by tripwire on January 16th, 2007

Question

Help answer this question below.

Is Putin's war on terror just another genocide in disguise?

Like
Report

Share:: Facebook; Twitter; Other

Answers. 3 helpful answers below.

by Realist25 on February 3rd, 2008
The fact is there is a few radical islamic extremists who joined forces with chechenya rebels and who have carried out attacks agaisnt russian soldiers so Russia has the right to defend itself against terrorists. We all know Chechens wont achieve anything by attcking Russia...they will make the situation worse. The most important thing is that we should ALL remain on offense against terrorism. Initially, Bush and Putin were in good terms because of this common ground but Bush decided he wanted to occupy Iraq and this action damaged their relations. Look, nobody is a saint because there is more than a 100,000 iraqis dead because of one man's decision. Additionally, Putin has the support of Russia; It is not like Iran or Venezuela where their leaders mismanaged their economy and people are angry. As long as Putin feeds his people, they will overlook his oppressive and dictator ways
Comments
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
No comments. Post one | Permalink
by Amy on January 27th, 2007
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Putin#Foreign_policy
Comments
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
No comments. Post one | Permalink
by Kangarus Gyrfalcon on March 29th, 2011
Probably, but as long as Russia does not end up destabilised to the point of balkanisation as what happened to Yugoslavia, who are we in the West, what with the US campaign in Iraq, to judge other nations for their ways of dealing with their own issues?

Russia's methods in this are oppressive, but they are, more or less, getting results by keeping neighbouring areas of Russia to Chechnya held together, to keep the rest of the Russian peoples relatively safe from the enemy attacks. It is unfortunate that the Chechen people have to die, but you must consider that Russia is geographically very close to powers such as Iran and do not have the luxury of being sheltered away over large bodies of water.

As for the question itself, one could easily say the same of what the Americans call their War on Terror. Semantics aside as much as I may wish for peace, I am forced to believe that the only way a lasting peace could be achieved for either of each side is the comprehensive and total annihilation of the other. If genocide is what it shall come to, then it is better that we in the West, allied with the Far East, commit ourselves to such a goal against the entire Middle East, save for those elements which would be useful to us later, and have our nations looked back upon as the great tyrants and Nazi Germany types, then to roll on our backs as Tibet did and suffer ignominious extinction and obscurity? I don't know about anyone else here but I do not wish to die because of senseless religious fanatics, simple as that.
Comments
Add a comment...
- Like
- Report
No comments. Post one | Permalink