school attack in russia

[eppie]

I don't post this to get a discussion going, but I just thought it would be correct to think a bit about the terrorist attack on the school in north-ossetia.
I wonder what effect this attack has on world affairs. Allready after 9/11 terrorism has changed but this time terrorist have really overstepped a line. This attack so much aimed at hurting as many children as possible is really sickmaking.

The conflict in chechenya is a very terrible one, with killing, rapes, torture and attacks on civilians commited by both sides. To me it shows that a war on terrorism is not a solution. Creating hatred against you (even if you are right only works against you.

[Minionman]

Creating hatred against you (even if you are right only works against you.

Finally, someone who gets that this is important.

Sometimes wars/the military is useful to get stuff done, but when people argue for going to watr they always seem to forget to think about this point and only think about short term revenge.

[kandrathe]

Seems like a bunch of very incompetant terrorists. First, a very bad choice of target. As I understand what happened, the bomb strapped to the ceiling of the gym came loose and detonated. The terrified surviving children, teachers and parents fled in the chaos resulting on the remaining terrorists firing on their fleeing victims. This caused the Russian military to rush in to try to save any remaining survivors. I imagine now 1 in 5 russians is volunteering to join together to exterminate Chechyns.

School siege: Russians react

To me it shows that a war on terrorism is not a solution. Creating hatred against you (even if you are right only works against you.

So then you are suggesting that surrender is the solution? Terrorism is a doubled edged sword meant to challenge the authority of the government. If like in this case or 9/11, the government seems not to have done enough to prevent the attack, they are blamed. But, if they do too much and clamp down on civil liberties or seem too heavy handed that also plays into the terrorists strategy to make you prove you are a tyrannt. There are no silver bullet solutions. Unfortunatly, I'm beginning to think that the Chechyn's have now joined the pan-Islamicist union in a terror network of desparation against the west. If they were only wanting some autonomy or food you might deal with them or feed them, but once this becomes an ideological struggle only victory or death will appease them. Unfortunately for the Chechyns, this incident will give Putin the justification to crush them completely.

[Bob]

I imagine now 1 in 5 russians is volunteering to join together to exterminate Chechyns.

As I understand it the Russians conscript every non-disabled male at age 18 for x years amount of military service (might be 2 years, not sure). Now, those agreeing to stay on (good because you have experienced soldier & don't have to train them), re-join at a later age like 25 or so (good because you don't have to put them through basic training again) or volunteer to go to chechnya (good because soldiers fight better if they want to be where they are) could be volunteering, but few will be actually signing up for the army.

Although, either way it doesn't spell good news for the Chechens, or, unfortunately, innocent chechen civilians. Large armies tend to be worse trained than smaller armies. Worse trained soldiers tend to make more mistakes, like shoting civilians, or being a bad shot and accidentally shoting civilians. They also tend to be less disciplined and therefore more likely to shoot civilians for revenge, or whatever reason.
Like I say, bad for innocent civilians.

-Bob

[Occhidiangela]

EDIT: Apologies to all: I gooned up the nesting of quotes, and mixed up Bob's and my comments. My bad, I are a rube sometimes.

Although, either way it doesn't spell good news for the Chechens, or, unfortunately, innocent chechen civilians.

Is there such a thing?  "They are all Cong."  The terrorists, to include Arabs who have chosen to help the locals, are, per Mao, swimming with the fishes, hiding behind the skirts of the women and children.  The terrorists have made the civilians part of the target set by using them as a flesh shield. They do this deliberately in order to try to score propaganda points with the weak European stomachs.

Large armies tend to be worse trained than smaller armies.

False. US has a big army, extremely well trained. The Red Army was well trained. The current Russian Army less so. The Belgians I worked with were generally well trained and smart, but not a formation I would want on my flank. Lame. Give me a Royal Dutch Marine or a German anyday. Or a Norwegian. Or a Finn. Or a Canadian.

Worse trained soldiers tend to make more mistakes

True. IT's about training, not size.

, like shoting civilians, or being a bad shot and accidentally shoting civilians.

Shooting a civilian is a hazard of war. War is chaotic, bloody, and foul. The political leadership of Russia will determine how much blood inadvertantly shed it can accept, and provide guidance accordingly. It may be that the Russian government has a harder stomach than the German or Belgian government. Which makes being a "civilian" in Chechnya a raw deal about right now.

They also tend to be less disciplined and therefore more likely to shoot civilians for revenge, or whatever reason.
Like I say, bad for innocent civilians.

If there is such a thing as an innocent civilian, a presumption, not a fact, then yeah. By the way, what is going on in Checnhya falls into the class of war called "civil war" which as we know from history, is nastier, if such can be said, than more conventional wars.

How do the fish terrorist swim with "civilian" fishes without complicity? Without some support? There's a bunch who are most definitely not innocent. They are guilty accessories before the fact. And another bunch who probably are reasonably innocent, or guiltless anyway, and are in a very crappy situation about now.

Ugly, Ugly, Ugly. There is no up side.

The fault lies with the terrorist, who chooses that method to achieve his aims, who draws the "innocent" into the gun target line.

Poorly trained and poorly disciplined soldiers merely add to the down side.

Occhi

[Brista]

If The BBC is reporting accurately then we are being a bit unfair on the Russian Army

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/worl...an_s/html/1.stm

Special forces storm the school. However, the security cordon is breached by relatives, many of them armed, who mingle with the troops running towards the buildings.
Russian President Vladimir Putin later says the decision to go in was unplanned and taken after the attackers started shooting at children.

So the key failure was not a poorly launched attack but the failure to keep the parents and relatives out of the operation.

Once the parents were running in and children were running out to meet them and the terrorists had started shooting what was the army supposed to do?

I think at that point attacking was the correct option - the best of a bad set

I have no idea how difficult it was for the security forces to keep the parents out. We don't have entirely comparable situations since in most war-torn areas soldiers are reasonably comfortable with the idea of armed civilians on their side shooting at a mutual enemy

Possibly better training might have made the troops more aware of the danger of civilians taking action into their own hands.

It's a very large assumption that in the West our armed forces would be able to deal with a large, armed, frantic civilian crowd at the same time as coping with armed and hostile terrorists

We've failed on many occasions to control civilians crowds with feelings running far less high

There seems such an urge to blame people. The terrorists deserve blame. The troops seem here to be getting far more stick than they deserve. And in the Russian press the intelligence services are getting blamed for not anticipating it. The politicians are getting blamed for not having sorted this mess out

Just because the siege turned out dreadfully doesn't mean the soldiers who risked their lives were incompetent

[Jester]

"If there is such a thing as an innocent civilian, a presumption, not a fact, then yeah."

How about babies? What'd they do?

Jester

[ShadowHM]

How about babies? What'd they do?

Jester

are paid by the children and their children's children.

I used to think that was a threat when I read it in the Bible. Now I know that it is merely an observation on the way the world works. It is not fair. But it is accurate.

And it is a reminder to all parents to be careful of what they sow, because all too often their children will have to reap it.

[Taeme]

Edited

[Occhidiangela]

The Babies, Jester?

Guilty, poor things.

They were breathing air in the wrong place, at the wrong time.

Guilty, as judged by the terrorists, self appointed executioners, who started the battle.

Occhi