Putin blasts U.S.A....good comment here...

[DebJ]

"In other comments, Putin said Russia would take its own approach to democratic reform.

"We'll do this at our own pace," he said. Democracy can mean different things in different countries, he said.

"In Russia, democracy is who shouts the loudest," he said. "In the U.S., it's who has the most money."

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/09/07/putin.us/index.html

HEY IT'S TIME WE CHANGE AMERICA TO WHO SHOUTS THE LOUDEST AGAIN!

[Eurobabe]

1. ouch, but he's right.

[Spinzonner]

2. I wonder what Shrub's seeing it Pootie-Poot Putin's soul

these days

[moondust]

3. The U.S. a plutocracy?

I AM SHOCKED!! Can he say that right out loud?

[0007]

4. Hilarious, but true!

[Lovecrafty]

5. Damn! Putin seems to be more aware than your average Freeper!

[Bouregat]

6. Al-Queda is driving Putin to our side, though

Even with Russia's decision to eschew the war, apparently that hasn't prevented Arab terrorists from visiting it's deadly agenda on that country.
The world is finally seeing these terrorist thugs for what they are: vile, cold, cruel savages who think nothing of slaughtering children.
Al-Queda is fighting us in Iraq. With attacks like this on children, which outrage the world, they are driving hearts and minds to America's side in our fight with those terrorist animals.
You can always tell which side the bad guys are: they're the ones who wantonly and purposely slaughter innocent children.

[Capt_Nemo]

7. No, it's driving Russia vs. the US in Georgia (not the US state)

But your comments show that you ignore the subtelties of Geopolitics...

On edit:
You can see for yourself here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x806663

[pretzel4gore]

8. who told you that?

cnn/foxnews are fukkin liars

[Bouregat]

9. You don't think this massacre against hundreds of children

would galvanize feelings against the savages who did it? Nobody told me that. It's common sense.
Aside for being a horrible atrocity, it was a terrible PR mistake on the part of the Arab terrorists.

[independentpiney]

10. They're not Arabs

Somebody needs some edumacashun

[Bouregat]

11. 10 of them were Arabs

Yes, one of us does.

[BeFree]

13. Oh no! Not Arabs!

What kind of racial slurr is that, Bouregat? Just cause ten of them may have been Arabs, they are al-ciada? Just because they are Arabaian, they are terrorists?

Yes, one of you needs an edumacashun. And believe me, you will become educated if you can last a more than a few weeks! LOL

[Bouregat]

15. Arabs are Caucasian

Just as I am. So enough of the racism petard. The fact that they are Arabs underscores this was an Al Queda operation that butchered these children. And I'm sorry, but anybody who does that, Arab, black, yellow....are pieces of excrement.

[Aidoneus]

17. the fact that there weren't actually Arabs..

underscores the fact that there weren't, actually, Arabs. These claims are made rather loosely, and best taken with a grain of salt.

What of the 42k Chechen children to be murdered; did excrement do that, or is that acceptable behavior?

Nevermind, I already can tell from the Spanish-American/etc remark in the other threat that this is a waste of my time.

[Bouregat]

23. They weren't Arabs?

10 of them were. This is what the news outlets reported. Sorry.

[Aidoneus]

24. that is what some gov't official reported, and press bots picked up

Not actually corroborated by anybody inside or outside. Lies are often told by gov't functionaries to suit an agenda. I am surprised when people believe them.

They were mostly Ingushes & Ossets inside, reportedly also with Russian army deserters and 2 actual Chechen 'Black Widows'--one of whom split the scene in the middle of the chaos, not quite sure where she ended up, probably halfway to Mexico by now. I have my own information on this, sources that are a little bit better informed than Fox News and NBC, corporate entities who do nothing but pass on the lies of various gov't line spokesbots on any issue at all (not merely this, and it should not be thought that I am singling out the Russians on this matter, for I would not suggest originality in the approach). Among a great many others, these sources that I reference include the Interior Ministry of the Republic of North Ossetia-Alania itself and well informed people in the area and around the world that I talk to.

This was not at all the ending that was planned by the people inside (I cannot say that I can assume what the idea of those storming the place had thought) and is considered a tragic catastrophe as the rest of the world holds it. If this was the intent, it would have been one giant hollowed out crater with knee-high piles of masonry within minutes of arrival; in short, those buildings would've looked like half of what Djokarkala (Grozny) did and does, and all of those children would be like the 42,000 Chechen children murdered in the last decade.

