mrstickball said:

1. So you're saying that no state should be granted freedom if it wants it? Just because Chechnya wasn't a state that merged with the USSR doesn't mean it shouldn't of been granted freedom.

Check Khasavyurt Accord, which is de facto and independence and check how it has ended. With an attack to neighbouring Dagestan in 1999 lead by mercenaries from Middle East. Basically Lybian scenario, except most of the are dead by now. BTW unlike your Yuschenko poisoning case, lol, heres a REAL example how we kill people whom we do not like. Check the murder of Yandarbiev in Qatar (and again Qatar :D) in 2004, his car just blow up.

In the US, if a state such as Texas wanted to ceede, I would think that most Americans would be OK with that, and would deplore the idea of sending federal troops in there to quell those that wanted freedom. Do you really think massacring people in Checnya was okay?

You? Maybe, the US wouldn't. BTW what with the right of nation to self-determination? I see it often used by you as an excuse for killing people.

2. To kill 100,000 civilians, you don't need a death camp. Look at the Bosnian civil war: 100,000 killed in 2 years. The Syrian civil war is at 30,000 killed and growing. 130,000 have died in Iraq thus far. 40% of the Chechen civilians were displaced during the war. Care to give any actual sources that say far less people died in the fighting? Every source I find has casualties between 50,000 - 100,000.

Why exactly I should provide sources? It's not like I'm talking BS :D BTW there's only ONE source, "one guy told other guy who told me" is not a source. Learn how to work with historical data.

As for your number, I just remembered from where it came from, from Maskhadov. He claimed 120k actually. No wonders you never see any other data :D It always works just like that. During Georgian war CNN were claiming the death toll that actually excedes total population, lol. Yet this number is often quoted over Internet, so likely you don't get anything else.

Furthermore, at 100,000 people, that isn't 10% of the population.

Care to proof that? I'm having data before my eyes atm.

Still do not get what this has to do with the point Kaz has raised. Elaborate.

mrstickball said:

What am I using as an excuse to kill people, again? I don't remember advocating for the death of anyone. I'd like a source for any statement I've made about people needing to be killed.

It's not you, it's your goverment.

As for my source on Chechen deaths, I was citing HRVC's report: http://web.archive.org/web/20070821154629/http://www.hrvc.net/htmls/references.htm

Oh boy, I didn't expect more, humar rights activists, who quoting ridiculous Kovalyov :D How the f**k he could know the numbers? There're dozens of HR activista groups and organizations that have reported up to 200k killed. Why these? What're the methodology behind the numbers?

Here goes good old Soviet propagandistic poster to illustarte the situation. "Human rights" is written on his glove.

And again these are NOT the sources. Didn't I say not to bring "the guy told other guy that told me" kind of information? For those who missed history classes, there're three kinds of work: 1) actual sources; 2) statistical research including methodology and stuff based on the sources; 3) analysis that uses statistical researches. From the first group there's only ONE source akin to Chechen conflict - MVD, from second ther're multiple works like Krivosheev or Ryazantsev. There're shitload of workd from the 3rd category, most of them is yellowish iditotism you've quoted. I'm asking for SOURCES.

The Russians themselves reported at least 50,000 civilian deaths. Your own Leiutenant-General, Aleksander Lebed cited around 80,000 dead. Those aren't just random people, or "Some guy", they're your own military officials. Every independent study has pegged deaths betwen 50,000 - 100,000. Only Kuvilov's report came in lower, at 20,000, which has been criticized by every possible agency.

Not Russians, but Lebed, who ran an electional campaign at the time, so he could have said anything to suppoprt that. You know, just like most of yours political BS spitters.  OMG a politician blowing numbers out of proportion! BTW I could name a few more that did the same thing - Yavlinski and Maskhadov, see the article below - it has it all, including other generals who quote drastically different numbers.

Here more elaborate information from actual scientific journal that deals with demographics:
http://www.demoscope.ru/weekly/2005/0211/analit02.php

This one happens to quote MVD numbers who actually run investigation in 1995 and received following numbers - 26k dead, out of which 9-14k are civilians. This's as official as you can get.

As for your Syrian numbers, they are bollocks, yet another HR group I pressume? Bosnian War numbers are more or less in line with what I have, though consider the bigger scale of a conflict that encompassed bigger territories with larger population, that counted only military deaths more than all deaths in two Chechen campaigns combined. For god sakes even tiny Kosovo is two times bigger than Chechnya.

As for Chechen population:

http://www.nyidanmark.dk/NR/rdonlyres/6EC0730B-9F8E-436F-B44F-A21BE67BDF2B/0/ChechensintheRussianFederationFINAL.pdf

Grozny had 450,000 people in 1989. Today, its 250,000. Care to cite a census that has pre-war Chechnya at 1 million people? Everything I can find puts it a bit higher - likely closer to 7-8% of people dying in the 1st Chechen war, not 10%.

Total population of ChIASSR in 1989 as per last USSR census is 1 275 513, out of which ~900k is Chechnya. Again you can't be more official than that :D

http://demoscope.ru/weekly/ssp/rus89_reg1.php