Russian death squads 'pulverise' Chechens

Originally posted by maloy
Lets's assume you are alluding to the Russian shelling and bombing of Grozny in 1994 and 1999. The Russians have tried taking the city without bombing for weeks and have been repelled being overwhelmed by the insurgents. After that the Russian troops have dropped leaflets and made multiple announcements that the city will be bombed and civilians must leave - the vast majority of whom did in fact leave. Only after that the shelling commenced.

Actually they were shelling and bombing the city well before that. It was December 11 the Russians gave for people to leave after that they were to be considered terrorists and murdered. Funny thing about all this is the Russian forces fired on the refugees trying to flee many times.

And then there are the Alkhan-Yurt massacre (Rape and Muder - 41 killed), Staropromyslovski massacre where 38 confirmed civilians were summarily executed by Russian soldiers.

The village of Katyr Yurt, 'safe' in the Russian-occupied zone, far from the war's front line, and jam-packed with refugees, was untouched on the morning of 4 February when Russian aircraft, helicopters, fuel-air bombs and Grad missiles pulverised the village. They paused in the bombing at 3pm, shipped buses in, and allowed a white-flag convoy to leave - and then they bombed that as well, killing Taisa's family and many others.

www.guardian.co.uk...

reply to post by maloy



What have I aggravated your Russian sympathies?


I could qualify my statements but wont.

But tell us about the Russian "every third one" policy. Is that a product of the western media? I heard it from a Russians own mouth. Its is old school.

The difference in American and Russian doctrine is not that obvious.

Now I am not criticizing Russia or making a comparison based on moral grounds at this point. Simply pointing out that Russians have different ways of handling things, prisoners, civilians ect as do several other nations in that part of the world. Ways that Americans couldn't get away with as a matter of policy anyway.

In light of that reality, let us not fool each other, americans water boarding prisoners is child's play in comparison. Would you not agree?

Originally posted by Schaden
The Russian youth aren't told about the slaugter. It's not in the history books. There is a resurgence in the cult of his personality.

Joseph Stalin, one of the biggest mass murderers in human history, is cool again in Russia. In a recent poll to decide who was Russia’s greatest historical figure, Stalin came in third, behind medieval prince Alexander Nevsky and former prime minister Pyotr Stolypin. Stalin led the tally for months, according to the BBC, “until the show's producer appealed to viewers to vote for someone else.

In December, the BBC reports that police raided the offices of the human rights organization Memorial and seized a digital archive of Stalin’s atrocities. Irina Flige, office director of the organization, believes the raid was politically motivated. Flige told the BBC, “if the terror of Stalin is justified, then the government today can do what it wants to achieve its aims.”

www.utne.com...

They opened a museum dedicated to Stalin's legacy. No mention of the purges. Unless they lived through it, the common Russian citizen has no idea of the sheer brutality. Saddam Hussein modeled his leadership on Josef Stalin.

[edit on 2-5-2009 by Schaden]

So you lived through Stalins era did you? You lived under his rule?

The biggest crime in world history, done by Russia, 60 million dead?
What about Mao, an estimaed 75 million...or is there no room for such things in your bigoted mind?

How many people has America killed? From the natives of north America, to the millions around the world, in every corner, on every continent.
Directly and indirectly.
Indirectly how about all the dictators they have supported and armed, who have gone on to massascre millions? That's blood on American hands.

I don't hear you whining about that though.

Originally posted by Logarock
What have I aggravated your Russian sympathies?

I don't get aggravated. I get humored by people talking about something they have little direct knowledge of.

Originally posted by Logarock
But tell us about the Russian "every third one" policy.

What are you talking about? Any details on this supposed policy?

Originally posted by Logarock
I heard it from a Russians own mouth.

Oh, in that case it must be true....

Originally posted by Logarock
Simply pointing out that Russians have different ways of handling things, prisoners, civilians ect as do several other nations in that part of the world. Ways that Americans couldn't get away with as a matter of policy anyway.

Americans have gotten away with lot of things over the past half century - things that many Americans either don't care to know about or choose to ignore. And even today no one truly knows what types of things Americans get away with. Different conflicts and different circumstances, usually ones arising from desperation, can lead even the most moral and politically correct side to commit attrocities.

If you want to compare Chechnya to a conflict with American involvement, look at Vietnam. Sure things are different today, but then the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan are not as hopeless as the Vietnam War.