At this time, ordinary Ingush people are already being scapegoated and terrorized in response to the racist hysteria being whipped up. That will only get worse, as the Prigorodny war against the small Ingush minority previously displayed a little over a decade ago.

[Bouregat]

26. Let me get this straight

1) I shouldn't believe the official news sources, but I should believe what you say about your personal 'sources'

and

2) The 'people inside' certainly didn't have bad intentions, rather, the deaths of these children is the fault of the Chechen police.

I get the picture.

[Aidoneus]

28. You obviously don't get it..

having (deliberately?) mistaken every point that I had clearly made on my own, and mangled the most basic of facts that I had not.

[allemand]

32. Interesting comment by The Guardian on one of your "sources"

Bombers' justification: Russians are killing our children, so we are here to kill yours

Chechen website quotes Bible to claim carnage as act of legitimate revenge

Jonathan Steele in Moscow
Monday September 6, 2004

<...>

"The words were amplified yesterday on a website that is close to Shamil Basayev, the most extreme Chechen commander, whom Russian officials think was the mastermind behind the Beslan atrocity. "However many children in that school were held hostage, however many of them will die (and have already died) ... it is incomparably less than the 42,000 Chechen children of school age, who have been killed by Russian invaders," said the statement on www.kavkazcenter.com.

Dead children, dead adults - brutal murder of more than 250,000 Chechen peaceful civilians by the invaders - all of it cries to heaven and demands retribution. And whoever these 'terrorists' in Beslan might be, their actions are the result of Putin's policies in the Caucasus in response to terrorism and crimes committed by the Kremlin's camarilla, which is still continuing to kill children, flood the Caucasus with blood and poison the world with its deadly bacilli of Russism."

The website quotes the Bible: "What measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you." (This is what Jesus said in The Bible - Matthew 7:2, Mark 4:24, Luke 6:38)."

More:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/russia/article/0,2763,1298075,00.html

The number of "42,000 Chechen children" that you quote comes directly from the statement on www.kavkazcenter.com, "a website that is close to Shamil Basayev"...

Very interesting... :eyes:

[Aidoneus]

33. Yes, I read it on the Russian-language page earlier

the English has been slow as shit on the update lately, and for that matter the other languages not much better--I suppose the DDOS cyberterror assaults have crippled it periodically and they are waiting for the storm for the server to be weathered. At any rate, not too terribly useful throughout the last week so I haven't relied on them much. Some Russian-language pages have provided a selection of interesting factlets that I have sown together in my mind and spoken outward.

As for this, before I had always guessed the figure to be around 30k-50k, this in proportion to the approx. 200k (CP & KC generally estimate 250k) in all; 42k sounds as a (un)happy medium between my bracketed estimations, and it was active in my mind just then as I was writing up.

Seems a matter of semantics at this time.. Are you disputing the claim in general, or just trying to insinuate something about me?

[allemand]

34. If you are critical about the bias of Western and Russian media

you should be equally critical about the bias of a pro-Basayev website.

You don't seem to notice that the statement you are quoting is trying to justify what happened in Beslan, but one carnage can never justify another.

[Aidoneus]

35. 2 points & a couple diversions

Note(1) exactly how I speak--at no point do I personally try and justify anything, regardless of what I say that could (but doesn't) try to. That's important, because I'm here and Basayev & Udugov aren't. I noticed it. At any rate, KC has yet to make any editorial statement regarding the event in any language and at this stage it is entirely speculation. I will not make my mind up on the who's and what's until Shamil speaks on it. Not that I feel the need to justify myself, but that may bring to a screetching halt a great deal of my thoughts on the subject in general.
Note(2) also I said that KC hasn't been too terribly useful to me in the last week. That sounds critical to me, but hey..

[Aidoneus]

67. Upon greater reflection, I have some other points to get out

First of all, I finally found the articles referenced on the English KC page. I would recommend reading them, if only to know the whole and true version of what is referenced (often, that is not the case). The one editorial was in fact written by a Russian citizen Boris Stomakhin, whom I have read pieces by previously. I hadn't read this one before, which was why the Bible reference did not seem familiar to me at first.

The piece I read was by Said Ibrahayev, and is available here.

Two segments, from the piece entitled: How can 42 thousand children be killed legally?

--snip--

As we can see, the sentence pronounced to armed 'unmen' is unambiguous. Those who attempted the lives of 132 schoolchildren in Beslan have now been crossed out of the list of the human race. Let’s make a note of it – not those who killed, but who threatens to have a possibility to kill under certain circumstances.

