The W
Views: 99949340
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Color chart | Log in for more!
23.10.07 0616
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - Bush and Chechnya Register and log in to post!
Pages: 1 2 Next(704 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (21 total)
JayJayDean
Scrapple
Level: 125

Posts: 1595/4719
EXP: 22169336
For next: 284891

Since: 2.1.02
From: Seattle, WA

Since last post: 50 days
Last activity: 6 hours
AIM:  
Y!:
#1 Posted on 5.9.04 1340.50
Reposted on: 5.9.11 1341.37
Since the Russian school tragedy, a couple of questions have bugged me.

One, if the President is vowing to fight terrorism around the globe, shouldn't he be offering to send our forces to Chechnya? Obviously, the actions the Chechen rebels can be 100% classified as "terrorism". Aren't we fighting the war on "terror", or are we fighting the war on "terror that only affects the USA"?

Two, if Putin called Bush and offered to send Russian troops into Iraq (the list I looked up said they're not there now) in return for the USA's help in dealing with Chechnya, would Bush have any choice but to agree or look the fool for claiming to want to rid the earth of terrorism, as opposed to, say, wanting to rid the places where valuable oil reserves are of terrorism?

I'm not saying I'd even like to see Bush offer to get involved in Chechnya. In fact, I'm sure I'd much prefer for the USA to stay out of there unless we ABSOLUTELY should. BUT, the UN and others told the USA not to go to war in the Middle East and Bush said "screw you, we've got a war on terror to fight." So wouldn't it seem reasonable to expect the man who declared war on terrorism to want to defeat ALL terrorism?
Promote this thread!
Leroy
Boudin blanc
Level: 91

Posts: 417/2266
EXP: 7348274
For next: 120667

Since: 7.2.02

Since last post: 7 days
Last activity: 6 days
#2 Posted on 5.9.04 1502.47
Reposted on: 5.9.11 1502.53
I think that's one of those conflicts we'd be very wise to stay out of. Basically, the two sides HATE each other... and quite honestly, I think it's going to make Israel-Palistine look tame.

The LA Times ran a story on the conflict about three years ago, and both sides are basically willing to fight until there's nothing left. It described some pretty graphic scenes... like Russians tying a female Chechnyan soldier to two tanks - like in the movie The Hitcher - in order to "boost morale". That's how bad it's getting. Both sides are behaving badly....

StaggerLee
Scrapple
Level: 141

Posts: 1874/6335
EXP: 33455883
For next: 664215

Since: 3.10.02
From: Right side of the tracks

Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 2 days
#3 Posted on 5.9.04 1628.29
Reposted on: 5.9.11 1628.57
Well, its one of those things were, if we offer to help, I am fairly sure we would be turned down. I am sure the Russian people would surely not want the USA to get involved in anything. If Russian officials would offer to send troops to Iraq, wouldnt they be better served sending them to fight the rebels?

DrDirt
Banger
Level: 96

Posts: 1185/2703
EXP: 8924331
For next: 64488

Since: 8.10.03
From: flyover country

Since last post: 8 days
Last activity: 2 min.
#4 Posted on 5.9.04 1635.58
Reposted on: 5.9.11 1636.10
I think since this isn't "international" terrorism we can safely pass. Also it doesn't affect our lives. Plus like it or not we must cherry pick our fights of half the adult population would have to be in the military.
The Thrill
Banger
Level: 99

Posts: 1319/2781
EXP: 9917771
For next: 82264

Since: 16.4.02
From: Green Bay, WI

Since last post: 189 days
Last activity: 35 days
#5 Posted on 5.9.04 1718.39
Reposted on: 5.9.11 1718.58
I seriously doubt Putin would ask for US ground troops or air power in Chechnya. The Russian armed forces are plenty big enough to pound the rebels into the ground w/ a little re-deployment. Any help America might deliver to Russia would probably be in the form of intelligence...although that's not in demand so much these days.

And personally, I hope the Russians win. Sure, Chechens have been fighting for their independence for a long, long time, but they've teamed up w/ Al-Qaeda...so fuck 'em. Go Russia!
Pool-Boy
Lap cheong
Level: 81

Posts: 1552/1759
EXP: 4929855
For next: 63015

Since: 1.8.02
From: Huntington Beach, CA

Since last post: 1315 days
Last activity: 81 days
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#6 Posted on 5.9.04 2009.31
Reposted on: 5.9.11 2009.39
Yeah - this being something that is "inside Russia" would make sending US troops a bit touchy. I think expressing support is the right way to go, and if the Russians find they need help with something, make sure the door stays open to them.

