140 dead in Moscow hostage, death toll still rising...

C Elegans · Post by **C Elegans** » Sat Oct 26, 2002 11:54 am

So this is how the hostage situation at the Melnikov theatre in Moscow ended, and I think we all knew there could not be a non violent ending. No official death toll is released, European media report around 90 dead of the hostage and between 40-50 of the hostage takers dead. There are also some casualties among the special forces.

If you somehow have managed to miss this horrible event, read more about it here

The conflict between Russia and Chechnya goes centuries back. In brief, the 19th century Russian tsar regime kept control over the area by burning fields, killing livestock and deporting people. Chechnya lost about half of its population in the 19th centruy wars and deportations. The 1917 revolution brought no change, first the Mencheviks then the Bolsheviks continued the starve-out strategy. In 1944, Stalin finally decided to solve the rebel problem once and for all by simply deporting the North Caucasus populations to Siberia and Kazakstan. It is estimated that about 200 000 Chechnyans died during those transports. In the light of hundreds of years of unfair and cruel treatment from a sovereign Russia who constantly kept breaking their part of the numerous peace treaties, it is not surprising that in 1991 when the Soviet union had fallen, Chechnya were among many of the states who declared themselves independant. However, as we all know, Russia did not accept Chechnyan independence but invaded the place with military forces and the whole 1994-96 campaign was a total disaster for both sides. Since the ceasefire in -96, things have not been better in Chechnya. The promised finacial support from Russia never came, so the torn cities and society have not been rebuild. 80% of the population has been unemployed. The elected president Machadow has not been able to control the situation, and criminality, fundamentalism and actions from independant warlords flourished in the chaotic and unstructured Chechnya. Bandit gangs living off kidnapping foreigners in order to demand big ransons, made work impossible for aid organisations and journalists. Several warlords actively work against the elected regimes policy to create peace in the region, and in 1999, Basajev et al attacked the neighbour state Dagestan in order to incorporate it into a larger, independant muslim state. This of course gave Russia a very good reason to reinforce its military presence in Chechnya.

After the 9/11 attack in the US, Putin of course had the chance to increase Russia's pressure and use a harder line against Chechnya without having to fear much critisism from the international community. From what I see in US and UK media, Putin has managed very well to sell in the idea that the Chechnyan rebels are terrorists, connected to Bin Laden and Al Queda. And the theatre hostage situation only confirms this view.

So after this little background, my questions are two:

1. What do you think about the Chechnyan rebels, do you view them as freedom fighters with a just cause, or as terrorists? How do you think a situation like the Melnikov hostage could happen?

The hostage takers had planted explosives around the whole building, and many of them also carried explosives on their bodies. The architechture of the Melnikov theatre is such, that a collapsing of the building would most certainly lead to instant death of everybody within. The hostage takers have declared several times that they were all prepared to die.

The hostage takers started to kill hostages this morning, just as they said they would do if Russia did not withdraw from Chechnya. After the killings, a group of hostages tried to flee, and that's obviously when it was decided to storm the theatre. Spetsnaz troops stormed early this morning, probably using some kind of gas.

2. What do you think should have been done? With hindsight, could the situation have been solved in a less violent and costly way?

My condolences to all of the victims and their families, and to Russia and Chechnya both.

ThorinOakensfield · Post by **ThorinOakensfield** » Sat Oct 26, 2002 12:16 pm

1. What do you think about the Chechnyan rebels, do you view them as freedom fighters with a just cause, or as terrorists?

Like I see Palestinians, Kashmiris, Basque as freedom fighters, I see the Chechnyans as freedom fighters too. Russia is holding onto this tiny little country, for some reason. Is it because it is a connection to the Black Sea? Or because Russia is trying to hold onto the little they have left of their former empire? The Russians have acted in a horrible way against the Chechnyans. They've been killing thousands and thousands for the past 100 years and got very bad under the Communists. The Chechnyans went to an extreme by taking a huge number of hostages and I doubt they had planned what was going to happen after a few days anyway. Russia doesn't give into "terrorists" demands, and wouldn't have even if it meant the death of many of these people. Russia is asking for this by constantly invading and killing Chechnyans. They can't expect them to sit back and be conquered. (I'll never understand why some people think that somebody can be conquered and won't resist).

