The Russian School Seige

Well its finally over, and with the death toll still being calculated it seems as if the large percentage of people survived, however do you think it was right for the chechen rebels to bring their war to a russian primary school? Do you think the Russian government and army handled the situation well and with hindsight is there anything that should have been done differently.

Of course i condem a civil war being brought to such a place as a school but i do feel that the russians handled the situation well and when it all seemed to goto pot they kept their calm, went in and sorted things out.

Of course tell me your opinion on the situation :D

Are oyu talking about that school in Russia with lots of students inside it that the terrorist took control?

Yes he is.

Well, terrorists hold hostages. Russians run in with guns blazing. MOST of the kids survived.

No, I think they could have done better, Kids died right? Thats no good.

Thank Lord it stopped but I think that terrorist don't look to other people and feel desperate so they do this attacks of nonesense. What have kids to do with what they want? It is wrong and they don't have the right to do it...

By the way any news about the two french journalist hostages kidnapped in Iraq?

Fer-ench? whats that? :D

French from France? People from France?

I really find it difficult to cast an opinion on this situation, never having been in such a state of rebellion. I also think it would be very hypocritical for me to be aghast at this situation considering I come froma country birthed through guerilla war tactics. The Chechen people have been through a lot at the hands of Russia, seemingly for no reason at all, especially in recent years. Before I make a real statement about the situation, I'd need more information.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TasteyPies

Well, terrorists hold hostiges.

---

I would just like to make the point that although any situation involving hostages automattically induces the word terrorists they were not terrorists. The reason, they were members of the Chechen rebel force which is currently in a state of civil war with Russia. This means that although their actions were of terror, they were not terrorists and although the news used the word terrorest every third sylible they should not be classed as that.

Also in response to Tastey, the russians only went in after civillians tried to escape causing the insergents to begin shooting the civilians, this was probably to try and reduce the total number of casualties.

My spelling [strike]are[/strike] is as bad as my sources. xD I heard on the radio that they were terrorists.

Quote:

---

I would just like to make the point that although any situation involving hostages automattically induces the word terrorists they were not terrorists. The reason, they were members of the Chechen rebel force which is currently in a state of civil war with Russia. This means that although their actions were of terror, they were not terrorists and although the news used the word terrorest every third sylible they should not be classed as that.

---

That's like saying 'even though he murdered someone, he's not a murderer.'. Completely wrong. They are EXACTLY that - murderers and terrorists. They have brought their fued beyond the reasonable grounds of fighting Russian armed forces, to capturing and murdering civilians. The Chechens are NOT Russians, they are not in a CIVIL war with Russia. They're their own people, who want Russia out of their turf, and if they can kill as many of the Russian Christian infidels along the way - goody. They are in close ties with the Arab\Muslim world outside, including Al Qaueda, by the way, they live by the laws of Islam, follow the doctrine of the Muslim Ummah (i.e, Islamic world domination)... sorry, but this is exactly like what's going on in other parts of the world.

Those people are TERRORISTS, MURDERERS, and denying that is like burying your head in the sand.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Divinity

Thank Lord it stopped but I think that terrorist don't look to other people and feel desperate so they do this attacks of nonesense. What have kids to do with what they want? It is wrong and they don't have the right to do it...

---

I agree.

I feel bad for those poor children. It was their first day of school. Even though some died, which is very tragic, at least it turned out better than the terrorist situation at that Moscow theatre where I think all the hostages died.

And I agree with War Angel. The children did absolutly nothing wrong, so I think the term terrorist is right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by War Angel

Those people are TERRORISTS, MURDERERS, and denying that is like burying your head in the sand.

---

I never said their not murderers, I said their not terrorists. And just because your not a terrorist does not mean you do not murder people. I doubt people go round calling World War II Nazi's terrorists, yet they murdered many people.

A terrorist is someone who does something to insite fear into a community, however most of the time there is no real reason behind this bar that they hate the world. Terrorist is an over-used American term, and I feel it is not applicable here. It is a civil war, and wars do not involve terroists, they involve insergents, armies and soldiers.

I saw now in a site that 150 people died and 300 got hurt...

Quote:

---

at least it turned out better than the terrorist situation at that Moscow theatre where I think all the hostages died.

---

Not nearly - around 50 innocents died back then, out of a possible 700, if memory serves. All the terrorists were killed.

Quote:

---

I never said their not murderers, I said their not terrorists.

---

How so? They are a non-unified (that is, not of a state or a country) force, trying to further a relogious/political/personal goal, through the use of violence and fear. That's terrorism.

Quote:

---

Terrorist is an over-used American term,

---

There's nothing American, or over-used in the word 'Terrorist'.

Quote:

---

It is a civil war, and wars do not involve terroists, they involve insergents, armies and soldiers.

---

When acts are carried out specifically against civilians, for the sole purpose of harming them and furthering anothe, remote goal (and not a direct one), then that is terrorism.