Beyond their borders, though, I think it is too soon to tell if there is anything we can do to help, beyond our existing "War on Terror" efforts.

I do hope those sorry chunks of human debris that would murder children for political gain get what is coming to them. You don't talk peace with people like this - you just kill them. And it is better than they deserve... I second those thoughts- Go Russia...
PerthHeat
Mettwurst
Level: 29

Posts: 34/169
EXP: 133988
For next: 13898

Since: 16.8.04
From: Perth Australia

Since last post: 3024 days
Last activity: 3010 days
#7 Posted on 5.9.04 2053.07
Reposted on: 5.9.11 2053.50
    Originally posted by DrDirt
    I think since this isn't "international" terrorism we can safely pass. Also it doesn't affect our lives. Plus like it or not we must cherry pick our fights of half the adult population would have to be in the military.



I guess your right I mean how many Russians were at Waco? ( I do agree with your point)

Bullies only pick the fights they know they can win.


Just a comment and it is a pedantic one... Why is it called terrorism and not a criminal act? Does having a political cause make it terrorism and not what it really is? I sometimes feel half the fear mongering is in the words we choose to use and not the act itself.

It is unfortunate and tragic all the people died and I think it will now happen again and again, because to me the correct response would have been to take all the Chechens out of the jail put them on a bus on national tv and have your special forces ready and while the kidnappers were watching tv blow the bus up. In that second of disbelief your special forces attack the school. Yes people and children will die... but they died anyway but the message you send is that no ransom will be paid and that lives will be sacrificed to maintain order. History has shown the Chechens to be a blood thirsty group and negotiations wont work.
DrDirt
Banger
Level: 96

Posts: 1186/2703
EXP: 8924331
For next: 64488

Since: 8.10.03
From: flyover country

Since last post: 8 days
Last activity: 2 min.
#8 Posted on 5.9.04 2150.04
Reposted on: 5.9.11 2150.53
Terrorism: A systematic use of violence, terror, and intimidation to achieve an end.

Perthheat, the trouble with your solution, is while it may seem justified, it would achieve nothing but crating a worse situation. The trouble with these groups is that almost all the responses the world community comes up with are nothing more than the equivalent of adding gasoline to a fire.

We act according to a set of rules and mores that they reject. Hence the difficulty in formulating a response that works.
AWArulz
Knackwurst
Level: 108

Posts: 861/3392
EXP: 13472255
For next: 48288

Since: 28.1.02
From: Louisville, KY

Since last post: 6 hours
Last activity: 6 hours
AIM:  
Y!:
#9 Posted on 5.9.04 2313.50
Reposted on: 5.9.11 2315.04
    Originally posted by PerthHeat
    Why is it called terrorism and not a criminal act? Does having a political cause make it terrorism and not what it really is? I sometimes feel half the fear mongering is in the words we choose to use and not the act itself.


Criminality is usually defined as the breaking of a law or laws in order to personally gain from the act, whether financially or emotionally.

I suspect that the Chechens feel they are gaining emotionally from the act, but terrorism is usually defined as the breaking of a law or laws in order to cause general disorder within the populace, usually, but not always, for political gain

You see, Dillenger wasn't about scaring the crap out of people - he just robbed banks, cause that's where the money was. The only people he wanted to scare were the people in the banks.

Agood example of a terroristic act not for political gain is the Washington area snipings. He wanted to cause general disorder so he could get his kids back.
Lafayette
Weisswurst
Level: 11

Posts: 14/21
EXP: 5874
For next: 112

Since: 10.8.04
From: Dan Rathers Bath House

Since last post: 3666 days
Last activity: 3666 days
#10 Posted on 6.9.04 0912.50
Reposted on: 6.9.11 0913.29
Bush did offer any help needed but was thanked and turned down. That was simply diplomacy though. Bush was speaking of monetary aid and investigative work. There is no way we are sending our troops into a Sovie....err...Russian F up.

By the way, Terrorism is a description of a criminal act like arson and larceny.

dMr
Andouille
Level: 89

Posts: 1420/2212
EXP: 6879467
For next: 36461

Since: 2.11.02
From: Edinburgh, Scotland

Since last post: 44 days
Last activity: 12 hours
#11 Posted on 6.9.04 1125.52
Reposted on: 6.9.11 1125.57
    Originally posted by Pool-Boy
    Yeah - this being something that is "inside Russia" would make sending US troops a bit touchy.


But how many times have we heard recently when the war in Iraq is quetioned that Saddam was a brutal dictator who tortured and murdered his own people? In the absence of WMD the problem could certainly be construed as being 'inside Iraq'.