Zelgadis · Post by **Zelgadis** » Sat Oct 26, 2002 12:32 pm

Originally posted by C Elegans
1. What do you think about the Chechnyan rebels, do you view them as freedom fighters with a just cause, or as terrorists? How do you think a situation like the Melnikov hostage could happen?

Hmm, i would say freedom fighters, their cause is justified.

Originally posted by C Elegans
2. What do you think should have been done? With hindsight, could the situation have been solved in a less violent and costly way?[/b]

I think that russia should have withdrawn. The whole region is too unstable for them to try to control, and the money they are spending on military forces would be better spent improving their economy and raising the standard of living than more violence.

HighLordDave · Post by **HighLordDave** » Sat Oct 26, 2002 12:40 pm

Originally posted by C Elegans
1. What do you think about the Chechnyan rebels, do you view them as freedom fighters with a just cause, or as terrorists? How do you think a situation like the Melnikov hostage could happen?

This is a tough question because there is a fine line between a freedom fighter and a terrorist. The founding fathers of the United States were in fact terrorists leading an armed insurrection against a legitimate government. Sam Houston and the movers and shakers behind the formation of Texas were also terrorists leading an armed insurrection against the same people who invited them to develop the land. Washington and Houston are remembered as freedom fighters fighting against oppressive regimes.

Jefferson Davis led his own armed insurrection and he is villified in modern history. So what's the difference between a freedom fighter and a terrorist? Victory and spin. In his own mind, Osama bin Laden is fighting for some cause that sees the United States as an oppressive presence in Saudi Arabia and the middle east. To his followers, he is to be venerated crusader against evil; to us, he is a terrorist.

Do the Chechens have a legitimate beef against the Czar's descendant government? Sure they do. The Caucasus were conquered by the Russians and incorporated against their will into the Russian (and later Soviet) sphere. Unfortunately, there is not a lot the Chechens can do about the Russian presence on "their" land. The track record of terrorism isn't very good; if you look at the Palestineans and the IRA, they have been unsuccessful in their aims despite decades of guerilla warfare.

The way I see it, there are two ways for the Chechens to get what they want. First they can convince the Russians that it is more trouble to govern the province than it's worth and convince them to give Chechnya autonomy. This is how the British empire has dissolved; India, Hong Kong, Singapore, their colonies in the middle east, etc. were all given independence because the British could not afford to keep governing their empire.

The second way would be for the Chechens to get some patron to fund an insurrection. For quick independence, they would wage a full-out rebellion and gain autonomy from Russia. A longer path to this end would be a long and bloody war with mounds of causalties on both sides. This is what happened to the Soviets in Afghanistan, which was as much an open military conflict as it was terrorist activity. Unfortunately for the Chechens, the only state who can afford to fund such a war is the United States and we have no desire to pour money into Chechnya now that the cold war is over.

Since the Holocaust, the world has a low opinion of people who use civilians as proxies for their aims, even though everyone (including the United States) does it. As long as Chechens are taking civilian hostages and going into Moscow to do it, I think that international sentiment will be against them. I also believe that Chechen independence is not likely in the near future unless the Russians can be shown that it's in their ultimate best interestes to give up the province.

Littiz · Post by **Littiz** » Sat Oct 26, 2002 12:42 pm

1)
Terrorists.
If you really have a GOOD cause, you don't go killing randomly people
whose only mistake was NOT KNOWING or not caring for their cause.
The hostages were executed.
No one of the terrorists ever thought to survive all of this.
Sooner or later, the bombs would have exploded, just as people started
being executed.
Besides, they already had sent their delirant videos to Al-Jazeera, proclaming
the deaths of 100s of infidels.

