Screw it - Time to cleanse the world of ALL Islamic radicals

[-tronski-]

Originally posted by Toad:
Take a look at the results. It's almost over and best information puts the number of Afghan civilian casualties between 300 and 600.

That number include the 600 bodies found in Mazar-e-Sharif?

 Tronsky

[leonid]

toad, your figures are probably correct(don't worry I trust ya - no need for all that typing), but the point has been missed.  The hype was not about civilian losses as it was about a war against a country 'trying to assert its freedom against a harsh regime'.  Tell that to all those hundreds of dead in those apartment buildings in Moscow.

[Toad]

Tronski, that figure is, at present, the best estimate of civilian casualties from direct action by armed forces of the United States.

I assume you are referring to the reported finding of 600 bodies of "Arab Taliban" found in Mazer after the takeover by the Northern Alliance?

[Toad]

Leonid, I think it's related, don't you?

There's absolutely no doubt that the Russians have been subjected to terrorism by the Chechens and clearly have the responsibility to deal with them.

There's also no doubt that the Russians have responded in an incredibly brutal fashion that has resulted in a very, very high number of deaths amongst Chechen civilians. 30,000 is the lowest number I've seen.

This, I think, puts the Russians at a severe disadvantage when trying to portray themselves in a sympathetic light in Chechnya.

Thus, it's harder for them to get "good press".

As I said, I've got no problem with the Russians going after Chechen terrorists.

I do get a little miffed when Boroda predicts how the US is going to slaughter thousands of innocent Afghans (which obviously has not happened) and then justifies the way the Russians have truly slaughtered Chechen civilians.

The Chechen Campaign has undoubtedly been necessary for the Russians. However, their tactics and disregard for civilians have been truly beyond the pale.

[-tronski-]

Originally posted by Toad:
Tronski, that figure is, at present, the best estimate of civilian casualties from direct action by armed forces of the United States.

I assume you are referring to the reported finding of 600 bodies of "Arab Taliban" found in Mazer after the takeover by the Northern Alliance?

So what is the real number of killed by 'allied' forces, and does this number include executed pow's?
Or is that a seperate civilian number perhaps listed under miscellaneous?

Ever seen the movie Oh! What a Lovely War, where the British causalties are listed on a cricket scoreboard...

 Tronsky

[Toad]

So, Tronski, your point is that the US is responsible for any civilian casualties caused by the Northern Alliance/United Front?

Is that what you're saying?

How far back do you want to go? The NA/UF has been fighting the Taliban a long time, with atrocities on both sides.

Further, are you saying the US is responsible for any war crimes/atrocities caused by the NA/UF?

Can you give me the link that shows where representatives of the NA transferred command and control of their forces to the US military? And the link where we accepted?

Or are you just hurling the old "you made alliances with people who were bad!" BS again?

[-tronski-]

Originally posted by Toad:
So, Tronski, your point is that the US is responsible for any civilian casualties caused by the Northern Alliance/United Front?

Is that what you're saying?

Or are you just hurling the old "you made alliances with people who were bad!" BS again?

Actually I never once mentioned US responsibility so you may keep your paranoia in check.
Quite frankly I find the whole argument over who killed less people repugnant. Being proud of only killing 600 civilians a ridiculous statment.
Hence the reference to the movie Oh! What a Lovely War, where British generals kept the causalties of the somme etc as a cricket score.

 Tronsky

[Toad]

So, your entire line of questions...

 

That number include the 600 bodies found in Mazar-e-Sharif?

 

So what is the real number of killed by 'allied' forces, and does this number include executed pow's?
Or is that a seperate civilian number perhaps listed under miscellaneous?  

...had nothing to do with US responsibility?

It was merely to highlight that you mistakenly assumed these lines...


 

 I recall a thread of Boroda's not long ago bemoaning how US forces were going to slaughter thousands of innocent Afghans in the yet to be initiated war in Afghanistan.

Take a look at the results. It's almost over and best information puts the number of Afghan civilian casualties between 300 and 600.

Then take a look at the civilian death toll in Chechnya in the '94-'96 campaign. 50,000 would be a VERY conservative estimate.

 somehow indicated pride instead of a comment on Boroda's pre-war prediction of an American slaughter of civilians in Afghanistan and his contention that the Russians were fighting the Chechen war more carefully with respect to civilians?

OK.    

Well, let me clear it up for you.

I don't think "pride" has anything to do with it at all.

Like probably every single American, I'm thankful the number is that low and wish it could be lower.

[-lynx-]

Jeepers Toad - you can't really be that naive, can you? The difference is that Russians do not have their Northern Alliance to wage ground war. I'm sure they'd be delighted to have an opportunity to unload on Chechnya from 30,000 feet leaving somebody else to get the blame for "civilian casualties"...

I do get a little miffed when Boroda predicts how the US is going to slaughter thousands of innocent Afghans (which obviously has not happened) and then justifies the way the Russians have truly slaughtered Chechen civilians.
 

[Toad]

Jeepers, Lynx...

You can't really be that unaware of the great lengths that the US goes to in order to avoid civilian casualties can you?

If the US had to fight a ground war in Afghanistan, do you think we'd use a huge massed artillery barrage on Kabul like the Russians used on Grozny?

That wasn't war from 30,000 feet.. this was a massed indescriminate artillery barrage for two MONTHS. BEFORE the civilians had a chance to evacuate, for the most part.


