Has anyone else found it interesting that the American media is referring to the Wahabi Muslim Terrorists who murdered hundreds of children in Chechnya as "SEPARTISTS"!

"Separatists", who killed an 18 month old baby with 7 (SEVEN) stab wounds to the abdomen?  "Separatists" who killed mothers in front of their single digit aged children!  etc, etc.

What the fuck?  I too find it difficult to find an adjective to describe just how I loath these fucks, but "separatists" wouldn't have been on my list.

Their political aim, however misguided and obtuse, is seperation from Russia.  Thus one of the things you can call them is separatist.  you can also call them Muslim Terrorists or cumstains or whatever.  But so keep them aprt from Al Quaida in the mind of the avarage US ignoramus, sepratists is not a bad term to use.

Terror almost always has a political agenda (I must admit th?BoardID=39&Page=1&Messageid=9839 at all- waiting for an explanation of that one), so using the terms that describe the political motive is often useful.

totally agree with you that the behaviour shown was despicable, but then perhaps you have not read about the actions of the Russian Army in attacking Chechnya- this is a race for the nadir of human actions with both sides in full charge!  Not an excuse- an explanation.

Of course the tactics in the Chechnya situation are horrible, but they had good teachers. Remember the Gulags?

You can justify just about anything with your moral compass smashed to fucking pieces under your own foot!  Your ability to reason, I'm sure shared by your candidate is why he will go down in flames in November.

You chose moniker well.

They are lower than spent cum floating in the toilet.

Even if they have a political agenda, the killing of innocent children cannot be justified by any political cause.

bite me, Bri.

As absurd as it may sound, I have read stories (and I didn't write them down back then, so please don't ask for cross references...I never thought I would be referring to them) with some prisoners where they said they would have preferred to be killed or have had their family killed than to have gone through the the gulag years and had their wives and children tortured or raped or imprisoned for life.  Additionally, part of that whole scenario and the Lenin and Stalin years included many, many killings.  That was why I was comparing it.  Sorry I didn't spell it out to the letter before.

BTW, Dubya has the market cornered on moral justification already.

the closure of the Gulag system.  And if you are old enough, you most likely did too!

Of course the Gulag's were horrible, however your claim of  "wives and children tortured or raped or imprisoned for life" line is without merit, not even Alexander Solzenitzen made that claim.

That Stalin murdered over 30,000,000 of his people is factual and most children weren't counted so the real number is anybodies guess.

So you might ask yourself, why was Kerry so rabid in his fight against Reagan?  You would agree that Kerry was wrong wouldn't you?

Sigh...oh, the God-status anointed to Rapmaster Ronnie.

The Soviet Union would have fallen apart if Jimmy Carter would have been reelected.  It was just a matter of time.

As Sting sang, "Mr. Reagan says 'We will protect you', I don't subscribe to that point of view".

So glad the world was made safe for our current imperialism.