Not that I think Western involvement is the way ahead by any stretch of the imagination, but there are parallel's between the two situations. The Chechen's have definitely done a fine job of 'elevating' themselves to Saddam's level of depravity.
DrDirt
Banger
Level: 96

Posts: 1188/2703
EXP: 8924331
For next: 64488

Since: 8.10.03
From: flyover country

Since last post: 8 days
Last activity: 2 min.
#12 Posted on 6.9.04 1238.39
Reposted on: 6.9.11 1239.11
    Originally posted by dMr
      Originally posted by Pool-Boy
      Yeah - this being something that is "inside Russia" would make sending US troops a bit touchy.


    But how many times have we heard recently when the war in Iraq is quetioned that Saddam was a brutal dictator who tortured and murdered his own people? In the absence of WMD the problem could certainly be construed as being 'inside Iraq'.

    Not that I think Western involvement is the way ahead by any stretch of the imagination, but there are parallel's between the two situations. The Chechen's have definitely done a fine job of 'elevating' themselves to Saddam's level of depravity.


Also that Saddam was a threat to destabilize oil flow, I mean neighboring countries.

They are depraved but within the Russian borders. I guess an analogy is the IRA in Northern Ireland. They created havoc and death but it was confines to Great Britain. I am not equating the two situations.
Malarky
Bauerwurst
Level: 23

Posts: 21/104
EXP: 64659
For next: 3065

Since: 19.8.04

Since last post: 3666 days
Last activity: 3663 days
#13 Posted on 6.9.04 1909.53
Reposted on: 6.9.11 1910.49
U.S. go into Chechnya?

1) Russia would NEVER accept American forces within their borders, not just due to strategic concerns but also national pride. "Why can't Putin solve this problem? Do we need help from the Americans?" Putin's entire political career is based around the tough guy image, any percieved setback in dealing with the Chechen problem is a blow for him, and that's why we saw him take an unrelenting hardline stance over the Beslan situation.

2)Where is the line? Do we send troops into Basque country to fight ETA? Do we go into Northern Ireland to fight the IRA?

The whole Caucasus region is a tinderbox. We have Russia-Chechnya igniting into a wider conflict involving Ingushetia and North Ossetia, we have Georgia-Russia fighting a low-level phony war over SOUTH Ossetia, and we have Azerbaijan and Armenia and the Nagarno-Karbakh situation (Armenia still occupies part of Azerbaijan). Not good. One conflict becoming hot could quickly ignite the whole region.

Bush of course has to pay lip service to the Russians over Chechnya, so as to not provoke their ire over Iraq/Afghanistan/the WoT. Scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours.
Grimis
Scrapple
Level: 124

Posts: 3885/4700
EXP: 21583401
For next: 253261

Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1269 days
Last activity: 1066 days
#14 Posted on 7.9.04 0748.08
Reposted on: 7.9.11 0748.22
The only reason that we may involve ourselves in the Chechen conflict is that some of the Checnyans have tides with al-Qeada.

Incidentally, we could've sent in Delta Force and the Russians could've taken the credit...
avonhun
Cotechino
Level: 22

Posts: 62/91
EXP: 53771
For next: 4580

Since: 21.4.04

Since last post: 3297 days
Last activity: 3260 days
AIM:  
#15 Posted on 7.9.04 1621.16
Reposted on: 7.9.11 1623.19
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010926-5.html#Chechnya-Russia

Q And so, the administration believes, with President Putin, that the resistance in Chechnya has been infiltrated and is linked to the same terrorist networks that committed the atrocities in New York?

MR. FLEISCHER: Terry, there is no question that there is an international terrorist presence in Chechnya that has links to Osama bin Laden. And that's why I indicated what I indicated.


This was from 2001. If the US is committed to fighting the worldwide war on terrorism, then something should have been done a long time ago.
Pool-Boy
Lap cheong
Level: 81

Posts: 1557/1759
EXP: 4929855
For next: 63015

Since: 1.8.02
From: Huntington Beach, CA

Since last post: 1315 days
Last activity: 81 days
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#16 Posted on 7.9.04 1707.49
Reposted on: 7.9.11 1707.52
    Originally posted by avonhun
    http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010926-5.html#Chechnya-Russia

    Q And so, the administration believes, with President Putin, that the resistance in Chechnya has been infiltrated and is linked to the same terrorist networks that committed the atrocities in New York?

    MR. FLEISCHER: Terry, there is no question that there is an international terrorist presence in Chechnya that has links to Osama bin Laden. And that's why I indicated what I indicated.


    This was from 2001. If the US is committed to fighting the worldwide war on terrorism, then something should have been done a long time ago.


What do you think should have been done? Its not like we were going to send troops to Russia - not only would everyone who opposed Iraq oppose that, but 90% of the pro-war folks, and Russia themselves would strongly oppose that course of action.

Our goals right now are to use military pressure on nations that support terrorism, and harbor terrorists within their borders. Russia does not support terrorism, and sending troops into Chechnya would do nothing other than to provoke the Russians in a very real way against us.

Even suggesting that we should have done something about Chechnya before today is asinine. Right now, that is Russia's fight. If they decide to ask for our help, we will discuss it with them. Until that point - we have commitments elsewhere...

This is a perfect example of "Damned if you do, damned if you don't." We go after Iraq, and we are warmongers, and wrong. We DON'T go into Chechnya, and we are negligent, and therefore wrong.

I guess you just can't win with some folks...
avonhun
Cotechino
Level: 22

Posts: 63/91
EXP: 53771
For next: 4580

Since: 21.4.04

Since last post: 3297 days
Last activity: 3260 days
AIM:  
#17 Posted on 8.9.04 1234.57
Reposted on: 8.9.11 1234.57
the world will be a much better place if people ever realize that there are other ways to solve problems than violence. i never said we should sent troops into russia, that would have been ridiculous. my point was that we are not fighting an effective war on terror.
DrDirt
Banger
Level: 96

Posts: 1201/2703
EXP: 8924331
For next: 64488

Since: 8.10.03
From: flyover country

Since last post: 8 days
Last activity: 2 min.
#18 Posted on 8.9.04 1334.47
Reposted on: 8.9.11 1335.04
    Originally posted by avonhun
    the world will be a much better place if people ever realize that there are other ways to solve problems than violence. i never said we should sent troops into russia, that would have been ridiculous. my point was that we are not fighting an effective war on terror.


I can't agree or disagree with you. How do we know if we are fighting an effective War on Terror? It's much more complicated than a conventional war.

Hell, in Vietnam we were winning and didn't really realize it for 20 years.
spf
Scrapple
Level: 133

Posts: 2937/5403
EXP: 27158617
For next: 694123

Since: 2.1.02
From: The Las Vegas of Canada

Since last post: 10 days
Last activity: 2 days
AIM:  
#19 Posted on 8.9.04 1344.38
Reposted on: 8.9.11 1347.27
    Originally posted by DrDirt
      Originally posted by avonhun
      the world will be a much better place if people ever realize that there are other ways to solve problems than violence. i never said we should sent troops into russia, that would have been ridiculous. my point was that we are not fighting an effective war on terror.


    I can't agree or disagree with you. How do we know if we are fighting an effective War on Terror? It's much more complicated than a conventional war.

    Hell, in Vietnam we were winning and didn't really realize it for 20 years.

Much like now, what exactly were we winning in Vietnam? We were losing tens of thousands of young Americans to prop up a corrupt regime that had no affection for the United States. What was the prize worth all those lives? Just as now, what are we winning? The war on Iraq has created more terrorists than it has stopped IMO, and turned a country that was relatively secular until recently into a hotbed of Islamic Fundamentalism. Not what we needed.
DrDirt
Banger
Level: 96

Posts: 1202/2703
EXP: 8924331
For next: 64488

Since: 8.10.03
From: flyover country

Since last post: 8 days
Last activity: 2 min.
#20 Posted on 8.9.04 1430.19
Reposted on: 8.9.11 1432.44
    Originally posted by spf2119

    Much like now, what exactly were we winning in Vietnam? We were losing tens of thousands of young Americans to prop up a corrupt regime that had no affection for the United States. What was the prize worth all those lives? Just as now, what are we winning? The war on Iraq has created more terrorists than it has stopped IMO, and turned a country that was relatively secular until recently into a hotbed of Islamic Fundamentalism. Not what we needed.


I am not commenting yea or nay on the reasons and goals in Vietnam. Simply, we pulled out because we thought we weren't winning and could never win. After Tet in 1968, we had inflicted huge casualties and were in a position to "win" the war. Only we didn't realize it. My point is that in wars like this, it's almost impossible to tell where you are at.

I agree with your last ideas but we are there now and are stuck finding a way to successfully conclude it.
Pages: 1 2 NextThread ahead: Zell Miller makes Chris Matthews his bitch
Next thread: Bush ahead by 11 points
Previous thread: The Midnight Ride of John Kerry
(704 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - Bush and ChechnyaRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board - 7 year recycle

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim
This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.193 seconds.