who have to sort out your body parts from the body parts of the people around you.

Imagine how your family would feel when the authorities asked them to identify your remains.

You'd bet your bottom dollar they'd want revenge.

There are two sides to every battle. Don't let's forget that people are driven to take extreme measures. We might not agree with the measures or the politics, but we should be able to rise above comments like “such people” and “As bad as the death toll is it is still less than a tenth of their worst attack on the World trade.”

Originally posted by evildrneil
The TV reports I have seen claimed Arabs - and then immediately began to bandy about claims of them being part of Al Queda / Weapons being supplied by <fill in your least favourite arab state here> with no evidence. We are currently witnessing a 'Muslim Extremist' witch hunt and these claims are not helpfull -in fact are positively harmfull. If you treat a large group of people as if they are all behave like a tiny minority and all you will do is put up social walls and harden extremist positions.

Yes I agree. That's exactly why I suggested that perhaps he might be better off with the slapper threads. This whole school siege was far more complicated than the 'simple' matter of a load of gun totting international terrorists trying to kill as many 'Westerners' as possible.

A lot of Russian 'experts' on TV have quite rightly pointed out that it's in Russia's interests to portray the school massacre as the work of international terrorists. They can then use this as an excuse to commit their own atrocities in Chechnya and if anyone complains they just say it's all in the name of fighting 'international' terrorism. :rolleyes:

Originally posted by slimsid2000
Many people seem to ignor the recent reports that it was not only Chechen Seperatists but 'foreign Fighters' as well. In other words fundamentalist Muslims from outside who wanted to kill as many as possible. The Russian massacre should be partly seen in this light and as part of the ongoing activaties of such people. As bad as the death toll is it is still less than a tenth of their worst attack on the World trade Centre in 2001.

As others have mentioned, no one here can begin to fathom these events. A tragedy is a tragedy, regardless of the numbers involved. We can hardly say 'only 150 people have died, but that's not really that bad compared to 11/9/01'. It's still a monumental tragedy.

In reference to your earlier post, I'm afraid that it is completely natural for most living creatures to value the lives of their young over adult lives. Whether you like it or not, the fact is that most of us value a childs life over yours or mine for example. You'll just have to deal with that!

I think there is a difference between valuing their own child's life above their own and that of children's lives in general. However, the main point seems to be that some people feel that acts of terrorism are the moral equivalent of acts carried out by state troops. I can't agree with that. We are much more in danger of attack from terrorists (and lets be honest rather than PC, Islamic terrorists) than we are from the Russian army, much less the American army. Personally I always view those who seek to kill me as far worse than those who don't and I offer no apology for that.

Originally posted by slimsid2000
I think there is a difference between valuing their own child's life above their own and that of children's lives in general. However, the main point seems to be that some people feel that acts of terrorism are the moral equivalent of acts carried out by state troops. I can't agree with that. We are much more in danger of attack from terrorists (and lets be honest rather than PC, Islamic terrorists) than we are from the Russian army, much less the American army. Personally I always view those who seek to kill me as far worse than those who don't and I offer no apology for that.

Terrorists don't magic themselves out of thin air, they are created by oppressive state regimes (both East and West). Not a justification for vile acts, but you've got to open your eyes to the world and see that the atrocious effects have causes. Often causes that we don't hear much about (cf the blackout of media coverage in Chechnya).

Originally posted by slimsid2000
We are much more in danger of attack from terrorists (and lets be honest rather than PC, Islamic terrorists)

Soooooo - how many attacks have there been by islamic terrorists in britain?

It does seem that there are more terrorists in the name of Islam than any other religion. Instead of tip-toeing around being PC, why can't we look into the reasons for this? For example, the French ban religious symbols in school. This ban applies to Jewish skullcaps, Christian crosses, Muslim headscarves, etc. I didn't see any Jewish kidnappers threatening to kill innocent French journalists if the ban wasn't lifted, did you?

