[Stryke 9]

Actually, I'd applaud wholeheartedly if the Apaches finally got their revenge. Join 'em, too, if I could. If not, just take the hint and get the **** back to Europe. That's either a very poor analogy or quite a good one.

[Nico]

Originally posted by Stryke 9
Actually, I'd applaud wholeheartedly if the Apaches finally got their revenge.

heh

Originally posted by Stryke 9
If not, just take the hint and get the **** back to Europe.

Mmh, I take it back, the natives and the US people gets along so well now, why would they start complaining now?

[Stryke 9]

Yeah, all, what, fifty thousand of them left? Maybe twice that at most?

Those'd have to be some pretty heavily-armed Indians, I gotta say.

[Nico]

Mmh... not really, well organized, for sure, but well armed?
the resistance in France in 40, they were around 10000, they were against an occupation army, and yet they did quite well ( yeah, we sucked during the war, I'm the first one to admit, but still I'm proud to have such people in our history ).

[Stryke 9]

200,000 people against the collective police force, army, and nuclear power of the United States, not to mention thousands if not hundreds of thousands of vigilante rednecks who are fairly well armed and would be all too happy to get a shot at one a' dem durn lazy injuns. Too many people in too restricted an area (which was intentional), can't engage in guerrilla warfare all that effectively.


Well organized and well armed. And both in extremes like nothing in the history of the world.

[Stunaep]

well, you'd think the Russian Goverment would do something to keep these things from happening. Like tightening security, or actually stopping ****ing the entire Chechen nation in the ass. But noooo, they're to busy dissing human rights in their own damn country, arranging false elections, or other such ****.

Now blowing up people is wrong, I said that in my first post.
I just think that you shouldn't blame the chechens any more than you should blame the Russians.

And did we have a thread when 200 Chechen civilians were ruthlessly murdered by Russian soldiers?

To sum up, yes the Chechens suicide bombers are inhuman morons, and the russians who got killed were killed without a reason. But the Chechens civilians who were (and still are) murdered in Chechenia by Russians are killed without a reason as well.

Oh, by the way, some of the Chechen terrorist attacks in Moscow in the beginning of the Second Chechen war have been linked to the FSB. And the Russian Intelligence, be it the FSB, the KGB, the GPU or the Tsheka, have arranged terrorist acts to support their war efforts or racism before.

In other news, the Russian Foreign Minister has recently made a statement, that they will invade any neighbouring country that harasses the rights of Russian citizens, has an unstable goverment, or presents a threat to Russian National Security. Which in translation means, that "If we feel like it, we'll arrange a little accident on your border, and invade". I feel so much safer now.

[Stryke 9]

It'd be pretty hard to tighten security when an enormous chunk of your country, something like 70% of it at least, is uninhabited wilderness, and the group you're trying to keep out lives right next door and is connected by mostly similarly desolate areas. The entire freakin' population of the country could move out into guerilla camps in the forests, and once in there it'd be a piece of cake to get into Moscow. Or just fire rockets at it from a distance.

[Nico]

Originally posted by Stryke 9
200,000 people against the collective police force, army, and nuclear power of the United States, not to mention thousands if not hundreds of thousands of vigilante rednecks who are fairly well armed and would be all too happy to get a shot at one a' dem durn lazy injuns. Too many people in too restricted an area (which was intentional), can't engage in guerrilla warfare all that effectively.


Well organized and well armed. And both in extremes like nothing in the history of the world.

Well, I remember that guy, last year or two years ago, with his rifle, driving everybody mad, while acting completly incoherently, and being catch, what, at least two weeks after he began shooting at people randomly, while being on highways, highly populated areas and so on. Guess everybody decided to ignore him?

Not that it would/did achieve anything in the end, granted.