Still, I do feel sorrow even for their women. It's a male weakness, but I was
close to cries when I saw the lifeless bodies of those young girls and ladies...
That wasn't supposed to be, they were only girls...
Even more are the hostages dead because of them, though....
Even a russian, 14 years old girl...

2)
Unfortunately, there was very little else to do.
The gas was the only mean to stop the bombed women AT THE SAME TIME.
Terrible day. Terrible.
But they had already decided to die, and executions were started.
They saved 700 people, without letting them explode
I think that was the right thing to do, still, I wouldn't ever had the
heart to decide it!!!
Man, I was awake to follow the events tonight..
Terrible...

ThorinOakensfield · Post by **ThorinOakensfield** » Sat Oct 26, 2002 1:35 pm

Originally posted by Littiz

Terrorists.
If you really have a GOOD cause, you don't go killing randomly people
whose only mistake was NOT KNOWING or not caring for their cause.

The same can be said for alot of people who are killed. People in Pearl Harbor, people in Hiroshima, people killed by Israeli missiles, and those that killed them felt it was good for the cause. Some may have been for the better, some for the worse. But they aren't terrorists. Even young men are sent to fight for something they don't care about and they are often killed too.

Besides, they already had sent their delirant videos to Al-Jazeera, proclaming
the deaths of 100s of infidels.

I hadn't heard of this. Where did you find this?

Still, I do feel sorrow even for their women. It's a male weakness, but I was
close to cries when I saw the lifeless bodies of those young girls and ladies...
That wasn't supposed to be, they were only girls...
Even more are the hostages dead because of them, though....
Even a russian, 14 years old girl...

Yes its a male weakness. For some reason we always feel worse for the women. Maybe because we (males) feel that women are more innocent and fragile, although it is a bit sexist.

Littiz · Post by **Littiz** » Sat Oct 26, 2002 1:51 pm

Oh, no, not so easy.
Don't get me wrong, I feel sympathy for the REAL good cause behind
all of this. But they *WERE* terrorists.
Israeli missiles don't HEAD directly to civilians.
It's terrible, but different.
In that theater you have an innocent before you, it's you and your gun.
You watch him in the eyes, you see his fear, his sweat.
It takes a great amount of blind hate and/or evilness to pull the trigger
that way.

As I told, I remained awake and followed *everything*.
I saw with my eyes the video with THE SAME women of the theater, they
said they had decided to die in Moscow, killing 100s of "sinners".
Al-Jazeera somehow is always in touch with terrorists...
I'll hold my tongue now, I'd say too much...

Yes, I know, I should feel that way for everybody...
It's not equal...
But I really hoped for a miracle tonight, that those fanatic girls
could be spared and helped...

ThorinOakensfield · Post by **ThorinOakensfield** » Sat Oct 26, 2002 2:24 pm

Ok the Israeli missiles are often mistakes.

Take the example of droppping the atom bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Its the pilot and in the sky its him, the trigger to let the bomb go, and thousands of innocents underneath him. So would it be a great deal of hate against the Japanese for him to do that?

I know its not related in many ways but its something I wanted to point out.

I hadn't heard anything about these sinners. They were there to get Russia to stop fighting in Chechnya. I don't see where this "sinners" part comes in.

And don't call them fanatics. Its seems alot of people are under the impression these Muslim fundementalists. Some may be so, but most of them aren't here to kill the infidels or go to heaven. They were there to make a statement to Russia.

*Not all Muslims are fundementalists*

In that theater you have an innocent before you, it's you and your gun.
You watch him in the eyes, you see his fear, his sweat.
It takes a great amount of blind hate and/or evilness to pull the trigger
that way.

But doesn't this happen all the time. Don't soldiers come in this situation. Maybe they're ambushing anothe patrol of soldiers on the other side. They have them all lined up in their cross hairs. Once again would it take a great amount of hate?

