It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by InvisibleAlbatross
I completely disagree with your last statement. Over the past 10-15 years terrorist attacks have often been carried out by religious extremists (within the US and Middle East). However looking at a history of Europe in the 20th century, we can see that most terrorism was based on politics and right/left ideology, not religion.
While there was a surge of attacks recently, the Islamist terrorists in Russia have actually been mostly irradicated. Their numbers are in the hundreds, down from tens of thousands less than a decade ago.
Originally posted by SLAYER69
It only took one fanatic suicide bomber to kill 17 [ possibly more] and seriously injure over 100.
May those who died rest in peace, and may those who are behind this attack be hunted down and butchered mercilessly.
Originally posted by oozyism
ODD how all the empires act the same, and also call those resistance fighters terrorists to please other empires lol..
Originally posted by oozyism
See how resistance movement in the middle east are called terrorists by USSR also to please the US, that way the US can call the Russian resistance fighters, so that USSR may call the resistance against US terrorists.
Originally posted by oozyism
I for one stand for freedom, in all sides. When people want freedom, give it to them, don't bomb them, or imprison them, when you do, they will bomb you, and take hostages from your population.
Originally posted by oozyism
It is called the resistance movement, and it exists all across the world.
Originally posted by maloy
The thread topic revolves around murder of innocent people and you wish to discuss linguistics? Call them resistance fighters, saintly angels, or noble knights for all I care, and LOL all you want - this isn't your home or your people being subjected attacks after all. Will that change the fact that they are violent zealots who long ago lost their fight but still want to remain relevant by killing innocent people? No. What are they resisting? Law and civility?
What's odd is how some people are so blinded by their self-perceived liberal righteousness that they advocate the cause of those who carry out the most inhumane actions.
When is the last time you heard USSR call anyone anything? It hasn't existed for almost 20 years.
Personally I call a murderer a murderer, and a terrorist a terrorist. Can a resistance fighter be a terrorist? Certainly. Does that change the fact that he is a terrorist and must pay for crimes commited?
Freedom is as relative of a term as terrorism or resistance fighter. One may want the freedom to sell heroin, to enslave people, to take property of others, or to marry women against their wishes. If there are no lines between what one perceives as freedom and law and order, then it becomes anarchy - and then everyone is free to do what they want including interfere with freedom of others.
It is certainly easy to use cliche terms like "freedom" when referring to conflicts like Chechnya, or any other conflict in the world for that matter. But the problem is that it is far more complex than freedom or the lack thereoff. You can't use a blancket statement like that and be taken seriously.
So if someone kills a police officer while robbing a bank, and in doing so resists authority - they are justified in their actions? One can proclaim virtually anything to be a resistance movement. Unfortunately for them societies and laws exist for a reason.
edit on 9-9-2010 by maloy because: (no reason given)
"We will pursue the terrorists everywhere," he said. "You will forgive me, but if we catch them in the toilet, we will wet them even in the outhouse."
Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by maloy
Ooozii needs to learn about the collapse of the USSR.
On topic.
Jake as usual that's fine well thought out reply.
Originally posted by oozyism
I should post a picture of my mom on Kabul roof top with an AK47, but that might offend the ATS Russian community
I'm just curious OOZ.
Do you think a Afghanistan under Taliban rule would let your mom carry that AK-47?
Originally posted by oozyism
They can resist what ever they like, they have the right to, "no one should be forced to live in a way they don't want to live".
Originally posted by oozyism
Well they have cause, and their cause is much more just than the empire's causes of world domination and forceful occupation.
Originally posted by oozyism
Nope, anyone who murder innocent people for what ever cause, must be punished, but that doesn't give you the right to demean their cause.
Originally posted by oozyism
Nope, I am talking about freedom to choose how ever you like, but that doesn't mean against other people's wishes.
Originally posted by oozyism
It is called the freedom to choose, those who are committing these horrible acts against humanity are not given those chances, and most likely started their resistance against control freaks peacefully..
Originally posted by oozyism
My family, both my mom and dad's side was in the resistance movement against USSR, so I know much, excluding the Western propaganda
Originally posted by maloy
...and we are back to anarchy. Laws and organized societies exist for a reason, and if they force people to do anything it is to cohabitate with other people.
