It now apears that the number of victims of the Moscow theatre siege has risen to 117. It also appears that all the victims were killed by the gas that was used to overcome their terrorist captors.
Unarguably that is a terrible price to pay but I am forced to agree with Dale Amon that the Russian authorities had no other plausible options open to them. Faced with not being able to win them all, they settled for not losing them all. Decisions do not come any harder than that.
Negotiations, however framed, were a non-starter. To even commence them would be, and be seen as, a capitulation; a reward to the terrorists for their audacity and enterprise and a guarantee that every public venue in the civilised world would, henceforth, be eyed hungrily for the prospect of a repeat performance. Negotiations don’t always save lives.
Like it or not, the Russians have now established the template for dealing with these situations and, regardless of the whining in the mainstream media, it’s a template that will be followed, albeit improved upon. It is also a message to every terrorist nutjob in the world that all they can expect in return for their ‘heroic’ efforts is a miserable, pointless death. I wonder how many other planned terrorist ‘operations’ of this nature are, even now, being hastily reconsidered? The much-feared Russian proclivity for brazen ruthlessness has, for once, worked both in their favour and ours.
They have a saying in Russia: if you’re going to die, then die with music. It means go out with a bang, go down fighting, make sure your death has meaning. Whilst it will not constitute even a meagre crumb of comfort for the bereaved, I do not believe their loved ones died in vain. By their tragic deaths, many, many others might avoid an equally grisly fate.
I cannot bring myself to glorify an event which led to the deaths of so many people who went out to enjoy a musical evening. But I think it appropriate to pay them tribute by acknowledging that they died with music.
I agree.
I was a bit surprised by this other tidbit that showed up in my mailbox today, the Mises Institute daily article, it being a different view from people also at the liberty-promoting end of things.
http://www.mises.org/fullarticle.asp?control=1080&month=49&title=Russia%27s+War+on+Chechnya&id=49
I admit to ignorance about most things, including the situation in Chechnya. How to approach the truth?
lars
I am no great friend of Muslims, but the Russian forces have no business being in Chechnya.
Even the “instablility” Mr Putin gave as one of the excuses for the latest invasion was caused by the Russian government itself – they murdered the Chechen President (an ex Soviet Air Force General – and not a radical Muslim).
I am told that most Chenchens are Sufi muslims anyway (what westerns used to call the Dervishes). Enemies of the Wahabi muslims (the ultra puritians who are behind most of the terrorist groups).
Of course terrorists are scum and should be exterminated – but that is not the only truth here.
Paul Marks.
Well said. It seems to me that if anyone is going to be blamed for the death of those people, it should be the terrorist bastards who started the whole thing to begin with.
What a load of bunk. If you people were really libertarian you’d be all for the Chechen’s right to self-determination, a right the Russians stomped over a few centuries ago and have refused to give back since. ‘Who started it first’ is one of those chicken-and-egg games that is quite honestly pointless. Now that the immediate crisis is over, true libertarians will stand up and say, Russia out of Chechnya.
Should that not be Chechnya out of Russia?