All right. On the whole, the logic is clear and emotions are explainable. But… There are a couple of trivial questions in this regard:

What, for an example, can you call those who just kill children, and not threaten them? And what kind of punishment should be made for them?

What kind of species of mammals or predators are those who killed 42 thousand Chechen children of school age, and who have been holding the survivors hostage for the past 10 years and threatening to kill them each minute?

If «the very threat to kill a child is renunciation of belonging to the human race, it’s like killing your own mother», then what is the real murder of 42 thousand children, but not just a threat?

Or Chechen schoolkids are not children? Or Chechen children do not belong to the human race? Or killing Chechen children is not a crime, but only an 'inadequate use of force'? Or Chechen children can be legally tortured in Russian concentration camps?

Why the threat to the lives of 132 Russian schoolchildren raises an emergency to convene an urgent session of the UN Security Council, while murders of 42 thousand (!!!) Chechen children of school age have not been making anybody in the world outraged throughout 10 years?

--snip--

I don’t know who seized the school, what the purpose of the hostage-taking is or what the consequences will be. We will find out about it in the nearest future. But this is what I feel like saying every time I read the irate articles of the Russian and of some of the Western press, and every time I listen to the condemning statements that Western leaders are making, while they kiss with the murderer of 42 thousand Chechen children of school age:

-You are hypocrites and scoundrels… And you should go to one gloomy place with all of your condemnations… You don’t even have the right to even be looking towards Chechen soldiers, let alone condemning them, because you are direct accomplices in the murder of 250 thousand Chechen women, children, the disabled, the pregnant, the elderly, and unborn infants killed by Putin’s sadists in the wombs of their mothers. Nevermore, forever and ever, are you or your fosterlings will be pointing to the Chechen people how to be living their lives.

--snip--

So that's that.

Stomakhin's I'll have to read first before commenting.

...Ok, this one doesn't seem too interesting to me, but here it is anyway.

No justifications or claims of credit are made, but rather comparisons and mainly the pointing out of rather important but generally ignored facts. The basic premise of the latter piece, including the «What measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you» line, seems not to praise or excuse, but rather to explain the boomerang effect of what is done, in addition the taking to task of some rather obvious propaganda. The Guardian is off its game.

[allemand]

68. The Guardian refers to and criticizes the Stomakhin article

and justifiably so.

All in the context of the Beslan massacre the article speaks of retribution
("all of it cries to Heaven and demands retribution")
seems to have doubts that the hostage-takers are terrorists
(whoever these 'terrorists' might be)
justifies their actions
("their actions are the result of")
and uses the Bible quote to that end
(«What measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you»).
http://www.kavkazcenter.com/eng/article.php?id=3156

As I said before, one carnage cannot justify another.

[Aidoneus]

48. Let me illustrate my point here further

The current "GUESS" as to who was what is as follows:
...Chechens, Ingush, Tatars, Kazakhs and Koreans among the attackers...

Yes, you read that right. Some Russian official is seriously suggesting all of that. I also read the Korean bit in a Korean newspaper. Fucked if I know what that's about, but there are a few Korean traders in the North Caucasus.

"some official" being Deputy Prosecutor Sergei Fridinsky.

ex-Ingush President Aushev said that the people inside had refused to speak the Vainakh language to him. That is, Ingush & Chechen languages. They spoke Russian instead, which is spoken over all the Caucasus and Russia.

Putin's top negotiator said that he didn't recognize a Chechen or Ingush accent to the Russian spoken, according to Noviye Izvestia.

[Ravenseye]

19. Arabs are definately NOT Caucasians

The Arab ethnicity, of which I am a proud member, is not caucasian.

Believe me I was getting racially attacked by people when i was younger..physically attacking me, destroying my property etc...People definately didn't see me as 'white' or 'caucasian'. In fact at one school they listed me as Asian/Pacific Islander because at the time the only choices were Caucasian, Black, Hispanic, Asian/Pacific Islander.

Arabs are Semitic, along with the Jews, and a couple of smaller groups in the middle east and Africa. They are part of the larger Hamito-Semitic group which includes the Semites, as well as the Hamitic groups which are located solely in Africa.

The people who committed this crime from what I read, may have been muslim, definately were terrorists....but that doesn't make them arabs.

[Bouregat]

22. There are only three races in the world

If you are not Caucasian, what are you? Negroid? Mongoloid?