Originally posted by Logarock
In light of that reality, let us not fool each other, americans water boarding prisoners is child's play in comparison. Would you not agree?

In comparison to what? What torture methods did Russians use in Chechnya (I am talking about facts not rumors)? And I didn't even start this waterboarding arguement. My point in this thread is that articles like this should not be taken for fact since they provide no mention of proof or evidence.

reply to post by maloy


Maloy, oddly, I feel more a more kindred sense of brotherhood with Russian soldiers who fought against the Chechens than I do with a number of my candiass fellow Americans, such as those who not only make wild claims without substance, but would hand over to the enemy every possible advantage at every possible opportunity.

Whatever happened to defeat the Chechens, I applaud those efforts, and their uncanny ability to solve the problem without being blinded by many and several ancillary considerations that preclude one from even coming within sight of the goal.

My hat off to your Russian brothers.

We in the US could learn a few things here, but oddly, we already know everything.

Originally posted by dooper
Maloy, oddly, I feel more a more kindred sense of brotherhood with Russian soldiers who fought against the Chechens than I do with a number of my candiass fellow Americans, such as those who not only make wild claims without substance, but would hand over to the enemy every possible advantage at every possible opportunity.

You have fought with American soldiers before ?

Whatever happened to defeat the Chechens, I applaud those efforts, and their uncanny ability to solve the problem without being blinded by many and several ancillary considerations that preclude one from even coming within sight of the goal.

I see so mass disappearances, torture and execution is how you would go about things in Iraq and Afghanistan? Levelling whole cities to root out a few thousand men. You know America took Falluja with a larger population with twice as many die hard fanatics defending it in weeks without levelling the whole place and losing far fewer men.

BTW, you do know that Chechnya's entire population is about 1 million people or a quarter of that of Baghdad. To use Russian tactics in Iraq would be so stupidly foolish that it shouldn't even warrant any consideration.

We in the US could learn a few things here, but oddly, we already know everything.

Yes oddly enough in the US there is more respect for people and their lives.

Originally posted by BLV12
The biggest crime in world history, done by Russia, 60 million dead?

I didn't give a number. Although I quoted an article stating Stalin is one of the largest mass murderers in history, which I agree with and is currently accepted fact in academia. Notice I didn't blame communism, I blamed Stalin. Do you dispute it ?

Originally posted by BLV12What about Mao, an estimaed 75 million...or is there no room for such things in your bigoted mind?

I'm not defending Mao.

Originally posted by BLV12How many people has America killed? From the natives of north America, to the millions around the world, in every corner, on every continent.
Directly and indirectly.
Indirectly how about all the dictators they have supported and armed, who have gone on to massascre millions? That's blood on American hands.

The natives have every right to compensation, actually if you knew any Native Americans, many do quite well with the casinos. But you can't blame America for what is simply human nature. The natives went to war and enslaved one another for centuries.

There has been approximately 22 advanced cultures throughout human history. Most have perished off the face of the earth. Current western culture is responsible for the end of 7 of them. That's from the book Tragedy and Hope, by Prof Quigley, a historian with deep connections to the NWO and anglosaxon power structure at Georgetown University.

I don't seen an equivalency. I was grimmacing at the homicidal actions of a single god head dictator.

Stalin's crimes are especially brutal considering they were carried out against his own citizenry. Besides the mass executions and gulags, his "indirect" economic policies starved millions.

Originally posted by Harlequin
and what about the USAF officers from barksdale who have ALL died in `accidents` because they knew the real location the `missing` nuclear warheads ended up?

Not wanting to derail this thread, but that has to be the biggest amount of BS I've read.

Anyway, after Beslan, I really don't give a crap what the Russians do to any terrorists they find. DSAF - Done Society A Favor.

Originally posted by rogue1
I see so mass disappearances, torture and execution is how you would go about things in Iraq and Afghanistan?

OH COME ON - do not pretend that Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan do not kill innocent civilians when they bomb suspected insurgent hide outs or conduct operations. Take a guess how many civilians died as the result of those wars? How many people have disappeared?

As for mass dissappearances, torture, and execution - that is how things always were in Iraq and Afghanistan and certain other regions in the world, and that is how they will always be for the foreseeable future. What do you think will happen after the US forces finally leave? You think Afghanistan will flourish into a democracy with outstanding human rights? You think there won't be blood spilled and people killed and abducted over political differences in Iraq? Chances are war will never end in Afghanistan until some hardliner dictator takes the lead.

