QandOQuestions and Observations |
||
|
||
| Comments | ||
|
Russia seems to handle these things a bit too ham-fistedly. Remember the Opera House takeover? They killed everyone by pumping in too much gas. If Putin wants to nuke the terrorists, I say he goes for it. Posted by: shark at September 3, 2004 09:40 AM |
||
|
'bout the only thing that kept the terrorists from killing everyone this time is that they didn't bring enough explosive to do the job right (that's their aim to began with). When they get their hands on tactical nukes, you can kiss Moscow and St. Petersburg goodbye. Posted by: BigFire at September 3, 2004 09:42 AM |
||
|
In reply to Shark: Regarding the Opera House; the military did not pump too much gas in. They mixed incorrect quantites of the chemicals to produce the gas; thereby making it deadly. It is not up to America to impose its "policing" on countries that do not effect America's security. If that was the case then why has your government allowed thousands of people to be killed on a daily basis in Sudan...oops I forgot, there's no oil in Sudan and therefore no reason for your country to step in. Posted by: Emma at September 3, 2004 09:52 AM |
||
|
Actually there is oil in the Sudan, Emma, and unless you've been living in a cave, you'd know the US has been leading the fight to get the violence stopped in Sudan. As usual the third-world debating club known as the UN has done nothing and the Europeans sent a "fact-finding" mission there and concluded it wasn't "genocide" so they could safely ignore it. Posted by: McQ at September 3, 2004 09:58 AM |
||
|
I think that they probably did seal the escape routes but the terrorists where using human shields. Posted by: andy at September 3, 2004 10:09 AM |
||
|
How much oil have we pumped out of Bosnia lately? Any count on the # of barrels per day? And our guys really hosed up that hostage extraction in the school in Russia. Guess our policing troops got out of there before the cameras could catch them. Posted by: looker at September 3, 2004 10:09 AM |
||
|
In reply to Shark: Regarding the Opera House; the military did not pump too much gas in. They mixed incorrect quantites of the chemicals to produce the gas; thereby making it deadly Thanks for the clarification Emma Posted by: shark at September 3, 2004 10:09 AM |
||
|
well as an iraqi here i apreciete what Mr.Bush did , maybe not completing the job yet but we belive in giving time , and i believe in teh russian case the russians HAD to act like that in both cases the school and opera , you must put in your mind that this people don't plan to go out alive so even if their demands were met they will probably end up killing everybody because their aim is to kill not to get their demands met , so in the opera house you must know that most than half the hostages lived so what is better half dead or all dead !!! ,andin the school part they could have arranged it better but it seems to me that this city is very far from the central command for some reason ! plus knowing the people of these areas ( iraqis have similar mentality ) i assure you there's absulotly no way to convince the parents to stay away without shooting them !! Posted by: MSa at September 3, 2004 10:11 AM |
||
|
Yes, but the oil in Sudan is inaccessible to the US because of the sanctions imposed. Additionally, the UN have recently, more precisely, yesterday, assisted the AU to reach an agreement between rebel groups. Posted by: Emma at September 3, 2004 10:14 AM |
||
|
i assure you there's absulotly no way to convince the parents to stay away without shooting them !! You move them, if necessary, by brute force. You do what the NYPD did to disruptive protesters this week. I'd much rather have parents alive to be upset at me afterward than to have them in the line of firing or interfering with the operation. All they can do is hurt the operation and jeopardize its success. There is no upside to them being there. That's how you clear the area and isolate it. There is no reason, to include compassion for their plight, which should override and jeopardize the success of the rescue. From what I've read, they didn't do that and that was their first mistake. Posted by: McQ at September 3, 2004 10:16 AM |
||
|
Ah, now there IS oil in Sudan but its not available to the US? I see. Well gee, Emma, according to your line of reasoning, it would appear then that there's all the more reason for the US to go in there, huh? Another good "war of oil", eh? As for the agreement, they had another which the government of the Sudan didn't live up to which expired a week ago. Somehow it appears those who think the UN will actually do something forget the 10 years they wrote nasty notes to Iraq while it was murdering its citizens. Why in the world would I expect anything the UN has done concerning the Sudan to be any different? I'm from Missouri ... "show me". Posted by: McQ at September 3, 2004 10:21 AM |