Please educate us as to the cause of the Islamists currently operating in North Caucasus? And how do you measure cause, to say one is more than the other? Do you realize that the whole conflict and "separatism movement" in the Chechnya originated as a business proposition between organized crime/oligarchy groups and self-proclaimed regional warlords seeking a method to transport oil and illegal drugs without being subject customs or laws, and to launder money through unmonitored access to Middle Eastern banks?
And here you thought it was about freedom for the poor people of Chechnya. They were pawns used and discarded by both sides. It was never about anyone's freedom, and it still isn't. Are you aware of the actions of the first Chechen "President" Dudayev and his militias after he came to power? Take some time to research "the cause".
Actually, if they murder in the name of their "cause", then yes it does give me the right to demean it.
And how do you know that their cause is what they say it is?
Chechnya was not a homogeneous society in 1992 when a bunch of armed thugs decided to proclaim independence. Many people, including Russians who lived in Chechnya (about 30-35% of population) were against it. Do you wish to hear the ethnical cleansing methods that Dudayev and his militants employed against the said Russians in the early 90's? Thousands were killed and tortured, and tens of thousands were forced to flee their homes leaving everything behind. Is that considered "taking freedom against other people's wishes"?
I realize that many Westerners have no idea about what actually took place in North Caucasus in the 90's. All they know are bits and pieces gathered from the 30 second snippets in the 5 o'clock news. The reality was much different from your cliche "freedom fighters" scenerio.
doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results
The armed gangs composed of Chechens and criminals from Russia created an "independent" anarchy state, meant to facilitate criminal activities within Russia's de-facto borders, but not subject to its laws.
They envisioned a sort of wealthy "Dubai" turned gangster paradise. They rallied under radical Islamic Wahhabism in order to brainwash certain local factions to support them, and then proceeded to cleanse their new "republic" of anyone who voiced opposition.
If Russia was guilty of anything, it was inaction when the local Russians and Chechen opposition pleaded with the federal government to intervene since 1991.
By 1994, when Russia mobilized its forces it was already too late. Chechnya was full of Arab mercenaries and mujaheedeen veterants from the Soviet Afghan War, who were well versed in guerilla warfare and terror tactics. Some factions in the Russian government at the time also purposely turned a bling eye or even faciliated the criminal activities in Chechnya, further aggravating the situation.
I lived in North Caucasus in those years, and it was all too close for comfort. The so called "Chechen independence" was a huge mess from its very start. "Freedom" was not anyone's cause in a sense that you envision it. The thugs calling themselved separatists were absolutely ruthless, and for years they had a virtually free reign to do what they wanted. They turned a once calm region with decent standard of living into a nightmare, at least for the regular civilians, long before any Russian troops arived.
There was nothing peaceful about Dudayev and his henchmen coming to power. But again - the conflict is so unknown in the West that you can't blame one for not knowing the course of events. Chechnya was virtually free and "independent" from Russia from 1991 to 1994, and again from 1996-1999. The attrocities committed during those times by the so called "resistance fighters" make quite an impressive archive. A simple search among unbiased sources would lead to lots of good educational reading on the matter,
I do not wish to argue "resistance fighters" and "terrorist" linguistics with you. A background on the Chechen crisis is necessary to understand where the current attacks stem from.
go check and see how much the word terrorism has changed, if the word was to be taken literally, law enforcement agencies are terrorizing criminals therefore they are terrorists
Originally posted by oozyism
If you read what I wrote you would have concluded that I regard anyone resisting control freaks, freedom fighters. Whether they bomb civilians or not, they are still freedom fighters. The cause is as important as the result.
Originally posted by oozyism
For you to demean the freedom fighters by pointing fingers at their desperate attempts, then that won't work
Originally posted by oozyism
I know you don't want to debate that issue, because you know you are wrong.
Originally posted by oozyism
Let me elaborate, both a female and a male can be a human being, in the same wordy manner a (killer of civilians) and a (killer of soldiers) can be regarded as freedom fighters.
You don't see "Law Enforcement" Blowing themselves up to kill the Criminals and in the process killing innocent women and children.
Police shoot & kill innocent bystander during armed robbery
pe.com — Daniel Baledran, a 21-year-old resident of the unincorporated area near Riverside, was at a Papa John's Pizza restaurant in Chino during an armed robbery that turned into a gunfight between police and armed robbers. Two suspects and an officer were wounded and police believed Baledran to be a third suspect when they shot at him.