[Aidoneus]

25. I'm no expert on race classifications,

but I believe Arabs and Jews count as "betweens", a mix of Caucasians & Negroid, and many of them also part-Mongoloid as well. This is all due to a wide variety of population movements and the central location of the Arab lands.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

27. Sounds like you've been brushing up on Social Darwinism

The Chechens are white and of CAUCASIAN ethnicity. Her CAUCASIAN refers to the mountainous area in West Central Asia.

[Bouregat]

30. What the hell?

Try reviewing the last few threads so you can have an idea of what we are talking about

[Kathy in Cambridge]

40. I did-and I said that the Chechen were of Causasian ethnicity

how does that vary from what anyone else is saying?

[Bouregat]

45. OK..Listen closely

Somebody disputes that Arabs are Caucasian. Since there are only three races, if one is not Caucasian, then one is Negroid or Mongoloid. Is this clear now?

[Kathy in Cambridge]

49. Nice patronizing attitude

who the FUCK are YOU? Buh-BYE! :eyes:

The alert button is my friend.

[Bouregat]

58. Funny

You were pretty condescending on another thread where you claimed the need to teach 'us' history. So now you scream to the moderators when somebody gives it back. Telling, isn't it?

[Kathy in Cambridge]

60. Well, if the shoe fits

You didn't understand that corporatism in Mussolini's Italy was just capitalism.

I put my money where my mouth is. It's usually your kind that calls for blood and fails to follow through. Enjoy your stay.

[Bouregat]

62. Nah

You condescended about 'you people' in the post before your statement about 'corporatism'. Nice revisionism, though.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

65. I have a Masters in History. So far you've shown how little

you know of history and current events, except what Fox News tells you.

[Ravenseye]

50. Why Not Read About It

The whole concept of 'Race' has been disputed. The use of the three races terminology of Caucasian, Negroid, and Mongoloid is old has been shown to be nothing more than an unscientific labeling from over a hundred years ago.

More recently they've shown that 'race' just simply doesn't exist in those terms. Humanity exists in shades of grey not three distinct colors. In fact genetic studies have shown that there is often MORE genetic variation within a 'race' than without. What does this mean? It means genetically a person from the Sudan might be more closely related to a person living in El Salvador than to another Sudanese. We're a big blend.

Since 'race' was shown to be completely lacking in basis people started using 'ethnicity' which was not so much a genetic terminology but one of culture and language.

Focusing on the middle east, and iraq in particular there are a number of ethnic groups. The Kurds, Arabs, Assyrans, and Chaldeans making up the largest groups. There are also Jews, a few Druze I think, and other mixed groups of later immigrants. Mostly though it's in the first four.

When you look at groups you look at their language roots, cultural roots, and historical interactions. Every ethnic group has a little bit of everything in them. Over thousands of years people migrate and their DNA gets dispersed. Think of the typical 'asian eye' which is actually caused by something called a epicanthic fold. It's just a flap of skin over the eye that gives the appearance of being more angular. Nearly 100% of people living in China have epicanthic folds...but not all of them. Same thing for Ireland. Nearly 100% do not have epicanthic folds...but some do. There is no clear boundry for this facial feature and actually blends from near 100% in China to near 0% in Ireland, with everywhere in between carrying a different progression of these features.

Arabs living in what has been termed a 'crossroads' have many different genetic influences in their systems. In fact while they call people living from Morroco to Iraq and even into Iran as 'arabs' the group itself is widely diverse, with heavier african and berber influences in northern africa, and heavier turkish, persian, and yes even white, influences in Iraq and Syira.

The main component though remains what I said before. The Arabs are at root a semitic people with a semitic language that comes from the Hamito-Semitic group which came out of Africa.

If you insist on forcing people to use antiquated and highly disproven race terminology of Caucasian, Negroid, and Mongoloid and you want to know where Arabs would fit in there...then they'd be most accurately listed as Negroid. The fact that Arabs don't easily fit in one of these three categories is in iteslf evidence that the 'three races' is complete BS.

[Bouregat]

56. Arabs aren't of the Negroid race

How utterly proposterous. Each race has physical characteristics. Arabs have Caucasian characteristics and none of the Negroid.

[Ravenseye]

66. Did You Even Read What I Wrote?

You know...the part about how there is no such thing as the racial classification you seem bent on?

How bout even the last sentence?

"The fact that Arabs don't easily fit in one of these three categories is in iteslf evidence that the 'three races' is complete BS."

