mai said:
|
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.
|
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.
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
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.
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%.
