[ionia23]

Profits? how so?

[Flipside]

Apparently some of them are still holed up in the basement with an unknown number of children.

[übermetroid]

anybody ever read rainbow 6?  I wonder if something like that (the team , not the bad thing) will come true.

The world is starting to really need it too.  

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by ubermetroid
anybody ever read rainbow 6?  I wonder if something like that (the team , not the bad thing) will come true.

The world is starting to really need it too.  

All we need is for foreign countries to allow the SAS in to assist in these sorts of operations.

[karajorma]

Originally posted by Stunaep
But do note, that the only one who profits from the two terrorist acts, is russia, and not by a small amount.
[edit]

and again, the 'chechen' terrorist group was made up of at least 9 arabs, and the better part of them came from other caucasian countries,  not chechenya.

Yeah but also remember that Chechenya didn't stand to gain much from the moscow theatre seige and they still gave that a damn good try.

[ionia23]

Kinda backs up my act-of-sadism argument nicely.

[Rictor]

the conspiracy-minded parts of my brain are starting to send to warning signals here.

[aldo_14]

Terrorism is about the spreading of fear and the gaining of publicity.  I'd say the Chechens did very well out of it in this respect.

[Rictor]

If thats all that terrorism is about, that it is the single most ineffective and absurd tactic in the history of mankind.

Every single example that I can think of has had the opposite effect, causing a retaliation and strenghtening the enemy's resolve. So, needless to say, I don't believe that thats all there is to it.

Every group, be it a terrorist group, a political lobby or an advertising agency, desires to be effective. If acts such as these have a long and proven history of being detremental to the cause they are trying to further, its stands to reason that more complex things are at work..

but thats just me.

[Stunaep]

Originally posted by karajorma


Yeah but also remember that Chechenya didn't stand to gain much from the moscow theatre seige and they still gave that a damn good try.

But these are different situations. You must understand, that the caucasian way of life condones blood revenge, but NOT the massacre of children. In the Nord-Ost crisis, it was revenge, and the chechenyans still had the support of the rest of the caucasian people. But taking children hostage is currently being condemned by every caucasian nation. Plus, Aslam Mashadov himself has offered to become a negotiator.

If russia can convince the world, that the Chechenyans were responsible for this act of terror, then the entire caucasia will be on the side of russia, which is something they've been wanting since the collapse of the USSR.

[aldo_14]

Hate isn't a very complex reason, but it's a driving one - for one thing.

The other is that publicity and fear are very useful.  Terrorists can't win a war on military terms - they're usually too few in number and don't strike military targets much anyways.  But what they do, is try to make people question whether it's worthwhile.

If people are scared, and they can put a finger on why, then they may act.  Sometimes it may lead to a strengthening of resolve - but if that isn't working as in Russia, what next?

We've also seen that retaliation strengthens the terrorists cause within their own people, boosting their recruits.  Eventually, the idea is that they become so powerful that they are able to cause sufficient damage to make it an 'unwinnable war' for their enemy.

Whilst actions as morally rupugnant as taking hostage hundreds of schoolchildren won't impress your moderate-minded Chechen, these sorts of people aren't the type to join terrorist groups anyways.

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by Stunaep


But these are different situations. You must understand, that the caucasian way of life condones blood revenge, but NOT the massacre of children. In the Nord-Ost crisis, it was revenge, and the chechenyans still had the support of the rest of the caucasian people. But taking children hostage is currently being condemned by every caucasian nation. Plus, Aslam Mashadov himself has offered to become a negotiator.

If russia can convince the world, that the Chechenyans were responsible for this act of terror, then the entire caucasia will be on the side of russia, which is something they've been wanting since the collapse of the USSR.

It's unclear as to whether this was motivated by Islamic fundamentalism to a degree.... i.e. by those wanting an Islamic theocracy in Chechnya.  And to the extent of how much credence you give to the reports of 'Arab mercenary terrorists' being amongst the hostage takers (given that the Russians are not exactly the most reliable people at transparent government).  i.e. people whose zealotry for their cause goes beyond what we would consider human decency, and into the realms of sheer irrational hatred.

I would not, however, fall into the trap of blaming this on international terrorism as Putin will - the reasons stem from Chechnya, no matter how much he would want to divert scrutiny from that.

[Fergus]

What you need to understand is that Chechnya has been occupied for years by Russia.  You NEED to see the streets of Grozny (Chechen capital) to understand, it's more like the scenes in Bosnia and Srebrenica than anything else.  I agree the act is wrong but you have to understand that many many more people have been killed in Chechnya, soldiers, rebels or civilians.  Think northern Ireland but everyone wants out of GB, it's full blown war and N.I. is almost ignored internationally.

