Author Topic: explosion in moscow  (Read 494 times)

explosion in moscow
« on: February 06, 2004, 05:08:04 PM »
here's one explanation:

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,1142681,00.html

putin's quoted as saying he doesn't need to see any evidence to know it was a chechen suicide bomber. he's odds on favourite to win the next elections now that he's locked up most of his political rivals as well.

there was some guy speaking about the blast on today, today. he sounded pretty worried, saying that he believed that this was a turning point for the chechen resistance. he didn't elaborate but i guess what he meant was the rebels are now going to start targetting civilians a la the palestinians, instead of the troops. can see their point, it's much more politcially savvy and media-worthy.

so opinions? are al quaeda operating there? who's in the right here? is this why putin supported TWAT? so he could carry on with his own fight against "terrorists?" why exactly did abramovitch leave russia for london?

i don't know much about this conflict really, but i think pretty soon it's going to become a lot more high profile

explosion in moscow
« Reply #1 on: February 06, 2004, 05:56:45 PM »
The Russians imperialistically occupied Chechnya. The Chechans responded, albeit in a way I don't of course condone. Is anyone surprised? Why don't the Soviets finally end their fucking empire and leave Chechnya? Must be some exploitable resource there I guess..

An analogy would be the English occupation of Ireland and Elizabeth I's forced influx of protestant Scots and English into the north, evicting Irish landowners in the process, which led ultimately to the IRA. Cause and effect. You may not agree with the effect, but the cause is fairly clear I would say, as is the solution.

Imperialists - fuck off.

No-one likes imperialists, and why should they?