||
|
The parents were angry and armed !! will you be happy trying to stop them trying to save their children!!, plus it's appearant that they didn't have enough troops around to break into the building and seal the building , because from what i hear at teh news the building was well sealed till the breakout happend , and belive me when people are running out of a building under gun fire the last thing a soldier will think of is to check everyone going out and stop people going it , think of it from a human point of view, will you run to pick up a child or stop a parent running in !! Posted by: Msa at September 3, 2004 10:22 AM |
||
|
So? What did the military have, sticks? Look, if you're comfortable with trying to run a hostage rescue with all sorts of people interfering and getting in the way, you'll see results like they had. I'm arguing that one of the reasons that the rescue came off so poorly is because they didn't do the necessary things to secure and isolate the area. I think that's an obvious point. Why it happened is really irrelevant. That it did happen is the point and one of the reasons it went so poorly. Posted by: McQ at September 3, 2004 10:26 AM |
||
|
Will the concept of deterrence work with those whose only apparent goals are to kill massive numbers of civilians? What would happen if Russia decided to level a city (perhaps allowing locals to leave, or perhaps not, beforehand) in retaliation for every such attack on their civilian population? Would the certainty of material or human loss on a massive scale convince the supporters of those performing attacks on civilians that the cost/benefit ratio was not in their favor? Posted by: me at September 3, 2004 10:27 AM |
||
|
Not to the fanatics. If they're willing to kill children as well as die for their cause, why would that impress them? Posted by: McQ at September 3, 2004 10:28 AM |
||
|
Emma - Or SERBIA- another major oil exporter to the world.
Posted by: looker at September 3, 2004 10:33 AM |
||
|
No, there is less reason to go in because of the sanctions. Anyway, no offence 'cos I think the US military are trained to a very high degree, but at the same time, I think they would be out of their depth in a guerilla war. Posted by: Emma at September 3, 2004 10:36 AM |
||
|
Perhaps they need to build a wall and seal themselves off from the Chechens, if that is even possible given the geography of the situation. Otherwise they're going to need to take extremely draconian steps Posted by: shark at September 3, 2004 10:36 AM |
||
|
No it won't work , this is a terrorists way of dealing , and it is not working for them too. Posted by: Msa at September 3, 2004 10:38 AM |
||
|
Emma: I didn't bring up the subject. As a reminder, you did. You shotgun some broad insults about the US and then, when your feet are held to the fire, you pretend you'd prefer to talk about the Russian problem and write off the replies you got is a "black and white" view. Really. How much more black and white can one get It is not up to America to impose its "policing" on countries that do not effect America's security. If that was the case then why has your government allowed thousands of people to be killed on a daily basis in Sudan...oops I forgot, there's no oil in Sudan and therefore no reason for your country to step in. ...hmmm, Emma? Posted by: McQ at September 3, 2004 10:42 AM |
||
|
Before I leave. I totally agree Msa, I don't think a wall would work. It didn't work up in Northern Ireland, and I only live a few miles down from there. I don't think it's going too well in Palistine either. Posted by: Emma at September 3, 2004 10:43 AM |
||
|
Now they say 10 arabs were in the hostage takers , as an arab i hate these people with all my heart and have no support for them , and i don't know any iraqi who does . Posted by: Msa at September 3, 2004 10:45 AM |
||
|
UPDATE: From a radio report, Russia is claiming that 9 of the terrorists which were killed were "Arab mercenaries". Not Islamic fundamentalist. Not jihadists. Not terrorists. Mercenaries Well, don't forget, the journalists creedo is "one man's terrorist is another mans freedom fighter" Because killing children are what freedom fighters do, sure. Posted by: shark at September 3, 2004 10:47 AM |
||
|
the answer is easy , all the Mercenaries arabs who went to fight in chychenia are islamic fundemetalists but how would you know that from the place where you are from we know that because we were there Posted by: msa at September 3, 2004 10:51 AM |
||
|
msa: all the Mercenaries arabs who went to fight in chychenia are islamic fundemetalists.
