Chechnya?

[WUOrevolt]

Thoughts on independence, resistance to Russian occupation, etc.

[Phalanx]

I think the Chechans should have their independence. I don't know how bad it was for Chechnya before the war, but after 100-300,000 dead it seems the Russian government isn't peaceful towards the republic. However, I am opposed to the radical brand of Islam much of the resistance movement has introduced. All sides have committed atrocities towards civilans, but it is time for Russia to give up Chechnya!

[CLOCKWORK ORANGE]

Yes the Chechans should have their freedom. But Russia won't let them because Chechnya is very rich in oil & gas.

I do agree with Chinghis Khan about the Islamic extremists in Chechnya. The Beslan school siege was absolutely brutal. Even the Muslim clerics in Saudi Arabia and Iran condemned the school siege. Muslim militants and extremists have distanced themselves from the Chechen extremists. They themselves know that was pure savagery.

[Sankara1983]

I unconditionally support self-determination for Chechnya/Ichkeria and neighboring Dagestan and Ingushetia. However, I am not convinced that establishing more sovereign nation-states in the region is the best way to pursue this goal. These proposed states would be totally dependent on aid donors because of the devastation caused by the wars waged against them by the Kremlin. Such actions would also serve to stoke more ethnic tensions and violent conflict in the Caucasian republics that would remain under the Russian flag, especially Alaniya. Tensions in Alaniya would directly affect politics in South Ossetia, a region ethnically close to Alaniya that is recognized by the world as part of the republic of Georgia, but in reality is independent of Tbilisi. The Georgian government (with Western imperialist support) would most likely attempt to invade South Ossetia to prevent total secession, an example that might also lead Armenia to further its claim to Nagorno-Karabakh by force. This chain reaction would lead to general chaos throughout the region, which would not serve the interests of anyone except the Putin regime, extreme nationalists (backed by the West), and the Islamists, which happen to be the least desirable political forces present.

[WUOrevolt]

Most Chechans are regular Muslims who oppose whabbaism, but I wonder about the more secualr Chechens. I support Chechen independence, as I oppose miltary occupation of any country.

[Guerrilla22]

I support any movement that is trying to resist racial oppression and oppression from a government, which definitely is the case with Chechenya.

[ComradeOm]

Originally posted by CLOCKWORK [email protected] 30 2006, 02:40 AM
Yes the Chechans should have their freedom. But Russia won't let them because Chechnya is very rich in oil & gas.
Bullshit. Chechnya had de facto independence after the first war. What did the Chechans do with this new found freedom? They used it to launch attacks and raids into Dagestan and other neighbouring states.

I'm not saying that Russia and Putin have benefited from the war and gas but in '96 Russia was incapable of taking advantages of these. They were soundly beaten in the first war and would not have ventured near the region were it not for the stupidity of the Chechan bandits.

[Dreckt]

Bullshit. Chechnya had de facto independence after the first war. What did the Chechans do with this new found freedom? They used it to launch attacks and raids into Dagestan and other neighbouring states.

The same could be said about any other nation. In the end it is the Chechen people who are suffering. Really, do the working class in Chechnya really care if they are a part of Russia or a sovereign nation?

They would continue with capitalism, if not create an Islamic Republic. I am not defending Russia or Russian atrocities in Chechnya (foremost rape and executions), so I'd say the situation is kind of tricky.


They were soundly beaten in the first war and would not have ventured near the region were it not for the stupidity of the Chechan bandits.

I don't think the Chechens quite won the war in the general meaning. I think Russia would interfere no matter what. They don't want to loose a part of their country anymore than Turkey want to loose Kurdistan or China Taiwan.

[ComradeOm]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30 2006, 07:58 PM
I don't think the Chechens quite won the war in the general meaning. I think Russia would interfere no matter what. They don't want to loose a part of their country anymore than Turkey want to loose Kurdistan or China Taiwan.
Russia lost the first war. They were in no position to offer anything but de facto independence. Would Russia have interfered in Chechnya anyway - yes; it is within their sphere of influence. Would it have been a new war - who can say. But the Chechyans handed Putin exactly what he needed to go to war and have nobody to blame for this current mess other than the bandit leaders.

[CLOCKWORK ORANGE]

Originally posted by ComradeOm+Mar 30 2006, 06:48 PM--> (ComradeOm @ Mar 30 2006, 06:48 PM)
CLOCKWORK [email protected] 30 2006, 02:40 AM
Yes the Chechans should have their freedom. But Russia won't let them because Chechnya is very rich in oil & gas.
Bullshit. Chechnya had de facto independence after the first war. What did the Chechans do with this new found freedom? They used it to launch attacks and raids into Dagestan and other neighbouring states.

I'm not saying that Russia and Putin have benefited from the war and gas but in '96 Russia was incapable of taking advantages of these. They were soundly beaten in the first war and would not have ventured near the region were it not for the stupidity of the Chechan bandits. [/b]
I don't see how anyone can deny Moscow's interest in Chechen oil.