And don't you think that the Russian troops have done similar things to the Chechnyans. They drag them out, deport half of them, kill some others. Many of them were innocent.

Littiz · Post by **Littiz** » Sat Oct 26, 2002 3:22 pm

I don't see where this "sinners" part comes in.

You heard me?
They sent a video, with their last words, BEFORE the thing begun.
The video has been released by Al-Jazeera.
The women spoke, they said they were willing to die in the name of
Allah, they said they "loved death more than life", they said they wanted
to die in Moscow taking 100s of "sinners" with them.
Do I have to say it for the fourth time?
(If you don't trust my words try an internet search or something)
If you were in that theater you would call them fanatics too, you can bet on it
But are you aware or not that they immediatly killed a 27 years old Russian
girl, and yesterday night they started executing the hostages?
Foreign survivors, not only russians ones, witnessed and testified this.
One was shot directly in the eye

*Not all Muslims are fundementalists*

And I agree. I said THOSE were fundamentalists.
Have you read my post at all?

Russian troops have done terrible things, and suffered terrible
things. They too were young boys, who didn't have their homes there
near the field too flee. Many of them were tortured and mutilated.
War is wrong by all sides. There's never a complete "right" side.
But when people take 800 hostages, hostages that prove no personal
threat nor enemy for them, and with cold blood start to kill them just to let the world know their "cause", to me they are "terrorists"
Hope you'll never learn it the hard way

fable · Post by **fable** » Sat Oct 26, 2002 4:49 pm

The best of causes in favor of legitmate independence will fail if the most despicable acts aren't performed to compromise rulers and draw the attention of the world. If an example is needed of what happens when the subjugated "play fair," look no further than Tibet, a land where the Chinese have deported hundreds of thousands of Tibetans, replacing them with their own colonies--taking over their houses, their businesses, etc. But the Dalai Lama insists that the way of Buddhism is non-confrontational: and so, Tibet becomes Chinese, and the Tibetans cease to exist.

As has been pointed out, indepedence is never granted to a conquered colony unless its in the best interests of the conquerer. That was the case with the British in India. If the Chechens are to convince the Russian government to let them go, they will have to appear more heartless than the Russian army (whose acts of terrorism in Chechniya are well known), more determined than Putin, and very willing to draw the attention of the world upon the state of the area. They have no friends, and politely waiting for the Russians to give up is like politely waiting for a man who's bludgeoning you to death to apologize and leave your home.

/-\lastor · Post by **/-\lastor** » Sat Oct 26, 2002 7:02 pm

1) I never EVER see people who kill innocents as a statement as the "good guys", when one kills an innocent victim he loses almost every right a human has IMO. If the terrorists had taken goverment officials hostage or had the act taken place in their own country then I could bring up a little sympathy for them. But this was just futile and stupid. After all the government has been denying them their rights not the citizens.
By commencing such an action they condemned their own people, who are innocent too, to a grisly fate as Russia now has to "peacify" the region.

2) The Russian counter-terrorism team should have called in the help of the SAS or GIGN, they are way much more capable and experienced. They also should have used the gas much earlier, if you release an invisible, not smellable sleeping gas with a delayed effect you've solved your problem. Everybody's sleeping hostages and hostagetakers alike, then you just can identify the bastards and put em behind bars.

fable · Post by **fable** » Sat Oct 26, 2002 8:09 pm

Just heard on Deutsche Welle that the Soviet Police are refusing to say what gas they used in the theater, and that it's placed quite a few of the former hostages lives in danger--the doctors don't know what poison to treat them for.

Also, the Soviets have just launched a massive offensive in Chechniya, rounding up people seemingly at random from various population centers, and driving off with them.

