Bordoy 0 Posted September 4, 2004 5. Russian special forces storm the building. The soldiers which entered the building were not Special forces. Spetsgruppa A was not in the area at the time of fighting. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Apollo 0 Posted September 4, 2004 Quote[/b] ] I say nuke em. Chechnya, Iran, Iraq, Syria, and portions of Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Saudi Arabia. And you suppose we should take you seriously?? You couldn't have given a more stupid remark. really! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ralphwiggum 6 Posted September 4, 2004 These Chechens have decided to prove that they are not fit to be in the human race. Â The Islamic militants continue to attack the world's nuclear super powers, so obviously they must want to be vaporized. Â I say that if they are so desperate to die in battle against a westerner so that they can go to heaven and get their 72 virgins, then who are we to deny them this service? Â I say that letting an Islamic terrorist live is a true violation of his human rights. Â Actualy human rights don't even apply in this case, because in my eyes, when you become a terrorist, you basically are deciding to leave the human race. Â I say nuke em. Â Chechnya, Iran, Iraq, Syria, and portions of Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Saudi Arabia. Â If the governments of these contries object; too bad. Â They allow these psychopaths to train and recruit in their contries, and even secretly celebrate when they carry out successfull attacks against civilized countries. Â Militant Islam is a threat to the free civillized world. Â Enough screwing around. Â Break out the nuclear weapons already. no bigotry is allowed here on forum. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Scorpio 0 Posted September 4, 2004 Quote[/b] ]Maybe you are a ctually forgetting that in the end we are in the middle of a war of Muslims vs. Christians. It's all over that region, and the Muslim extremists or fighters (whatever, I don't give a rats...) are joining forces like we do in the West (coalitions). Are they really? I don't see any Christian that is openly declaring a conflict and actually proud of using their religion to make a point. Quote[/b] ]Me, I don't want to have anything to do with modern crusades, it makes me sick that under this kind of cloak of terrorism some of our tax money goes towards them. Neither do I, but in the eyes of some governments and people such as philcommando, WE have to account for their actions. Rediculous, aint it? Oh, and here is an example of how every religion has it's extremists: Quote[/b] ]The Islamic militants continue to attack the world's nuclear super powers, so obviously they must want to be vaporized. I say that if they are so desperate to die in battle against a westerner so that they can go to heaven and get their 72 virgins, then who are we to deny them this service? I say that letting an Islamic terrorist live is a true violation of his human rights. Actualy human rights don't even apply in this case, because in my eyes, when you become a terrorist, you basically are deciding to leave the human race. I say nuke em. Chechnya, Iran, Iraq, Syria, and portions of Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Saudi Arabia. If the governments of these contries object; too bad. They allow these psychopaths to train and recruit in their contries, and even secretly celebrate when they carry out successfull attacks against civilized countries. Militant Islam is a threat to the free civillized world. Enough screwing around. Break out the nuclear weapons already. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Albert Schweitzer 10 Posted September 4, 2004 I disagree Albert. As I understand it, the sequence of events were like this:1. Negotiations were in progress and an agreement was reached to let some rescue workers extract some of the wounded people. 2. One of the terrorists accidentally detonated an explosive device, collapsing the roof over the area where the bulk of the hostages were held. The majority of people that got killed overall were killed at this point by the collapsing roof. 3. Hostages panic and start fleeing. 4. Terrorists open indiscriminate fire on the fleeing hostages. 5. Russian special forces storm the building. Basically, they had no choice. They were in the middle of negotiations that looked like they were going somewhere. Suddenly the roof collapses and the terrorists start wildly shooting hostages. They had no option but to storm the place. What else was there to do? this is what is being told.. but come on ... "oops ... I was so suprised to see the ambulance coming in here I accidentaly dropped my bomb... sorry" Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bordoy 0 Posted September 4, 2004 Quote[/b] ] I say nuke em. Â Chechnya, Iran, Iraq, Syria, and portions of Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Saudi Arabia. And you suppose we should take you seriously?? You couldn't have given a more stupid remark. really! I agree with you there mate. Lets create Nuclear Winter for decades to come. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bordoy 0 Posted September 4, 2004 I disagree Albert. As I understand it, the sequence of events were like this:1. Negotiations were in progress and an agreement was reached to let some rescue workers extract some of the wounded people. 2. One of the terrorists accidentally detonated an explosive device, collapsing the roof over the area where the bulk of the hostages were held. The majority of people that got killed overall were killed at this point by the collapsing roof. 3. Hostages panic and start fleeing. 4. Terrorists open indiscriminate fire on the fleeing hostages. 5. Russian special forces storm the building. Basically, they had no choice. They were in the middle of negotiations that looked like they were going somewhere. Suddenly the roof collapses and the terrorists start wildly shooting hostages. They had no option but to storm the place. What else was there to do? Â this is what is being told.. but come on ... "oops ... I was so suprised to see the ambulance coming in here I accidentaly dropped my bomb... sorry" Wrong. Eye witnesses said one of the bombs attached to the ceiling fell and went off. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
denoir 0 Posted September 4, 2004 According to eye-witness accounts a bomb attached to the ceiling fell loose and exploded. This in turn led to one of the female terrorist to detonate herself, collapsing the roof. Point being, the Russians didn't strom the place just for the hell of it. They did it when fleeing hostages were being gunned down indiscriminately. What the hell else could they do? The subsequent action may not have been the best possible (understandable though, given the improvisation), but it is not what caused the deaths of the vast majority of the hostages. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bordoy 0 Posted September 4, 2004 According to eye-witness accounts a bomb attached to the ceiling fell loose and exploded. This in turn led to one of the female terrorist to detonate herself, collapsing the roof.Point being, the Russians didn't strom the place just for the hell of it. They did it when fleeing hostages were being gunned down indiscriminately. What the hell else could they do? The subsequent action may not have been the best possible (understandable though, given the improvisation), but it is not what caused the deaths of the vast majority of the hostages. Thats what ive been trying to explain to my dad, and i agree with you, what else could they do? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bn880 5 Posted September 4, 2004 Sure, they could have done more, _maybe_ a very few would have been saved if ambulances were near or if they sent in special forces... maybe, I don't know. I guess for next time more crowd control is needed badly, more distance around the area is needed as we saw that friendlies and unfriendlies ended up being dressed the same and all shooting. Nice confusion. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Albert Schweitzer 10 Posted September 4, 2004 I dont believe in those constant coincidences. Are you people seriously believing that the russian forces werent cooking anything when they came to extract the wounded? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Balschoiw 0 Posted September 4, 2004 Give them the 12 Prisoners, let them go away even if they take some hostages with them and toast them afterwards. Think...1200 hostages in danger or maybe 50 when they were getting away with the prisoners they demanded. What would be your choice ? Keeping in mind that the situation was in it´s third day already, the negotiators could have been a bit more flexible don´t you think ? Why didn´t they give them the 12 in question and rock their asses afterwards ? I´m maybe a bit too much wetback here, but I would have no problem telling them anything they want to hear and give them the prisoners , let them move away...even with some hostages and kill them. Easy as that. Edit: Not to mention the hunt that started afterwards....sorry but coordinated moves look very different. At least an area where a hostage situation takes place should be encirceled... I´m sorry, but russian forces again didn´t act like professionals. My opinion by the status of knowledge I have right now. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ericz 0 Posted September 4, 2004 Scorpio Quote[/b] ]Quote  then its their job to clean it up. No, I don't agree with that. Other muslims should have to answer to NOTHING. What a few cowardly dogs did has nothing to do with the muslim communities and NONE of the good muslims should have to account for their actions. Why can't you just leave them alone? They had nothing to do with it, for goodness sake. By your statement: -A killed B. - C should account for B's actions.  Incorrect... Muslims DO have an obligation to denounce this kind of act.  The perpetrators of this act and others like it present themselves to the world to be devout Muslims.  Lets not forget their rallying cry of Allah Akbar as they detonate themselves and blow children away.  If they are silent , then it can be assumed that at very least, acts like this have their tacit approval. Communities have a responsibility to police themselves.  The Chechen people have a responsibility to themselves, their cause and the world to assist in eradicating terrorists in their midst.  That is unless they approve of their actions in the first place. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DracoPaladore 0 Posted September 4, 2004 Quote[/b] ]Maybe you are a ctually forgetting that in the end we are in the middle of a war of Muslims vs. Christians. Â It's all over that region, and the Muslim extremists or fighters (whatever, I don't give a rats...) are joining forces like we do in the West (coalitions). Are they really? I don't see any Christian that is openly declaring a conflict and actually proud of using their religion to make a point. Bush? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
