Dana and Jag, there are some underlying assumptions to your arguments that I’m not prepared to grant without much better substantiation.

1) That there exists a context which justifies the targeted killing of children. You argue that we don’t understand the complexity of the political realities which has borne out these actions, but that presumes that there is some conflation of political, economic, or social circumstances which makes this action not only understandable, but permissible. If so, then the concept of moral behavior has lost any meaning. “Treat other people as an end in themselves, never as a means to an end.”

2) That only those persons who have existed within such a context are capable of evaluating the moral permissibility of their actions. You argue that because we have not lived through what they have lived through, we cannot possibly make moral evaluations of their ensuing actions. I reject this wholesale. Is the father whose daughter was raped in the best position to evaluate the moral permissibility of his retaliatory actions? Is the husband whose wife committed adultery the best judge of the morality of her actions? Those who have skin in the game are not the ones I want making the rules. It is the outside observer who is best able to make moral evaluations about a given action.

Just my $.02

-sm

You're talking about moral validity, I'm talking about comprehension of mentality.

The pictures coming out on this are just horrifying. The fear in the kids' faces. It's unreal.

yeah, i just don't see how the black widows (see i can say it) can gain anything but contempt from this.
children

CNN's report

Well they certainly lost a great deal of support in Chechnya itself.

I'll be interested to see where these arabs are from, I bet the mainstream chechen rebel forces are fucking pissed off about this, is hurts their rep and validates putin's rants about links to islamic terrorism. 200 dead....I didn't expect it to end that badly, sounds like the raid was a total FUBAR

Appalling.

Saudia.. holes?

When the Dayton Accords made the mujahidin presence in Bosnia politically uncomfortable, several hundred of the 'Afghans' began transferring to Chechnya in late 1995.

Photos of destruction in Chechnya on a World Affairs Board thread.


Source of the pics Eric Bouvet.

Wow. Thanks Griff, they are fascinating. That's destruction on a pretty total scale.

So you're saying that you condone violent attacks on the innocent by a non state-sponsored group? You've certainly implied it strongly enough.

What you don't seem to get is that

1) Terrorism, as a tactic used by the weaker against the stronger, cannot achieve positive goals for the weaker. If all the weaker cares about is making the stronger suffer, they can do that. But they can't get the stronger to do as they demand because

2) A nation simply cannot afford to give in to terrorist tactics such as hostage taking. That applies to the United States, Russia, and any other nation who doesn't want hostage-takers popping up all over the place when anyone has any grievance. Rewarding such tactics creates the incentives for more of the same. The US authorities tend to be more subtle about it, "negotiating" the other side to death until they surrender or to buy time to send a force in, the Russians are characteristicly direct and ruthless, but neither will allow a hostage taker to get what he wants.

and

3) It doesn't really matter what the Russians have done, are doing, or will do in Chechnya. By taking a school hostage, the Chechens have set themselves up as the bad guys. If they were looking for outside support, this was a real good way to assure they won't get it.

Jag, at what what point did I state unconditional suppport for the Russian authorities, and complete lack of sympathy for Chechnya? To read your reply to my post this must have been the case. I appreciate that you and Dana have great empathy for the Chechens. I do too, and I think I made it clear that I condem Russia's past actions. I was putting forward the opinion that long term they (Chechnya), cannot win by violent means, and like it or not, their only hope is to accept that. I do not back down from this view one bit, and your vitriolic, personal attack is hardly going to alter my opinion.

I suspect that the events in Beslan that followed the timing of your post might have taken some of the wind out of your sails.

Theres an excellent article on the BBCNews website discussing the possible identity of the hostagetakers. It's a very confused picture. Everyone is giving different information

Analysis

And also, a selection of comments from Russian Newspapers
Russian Press

This is too complex a situation to be comprehended and dealt with in comic book terms. (unless you were being ironic in which case my apologies) Good and bad may play a part in politics but only that, a part. Pragmatism is the politician's greatest ally. War and politics are intimately entwined and the only way to see an end this deadly embrace is to engage in realpolitik. Each side has a grievance ( many grievances ) with another. There are many sides. There are many factors all of which have led to the situation as it stands at this hour and day. What I have been arguing for is not acceptance of the horror of child slaughter, but just an attempt by any who take an interest to gain a deeper understanding of the various forces and motivations involved on all sides of the various struggles for independance which are boiling up in and around Russia.

Specifically my objection was to the desire by many to boil this down to good guys and bad guys and leave it at that.

And as for gaining outside support. I very much doubt that was part of the plan. Making a huge statement to the Russian people is more likely the rationale.

The net result is damn ugly, 300 or so dead, about half kids, we won't have a final toll for a while yet and it sounds like the area is still a bit of a warzone. Interesting that this was pre-planned with the weaponry installed during the summer, this was a well prepped operation. My gut feeling is that Islamic fundie elements have infiltrated and perverted the more radical elements of the chechen rebels but it's hard to be sure yet.

Take the wind out of my sails? Don't see why. Yes, a whole bunch of kids died, it's fucking awful but the point remains. Particularly about your pack of understanding. Firstly, you assume that all groups are working together. It's fairly clear they are not, there are various factions that use differing methods and it wouldn't be the first time they've fought each other, even if one wanted to call a ceasefire, who says the other would. Same problem was a right pain in the ass in Northern Ireland with career thugs like the 'Real IRA'.

Secondly, you assume that they have something to gain from doing so, I doubt they feel the same way, why on earth should they capitulate to drunk violent Russian occupation that will being no real peace or stability to the country anyway?

Thirdly, you seem to think that armed resistance never helps. Interesting, sadly not supported by history. Nelson Mandella was once a terrorist, hell, Israel might never have existed unless their terrorists blew up the King David hotel, the IRA gained political ground, the Communists are about to take over Nepal (strangely not making the news). The long and short is that force works. This appears to be a different breed of operation piggybacking on the chechen cause but it will still bring some attention to a conflict that has fallen on dead ears and as Russia eyes NATO, might force them to clean up their act there in the long term.