Try doing some research and look it up, or even read my response before you respond to it.

[DrWeird]

52. Arabs are semitic.

Perhaps you're confusing Arabs with Persians.

Oh, and the earth is round and revolves around the sun.

Just in case you didn't know.

What are Latin Americans? Caucasian? Mongoloid? or Negroid?

Is this the David Duke School of Racial Studies?

[Kathy in Cambridge]

54. Which is why I asked him about Social Darwinism

his "race" theory smacked of racist theory...

[Bouregat]

57. What a handy little canard

If you don't like what somebody says, they're 'racist'.

It is significant than ten of the hostage takers in Chechnya are Arab only because that could and probably does indicate an Al Queda connection. No other reason. I could care less what people look like but when they massacre little children intentionally, wantonly, they are EVIL.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

59. Now I'm going to patronize you

I NEVER called you racist-just that the theory you espoused was a racist one.

Some people do that out of ignorance and given your post history, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

[Bouregat]

61. My post was in response to #52

If I were responding to yours, my post would be indented from yours. Do you understand how these boards work?

[Kathy in Cambridge]

63. Buh-BYE!

Go back to Conservative Underground. That's where you're from, right?

:eyes:

I'm laughimg my ass off here...you're so pathetic.

[DrWeird]

64. OK. I never called you racist.

I just alluded that what you were spouting was racist ideology. Whether or not you understand what you were talking about, really meant it, or were just being sarcastic I can't say. So I'm not calling you a racist.

It's just what you were talking about was racist, eugenic, social darwinistic ideology and technically incorrect by any reasonable analysis.

So where'd you get your information from? Stormfront?

[IronLionZion]

43. you seem to have a lot of hate in your heart

and chechens are white, not arab

[Bouregat]

44. Read any article on this story

10 arabs were among the captors.

[dutchdemocrat]

47. Wrong

You forgot the fourth... Australoid.

Seems the whole race of humans you forgot to include may have 'discovered' America

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5927028/

[Ravenseye]

51. Read the response below (nt)

[skygazer]

41. History

I dont' know for sure if any of them were Arabs or not - there may well have been some but that does not make it an al Quaeda operation. There have been many instances of terror attacks by Chechens and the reasons are not because they "hate the Russians for their freedoms" or anything like that but because they feel they have been treated unfairly. Right or wrong, this is the usual reason for terrorist attacks to happen. This does not mean I condone those attacks but we have to be clear on the motivation if we're going to solve the problem.

This article explains the history behind the Chechnya/Russia problems and also touches on the Arab involvment. It's interesting and informative. (and free)

http://slate.msn.com/id/2106287/

[pretzel4gore]

12. i think putin sees bushinc's hand in this

face it, they way the entire school incident played defies common sense. THe russian ss is widely seen as one of the most vicious intel services in world...yet even they consider the western variety with unmitigated horror....al ciada was a cia creation (remember the billion spent driving russians out of afghanistan, the 10000 plus russians who were killed? and that is their neighborhood)
why would anyone do anything to damage their cause? you say they savages, but who's filling our news with stuff? possibly the same guys who had a finger in the pie in S russia in 1st place ie: the cia m16 mossad etc....and cnn/foxnews are their pr branches.
and as far as the victims are concerned....well cnn/foxnews can't won't tell us how many died in flattening grozny

[natrat]

14. if the media is telling you they are x

you cant believe it 100%--yes they probably are arab freaks living in the 12th century ...but just maybe they really are some other group bent on taking over the world ...who knows

[Junkdrawer]

18. Not covered by the US Media: Putin is pointing fingers at the West...

....
Mr. Putin took a defiant tone, acknowledging corruption in Russian law-enforcement agencies but lashing out pointedly at unspecified foreign foes seeking to tear the country apart.

"Some want to cut off a juicy morsel from us; others are helping them. They are helping, believing that Russia, as one of the world's biggest nuclear powers, is still posing a threat to them," Mr. Putin said. "Therefore, this threat must be removed."

Analysts said Mr. Putin had turned a new page in his foreign policy, blaming terrorism on the West. "(W)ho fears our nuclear weapons? Who are they aimed at? It's the West. It's not Osama bin Laden," said Pavel Felgenhauer, an independent military analyst.

Mr. Putin promised measures to "strengthen the unity" of Russia and tighten its borders, and demanded "action from our law-enforcement organs that would be adequate to the level and scale of the new threats."
...
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20040905.wbeslan0905/BNStory/Front

Link to more of the speech..
....
We showed weakness, and the weak are trampled upon. Some want to cut off a juicy morsel from us while others are helping them.