Posted by: McQ at September 3, 2004 10:56 AM |
||
|
Wise up Mc...I was drawing a parallel to Iraq and the original purpose of that war was to find WMD. Posted by: Emma at September 3, 2004 10:57 AM |
||
|
And 10 years of talking with Iraq yielded exactly what, Emma? Posted by: McQ at September 3, 2004 11:03 AM |
||
|
Unless they take some alive, we won't know if they are fundamental, or simply mental. And mercenaries? Doesn't quite work if they were willing to blow themselves up. Mercencaries like to enjoy the money they made doing mercenary things and blowing yourself up is inconsistent with that goal. Posted by: looker at September 3, 2004 11:04 AM |
||
|
Excellent point, looker .... hard to collect the big bucks if your a smoking, bleeding heap. Posted by: McQ at September 3, 2004 11:06 AM |
||
|
Msa- You need to find a TV station somewhere, and repeat what you have said here. More than 1/2 the people here in the US have no idea what the war we are fighting in Iraq is about. I believe WMD's were really secondary. IMO, the was was about creating an environment where, over time, there would be more people like you in the Middle East...and fewer like those who butcher school children or video tape beheadings of defenseless innocents. I am afraid that if we are not successful, the war will escalate greatly and millions will be killed. Posted by: Mr. K at September 3, 2004 11:20 AM |
||
|
looker: "Unless they take some alive, we won't know if they are fundamental, or simply mental." You are not stupid; neither are we. So stop acting like it. Please.
You know the strategic reason we took Iraq (there were plenty of good ones, but I mean why we did it when we did it)? Because now, with Afghanistan, we will be guaranteed at least two invasion routes to Iran. Iran is the key to the region. This administration, and God bless 'em for being adults serious about protecting this country, has always intended to take the mullahs out before the core starts cooking. Syria will not hang on after an Iranian collapse, and then we can reckon with the House of Saud, which just might clean its own stables before we have to. Five years to the virtual elimination of governments which fund, house and protect Islamofascists. And then a genration or more of continual pre-emptive actions against Islamofascist remnants until Arab Islam can face the truth and quit blaming the West for its own incompetence. Posted by: Jumbo at September 3, 2004 08:36 PM |
||
|
Jumbo - I should have engaged sarcasm mode beforehand on that segment. I don't believe for an instant they were mercenaries, and I'm sure they were fundamentalists of one stripe or another. Mercenaries may be the scum of the earth, but they like to live after they've done their daily scummy deeds, otherwise there's no point in being a "mercenary". Hence second para on my post still applies. Posted by: looker at September 3, 2004 08:56 PM |
||
|
On the "serves em right" front, I read on the wire that some villagers caught one of the terrorists and beat him to death. I'm having a hard time thinking that's a problem. Posted by: looker at September 3, 2004 09:31 PM |
||
|
"Jumbo - I should have engaged sarcasm mode beforehand on that segment." Sorry, looker. I see that now. Posted by: Jumbo at September 3, 2004 10:22 PM |
||
|
Jumbo - No problem here, I shouldn't have tried to joke, it's not a funny issue and I regret even attempting sarcastic humor. I caught enough of the still photos from the outcome that I didn't need to see. Thank God thumbnail shots are small and I wasn't wearing my glasses. Couldn't bring myself to watch the video. Who the hell can see this, or hear about it, and still tell themselves that we're the evil ones, that we're wrong and that we ought not to be involved in rooting this out stem and branch anywhere it occurs throughout the world. What kind of people can close their eyes to this and condemn us for what we're trying to do? What was it Burke said? - "The only thing necessary for evil to triumph..."? Posted by: looker at September 4, 2004 12:13 AM |
||
|
Mr.K Posted by: Msa at September 4, 2004 01:31 AM |
||
|
i am totally behind putin in his cause to retaliate and i believe that chechnya will see its come up very soon your going to have a nuclear power coming down like a tonne of bricks and hopefully russian vigilantes exacting their revenge and the best of luck to them. Putin was also right to leave charred remains of terrorists out to hang to deter future assaults Russia will be dancing on their graves in no time Posted by: UniteAgainstTerrorism at September 7, 2004 05:10 PM |
||