[ComradeOm]

Russia has enough gas and oil of its own. Are they interested in having more? Of course. Would they have launched another war, following the disaster that was the first, to get it without provocation? Not a chance.

So before you start complaining about the big bad Russia crushing independence movements, remember that this current war is of the Chechans' making. They may as well have held the door open and invited the Russians in :rolleyes:

[CLOCKWORK ORANGE]

Russia isn't "big and bad." Don't get me wrong am not trying to make them out as bullies. And in no way am saying the Chechens are saints. Am just pointing to the fact that there is a great interest in the oil and gas.

[Janus]

The Chechens are ethnically and religiously different from the Russians. This is one of the major factors that has led to the seeking of independence by the Chechens. Though I support self-determination, I am somewhat troubled by the numbers of fundamentalist jihadis fighting in Chechnya. But the tactics that the Russians have supposedly used against the Chechens are just almost as atrocious as the deeds committed by the Chechen rebels.

[WUOrevolt]

The major difference between the Chechen forces and Russian forces is that the Chechens are rag-tag guerrillas, where as the Russians are a gigantic army with tremendous air power(as is evident in the complete destructin of Grozny by Russian missles and bombs).

The Russians forces are much worse than the Chechen forces. Most Chechen inflicted casualties are Russian forces, while Russians have killed thousands of Chechen civilians, raped many Chechen girls, and rounded up hundreds and hundreds of Chechen men just because they are fighting age and put them in "filtration camps" to root out rebel leaders.

[CLOCKWORK ORANGE]

Yeah you're right. But please your making the Chechen rebels look like some innocent guerrilla group. The Beslan school siege was the most horrific terrorist attack in recent memory.

Did you know the rebels planned a second school siege?
Chechen rebels planned second 'Beslan' (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4560017.stm)

[WUOrevolt]

I wasnt trying to make the Chechen guerrillas look like some innocent guerrillas. I know there are extremists like those who planned and carried out the school seige. But remember many Chechen rebels denounced the seige, so we do know that not all Chechen guerrillas are like those brutal murdereous thugs who carried out the school seige. 186 children dead, 331 dead in total seriously that is pure brutality. I denounce any attack like the school seige as that is pure terrorism and absolute brutality.

[CLOCKWORK ORANGE]

But remember many Chechen rebels denounced the seige, so we do know that not all Chechen guerrillas are like those brutal murdereous thugs who carried out the school seige.
I highly doubt any Chechen rebels denoucned the attacks. It doesn't make any sense, especially when the Chechen leader Shamil Basayev proudly claimed responsibility for the attacks. Why would the rebels go against their leader?

I never heard of the Chechen rebels denouncing the attack so please try to get some sources to prove your statement.

[WUOrevolt]

Aslan Maskhadov

[WUOrevolt]

Shamil Basayev is not the leader of the enitre Chechen resistance. He doesnt speak for all Chechen rebels.

[CLOCKWORK ORANGE]

Aslan Maskhadov
He didn't denounce anything at all. He simply negotiated with the hostage takers which in turn just made things worse.


Shamil Basayev is not the leader of the enitre Chechen resistance. He doesnt speak for all Chechen rebels.
I suggest you do some research on the Chechen resistance. Shamil Basayev is the leader of most Chechen rebels. Even the ones that aren't under his command didn't denounce the school siege.

[CCCPneubauten]

On one hand you have Islamic Radicals who murder children, and on the other you have Russian Imperialists who rape young women.

Both sides kill...

Wow...

This will be tricky.

[WUOrevolt]

Aslan Maskhadov has always denouned the killing of civilians.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/459302.stm

"They disregarded the fact that Mr Maskhadov publicly condemned the bloody attack, said that forces under his command had nothing to do with it, and called for Mr Basayev to face trial. "

"Mr Maskhadov described the perpetrators of Beslan as "madmen" driven out of their senses by Russian acts of brutality.

To the end, he condemned the killing of civilians."

[WUOrevolt]

Originally posted by [email protected] 31 2006, 06:26 AM
On one hand you have Islamic Radicals who murder children, and on the other you have Russian Imperialists who rape young women.

Both sides kill...

Wow...

This will be tricky.
I'm not trying to justify the brutal Chechen rebels at all.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4199146.stm

At least 40,000 civilians killed in 1994-96 war
At least 10,000 civilians killed since 1999
No clear figures for Russian losses but military deaths thought to at least equal USSR's Afghan toll of 15,000
Data on civilians supplied by Human Rights Watch

[CLOCKWORK ORANGE]

Originally posted by [email protected] 31 2006, 02:32 AM
Aslan Maskhadov has always denouned the killing of civilians.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/459302.stm

"They disregarded the fact that Mr Maskhadov publicly condemned the bloody attack, said that forces under his command had nothing to do with it, and called for Mr Basayev to face trial. "

"Mr Maskhadov described the perpetrators of Beslan as "madmen" driven out of their senses by Russian acts of brutality.

To the end, he condemned the killing of civilians."
That's an obituary not an article. Right, like an obituary isn't biased. If someone dies and a obituary is made, it won't say "John Smith is an asshole who used to beat his wife." I have yet to see or read any public statements by Maskhadov denouncing the attacks.