   

Tales of a Barrage: Scores of spent artillery shells litter the hills around Grozny. Parts of the city were literally flattened by Russian artillery

   

City in Ruins: Russian soldiers rest in downtown Grozny. Russia's bombing of the Chechen capital took such a heavy toll on the city's buildings that Russian troops struggled to find an intact office for their commandant

   


No Silver Lining: The devastation of Grozny is starkly evident when viewed from the surrounding hills, from which Russian artillery rained down relentlessly for more than two months

******


If the US had done anything like that, the whole world would be screaming at the top of their lungs.

But, it's OK for the Russians somehow, right?

[ 11-24-2001: Message edited by: Toad ]

[-tronski-]

Originally posted by Toad:
[QB]Jeepers, Lynx...

If the US had done anything like that, the whole world would be screaming at the top of their lungs.

But, it's OK for the Russians somehow, right?

[QB]

Actually more like the Russian army just went and did it, and there was silence because they could brow beat anyone into thinking it was an internal matter,
Where anyone dissenting against US the in Afghanistan has been told quite clearly that they could be next.

You're either with us, or against us can silent many critics. A fact the Russian, and American military know well.

Tronsky

[ 11-24-2001: Message edited by: -tronski- ]

[Toad]

So, Tronsky, you're saying that if the US Army conducts a savage two month long indiscriminate shelling of a major city in any of the upcoming campaigns the world press and UN will pretty much ignore it like they did Grozny?

There'll be no massive demonstrations in the streets of capitals around the world?

Yeah, right.  

There's a double standard and you, of all people, must be aware of it.  

[-lynx-]

BEFORE the civilians had a chance to evacuate, for the most part.

Just for the record - Grozny used to be predominantly Russian-populated city. That is before most of the Russians fled it after being pushed out. In a very same fashion Brits and Americans are being pushed out of Indonesia right now by some extreme muslims - "we kindly ask you to leave or we cannot guarantee you safety"... How I know that? My parents used to live in Grozny. My mom phoned me and cried on the phone after seeing their apartment block reduced to a pile of rubble on TV. They were quite lucky to be able to take all their stuff with them - many weren't.

Civilian casualties? I'm very sceptical about any Western scores obtained while "on the "freedom fighter's" side". It was very similar to Afganistan 20 years ago - peaceful peasant by day - mujaheddin (sp?) by night. They don't wear uniform you see to be counted as "military casualties"... I wouldn't trust Russian sources either - they were pushed against the wall and fought not necessarily a "clean" fight by Western standards but is there really a "clean" fight in war since it is the victor who gets to determine what was "clean" and what was not? The Northern Alliance slaughtered a few hundred young unarmed Taleban recruits - "tsk-tsk" was all they got. How do you fight "cleanly" with the enemy whose standards on what's honorable/acceptable and what's not are wastly different from yours?

I never said the US were targetting civilians - this is just ridiculous. But if US ground troops had to take Cabul - what do you think they'd do? Waltz into the city and die? Thank God there was no need for it...

As for the Russians - you said it yourself: "...it's harder for them to get "good press"...

[ 11-26-2001: Message edited by: -lynx- ]

[Toad]

I wonder why it's so hard for them to get good press?
 WAR HAS NO RULES FOR RUSSIAN FORCES BATTLING CHECHEN REBELS

"That may be the Kremlin's official position, but servicemen say things are different on the ground. In part because of media coverage of Chechen slave-trading, torture and beheadings, the soldiers believe that the enemy is guilty of far worse atrocities.

Although they know that executions and other human rights violations are wrong, they also consider them an unavoidable--even necessary--part of waging war, especially against such a foe.

In their view, human rights workers and other critics are simply squeamish about the real nature of war.

"What rules? What Geneva Conventions? What difference does it make if Russia has signed them?" said a 25-year-old army officer. "I didn't sign them, none of my friends signed them. . . . In Russia, these rules don't work."...

"I remember a Chechen female sniper. She didn't have any chance of making it to the authorities. We just tore her apart with two armored personnel carriers, having tied her ankles with steel cables."


As for taking Kabul, there's  major differences in doctrine between Russian and US armed forces. Ours is built around air, theirs leans more towards massed artillery... as we've seen.

[Boroda]

Toad, why not post direct links to "freedom-fighters" propaganda from www.kavkaz.org?

You can also post some photos from Berlin, May, 1945.

My friend, we send 18 years old boys to that hell, in a desperate attempt to fight terrorists, not the whole Chechen people. In Autumn, 1999, VVS was anxious to get an order and "flatten" that can of spiders with FAB-5000s. Like you did in Serbia. They have sent conscripted former school boys to die there instead. The losses per year are 2-3 times worse then in Afghnistan 15 years ago, and Chechnya is 60 (sixty) times smaller then Afghanistan.

It's really funny to listen about "human rights" for the terrorists from people who had no problem using napalm and carpet bombings against a small Indochina country, who had no problem bombing one Southern-European nation "to stone age" to support terrorist gangs sponsored by the Devilish Bin Laden.

My thread about civilian losses in Afghanistan had one purpose: to make your patriots shout about "inevitable casualities". Re-read it, please. Then - think about it. We fight the same enemy, and if you see another way for more "humane" warfare, then, send your troops to Chechnya and show us, Asian barbrians how to wage war.