Originally posted by slimsid2000
We are much more in danger of attack from terrorists (and lets be honest rather than PC, Islamic terrorists)

Over the last 50 years more people have been killed in Britain (in terrorist related incidents) by Catholics rather than Muslims - so based on this statistic you are actually in 'much more' danger from Catholic terrorists (and yes, I know there is a cease fire but this is statistically speaking ;) ).

Do you buy the Daily Express by any chance? :P

You can bend the stats anyway you like, e.g. number of attacks on westerners in last 10 years by Muslims Vs number of attacks on westerners in last 10 years by any single other religion. It won't change the fact that at this moment in time, the "problem religion" is most definitely Islam, whether this suits the ideals of the PC brigade or not.

I don't think terrorism should be blamed on Catholicism or Islam. Do you really think the IRA terrorists who killed innocent people were Bible-reading, church-going Catholics? I don't think so. I think terrorists like to find something to hide behind, even when the religion they are claiming to follow clearly forbids the terrible crimes they commit.

I have just been reading the daily mirror & to see all those poor people crying ,even the elders who do not openly cry in public,this is a crazy situation when is this all going to stop innocents getting murdered by so called terrorist,they are Cowards.

Originally posted by Geoff
Yes I agree. That's exactly why I suggested that perhaps he might be better off with the slapper threads. This whole school siege was far more complicated than the 'simple' matter of a load of gun totting international terrorists trying to kill as many 'Westerners' as possible.

A lot of Russian 'experts' on TV have quite rightly pointed out that it's in Russia's interests to portray the school massacre as the work of international terrorists. They can then use this as an excuse to commit their own atrocities in Chechnya and if anyone complains they just say it's all in the name of fighting 'international' terrorism. :rolleyes: Hope you dont mind Geoff but I just had to paste your reply onto a Moscow website. How do you become an 'expert' on the subject of killing or maiming children?


Dragon

I am really at a loss. I haven't bothered with your arguments over politics, religion and statistics.

Children were murdered.

It sickens me to think that children as young as my own were terrified, tortured and murdered by these monsters.
It concerns me that I am prepared to defend tooth and claw any who may wish to do the same to mine but I cannot be given a striaght answer by those who should be able to give it as to who is responsible.

So many questions no answers in sight. Just more political and religious games and still our babies cry.

May the souls of the dead be at peace with whichever god they serve.

Moon :cry: :shakes:

Originally posted by dragonsoup
Hope you dont mind Geoff but I just had to paste your reply onto a Moscow website. How do you become an 'expert' on the subject of killing or maiming children?
Yes I do mind and what the heck are you talking about? :(

If you are going to quote someone you might perhaps understand exactly what you are quoting beforehand... :rolleyes:

PS. What's a 'Moscow' web site?

Originally posted by dragonsoup
Hope you dont mind Geoff but I just had to paste your reply onto a Moscow website. How do you become an 'expert' on the subject of killing or maiming children?


Dragon

Hmm, thats a really tatseful thing to do. :rolleyes:

I suggest you look up the word context.

For the children

Donations to help the Children of Beslan (http://www.moscowhelp.org/donate.htm)

I am going to be setting up a donations box in my shop. So if you cannot get anything through the methods shown on their site...I will :)

Moon

It is certainly true that the IRA murdered many people and I would regard them as evil too.

As for the comment that there have been no attacks in Britian by Muslim terrorists isn't this slightly wishful thinking? It's great that there have been non so far but there have been attacks on America, Australia and Spain by these people (if people they can be called). There have also been attacks on British interests and British troops abroad. Most informed opinion seems to believe that there is at least a likelyhood that the Uk will be a target. Unless you know otherwise of course then please reassure us.

Originally posted by t020
You can bend the stats anyway you like, e.g. number of attacks on westerners in last 10 years by Muslims Vs number of attacks on westerners in last 10 years by any single other religion. It won't change the fact that at this moment in time, the "problem religion" is most definitely Islam, whether this suits the ideals of the PC brigade or not.

Unfortunately the Thick As Pigpoo brigade havn't quite managed to compute that one ninth of the world is muslim, that the term "westerner" ceased to have much meaning beyond the cold war, that any monotheistic religion has the substrate required for extremism.