They are helping because they believe that, as one of the world's major nuclear powers, Russia is still posing a threat to someone, and therefore this threat must be removed.

And terrorism is, of course, only a tool for achieving these goals. But as I have already said many times, we have faced crises, mutinies and acts of terror more than once.
....
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3627878.stm

[Joanne98]

29. Can you say Condi Rice.......

They've been encircling Russia with military bases. Bush came into office with Condi defending the Chechen's as separatist and freedom fighters. They came in with the cold war on their minds. Determined to fuck with Russia even more. Then they used 9/11 to build military bases in Central Asia. Putins' pissed about them "butting in" Georgia. I hope he takes this and shoves it right up Condi's ass.

[LisaL]

16. I think that whoever did it

achieved their goals, which seem to be war in the region.

[oneighty]

21. Like wingnut

McVeigh huh?

180

[Misunderestimator]

31. Like the thousands of innocent children we bombed, killing and maiming

them?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

36. "our side"? Which side is that? The side of the warmongers?

Seeing as how this "war" has made us the enemy of most of the people in the Middle East, and scorned by the rest of the world, and has swollen the ranks of the "terrorists", which side would that be?

As to slaughering innocent children, America has more than it's share of children's blood on it's hands.

[knight_of_the_star]

38. Sorry, check your info

The Chechen rebels have been at war with Russia since before Russia was the USSR. They have little, if anything to do with Al Queda. Their conflict is more along the lines of the IRA vs the UK.

[allemand]

42. Al Qaeda among the Chechens

By Scott Peterson | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

<...>

"In recent months, radical Islamist Chechen leaders such as Shamil Basayev, along with Osama bin Laden, have been "clear" about wanting to "set Russia on fire," says Michael Radu, a terrorism expert at the Foreign Policy Research Institute in Philadelphia. "This is not an Al Qaeda operation: These are autonomous groups," he says. "It's not like bin Laden wrote the checks. But they are synchronized ideologically and strategically."

<...>

Ties between Chechen radicals and Al Qaeda stretch back to the first Chechen war (1994-1996). A radical element - spurred by would-be clerics who traveled to Saudi Arabia to learn about the Salafi fundamentalist strain of Islam - began to develop in the late 1990s.

By 1999, when Chechen warlord Shamil Basayev invaded Russian territory in Dagestan - prompting a second war - it became clear that Islamic radicals dominated Chechen rebel groups.

"Chechnya began to attract emissaries, adventurers, and finances," says Alexander Iskandaryan, head of the Center for Caucasian Studies in Yerevan, Armenia. "After 1999, the radical tendency grew strong, and became more internationalized."

More:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0907/p01s02-woeu.html

[DarthRevan]

70. Exactly!

Did the children at that Russian school have opinions on Chechen independence? Were they a legitimate target for those "freedom fighters"? The Chechens obviously did. They knew that Russians have a soft spot for kids and they exploited that soft spot. Disgusting, but then people like that thrive off chaos and pain. And I know some of you will try and say that the US slaughters children in Iraq. Well, those who do that suffer from what I call selective memory. You conveniently forget that US weapons are far more accurate than they were in any other war. If you decry the civilian casualties in Iraq, what about Vietnam, World War II, Korea or any other conflict?

[RedDragon]

20. Yea

Putin hid the entire incident from the people of Russia until it was over. They only found out about it if they had a Dish and were able to see it on American TV. Putin Blasting America means nothing. He is a Dictator at heart.

[Cha]

39. We got a fucking Dictator right here in the

good ol' USA. But that fucker is on his way out.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

37. Capitalism + Democracy = Oligarchy

Putin is hardly a democrat but he's got this one tagged right. We have two parties both beholden and controlled by the monied interests in this country.

[lovuian]

46. I think Putin knows reality America's democracy is dead

:bounce:

[Centre_Left]

53. For any Russian politician...

...to lecture Americans (or anyone) on democracy and oligarchy is laughable. In Russian, not only democracy, but the basic rule of law as well, depends on how much money you have. At least bribery of public officials (excluding campaign donations) is not a part of daily life in the US for the average American.

[snooper2]

55. Putin is a POS

Amazing how people will side with him so quickly.

[jackieforthedems]

69. When I Heard That Today

on the Today Show, I immediately thought of possible problems, as in military issues, with Russia in the future.