But let's just say he did denounce the attacks. That is one Chechen rebel. You clearly stated
But remember many Chechen rebels denounced the seige Well who else denounced the school siege?

[WUOrevolt]

All the rebels under his command denounced the attacks, as he speaks for them as their leader.

[WUOrevolt]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3664864.stm

"Aslan Maskhadov, the main Chechen rebel leader, has denied any links to the three-day siege in the North Ossetian town which ended in carnage. "

[CLOCKWORK ORANGE]

Originally posted by [email protected] 31 2006, 03:03 AM
All the rebels under his command denounced the attacks, as he speaks for them as their leader.
Yet he has never made a public statement denouncing the attack. All these 3 word quotes seem to be from private conversations. So that's just complete bullshit.

That guy seemed to have a case of bad luck because he tried to stop Muslim extremism in Chechnya but in doing so just made Basayev bigger.

He didn't denounce the attacks, but let's just say he did. Look at this:
http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f192/clockworkorange192/Pic2.jpg

In the picture that is Basayev to the left and Maskhadov to the right. That is dated "Ramadan 2004"

Now, Ramadan in 2004 started in October. The school siege was in September of that same year.

Are you seriously still going to tell me that he denounced the attack and a month later "hangs out" with Basayev? Don't you see anything wrong in that?

That's like the someone denouncing Sept. 11 then going to a dinner with Bin Ladin.

Don't you see the hypocrisy in this?!?!?!?

[WUOrevolt]

Basayev and Maskhadov did have a loose alliance, but it was similar to the alliance Mao had with Chiang during the Japanese occupation. Basayev even tried to oust Maskhadov from power, so I doubt they had any joint operations.

All his statements are quotes from BBC reporters.

About the picture: I have no idea nor do you. We dont know what they were discussing. For all we know Maskhadov was condemnig Basayev for his brutal attacks, and trying to get him to end his campaign.

[WUOrevolt]

Look man, I have never defended the Belsan school seige.

[CLOCKWORK ORANGE]

About the picture: I have no idea nor do you. We dont know what they were discussing. For all we know Maskhadov was condemnig Basayev for his brutal attacks, and trying to get him to end his campaign.
You are definitely right, I don't know what they were talking. But I do know the date, a month after the attack.

I admit I was wrong, he did denounce the attack, but obviously didn't mean it.

He stood for the secular nationalists who "denounced" the attack. You're telling he's going to the religious fundementalist who financed the whole attack for some meeting a month after the attack? That is a very very inept thing to do. The guy's denouncing of the attack obviously wasn't genuine. I hope you can see that. Listen am not trying to hassle you but it's obvious he didn't have any true intentions.

[WUOrevolt]

What do you mean that he didnt have any true intentions?

He always denounced the killing of civilians.

Oh and you mentioned the secular Chechens, do you have any info on them?

[CLOCKWORK ORANGE]

What do you mean that he didnt have any true intentions?
He didn't hold any "beef" with Basayev. Yet he "denounced" like it was some courageous thing. He didn't even distance himsef with Basayev after the attack, proving the denouncing wasn't genuine.


Oh and you mentioned the secular Chechens, do you have any info on them?
Unfortunately no :( I'll try to look up more info on them. All I know is that after Basayev became out of Maskhadovs reach he formed his secular nationalist group. Now was it for Chechnya or protection from Basayev? Who knows. I wonder if the secular guerrillas are still around. I'll search something on them.


Look man, I have never defended the Belsan school seige.
Sorry if my posts come out like an "attack or assault." By no means am I implying you are defending the attack or anything like that.

But the debate has been going good :D No name calling or flame or any of that other crap so relevant in other message boards.

[вор в законе]

On one hand you have Islamic Radicals who murder children, and on the other you have Russian Imperialists who rape young women.

True

&

The Chechens are used as fifth columnists by the USA and other Imperialist forces.

The communists support the struggle for national liberation only if the struggle is anti-imperialist.

[dso79]

He didn't even distance himsef with Basayev after the attack, proving the denouncing wasn't genuine.

http://www.kommersant.com/page.asp?id=545159

In this interview Maskhadov not only clearly condemned the Beslan siege and other terrorist attacks, he even promised to hand over those responsible to an International Tribunal; he also said he would try to prevent similar attacks.

Maskhadov knew that such attacks were harming the Chechen cause so it makes sense that he would try to control Basayev, rather than just distance himself from him.


But the Chechyans handed Putin exactly what he needed to go to war and have nobody to blame for this current mess other than the bandit leaders.

There is some evidence that the apartment bombings that were used to justify the invasion were in fact carried out by the FSB.

[ComradeOm]

Originally posted by [email protected] 1 2006, 12:11 PM
There is some evidence that the apartment bombings that were used to justify the invasion were in fact carried out by the FSB.
Unlikely though I wouldn't put it past them. There is however plenty of evidence of bandits attacking and taking hostages in neighbouring states during the inter war period.