soul_assassin 1750 Posted September 4, 2004 5. Russian special forces storm the building. The soldiers which entered the building were not Special forces. Spetsgruppa A was not in the area at the time of fighting. some reports say otherwise and on some of the footage of the troops coming in u casn see Alpha Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turms 0 Posted September 4, 2004 What makes them alfa, instead of OMON? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Scorpio 0 Posted September 4, 2004 Quote[/b] ]Incorrect... Muslims DO have an obligation to denounce this kind of act. Yes, but they cannot do much more than denounce them. They DO denounce them but they lack the resources to get rid of these imposters.Quote[/b] ]The perpetrators of this act and others like it present themselves to the world to be devout Muslims. And they're making a hell of an impression. :\ To actually believe they are devout muslims is beyond stupid. If communities have a responsibility to police themsevles, then leave it to the leaders of that community, not the common individual. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bn880 5 Posted September 4, 2004 Quote[/b] ]Maybe you are a ctually forgetting that in the end we are in the middle of a war of Muslims vs. Christians. It's all over that region, and the Muslim extremists or fighters (whatever, I don't give a rats...) are joining forces like we do in the West (coalitions). Are they really? I don't see any Christian that is openly declaring a conflict and actually proud of using their religion to make a point. Bush? That's the whole point, it's a cloak to wage modern warfare, confuse the issue, scare the heck out of people to keep support. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Scorpio 0 Posted September 4, 2004 Bush? How could I forget him. I stand corrected. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
denoir 0 Posted September 4, 2004 What makes them alfa, instead of OMON? OMON = Otryad Militsii Osobogo Naznacheniya is a police unit. Alfa is an anti-terror unit under the control of the FSB (former KGB)/ministry of interior. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bordoy 0 Posted September 4, 2004 Two ex-SAS members and the ex-russian president advisior (forgot his name), all siad they are not alpha troops. The ex-SAS members also said they are the wrong type of weapons for CQB. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turms 0 Posted September 4, 2004 Yes i know what alfa is, but how can you tell the difference from the photos? (unit insignias? weapons? gear?) What ive read is that alpha wasnt present when the shit hit the fan, but came in the scene afterwards. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Yagyu Retsudo 0 Posted September 4, 2004 ScorpioQuote[/b] ]Quote then its their job to clean it up. No, I don't agree with that. Other muslims should have to answer to NOTHING. What a few cowardly dogs did has nothing to do with the muslim communities and NONE of the good muslims should have to account for their actions. Why can't you just leave them alone? They had nothing to do with it, for goodness sake. By your statement: -A killed B. - C should account for B's actions. Incorrect... Muslims DO have an obligation to denounce this kind of act. The perpetrators of this act and others like it present themselves to the world to be devout Muslims. and they ARE. Who are you to tell them their interpretation is wrong? Its no more or less valid than any other interpretation. Equally crazy, equally based on faith, equally lacking in reasoning.... but not any less valid than the peaceable muslim factions interpretations. (or the christian, jew factions interpretations of their myths.) Quote[/b] ]Lets not forget their rallying cry of Allah Akbar as they detonate themselves and blow children away. If they are silent , then it can be assumed that at very least, acts like this have their tacit approval. Communities have a responsibility to police themselves. The Chechen people have a responsibility to themselves, their cause and the world to assist in eradicating terrorists in their midst. That is unless they approve of their actions in the first place. Yes, although since some people seem to think devout religiousness is a good thing, ridding communities of the very religious (of the same religion) is not something you see often. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites