Soviet-Empire.com U.S.S.R. and communism historical discussion.
[ Active ]
[ Login ]
Log-in to remove these advertisements.

South Russia school massacre: Who is responsible? AWTWNS

POST REPLY
Soviet cogitations: 14
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Sep 2004, 19:13
New Comrade (Say hi & be nice to me!)
Post 10 Sep 2004, 19:56
South Russia school massacre: Who is responsible?



6 September 2004. A World to Win News Service. The murder of hundreds of schoolchildren in Belsan in the North Ossetia area of southern Russia was monstrous. As of this writing, the Russian government has given out conflicting claims about the identity of the hostage-takers and their political aims. But enough is clearly known to reveal the enormous guilt of the Russian government and of the various Western governments that have backed President Vladimir Putin in this crime, whether out of complicity or rivalry with Russia’s rulers.



The first fact that no one can deny is that the massive killing started when Russian troops stormed the school. According to Le Monde, “Many people in Beslan blame the forces of order and accuse them of provoking the massacre.” The authorities had announced that the children’s lives were the most important thing and that they had no plans to stage an assault that could endanger them, and then they did exactly that.



Even the Dutch government which currently holds the European Union presidency sent its ambassador to demand that Moscow explain “how this tragedy could have happened.” The Russian foreign minister angrily called this “blasphemy”.



The core unit of Russian troops sent to Beslan was the Alfa brigade of Russia’s Special Forces. This elite hit squad is modelled on the US Delta Forces, the British SAS and units of Israel’s Mossad. When Chechen rebels seized the Dubrovka theatre in Moscow almost two years ago, the Alfa brigade was sent in. Most of the 129 hostages who died were killed when the security forces flooded the theatre with poison gas. Alfa troops then entered the building from the sewers and shot 18 unconscious female hostage-takers in the head, according to the Guardian. Killing hostages and hostage-takers alike is standard procedure for the Alfa brigade. One way or another, they seem to have done it again in Beslan.



For Putin, the only thing that mattered in Beslan was to assert his authority and power to crush any threat to his regime. No matter who the hostage-takers were, the action was linked to the Russian invasion and occupation of Chechnya, and Putin treated them the same way his troops and police treat Chechens of all stripes, whether guerrilla fighters or ordinary people: by killing them indiscriminately.



This link with the Chechnya war is the second fact no one can deny, and yet it seems as if all the world’s political authorities have done so. No major government mentioned Chechnya before, during or after this crisis. Instead, they all shared the attitude expressed by Israel, which pledged increased cooperation with Russia “in the struggle against terrorism carried out by the worldwide Islamic jihad.” This is a racist codeword to justify war against the peoples of the Middle East and a big chunk of the third world.



The war in Chechnya is not about religion. Further, regardless of the horror of Beslan, it must be said that acting like Russia is a victim is turning reality completely upside down.



The seizure of the Beslan gymnasium, like the recent bombing of two planes leaving Moscow and a suicide bombing in the Moscow metro, came on the heels of the August presidential elections in Chechnya, an exercise in Russian cynicism and ruthlessness. The last Russian puppet president of Chechnya, Akhmad Kadyrov, a brute who along with his security chief son terrorised the country, was assassinated last May. The elections brought the Kremlin’s candidate Alu Alkhanov 74 percent of the vote. The New York Times described the runner-up in the elections as “Moscow’s backup candidate in case Alkhanov was killed before election day.” BBC reporters who visited polling places where thousands of votes for Alkhanov were reported said they had seen no one there all day. The Times recounted how a Russian journalist demonstrated the fraudulence of the elections by voting four times himself. “I could have voted even more, but I had to file my story,” he explained.



The Chechens are one of many nationalities in the Caucasus mountains historically oppressed by Russia. After the collapse of the Soviet Union the small Chechen republic tried to withdraw from the Russian Federation. Russia invaded in 1994, but two years later was forced to withdraw in temporary defeat. Chechnya was given substantial autonomy. Aslan Maskhadov, who had been chief of staff under the Russians, became president. In 1999, faced with a growing independence movement, Putin launched another invasion and overthrew Maskhadov.



Aerial bombardments, raids on villages, death squads, assassinations and widespread torture – to put it briefly, the Russian occupiers have fought much like the US in Iraq. Chechnya’s population is less than a million. Some estimate that almost a quarter has been killed during the Russian occupations, and another third turned into refugees.



Writing in The Guardian, a British columnist compared Russia’s war in Chechnya to the US in Vietnam. Its policy, he explained, is best explained by a quote from US General William Westmoreland. Asked by a reporter named Neil Sheehan “if he was troubled by the number of Vietnamese civilians killed by indiscriminate bombing and shelling, the general answered, ‘Yes, Neil, it is a problem, but it does deprive the enemy of the population, doesn’t it?’”



The reasons why Russia has not been called to account before world public opinion for its crimes are complex. It could be described as a big-power conspiracy in which the players have conflicting interests. The presidents of France and Germany met with Putin at his summer residence in the Black Sea resort of Sochi just after the Chechen elections and just before the Beslan crisis and raised no embarrassing questions or criticisms. For these countries, the considerable military strength of this former superpower, which still maintains an enormous nuclear arsenal, makes it a potential key element in developing a rival bloc that could challenge US imperialist efforts to grab up the whole world for itself. After the massacre, French President Chirac’s “solidarity with the Russian people” (really with Putin) contrasted sharply with his pointed rebukes to the US for acting similarly in Iraq. The UK and Italy issued similar assurances of continuing respect for the criminal Putin. George Bush called the incident “another grim reminder of the length to which terrorists will go to threaten this civilised world, ” in essence supporting Putin’s (and Israel’s) claim that this whole incident could be put down to Islam.



North Ossetia, the Russian Federation Republic where Beslan is located, is home to one of the biggest Russian military installations in the region and has played a key role in Russian efforts to keep the Caucasus under its control. Its people are considered particularly pro-Russian among the small states stretching from the Caspian to the Black Sea.



Journalists sometimes describe the people of the Caucasus as fearsome, but the big imperialists have long turned this region into a battleground for their conflicting interests. This is the most important factor in the fierceness that has characterised recent conflicts there. In its plan to set up a ring of US-friendly regimes and military bases around Russia’s southern flanks, the US has turned Georgia into a key pawn currently in its possession. Russia, in turn, has supported minority nationality attempts to secede from Georgia, including in South Ossetia. Russia has long charged the US with supporting Chechen independence forces. One piece of evidence that would seem to support this is that the UK and US have given asylum to still very politically active ministers in the Maskhadov government overthrown by Putin.



The complex situation among the Chechen resistance forces reflects all this. Russia once considered Maskhadov useful as a potential neo-colonial figure, and the US today apparently has some hopes for him and the forces he represents to serve their interests. Some observers say that Maskhadov’s failure to make any headway against intransigent Russian brutality is a factor in creating the political vacuum in which Moslem fundamentalist forces have arisen. It seems that one element that has favoured this development is that such forces are seen as not being compromised with the big powers. It is commonly noted that many of Chechnya’s current suicide bombers are widows, orphans and other relatives of men tortured and killed by the Russians.



Making this even more complicated is the fact that many in the Chechen independence movement formerly held positions under the Russians, while Russia has spent money freely to buy the loyalty of Chechen feudals and other notables. Many of these men have shifting loyalties. Russian security forces are said to be thoroughly penetrated by Chechen sympathizers and vice versa. Again, this is not unlike the US’s relations with some Islamic forces. Kadyrov, the Russian puppet assassinated in May, died when a bomb blew up under his seat while he was addressing a rally in a stadium. It may have been planted by people in his own security services. In short, the situation is very murky, and no matter which group took the children hostage in Beslan, they themselves might have no idea who they were really working for.



Whatever the conscious goals of these people may have been, it should be clear that the Chechen conflict is not about religion or the kind of “irrational” war on the West that Putin, Sharon and Bush label it. As in other countries in the region and much of the world, both the just struggles of the people and the machinations of the imperialist powers are at work.

- end item –
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 866
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 05 Mar 2003, 16:07
Komsomol
Post 10 Sep 2004, 20:33
Quote:
The first fact that no one can deny is that the massive killing started when Russian troops stormed the school. According to Le Monde, "Many people in Beslan blame the forces of order and accuse them of provoking the massacre." The authorities had announced that the children's lives were the most important thing and that they had no plans to stage an assault that could endanger them, and then they did exactly that.


Blancmange. Al'fa team were thirty kilometers away from Beslan when terrorists started shooting hostages who attempted to escape. The initial assault was committed by MVD units and armed civilians who have suffered heavy casualties (about 100 men, I believe). Most hostages died when the roof of the building fell on their heads.

Quote:
Killing hostages and hostage-takers alike is standard procedure for the Alfa brigade. One way or another, they seem to have done it again in Beslan.


Whoever wrote this, he is a complete idiot. Children don't look like terrorists, right?

I won't comment all other biased shit. They write only what communist Russophobes want to hear, completely ignoring many facts that speak against Chechens...
Image
Soviet cogitations: 14
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Sep 2004, 19:13
New Comrade (Say hi & be nice to me!)
Post 10 Sep 2004, 20:43
Russia is an imperialist country.
It is not socialist.

Your apologist remarks claim anti-Russian bias. The only "bias" in the article is anti oppression and occupation.

It seems Papergut is against the Chechen nations right to self-determination. If so, Papergut should take Stalin down as his/her avatar, because this line is anti-Leninist (Maoist). Stalin wrote extensively on why revolutionaries must recognize and uphold the right to self- determination of oppressed nations.

I understand that Papergut seems to "know" that Al'fa was 30 miles away. What was his/her source for this "knowledge"?

It is possible to uphold all the achievements of the Soviet Revolution and not uphold the moves of Russian social-imperialism.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 866
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 05 Mar 2003, 16:07
Komsomol
Post 10 Sep 2004, 20:58
Quote:
No matter who the hostage-takers were, the action was linked to the Russian invasion and occupation of Chechnya, and Putin treated them the same way his troops and police treat Chechens of all stripes, whether guerrilla fighters or ordinary people: by killing them indiscriminately.


It doesn't matter for them but it does for me. Chechen bandits, religious fanatics and Arabian henchmen do not represent the will of Chechen people, right? Second: this action, IMHO, is not linked with Chechen independence in any way. I think that Russian government lied, telling that the terrorists were demanding freedom for Chechnya, the school takeover was most probably connected with faked elections in Osetija that took place two days before. About killing Chechens by police forces - the author doesn't seem to know or doesn't want his readers to know that Chechen law enforcement units consist only of Chechen themselves.

Don't have more time to write now; it's already deep night here. I'll comment the other topics tomorrow...
Image
Soviet cogitations: 14
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Sep 2004, 19:13
New Comrade (Say hi & be nice to me!)
Post 10 Sep 2004, 21:09
September 11th, 2001: caused by the actions of the US government around the world. Who flew the planes into the buildings? We may never know.

Similarly on this subject:
Palestinian suicide bombings that target Israeli civilians:
The domination, occupation and slaughter of Palestinian people by the Israeli government is clearly the primarily the reason these horrible things occur.

The imperialist acts of aggression by the Russian government have caused all kinds of horrible scenes in Chechnya, including this one. This should be and needs to be clear.

In other words, I know who is to blame for this massacre, fundamentally. The Russian government.


Papergut seems to support imperialism. Under the name of "communism" he apologizes for the oppression of whole peoples. This anti-people stance can and should be exposed and called out by more people on this website.

Nazi fascists called themselves "socialists". Did they not?
Soviet cogitations: 4394
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 16 Jun 2004, 17:30
Politburo
Post 10 Sep 2004, 21:16
Every source I've read from had the rebels firing at kids escaping after one of their bombs went off. Then parents and civilians around the vicinity opened up a cover-fire. Unable to stop them, the Russian army moved in real quick and tried to neutralize the situation from withen. That's what I heard from CNN, ABC, and NBC. Granted these are bourgi sources, but that's what I've heard.

Comrade Papergut's line doesn't seem to far out of step of Stalin's in my opinion.

-TIG
Alis Volat Propriis; Tiocfaidh Ar La; Proletarier Aller Länder, Vereinigt Euch!
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 9306
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 02 Mar 2004, 15:19
Ideology: Other Leftist
Old Bolshevik
Post 10 Sep 2004, 21:25
To believe that it wasn't Al-Qaida that flew into the WT Towers is to choose ignorance because you dislike certain leaders.

I don't support and have often come out against Papergut's line many times, however what it sounds like to me is that you are trying to create a very sectarian group against Papergut. Argument, criticism, and self-criticism are all important things when handling contradictions. If we disagree with papergut, it would be wrong of us to try and create a broad sectarian opposition against him, as it would be wrong of him to create a broad sectarian opposition against us, arguments, criticism, all this should be applied. Denouncing and finger pointing should be left to the conservatives and the liberals.
Image

Fitzy wrote:
Yes, because I am poisoning them. They are my children.
Soviet cogitations: 14
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Sep 2004, 19:13
New Comrade (Say hi & be nice to me!)
Post 10 Sep 2004, 21:39
TIG says Papergut 's line does not fall far out of line with Stalin's. TIG should cite his/her reason for saying this. How does it not fall out of line with what Stalin's views were?

(I imagine TIG may have a twisted understanding on Leninism (Maoism) and on Stalin. I say this because TIG has the counter-revolutionary Trotsky as his/her avatar. Many Trotskyists try to claim Stalin was against self-determination. In fact no one wrote more on the subject than Stalin. Stalin also fought for a line supporting self-determination in the ICM.)

Stalin was a firm defender of a nations right to self-determination. This was based in his understanding of internationalism. For some of his writings on this subject check out "Marxism & the National Question"
Soviet cogitations: 14
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Sep 2004, 19:13
New Comrade (Say hi & be nice to me!)
Post 10 Sep 2004, 21:49
wcm said "To believe that it wasn't Al-Qaida that flew into the WT Towers is to choose ignorance because you dislike certain leaders."

I did not say this, nor attempt to imply it. I said that whoever did, regardless, it was causes by and a responce to the actions of the US government. (This is in no way an endorsemnet of the the horror, but an understanding of what was fundamentally at fault.)

wcm said "I don't support and have often come out against Papergut's line many times, however what it sounds like to me is that you are trying to create a very sectarian group against Papergut. "

I am not trying to create any kind of group around papergut. But I am down for organizing and exposing wrong lines. Line struggle is key to the class struggle.

There is nothing "sectarian" about identifying and isolating backwards lines. It is up to Papergut to either stick with the backwards line, and be isolated with it, or to break with it, and be embraced byt the forward thinking peoples. I am confident papergut can step forward.


wcm said "Argument, criticism, and self-criticism are all important things when handling contradictions. If we disagree with papergut, it would be wrong of us to try and create a broad sectarian opposition against him, as it would be wrong of him to create a broad sectarian opposition against us, arguments, criticism, all this should be applied. "

Criticism and self-criticism are imprtant, we struggle to uphold what is correct not just to "argue". The point is the backward ideas should be isolated. That is not sectarian, it is communist.

wcm said "Denouncing and finger pointing should be left to the conservatives and the liberals."

Why should communists not denounce those that uphold backwards or counter-revolutionary line? In fact communists do not just want to just debate, but to change the world.
Soviet cogitations: 4394
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 16 Jun 2004, 17:30
Politburo
Post 10 Sep 2004, 22:11
http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/w ... tonomy.htm

-Stalin repressed this document. For what reason?

Lenin:
Quote:
I think that Stalin's haste and his infatuation with pure administration, together with his spite against the notorious "nationalist-socialism" [Stalin critised the minority nations for not being "internationalist" because they did want to unite with Russia], played a fatal role here. In politics spite generally plays the basest of roles


Lenin:
Quote:
I think that in the present instance, as far as the Georgian nation is concerned, we have a typical case in which a genuinely proletarian attitude makes profound caution, thoughtfulness and a readiness to compromise a matter of necessity for us. The Georgian [Stalin], who is neglectful of this aspect of the question, or who carelessly flings about accusations of "nationalist-socialism" (whereas he himself is a real and true "nationalist-socialist", and even a vulgar Great-Russian bully), violates, in substance, the interests of proletarian class solidarity, for nothing holds up the development and strengthening of proletarian class solidarity so much as national injustice; "offended" nationals are not sensitive to anything so much as to the feeling of equality and the violation of this equality, if only through negligence or jest- to the violation of that equality by their proletarian comrades. That is why in this case it is better to over-do rather than undergo the concessions and leniency towards the national minorities.


Lenin:
Quote:
Exemplary punishment must be inflicted on Comrade Orjonikidze (I say this all the more regretfully as I am one of his personal friends and have worked with him abroad) and the investigation of all the material which Dzerzhinsky's commission has collected must be completed or started over again to correct the enormous mass of wrongs and biased judgments which it doubtlessly contains. The political responsibility for all this truly Great-Russian nationalist campaign must, of course, be laid on Stalin and Dzerzhinsky.


And if you want to (incorrectly) try to say that the quotes are out of context, and want a bigger, broader kind of approach - then read the whole document and try to compare it with Stalin's treatment of Yugoslavia. You'll see Stalin doesn't do ANYTHING that Lenin recomends:

Quote:
In my writings on the national question I have already said that an abstract presentation of the question of nationalism in general is of no use at all. A distinction must necessarily be made between the nationalism of an oppressor nation and that of an oppressed nation, the nationalism of a big nation and that of a small nation.

In respect of the second kind of nationalism, we – nationals of a big nation – have nearly always been guilty in historic practice of an infinite number of cases of violence; furthermore, we commit violence and insult an infinite number of times without noticing it.

That is why internationalism on the part of oppressors or ‘great’ nations, as they are called (though they are great only in their violence, only great as bullies) must consist not only in the observance of the formal equality of nations but even in an inequality of the oppressor nation, the great nation, that must make up for the inequality which obtains in actual practice.

Anybody who does not understand this has not grasped the real proletarian attitude to the national question; he is still essentially petty bourgeois in his point of view and is, therefore, sure to descend to the bourgeois point of view


I imagine Comrade Hellodolly2 may have a twisted understanding on Leninism (Trotskyism) and on Stalin. I say this because Comrade Hellodolly2 lacks understanding on the international question as far as the counter-revolutionary Stalin goes. Many Maoists try to claim Trotsky was a fascist. In fact, no one wrote more against the subject than Trotsky. Trotsky also had a dielectical view of the subject.

And to be blunt, I don't agree with Comrade Papergut's politics any more than he agrees with mine. However, interpreting his feelings of injustice over the school situation as a support of imperialism is an abhorrent stretch of logic.

-TIG
Alis Volat Propriis; Tiocfaidh Ar La; Proletarier Aller Länder, Vereinigt Euch!
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 9306
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 02 Mar 2004, 15:19
Ideology: Other Leftist
Old Bolshevik
Post 10 Sep 2004, 22:17
Quote:
I am not trying to create any kind of group around papergut. But I am down for organizing and exposing wrong lines. Line struggle is key to the class struggle.


True however Papergut's "line", which can only be called a line under the loosest definition of the word, should be treated with debate. Papergut is a generally progressive minded person, and as we all know, Mao said to Focus on the progressive. He however, is not an imperialist and drawing similarities with him to nazis will do nothing but drive him further away. It's hardly the way to criticize a comrade is it? A mishandling of contradictions among the people I would say. And you haven't given much proof against his arguments except for rhetoric, give him some documented evidence to believe you. Let's face it, he's a Russian living in Moscow, he is probably going to have the crazy idea that he knows more about Russia/Chechnya relations than you do.

Quote:
Why should communists not denounce those that uphold backwards or counter-revolutionary line? In fact communists do not just want to just debate, but to change the world.

This forum is created for debate, not for changing the world, you should probably stay offline to try and accomplish that. Why should we not denounce comrade Papergut? hmm because he is on our side, criticize him and his "line" sure, but label him as an imperialist and compare him to nazis is certainly no progressive way of self-criticism, it's a form of sectarianism which is a plague among communists.
Image

Fitzy wrote:
Yes, because I am poisoning them. They are my children.
Soviet cogitations: 14
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Sep 2004, 19:13
New Comrade (Say hi & be nice to me!)
Post 10 Sep 2004, 22:38
Ok alot to respond to and get into, but very little time.

First I want to say I think we should view all arenas of politcal struggle as a part of the struggle to change the world.

Also, everyone has a line. A stand and worldview they follow, whether they are conscious of it or not. People can be progressive around certain issues and at the same time very backwards about other issues. We should handle these contradictions correctly (I agree with WCM on this point.)

We should be able to dissect lines and views, without fear of harming ou relationship with others. To hold ones criticism, to close ones mouth out of fear of protecting some sort of friendship is liberalism.

The posts and quotes by Lenin are interesting and they do get into some deep things. However, the way they are being used here in this forum is very twisted. They are in fact out of context. Not particularly out of the context of the article, but out of the context of the Soviet Revolution, the roles different individuals played and what was involved in the struggles to determine how to follow the socialist road. (Also who is the person filling Stalins name into the Brackets? Serious questions as I do not have time to look up the quotes right now?)

At the same time it is important to understand that Stalin made a number of mistakes. First among them was his view that to maintain the Soviet state was the best way the Soviet people copuld contribute to the world revolution. That all else should be sacrificed in the service of maintaining this socialist state. This line led him to incorrectly handle many things, including the Spanish Civill War and contradictions among different nationalities. However despite this, he was always engaging this from the perspective of how to best serve the world revolution.

In relation to Stalin on self-determination, he never backed out of his stand that oppressed nations fundamentally have the right to self-determination.

I am not trying to start a struggle right here around Trotsky and his defeatism and centrism. Open another thread somewhere if you want to understand why he is hated so.

Papergut is apologizing for imperialism. Period.

Russian imperialists are trying to dominate and oppress a whole people. That is the point. Are you down with domination and oppression or not?
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 9306
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 02 Mar 2004, 15:19
Ideology: Other Leftist
Old Bolshevik
Post 10 Sep 2004, 22:55
well I've been arguing with Papergut about Chechnya before you even registered, so to question my stance on oppression and imperialism is ignorance.

Although to say Papergut, for feeling afronted about the terrorist attacks in North Osetia makes him imperialist, then you're going to have to denounce a lot of the working class in Russia as imperialist as well.

Ut's the common thought in Russia, yet you've truly added nothing to this discussion when we've asked for it. Give us some more articles on the Chechyna-Russian conflict, with deep going dialectic analyses. We have to prove and convince our comrades who is right and wrong yes?
Image

Fitzy wrote:
Yes, because I am poisoning them. They are my children.
Soviet cogitations: 4394
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 16 Jun 2004, 17:30
Politburo
Post 10 Sep 2004, 23:36
Quote:
The posts and quotes by Lenin are interesting and they do get into some deep things. However, the way they are being used here in this forum is very twisted. They are in fact out of context. Not particularly out of the context of the article, but out of the context of the Soviet Revolution, the roles different individuals played and what was involved in the struggles to determine how to follow the socialist road.


I placed these quotes here becuase they were in context with the article. I was not attepting to deviate from the context of the article, and thus the articles are not intended to be in the context of the Soviet Revolution, the roles different individuals played, and what was involved in the struggles to determaine how to follow the socialist road - though by their very nature, they do tend to bring such question up.

Quote:
(Also who is the person filling Stalins name into the Brackets? Serious questions as I do not have time to look up the quotes right now?)


The brackets are from Marxists.org, they are not my own though I do agree with the interpretation they make (I would have left them out and let people come accross the conclusion themselves, however. But as I am linking their translation I left them in the quotes).

Quote:
At the same time it is important to understand that Stalin made a number of mistakes. First among them was his view that to maintain the Soviet state was the best way the Soviet people copuld contribute to the world revolution. That all else should be sacrificed in the service of maintaining this socialist state. This line led him to incorrectly handle many things, including the Spanish Civill War and contradictions among different nationalities.


And because I have drawn, in large part, a similor conclusion, I maintain that Comrade Papergut's line is not in conflict with Stalin's.

Quote:
However despite this, he was always engaging this from the perspective of how to best serve the world revolution.

In relation to Stalin on self-determination, he never backed out of his stand that oppressed nations fundamentally have the right to self-determination.


I would argue this is in conflict with the statement above. However, I assume it's a matter of intent versus conclusion.

Quote:
I am not trying to start a struggle right here around Trotsky and his defeatism and centrism. Open another thread somewhere if you want to understand why he is hated so.


There are already many threads around here about Stalin vs. Trotsky that are open. No offense, but I am not going to open yet another one while one is still active.

As far as Mao vs. Trotsky, I normally make no stand on this because my education in Maoism is stunted enough that I don't feel that I can make a proper analyisis of Maoism one way or another. Curiously, based on what I have read thus far, some of the Stalin criticisms and other things are very clost to a Trotskyist's line of reasoning, but clearly not everything is.

If you can honeslty, with documentation, show me why Trotsky is so loathed by the maoist, than I would be interested as thus far honest inquries about it have yet to drum up anything but grossly misinterpreted texts and Mexican-Zionist-Alien-Student-Illuminatti conspiracy theories. PM the sources to me if you don't want to make a deal of it, I am legitimatly interested.

-TIG
Alis Volat Propriis; Tiocfaidh Ar La; Proletarier Aller Länder, Vereinigt Euch!
Soviet cogitations: 283
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 01 Sep 2004, 01:53
Komsomol
Post 11 Sep 2004, 01:38
In my opinion, Russia has to keep Chechnya for political and strategic purposes. Russian policies may have incited these attacks, but to where are you getting at by blaming Russia? Are you trying to say that any country that doesn't want a huge chunk of it's land taken away should just give in to terrorists? It seems so. Also, Chechens commit many more atrocities than the Russians do, buddy. And in my opinion, the terrorists are always at fault. I fully support Russian operations in Chechnya.
When we hang the Capitalists they will sell us the rope we use.
-Joseph Stalin
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 1598
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 23 Feb 2004, 22:46
Party Member
Post 11 Sep 2004, 02:04
I must say that I am deeply impressed with Comrade HelloDolly's find from A World To Win News Service, as well as their upholding of the Marxist-Leninist-Maoist line! Welcome to the forum, Comrade HelloDolly.

Down with Russian Nationalism & Jingoism; Up with Marxism-Leninism-Maoism!
Comrade Andrei Mazenov
2007 Winner of Soviet-Empire's A View to Kilt Award

Image
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 866
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 05 Mar 2003, 16:07
Komsomol
Post 12 Sep 2004, 19:21
hellodolly2 wrote:
It seems Papergut is against the Chechen nations right to self-determination. If so, Papergut should take Stalin down as his/her avatar, because this line is anti-Leninist (Maoist). Stalin wrote extensively on why revolutionaries must recognize and uphold the right to self- determination of oppressed nations.


I don't recognize religious fanatics to represent the will of people. Chechens had a chance to become independent recently when they had national referendum, but they decided to stay part of Russian Federation. You can call it voluntary slavery if it makes you any warmer.

hellodolly2 wrote:
I understand that Papergut seems to "know" that Al'fa was 30 miles away. What was his/her source for this "knowledge"?


My father returned from Beslan two days ago. Got evidence. Does it count?

hellodolly2 wrote:
September 11th, 2001: caused by the actions of the US government around the world. Who flew the planes into the buildings? We may never know.

Similarly on this subject:
Palestinian suicide bombings that target Israeli civilians:
The domination, occupation and slaughter of Palestinian people by the Israeli government is clearly the primarily the reason these horrible things occur.


You could also remember Kosovo, when the Serbs were portrayed as monsters slaughtering Albanians while the truth was far different from that.

wheelchairman wrote:
Let's face it, he's a Russian living in Moscow, he is probably going to have the crazy idea that he knows more about Russia/Chechnya relations than you do.


I don't live in Moskva, I live in Samara which is not far from Stalingrad. And I really have the idea that I know more stuff about my sandbox than you do. Why is the thought crazy?

Andrei Mazenov wrote:
Down with Russian Nationalism & Jingoism; Up with Marxism-Leninism-Maoism!


I'm not even Russian, I'm Soviet. I wouldn't mind if Chechens separated if they had steady "democratic"/socialist regime, but as long as they are dominated by the ideas of Muslim fundamentalism and Greater Chechnya they should be kept under control...
Image
Alternative Display:
Mobile view
More Forums: The History Forum. The UK Politics Forum.
© 2000- Soviet-Empire.com. Privacy.