Thousands of muslims have been killed by christian militias worldwide. But because this goes heavily unreported on the TV, the Thick As Pigpoo brigade simply assumes it doesn't exist.

Not to mention all the unreligiously motivated violence and terrorism that is in full swing across the globe.

Still, it's a long millenium, plenty of time for them to drag themselves, kicking and screaming, into it.

As for the Beslan atrocity - The last war between Ingushetia and North Ossetia was started by the killing of one taxi driver, and there is already talk of revenge killings as the North Ossetians start to point the finger of blame at Ingushetia and the Ingushetians.

Originally posted by Phanerothyme
Unfortunately the Thick As Pigpoo brigade .........

And this was exactly what I was talking about when I complained about the sometimes patronising tone taken by mods when they should really know better.

Just because someone has a differing view to you does not make them "thick as poo". I won't be blinded by PC ideals and at the moment the world's biggest problem is with Islamic terrorists. Whether or not this holds up with the PC ideal of everything being equal and harmonious (unless they're white, middle aged, middle class, christian and conservative, in which case they're scum of the earth) is irrelevant.

So you are trying to say that everyone in this world has equally as much intelligence?

Originally posted by t020
I won't be blinded by PC ideals and at the moment the world's biggest problem is with Islamic terrorists.

No, actually crippling poverty and injustice top that particular list. But that won't sell as many copies of the Daily Hate.

The point I tried to make was about who is the greatest threat to us in this country. You know, people like you and your children as you go about your daily business in Sheffield. I still believe this to be (at the current time) terrorists who have an extreme (and no doubt incorect) view of Islam. To them their religion is an excuse for killing as many white westerners as they can.

These people are, amongst other things, racist against us. I bet if it was the other way around (ie, some BNP sytle malita going to, say, Pakistan and planting bombs) they would be very quickly (and correctly) called racist.

Originally posted by t020
And this is exactly what I'm talking about here: http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?postid=166019#post166019

Just because someone has a differing view to you does not make them "thick as poo". I won't be blinded by PC ideals and at the moment the world's biggest problem is with Islamic terrorists. Whether or not this holds up with the PC ideal of everything being equal and harmonious (unless they're white, middle aged, middle class, christian and conservative, in which case they're scum of the earth) is irrelevant.

Whoa! you came over all defensive there....

The worlds biggest problems at the moment are climate change, malnutrition and disease.

Islamic terrorists is the biggest story on the TV at the moment, which is not the same as the worlds biggest problem. How many people killed by islamic terrorists in the last 10 years? how many killed by christian terrorists? how many killed by atheist terrorists?

Cos without even an idea of what those figures are, you are speaking from a strong position of total ignorance.

Even a member ought to realise that.

Well since September 11th alone saw over 3,000 fatalities, it's a safe bet that Islamic terrorists have caused the most death in the last decade and at this moment in time pose the biggest threat to our country.

Originally posted by t020
Well since September 11th alone saw over 3,000 fatalities, it's a safe bet that Islamic terrorists have caused the most death in the last decade and at this moment in time pose the biggest threat to our country.

The biggest threats to this country, if you are using deaths as a yardstick, must surely be road accidents, cancer and obesity?

Originally posted by max
The biggest threats to this country, if you are using deaths as a yardstick, must surely be road accidents, cancer and obesity?

OK maybe I should've made it clearer that I was replying within the context of phanerothymes post. ie.

"Islamic terrorists is the biggest story on the TV at the moment, which is not the same as the worlds biggest problem. How many people killed by islamic terrorists in the last 10 years? how many killed by christian terrorists? how many killed by atheist terrorists?"

Islamic terrorists pose the biggest threat to our country of those terrorists mentioned.

Yes we have hit a new low with the mass murder of children
but I'm not sure why people on the forum who attempt to look beyond this one terrible act seem to be regarded as supporters of the terrorists. To express outrage, condemnation, sorrow are natural responses but there should be an understanding of the circumstances which lead to this barbaric act.

Firstly the terrorists knew that their predecessors were executed whilst rendered unconcious by gas in the Moscow Theatre seige, so knew that they would not be taken alive.

