Arabs attack Grozny

[Ned]

Originally posted by Serb
I have no idea how they gonna solve this problem.

Neither do I.

[Timexwatch]

Isn't the Crimea really party of Really Outer Mongolia? I seem to remember there was a Khanate there before the Russkies got their act together...

[Ned]

Serb, Since I believe the Russians are in the right on Chechnya, I think they should bring the matter of Arab intervention to the attention of the UN.

[chequita guevara]

I don't think there are many Tatars left in Crimea, so it should probably belong to whichever state the people of the Crimea wish to belong.

One interesting thing to note is that once Wahabist/Arab money and people begin to get involved in local struggles, the tactics change. The Bosnian Muslims began committing attroticites, as did the Albanian and Chechens.

I am terribly uncomfortable being on the same sides of the barricades as imperialism, but this is a fight betwen the Enlightenment (as notyoueither properly notes), both left and right, and clerico-feudal reactionaries who wish to return the world to a time that never existed.

[Dinner]

I'm glade to see you've come out on the correct side Chegitz.

[chequita guevara]

This has been my position more or less since the attrocities. These people are something fundimentally different from your average anti-imperialists. Even Nazism is more progressive than what al-Qaeda represents, since Nazism, for all its horrors, still represented capitalism (albeit, in its most reactionary and corrupted form).

Clerico-feudalism, however, is a rejection of the Enlightenment, of capitalism, of democracy, and especially of socialism. They seek to return to a form of society that never existed outside their own heads, a deformed and debased fusion of klepto-capitalism and feudalism. Communists are progressives, and since capitalism is more progressive than feudalism, we are at the very least, co-belligerents, if not on the same side.

Christopher Hitchens was right to reject the muddle-headed left which knee-jerkedly supports whom-ever imperialism attacks. He calls the enemy Islamo-fascism. What al-Qaeda and the Taliban are trying to create is like a fascist version of feudalism. I don't think Hitchens should have broken with The Nation however, but rather continued trying to fight amongst the left to educate them. I have a feeling that when I finish developing my theory, I'm gonna catch a lot of flack on the left.

[Ned]

Gut reaction, Che, how do you thing the Security Council would react if the Russians were to bring the matter of Arab funding of terrorists in Chechnya before them? There seem to be many here who believe the Russians are equally as guilty of terrorism.

[Heresson]

There aren't many Tatars left in Crymea because Soviets forced almost all of them out - almost all, because the rest was killed.

I guess You are against (Muslim) fundamentalism and (Caucasian) feudalism, but that doesn't mean that You have to support (Russian) authoritarism, militarism and nationalism. If You wish - fight them all.

Don't say "Arab money" because not all Arabs are Muslims.
Don't say "Muslim money" because not all Muslims support that. Say "Money of Muslim fanatics from Arabic countries"

[Ned]

Originally posted by Heresson
There aren't many Tatars left in Crymea because Soviets forced almost all of them out - almost all, because the rest was killed.

I guess You are against (Muslim) fundamentalism and (Caucasian) feudalism, but that doesn't mean that You have to support (Russian) authoritarism, militarism and nationalism. If You wish - fight them all.

Don't say "Arab money" because not all Arabs are Muslims.
Don't say "Muslim money" because not all Muslims support that. Say "Money of Muslim fanatics from Arabic countries"

I think the story was clear that the money was from Arab governments.

[chequita guevara]

I really couldn't say. The Russians are most definately committing their own attrocities in Chenya. I think that the US would almost certainly oppose any moves to punish the Arabians, let alone brand them as aggressors and allow the Russians to have their way with them. I think the Russians are fully justified in their war, but they are handling it evilly.

The difference between say, Chechnya and Palestine is that the Chechens had three or four years of clerico-feudalism forced upon them after independence. The majority of Chechens don't want to live under that, having lived in a more modern society under the USSR and even Russia. I would hazard a guess to say they'd rather be part of Russia today than continue with their abortion of an experiment in independence.

I think that until we deal with the body, the hydra will continue sprouting new heads. Maybe we could get the Egyptians to overthrow the Saudi's, and split the Hedjaz off from the Nejd. Once you take away the Nejd's status as protector of the Holy Places of Islam, you can deal with the nest of vipers.

[Heresson]

I am disgusted by your justification of Russian war.
Were the French justified in their war in Algeria?

[Az]

Che: I don't think there is a real question, there. I don't feel bad whatsoever being 'on the side of empirialism', when it is stacked against a bunch of supporters of retarded ideas, which are also terribly cruel.

French in Algeria
The Shah in Iran
The Soviets in afghanistan

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Heresson
I am disgusted by your justification of Russian war.
Were the French justified in their war in Algeria?

To the extent that they were subdueing slaver-pirates who had been raiding the Mediterranean and the south and west coasts of europe for over a millenium, yes. No one knows how many Europeans were taken as slaves over this period of time.

OTOH when the french began to colonize Algeria, no. They should have stayed in Algeria only for the purposes of suppressing piracy and slavery.

[Heresson]

So if Poland attacked Zimbabwe and anected it in order to meliorate its internal situation, would it be OK?

[Az]

yes.