[aldo_14]

[Rictor]

yes, but public opinion is of huge importance in unbalanced conflict such as this (where one side is vastly stronger). Look at how much its working to the benefit of Palestinians. You don't see any "Freedom for Chechnya" activists running around, do you?

The thing to remember is - well two things actually - is that, first of all, Chechen militants don't really have any great power backing them up, like the NVA had in Vietnam. America, the EU and all the rest are more than happy to look the other way if it means maintaining good relations with Russia. And the second thing is that things are about as bad for the Chechens as they're likely of get. Every crime, every humiliation, every slap in the face and kick in the ass that it is possible to have happen to you, chances are its already happened. Which means there is no longer the shock value of "the Russians killed by brother, I'm going to go join the rebels". Anyone who is likely to stand up and fight has, after a decade of occupation, already done so.

Put these two together, and you come to the conclusion that the Chechen militants are not likely to win this thing by a war of attrition. And what I am assuming is that whoever is running the show is aware of this fact. And even if it is possible to force out the Russians by attacking the civilian population until they simply stop thinking its worth it, how long will that take? 10 years,  20 years? More?

You may point to al Queda and 9/11, but thats not really the same situation. First of all, and no offence intended, Americans are more sqeamish towards casualties. And secondly, al Qeuda not only has vast funding, but they have a wide network of alliances and like-minded organizations all across the Middle-East. They can actually stand up to the Americans militarily and have a chance of forcing them out. Afganistan is partly (dare I say mostly) under rebel control. And Iraq isn't going to well, as anyone can see.

So, whether you agree or disagree with the Chechen rebels, it simply doesn't make sense to do this, from a rationl self-interest point of view. Unless there's something I'm missing, and there is an excellent possibility that there is, no one with half a brain would do what was done at that Russian school.

[aldo_14]

Well, that's exactly what i mean.

No-one even cared about Chechnya - now it's on every news broadcast.

The Russians aren't afraid to fight a war of attrition.... but what about when it's civillians who are dying?  Will the civvies put up with living under constant fear in order to keep a desolate slab of land thousands of miles from them?  If not, who will they blame - the rebels or the person (Putin) who keeps Russian troops there?

For all the public opinion over Palestine, what has actually been achieved?

The Chechens (and i mean Chechen terrorists here), don;t give a flying **** about international opinion.... it's never done anything for them, so why should they care?  All that matters is getting the Russians out.  We know they can't do it militarily or politically, the Russian media is increasingly state controlled, so what can they do?  Scare them out, perhaps.  Maybe it'll take 10 years - maybe it'll take 10 months.  If they keep on attacking schools, who knows?

[Fergus]

I agree but I'm not sure this act was something that the whole of the Chechen rebels decided into as an entire entity.  It would be unlikely that the whole of the resistance groups in Checnya are in contact with one another ( the Russins have been rather good at destroying just about every utility you can name [phone lines, water ect.]).  That would make this less a colective effort and more an individual action in respect to a single group.  Still it's getting harder and harder to for the average person to sympathise with one of the most horrendous casses of a big country beating up a little country.  Putin had more or less got what he wanted.

[Fergus]

"the Russian media is increasingly state controlled"

A point about that, it turns out (slightly unrelated but very important) that jurnalists have been "disappearing" in Russia.  You make up your own mind.

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by Fergus
I agree but I'm not sure this act was something that the whole of the Chechen rebels decided into as an entire entity.  It would be unlikely that the whole of the resistance groups in Checnya are in contact with one another ( the Russins have been rather good at destroying just about every utility you can name [phone lines, water ect.]).  That would make this less a colective effort and more an individual action in respect to a single group.  Still it's getting harder and harder to for the average person to sympathise with one of the most horrendous casses of a big country beating up a little country.  Putin had more or less got what he wanted.

I don't believe that either.  I think there will be Chechen rebels who are more moderate and focused on guerilla warfare, and there will be some who are terrorists, and then maybe some who are Islamic radicals and thus prepared to be suicide bombers and commit this kind of act.

This was clearly organised, of course - there were something like 40 hoastake takers, well armed and with explosives (plus plans of where to use them) - and I'd hesitate to put this on the heads of every Chechen rebels rather than a particularly nutty subset of them.

I believe there has been some form of Al-Queda / Arab terrorism involvement, possibly not in terms of taking part in previous attacks but logistically or in training.  This may be an evolution of that involvement.
(  http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3293441.stm - bottom )

[Fergus]

Possibly, but its not as if any of us are privy to any of the Intellignce services information and so it is not a good idea to speculate too heavily in any possible Al-Qaeda links.  There is this horrible tendincy by the press to involve Al-Qaeda into EVERY attack no matter who they are.