ThorinOakensfield · Post by **ThorinOakensfield** » Sat Oct 26, 2002 8:33 pm

Originally posted by /-\lastor
1) I never EVER see people who kill innocents as a statement as the "good guys", when one kills an innocent victim he loses almost every right a human has IMO. If the terrorists had taken goverment officials hostage or had the act taken place in their own country then I could bring up a little sympathy for them. But this was just futile and stupid. After all the government has been denying them their rights not the citizens.
By commencing such an action they condemned their own people, who are innocent too, to a grisly fate as Russia now has to "peacify" the region.

Your post is an example of the point I was making. You say that anybody who kills innocents loses every right has a human being. So then what about soldiers who kill innocents? Or what about a pilot dropping a bomb over a city?

EDIT: Nevermind. I give in, Littiz you were right about what I just said and deleted.

Koveras · Post by **Koveras** » Sat Oct 26, 2002 9:24 pm

Whoa! I just knew about this. I can't believe how much serious violence is in the world right now, with the sniper shootings in DC area just ended. Heard something about this, but never knew it was this serious.

I better watch/read the news.

fable · Post by **fable** » Sat Oct 26, 2002 9:27 pm

There has always been a great deal of violence in the world, @Koveras--and btw, welcome to the forum.

Most of it just doesn't get reported in the news, which focuses on only the largest, juiciest stories. Who cared about the destruction of Chechnya and the slaughter going on over there--until the Moscow theater incident brought it back to international public attention? Out of sight is out of mind.

Koveras · Post by **Koveras** » Sat Oct 26, 2002 9:34 pm

@fable I agree, several years ago I was hearing about the Chechnyan war in Russia, but now I think the Chechnyans are desperate now or something. I mean the place is really chaotic.

Littiz · Post by **Littiz** » Sun Oct 27, 2002 3:09 am

If any of you (ANY of you) was there, he would have hoped for a quick
death of the terrorists. And if you had a kid with you to protect, you
would have killed them with your own hands.
I was watching from a safe place, and could feel pity EVEN for the
terrorists.But being there, there were people to save...

They refused to release kids over 12, considering them adults.
This caused at least the death of a 14 years old.
Sorry but... when people go kill randomly and savagely to gain audience,
I lose sympathy for their request of freedom.

This is a dangerous justification you are granting.
If we start feel this way, all people who somehow think to suffer
a wrong may start killing the first one in sight.
Those persons must not be justified, but yes, we have to think
about the people who remained at home, suffering in their turn but without
resorting to senseless killings of innocents.
(it's sad it works this way...)

EDIT: I understand you and the others Thorin, I sympathyzed already
for Chechens. But this thing crossed the line

Tamerlane · Post by **Tamerlane** » Sun Oct 27, 2002 3:23 am

1. What do you think about the Chechnyan rebels, do you view them as freedom fighters with a just cause, or as terrorists? How do you think a situation like the Melnikov hostage could happen?

I really really do sympathise with the Chechnyan cause but the extremist twist which we have seen recently doesn't go well with me. Bombing large apartment buildings all over Moscow a few years ago didn't seem like the work of freedom fighters. And only recently holding people hostage in hospitals and now theatres will only just strengthen the cause for Putins war in the province amongst his supporters and I shudder to think what the Russians will do in retaliation under the banner of fighting their war on terrorism.

2. What do you think should have been done? With hindsight, could the situation have been solved in a less violent and costly way?

Nope, the Russians are too proud to negotiate and the rebels declared themselves to be suicide fighters. I'm just thankful that the place didn't collapse on all the hostages, having recently experienced the impact of the Bali explosion and now hearing about hostages being gunned down as they tried to escape. I hold no remorse for the rebels in Moscow but feel terrible knowing that innocents on both sides will continue to perish as the incident escalates in Chechnya.

CM · Post by CM » Sun Oct 27, 2002 3:32 am

I will not get involved in this thread. Why? Basically since Bush came to power, my views have hardened become more intolerant. Thorin covers my views down to the letter. I wont say anymore.

Tamerlane · Post by **Tamerlane** » Sun Oct 27, 2002 3:38 am

I would of loved to of heard your point CM, but I respect your decision