The West is also partly responsible for this act, in its' ignoring of Russian barbarism in Chechnya which Putin has justified by linking it to Bush's war on terror.
Estimates are that 35000 kids have been killed by Russian troops, 10's thousands women raped, routine abduction ,torture and murder of Chechen men (the bodies often blown to bits with explosives to prevent ID) Grozny razed twice in recent times, the wholesale looting of entire towns and cities.
Then another rigged election to appoint Putin's man.
These acts do not justify the terror and slaughter brought to children but explain how this may have come about (imagine all these things happening in Sheffield)
Pressure should have been put on Putin a long time ago to stop these war crimes. Behind his democratic veneer he is a Stalinist KGB thug.

A minority of Chechens are now engaged in total war of a sort familiar to Russians and Germans on the Eastern front and they will see any Russian as the enem,y no matter what their age.
It's not right or justifiable whatever the circumstances but I'm afraid something similar is likely to happen again as a result of a decade of brutalisation of an entire population and the indifference of the world at large.

More innocents will become the victims of Checen terrorists in Russia and attract wide publicity whilst at the same time hundreds more women will be raped and children killed in Chechnya with little or no publicity (or condemnation from our "leaders")

I cannot undersatnd people who say that a Russian withdrawal would be giving in to terror. I presume they must therefore be also supporting the atrocities committed by Russian troops in Chechnya for the past 12 years?
Aren't all peoples entitled to self determination? It should be a right and at the same time a right that would also end this bloodshed.

Originally posted by slimsid2000
I think there is a difference between valuing their own child's life above their own and that of children's lives in general.

Ok, lets extend the idea a little. People value their children's lives more than there own, because not only are they a loved one, but also because they are so young and haven't lived a full life. I think it's fair to say that pretty much everyone would see more tragedy in losing their child, than one of their grandparents. Most humans are capable of feeling empathy for others, so see it as more tragic when children die in general, because they have some understanding of how they would feel if it was one of their own. Not all humans have the same emotional make up, which is why some people don't understand why others value children's lives more than adult's lives.

Originally posted by t020
Well since September 11th alone saw over 3,000 fatalities, it's a safe bet that Islamic terrorists have caused the most death in the last decade

A safe bet?

Interesting choice of terminology, but you are wrong.

and at this moment in time pose the biggest threat to our country

Well, if you could come up with a definintion of Islamic Terrorist or Islamic Terrorism where the terminology was justified, instead of simply a handy label that has been coined, then I might agree with you.

But even if all that were true, the overall threat is comparitively infinitesimal, whatever flavour of terrorist you pick.

Unfortunately we have lived in such a cultural soup of orientalism that we are probably blind to the intricacies of our subject matter, much as the press has tried to illuminate us.

Originally posted by Phanerothyme
A safe bet?

Interesting choice of terminology, but you are wrong.




Really? Then prove it.

Well since September 11th alone saw over 3,000 fatalities, it's a safe bet that Islamic terrorists have caused the most death in the last decade


One word. One awful place: Srebrenica

Another war envolving muslims. I can see a common link between all these terrorist acts and wars, but can't quite put my finger on what it is. :confused:

The world needs to be rid of all religion.

Originally posted by t020
Another war envolving muslims. I can see a common link between all these terrorist acts and wars, but can't quite put my finger on what it is. :confused:
I don't know of anyone apart from Milosevic, Karadzic, Mladic, Tudjman etc who don't accept that the Bosnian Muslims were anything but the victims of Serb and Croat ethnic cleansing. Perhaps you would like to acknowledge the massacres perpetrated by these two Christian groups on Muslims