[Stunaep]

Originally posted by Stryke 9
It'd be pretty hard to tighten security when an enormous chunk of your country, something like 70% of it at least, is uninhabited wilderness, and the group you're trying to keep out lives right next door and is connected by mostly similarly desolate areas. The entire freakin' population of the country could move out into guerilla camps in the forests, and once in there it'd be a piece of cake to get into Moscow. Or just fire rockets at it from a distance.

Ah, so maybe they should have thought about it when they first started to invade the country, for no particular reason. They went for their usual 'invade the country/province you don't like, kill a ****load of innocent people to give them a lesson, and blow up everything you can.' Only this time their plan backfired.

[edit] and why the hell are the chechens call rebels? Chechenia declared independence after the collapse of the Soviet Union, their parliament technically had the right to do so, only Russia decided to blatantly ignore that statement, and then later go running in rampaging with guns, and even later go rampaging again with guns, for reasons that are suspected to be the work of FSB.

[Dark_4ce]

Originally posted by Stryke 9
If there were no news, there'd be no democracy, either, even in the half-assed pathetic nondemocratic form it exists in today. Military dictatorships would be the best you could hope for. Quit your *****ing.

No... I don't *****.

But you're half right. The opression of all news would create a dictatorship, something perhaps reminicent of Orwell's 1984. But you missed my point, probably because I didn't state it clearly. My oppinion is just that I believe the News glorify everything they show. They make it "entertaining". And I just don't happen to agree with it, because that glorifying, is like a lure to bring in more terrorism. They see their handywork on tv, blared all over the papers, and get power from that. And I'm not saying they should stop televising Terrorist attacks, thats impossible. I dunno... Perhaps I'm only stating the obvious. In the end, I don't really care anymore whats happening in the world...

[Stunaep]

yeah, well, I care mainly because I don't want to end up dying from hunger in GULAG, like some of my ancestors.

[Impurial]

If you look for the driving motive behind most terrorist/freedom-fighter groups, you'll probably find it in a hatred for an oppressive (and generally external) government.  As Stu said, the actions of an oppressive government greatly contribute to the violent outbreaks of terrorism.  And in this dog-eat-dog world, there is only one proper way to respond to that kind of foolish behaviour: more foolishness.

The solution then, seems to lie in the prevention rather than the cure.  Stop the first wave of violence and you'll have stopped the second, and the third, and the fifthtieth.  It's cheaper than bombs and healthier overall than killing-the-other-dude-first (sorry, it's true).

Originally posted by Stryke 9
In the US as in Russia the government goes ahead pursuing its own interests and tells the people what to believe afterward. ...In the end, it's governments and corporations that are inevitably stricken with megalomania, desiring to run the entire world- most people couldn't give two ****s about how the Chechens, Iraqis, or Afghans run themselves.

Let sleeping dogs lie.  Even if you have a spare nuke, it'd hurt you both less if you grant him his beauty sleep.

btw, thanks Black Wolf for a grand HLP greeting

[Stryke 9]

Venom: Yeah, with significantly less surveillance investigative force, and force in general brought to bear than would be in an actual military action. You're right, though, and I certainly agree that a well-trained, clever guerilla can do damage well beyond what could be expected of one person, but a guerilla army cannot keep up a sustained assault on an established power without the tacit support of the populace. Even the snipers had to go out for food every day- you have any idea what it's like in an area under siege? Particularly a place like the wasteland reservations, where even your water has to be imported? You don't get support from a populace you're trying to kill, indeed, quite often they kill you back.


Dark: Well... it's inevitable. People want to be entertained, if they're informed that's secondary. Applies to everyone- I don't learn tensor equations because they quite frankly don't interest me, no matter that they're information and might be quite useful as such at some point in the future. Applies doubly these days, when TV has sucked out everyones' brains and makes them stimulation-starved addlebrains- you'll notice that all news these days is formatted to fit the ten-second attention span.

And, well, it'd be pretty hard not to make terrorism and that sort of thing look sexy on the news. After all, that's what terrorism and protests and the lot are designed for. Were the news to take a different form, people'd pander to that, and there'd likely be destructive versions of that pandering as well.