Originally posted by rogue1
Levelling whole cities to root out a few thousand men.

Should I remind you of the "Shock and Awe" campaign waged by the US forces at the onstart of the Iraq war.

Originally posted by rogue1
You know America took Falluja with a larger population with twice as many die hard fanatics defending it in weeks without levelling the whole place and losing far fewer men.

Please define what you mean by "twice as many" fanatics. Do you know how many fighters were in Grozny and other cities during the Chechen wars? And the circumstances of Falluja and Chechnya were much different. The two shouldn't be compared. Why don't you take a look at some of the battles US fought in Vietnam?

Originally posted by rogue1
BTW, you do know that Chechnya's entire population is about 1 million people or a quarter of that of Baghdad.

Do you know what percentage of Chechen population took up arms during the Chechen War in comparison to the population of Baghdad or Iraq? Do you know what types of weapons the Chechens had available to them as opposed to Iraqi insurgents? Do you know how many Muslim fighters came to fight in Chechnya from all over the Middle East? Do you know the size of the Russian military contingent that was tasked with taking Grozny, as opposed to the size of the US forces?

Untill you can describe those factors there really is no point to your comparison of Iraq and Chechnya wars.

Originally posted by rogue1
To use Russian tactics in Iraq would be so stupidly foolish that it shouldn't even warrant any consideration.

What about Afghanistan? US has been fighting there nonstop for about 7 years now, and there is no sign of improvement or of weakening of the Taliban. How much more time will the US troops spend there? 5 years? 10? 15? Will the Taliban ever be defeated under the current circumstances and the current weak un-self-sustainable government of Afghanistan?

It would be foolish to rule out brute force and some factor of intimidation in bringing that God foresaken region under control. Perhaps US still has money and patience to carry on that war, but what happens when those run out?

Originally posted by rogue1
We in the US could learn a few things here, but oddly, we already know everything.

And that is the problem with many Americans - they believe that they know everything.

Originally posted by rogue1
Yes oddly enough in the US there is more respect for people and their lives.

Other than for many people in Vietnam. And in Korea. And in Nicaragua. And Serbia. And Middle East. Wait are those even considered "people"?


[edit on 3-5-2009 by maloy]

Originally posted by dooper
reply to post by maloy

 

Whatever happened to defeat the Chechens, I applaud those efforts, and their uncanny ability to solve the problem without being blinded by many and several ancillary considerations that preclude one from even coming within sight of the goal.

Yea thats war. All wars are just a matter of degrees i suppose but its in those degrees where all the propaganda and moralizing lives.

When all fails just kill them all and let God sort them out.

reply to post by maloy


Well before we go on you must establish your high ground. What direct knowledge do you have?

As well are we to seriously consider ALL sources of information as inadmissible here? I am really not talking about mainstream media. I mean if I cant quote a Russian solider? What? We have to listen to your info alone and take your word? Whats your gig or are you just trolling?

This article smells bs to me. No special forces soldat in their right mind would expose war crimes to a newspaper, unless they were leaving some dying confession to get off their conscience, in which case they would name names. A comrade of mine was trained by a Spetsnaz minister and (what he told me) he never once took off his face-covering balaklava, deliberately tried to deepen his voice to hide it, and never gave out his name, not even a made up one!
So I highly doubt the validity of this story. I KNOW there are atrocities in both side there and not trying to justify them, but I dont believe this account at all.

Andrei, who was badly wounded in the war, said he took part in the killing of at least 10 alleged female suicide bombers. In a separate incident he had a wounded female sniper tied up and ordered a tank to drive over her.

Here is where it gives a name. And to 'justify' the actions:
-in WW1 people who used saw-bayonets and were captured, had their eyes removed with it. Both sides knew the sawback was unnecessary for kill and was only to incite pain
-also the Flammenwerfer were the most despised soldat of both WW1 and WW2, and were tortured and executed upon capture
-in WW2 machine gunners were always executed upon capture after D-Day
-snipers in general are hated by regular soldat because they are known as having mental 'deficiency'; you can be a normal soldat and never take a life... to be a sniper you have to want to kill!

It was in this highly charged climate that the death squads were operating. Andrei recalled that his men had detained a suspect who had several videos of militants torturing Russian hostages. One showed him laughing as his comrades raped a 12-year-old girl and then shot off three of her fingers.

Im sure both sides see the others videos and do more and more horrific things to the other...and they get revenge...and so on, and so on

Originally posted by Logarock
Well before we go on you must establish your high ground. What direct knowledge do you have?

I am Russian, and I lived a considerable part of my life in the Caucasus near Chechnya - in Krasnodar and Kabardino-Balkaria to be exact. I personally know several Chechen and Ingush individuals who escaped the war to the neighboring provinces.

I was fortunate enough to avoid being drafted to Chechnya, but my brother and several good friends served there. I researched the war considerably and have heard many personal accounts of the conflict. While I don't have direct knowledge about it, I think that I have a better background to speak about the war than those who live thousands of miles away in another country and solely rely on articles and news bits to gather information about the war.

And for you information I am strongly against the methods and recklessness used to fight the first Chechen War (1994-96), for which I blame Yeltsin and the incompetent Russian Generals. However I do feel that the war was necessary, and that the regular Russian soldiers did the best they could under the circumstances.

Originally posted by Logarock
As well are we to seriously consider ALL sources of information as inadmissible here?

Not at all. Journalists, both Russian and foreign, not to mention war participants, have directly documented a huge number of events during the Chechen wars. Some of these events involved attrocities committed by Russian troops, primarily dealing with collateral damage and civilian casualties in bombing and shelling attacks. In many cases they some sort of direct evidence. There is a good number of media sources who have solid reputation for reporting on Chechnya from neutral perspective.

However the article in this thread does not provide any sort of evidence to back up the rather outrageous claims. The article does not appear to have a solid source for the information, or at least doesn't establish the trustworthiness as far as the reader is concerned. In addition to this it comes from a biased news agency which is known to support the separatist struggle.

Originally posted by Logarock
I mean if I cant quote a Russian solider?

How do you know that the information comes from a Russian soldier, and is not made up or provided by an imposter? Why not provide some evidence such as the name of the battalion where the soldier served, the villages where the operations were taking place, the exact date when the events occured? If the author can't give evidence, at least provide some info on how that evidence can be obtained.

Imagine a Russian newspaper posting a story supposedly told by an American soldier who served in Iraq, about US soldiers gathering Iraqi babies and them devouring them for lunch, and then playing football with cut off heads of Iraqi civilians. The newpaper might even say that the soldier's name was Joe.

Fascinating story. Must be true right - it was told by an American soldier? Do you see where I am going with this?

Originally posted by Logarock
We have to listen to your info alone and take your word? Whats your gig or are you just trolling?

I never made outrageous claims and there is no need to take my word if you don't want to. But to believe this article without skepticism is rather absurd.

If you wish to endulge in your fantasies about evil Russians torturing civilians and blowing them apart with artillery shells for sh*ts and giggles - don't let me ruin your time.

My gig if anything is discussing current events and what gives rise to them, while trying to discect out all of the bullsh*t.



Could this article be true? Sure. But it provides nothing to lead readers to conclude that is factual. I, as well as several people here, have already pointed out some obvious fallacies in the story, that lead to a conclusion that this bit of news should be taken with high dose of skepticism. Basing an opinion about Russian military actions based on this article and others like it is ignorant.

[edit on 4-5-2009 by maloy]

reply to post by rogue1


rogue, you seem to have some romanticized concepts of a mortal struggle. There is no such thing.

For a soldier, it's a one on one proposition. His goal is to engage this one enemy, survive the process, kill him graveyard dead, and then engage the next, and the next, on and on until his enemies are all dead.

It doesn't matter how he gets him dead. Bullet, impaling with a blade, bashing his head in with a stick, his helmet, a rock, or cinder block. Explosives, gas, drowning, stomping his throat, or jumping on his back and splitting his head with an entrenching tool.

It's unfortunate, but once you get into the mode, you instantly engage movement. If it moves, in the interest of self-preservation, you kill it. Movement, engagement. Movement, engagement. And if you're fast enough and accurate enough, you generally get through the day.

To start all over again the next day.

As a soldier, I do feel more affinity with other soldiers, even Spetznaz, than I feel with candiass Americans.

At least we understand each other, we have learned some hard learned lessons, and we're not blinded by fantasy idealisms. Soldiers deal in reality. Not nebulous concepts of fairness. Those soldiers who have experienced mortal combat long ago realized that fairness has nothing to do with it.

There are the living and the dead.

No fair to it.