Hate is the common link to these acts of terrorism. And hate escalates with every act of terrorism. It’s a vicious circle. All religions condemn hate. It's evil people that indoctrinate believers of religions to accept that hate is a righteous thing. And society is not offering the environment that could abate this hatred of one another.
Let's not lower our own way of thinking by exhibiting an intolerance of other people or their different religions. This is how the terrorists think. We have to accept that there are evil people out there and they will cause us pain. But they are individuals who should be brought to justice - not a race or religion to be persecuted.
So called Human Rights Acts should protect humanity. There will always be paradoxical issues with human rights. But we will have to accept that some of the compromises are going to be objectionable to some people if justice is going to protect society from the acts of evil people. In my opinion, anyone who acts without humanity, ie: destroys innocent human life for the sake of selfish ends (like becoming a martyr) wavers the right to protection from the Human Rights Acts. As the new foot soldiers (the suicide bombers) end up dead it has to be that their commanders must be brought to justice and silenced. This is a direct violation of the Human Rights Act, but a worthwhile violation for the sake of peace.
The question is: Who or What is qualified to fairly determine how this justice is administered?

You make some very interesting and pertinent points Mr E.
Setting aside the Human Rights Act (or ignoring the Geneva Convention in the manner of Rumsfeld) to elliminate terrorist commanders doesn't address the problem of State Terror or State-sponsored Terror which is often the prime cause and promoter of terrorism in the generally accepted sense.

I think most people would accept that the Sudanese government is engaged in direct State Terror and State-sponsored Terror in Dafur
Other recent examples I would suggest are Indonesia in East Timor; Israel in the West Bank & Gaza; Russia in Chechnya; US in any number of Central/South American countries.
We are talking about 100s of thousands of deaths here.
Do we treat these State military and political leaders in the same way?
I'd be all for it, as they are often the root cause of the problem and not part of the solution

Perhaps we should give Birmingham up as an independant muslim state before they start to assassinate people here.

Lets just sit back and wait for this come eventually to the UK and watch your grand kids get blown away.

I agree with you Nedd
My use of the word commanders was loose. Any individual who is involved in terror from the top down, including those who "legitimately" licence arms to terror states need to be legally dealt with one way or another.
Part of the problem is the US's gun culture.
Common sense and experience shows us that armed militant groups create fear. Take the gun away from general circulation within a society and people can be governed properly by State Law, providing this is not corrupt.
The trouble is that the civilised world can not insist on the demilitarisation of groups because the US's gun culture is “acceptable”. I know there are exceptions such as Switzerland, where every household has a gun, but that is an example of a highly stable and moderate society. But right now it is the US that is asserting its strong arm and, unfortunately, it does not have enough of a moral high ground to do so without hypocrisy.

How can any country be equipped to deal with people who are prepared to kill themselves and kill innocent children who have no influence on politics? People who are callous enough to stab a little kid with a bayonet just because he wants a drink of water? People have always been prepared to die for their cause but to take other people with them - that's the bit I don't understand

Originally posted by ceridwen1977
How can any country be equipped to deal with people who are prepared to kill themselves and kill innocent children who have no influence on politics? People who are callous enough to stab a little kid with a bayonet just because he wants a drink of water? People have always been prepared to die for their cause but to take other people with them - that's the bit I don't understand

Murdering children, and then giving up your own life is to have an influence on politics. It's just not an influence that you will live to see expressed. But the influence has been pretty tectonic in this case.

History is littered with those who gave their lives in the belief they were doing the right thing, and those who slaughtered countless innocents and justified themselves in terms of their ends.

When two national entities find themselves in armed combat, but one has missiles and jets, whilst the other has kalashnikovs, SAM7s and RPGs, the inequality can be balanced by "asymetrical warfare" aka hitting civilian targets with unconventional weapons.

Of course the chief difference between destroying a block of flats with helicopter gunships and holding hundreds of children hostage with little prospect of being released alive is that one is covered up with no advance notice whilst the other is staged for maximum media coverage, giving world networks plenty of time to get live TV coverage from the scene.

Apart from that, both acts are equally heinous crimes against humanity.

Many of you will recognise the following though it is a summary of what is published. For me it has put a few things into perspective in relation to all attacks since 9/11 and all actions taken since.

The goal of terrorism is to create terror and fear. Fear undermines the establishment. It weakens the enemy from within...causing unrest in the masses.
Terrorism is not an expression of rage. Terrorism is a political weapon. Remove a government's facade of infallibility, and you remove it's peoples faith

Originally posted by Hadron
Perhaps we should give Birmingham up as an independent muslim state before they start to assassinate people here.
I don't think the Chechens want to move to Birmingham ffs! :rolleyes: And how would killing people in the UK influence the Russian government in to allowing Chechnya to become independent :rolleyes: :loopy:

Yet again, try looking in to who was actually behind this attack and their motives (i.e. re-read this thread and see story below) before you jump in and post something cr*p like that... doesn't help anyone.

Moscow has declared top Chechen rebel leaders Shamil Basayev and Aslan Maskhadov equally culpable in the Beslan tragedy. But in reality the pair share little other than the goal of driving Russian forces from Chechnya - and a habit of speaking quietly. BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3642532.stm)

Some people will always take the eneny's side in any war/conflict no matter how repugnant that enemy is. This has been demonstarted time and time again, whether it is the IRA, Saddam Hussain, The Soviet Union etc etc etc.

Originally posted by slimsid2000
Some people will always take the eneny's side in any war/conflict no matter how repugnant that enemy is. This has been demonstarted time and time again, whether it is the IRA, Saddam Hussain, The Soviet Union etc etc etc.
Not sure if you will read this as you seem to post without bothering to read other people's posts, but tell me - who exactly is taking the enemy's side in this particular instance? There has been worldwide condemnation of the attacks and I've yet to see anyone praise the actions of the terrorists... perhaps you know better!?

I think that a lead must be taken by "free and democratic states" which should adopt REAL ethical foreign policies.
They must not support regimes which are run by human rights abusers, murderers, dictators and the corrupt. No aid, no military equipment. They should put collective/coersive pressure on regimes engaged in torture, political repression etc.
Allies who flout human rights themselves or support repression by "clients"should be pressured into mending their ways.

eg Blair should have said "No" to Bush, The UN should have demanded Russian withdrawal fron Chechnya years ago (likewise Israel from the occupied territories)
If states which claim to promote freedom and democracy also support despotic and criminal regimes in the world, they are guilty of sowing the seeds of desperate acts of terrorism.
Political and economic expediency is one of the prime catalysts for terrorism. Politicians who cynically engage in this expediency risk bringing terror to our own shores. Unfortunately the "retribution" will fall on the innocents here as it does everywhere else. Those that bring down the wrath of the desperate, dispossessd and fanatical will of course receive maximum protection not afforded to the rest of us. Mr Putin would be the first to acknowledge that I'm sure.

Originally posted by slimsid2000
Some people will always take the eneny's side in any war/conflict no matter how repugnant that enemy is. This has been demonstrated time and time again, whether it is the IRA, Saddam Hussain, The Soviet Union etc etc etc.

Quite true, quite true. There are always refuseniks - our whole system of government (adversarial politics) depends on this tradition.

Some people will also always look behind the block headlines and tabloid style op-ed and take a bit of history into context, as well as trying to evaluate an event without without resorting to the meaningless shorthand of news speak.

And some people will swallow the simplest story possible that assuages the cognitive dissonance of believing that "this country is always right in war" but experiencing something quite different.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Geoff
It depresses me to see the general chat forum being used for such topics as "Slappers bring you joy" and "Britain's Fattest City". While I appreciate the need to lighten the mood from time to time... it depresses me that not many people want to discuss more mature/serious topics.

For example, did anyone see the footage of the storming of the Russian school at lunch time? This was horrific, seeing children pouring water on each other's badly burnt backs. It would appear that the whole thing is yet another chaotic 'storm' by Russia's apparent 'special' forces. At the moment the death toll from the raid stands at around 10, but there is a whopping 150 injured children so far.

Perhaps some of the forum's less mature users could take a break for a day or two and allow more serious items to take some of the lime light. This is a 'general' forum after all, which means both serious and fun... and it's all be the latter recently. [/QUOTE

]Hi to say thay where special forces is a joke
the operation was poorly planed no flash bangs the public
getting in to firefights thay shoud take a look at the SAS.
:rant: