Could this be counter productive???
 

Russia could be hurting itself in the long run with this tactic....

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news...-1225848812178

This could be used the wrong way on people who have no links to these attacks. it could provoke others who are not linked to this terror group to try their hand at it as well.

Given what they have already tried I wonder how much further they will have to go to notch up the cruelty factor?

They've been doing that in chechnya for years ,but the more repressive and "cruel" the Russians have been getting there hasn't done anything to stop the attacks and now there seems to be more attacks in Russia itself - It seems like it's been an endless cycle where the Russians hit the Chechen's then the Chechen's hit back ,then the Russians come back at them with even harsher measures etc and it just goes on and on till its at the stage it is now where neither side can back down!
I've got no Idea how it can be stopped but you can't keep doing the same things the Russians have been doing there , all that does is make people think they've got nothing to lose so they may as well take some of the opposition with them.

Beside any moral assessement, Putin won some years of relative "peace" by letting the army off the chain and pound Chechnya from here to hell, and back. After they stopped doing so, the djihadists regrouped, reorganised, the violence caused by them became even more religiously motivated (if that still was possible), and under new management and with restrengthened financial funding from Saudi Terror Arabia have promised to bring terror back to Russian streets, their leaders said.

If you accuse Russia to strike them hard, you also have to accuse Saudi Terror Arabia for encoiuraging them and fianncing them to revive the djihad. Note, this is not an independence war only, nor are these people freedom fighters. They fight for establishing a Caliphate in the southern provinces of former USSR. They always did since the 80s, but the focus in he past years has shifted massively from "independence" towards "djihad".

The western world has been chasing ghosts this last decade. Its like the war on drugs, or on the mafia. Putting a streat dealer in cell might be a good public relation stunt, and in the short term is something good. But if you want to resolve the heart of the problem you go for the head. And in the case of islamic terrorism, the funding mostly comes from Saudi Arabia. Cut the head, you cripple beyond recognition these extremists groups.

Bad guys fighting bad guys, in my eyes.

So after a very brutal campaign the survivors got some more foreign backing and are back now, but instead of calls of independance(and the flat out and out criminality that was prevailant there before) are playing the tune of the financiers from the crazy wahhibi version of islam(which of course Sky insists is the only true version).

All this talk about suicide bombers is getting blown up out of proportion!

:dead:

ha ha :rotfl2:

:haha:

They blow up much younger these days, agreed. :D

P.S. Let's have a daily dose of black humour. I say Yes! to black humour. The more PC nutjobs feel offended, the better!

Who may I ask are the good guys then? The Americans? They've been fighting for the last decade, more or less, in Afghanistan and Iraq and that hasn't exactly been a particularly nice war either. In terms of casualties Iraq and Afghanistan dwarf the Chechen conflict. And it's not like Iraq and Afghanistan are at US's doorstep like Chechnya is to Russia.

Skybird - amen brother.

The younger these idiots are when they blow themselves to tiny bits, the fewer people they have time to convert to their insanity. Of course - they totally fail to notice those exhorting them to turn themselves into smithereens never are the ones who actually do it themselves....

I think the worse the Soviets, erm, Russians, want to notch it up the better.

It's all win. In the West, we simply cannot accept doing what was SOP during WW2, total war. We did it to the Japanese, we (the US) did it slightly less so to the Germans (cause the UK had that bit well-covered already). You know what, it worked.

Fanatical enemies need to be COWED. It's not enough to win, they need to be driven to unconditional capitulation, whatever it takes. We were absolutely, in every possible way, worse to the Japanese, both in war, and domestically than we have been to Muslims. The analogs between the war in the PTO and islam are actually pretty stunning in terms of suicidal attacks, and the great difficulty in dealing with them.

Pragmatically, the Russians kill off more loons, possible loons, and proto-loons, and become the primary focus for them perhaps instead of the US being the "great satan." Diverting them from us is a good thing, and makes our far more benign style look even more appealing.

I certainly don't cry of dead chechens. Read up on the Beslan massacre, if that happened here in the US I'd be fine with glassing the entire Muslim world over, frankly.

Note that this was not a problem before the Saudis started pushing Wahabism into an area where the Muslims used to be Sufis.

<EDIT> my comment regarding nuking them was a little over the top, I'll admit. It was in the context of a response to a hypothetical Beslan-like attack on children by Islamists—who routinely, intentionally target children. Intent matters. Holding a whole religion responsible? Religion is a choice of ideas to hold. Ayaan Hirsi Ali talks about her feelings post 9-11. She immediately went and looked up the quotes OBL made afterwards in claiming the attacks, assuming they would be wrong, misquoted, or sneaky interpretations. She wanted this to be true, because she was a devout Muslim woman. She found them, and read them (in Arabic, since she speaks it, and partially grew up in Saudi Arabia). They were not "hijacked" but flatly true if you believe that set of ideas (Islam). She abandoned her religion rather than accepting membership in a group that held those beliefs. Are there true moderates in Islam? Sure. Just as there are people that claim to hold any group membership, but don't ACTUALLY believe all of it. That's hypocritical, IMO. I'm not religious because I can't believe their creation stories. Nothing more. I can't pick and chose only some bits, so I'm an "unbeliever." Regardless, glassing over a billion people won't happen, and could not happen. I might wish all KKK or neo-Nazi members to spontaneously combust, and that won't happen, either (and I'd similarly not be bothered by the loss of KKK or Nazis, either, every last one of them, even credulous goons who don't really know better).

Part of what the Russians do is in our national and civilisational interest, yes. Also, some of what is being done by them, is an fight of need, a battle of need.

However, many people get effected, suffer and die who have no cause they share with the thugs it is about. It must not be wished to intentionally target them, although sometimes it may be impossible to avoid accepting them being harmed, for they stand in the way of the fire reaching out at the thugs walking near them, amongst them, hiding behind them. War is not just. It only is either needed, or not.

Please keep that in mind. Being enthusiastic about a war going on, is not needed. There are human fates effected by it, and some deserve what war brings them, and others not, so - while intended killing may be needed to be done, and unintended deaths may be needed to be accepted in the cause of the first, both never must be loved.

Determination is enough.

Schmoochy buddies. :)

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.tmz.com/m...bush_getty.jpg