Thread: Moscow Subway Hit By Suicide Bombings..

Originally Posted by ItaloFandorin

but when I started talking about ideas on how to improve the situation, talking about specific politicians, etc.

I'm practically sure that your understanding of the political situation in Russia is a bit limited. This is not your fault, after all you live in different country and it may be that you simply do not have the necessary information to make some serious judgement or you may be influenced by the information about Russia you receive through media (biased, most probably). It's not that you did something bad or something wrong - just suggested something [s:1sqmwuvz]silly[/s:1sqmwuvz], well something tha you haven't thought through completely. If there really WAS an idea about how to improve the situation that would work people would gladly have listened to it. The problem is - there isn't any.
Things may look easy and clear from abroad but they are not that simple as they appear, generally.

Всё не так плохо, как оно есть на самом деле.

Originally Posted by Ramil

It's not that you did something bad or something wrong - just suggested something [s:2ccgfaz2]silly[/s:2ccgfaz2], well something tha you haven't thought through completely. If there really WAS an idea about how to improve the situation that would work people would gladly have listened to it. The problem is - there isn't any.
Things may look easy and clear from abroad but they are not that simple as they appear, generally.

Ramil, as far as I understand he is just told that he feels solidarity with the victims and the whole country wich suffered the attack, I don't understand how such feelings can be called "silly". As for understanding the situation with the terroristic activity in Russia... do you completely understand it yourself ? As for me I don't.
EDITED Sorry, I haven't read the guy's post properly. I agree that the recepies that average European can suggest to improve the situation in Russia CAN be silly.

@Ramil, Basil77, thanks for considering my question
I didn't make any specific suggestions, but just expressed some impressions...
I started speaking in a way that wished hope ("I am sure things will get better after this event. People usually wake up after this kind of events.") in the way I would have told if it had happened in any country. So I was not specific, just expressing concern. But then, after reading the news, I started telling my personal impressions, e.g. "I think it is possible for Russia to be more peaceful... I mean it is more multicultural than most would imagine. Even your interior Minister is Muslim, something you don't even get in EU countries."
Maybe this was annoying because also the terrorists also had Muslim affiliations?

Of course, I know I am uninformed and have never even been to Russia :P but I was simply telling my impression, based on my knowledge of other countries, etc.

You think I might have come across as an uninformed know-it-all who just says something because he has nothing else to say?

Originally Posted by ItaloFandorin

@Ramil, Basil77, thanks for considering my question
I didn't make any specific suggestions, but just expressed some impressions...
I started speaking in a way that wished hope ("I am sure things will get better after this event. People usually wake up after this kind of events.") in the way I would have told if it had happened in any country. So I was not specific, just expressing concern. But then, after reading the news, I started telling my personal impressions, e.g. "I think it is possible for Russia to be more peaceful... I mean it is more multicultural than most would imagine. Even your interior Minister is Muslim, something you don't even get in EU countries."
Maybe this was annoying because also the terrorists also had Muslim affiliations?

Of course, I know I am uninformed and have never even been to Russia :P but I was simply telling my impression, based on my knowledge of other countries, etc.

You think I might have come across as an uninformed know-it-all who just says something because he has nothing else to say?

In this case you didn't say anything offensive so pass it to some personal opinions of your penpals. Besides, saying something like "Russia is ought to be more peaceful" is nice but it doesn't tell us 'how' )))

Originally Posted by ItaloFandorin

You think I might have come across as an uninformed know-it-all who just says something because he has nothing else to say?

Many Russians are annoyed when some westerner starts to teach us in a mentor tone. Something like this: "You Russians should become less agressive to minor nationalities, more democratic, less corrupt bla bla bla. All these things. Imagine: someone came to a doctor with e.g. an arm bone break to recieve a cure for this particular injury and the doctor started to lecture the poor person instead of just putting a plaster cast on the fracture: "You should quit smoking, you should drink less, you should eat less holesterine food bla bla bla. Of course the poor injured person just wants to shout:"Please, shut up and just cure my f##king arm!" Another example: someone was just introduced to a couple at a party and after that that person ocasionally saw their controversy with each other. Just imagine how they could feel if this stranger will start to give them advices how to solve their little frictions. Sorry for my poor English, but I just tried to express how we Russians often feel when westerners express their views on our country.

Yeah Basil77, I get what you mean.
I'll be careful from now on, though what I said was more in the tone of the inspirational doctor talking to a child:"Come on, I'm really sure your arm will get better!! See all those kids? Also they had the same pain as you at the beginning, but now they are happy and frolicking on the playground, even that guy who almost lost his arm became a bowling master! I'm sure you'll be alright, and you will be able to play again much better than before!"

Sheer optimism maybe coming across as a bit naive or "parent-ish" I guess.

Originally Posted by starrysky

I don't really buy the oil theory, sorry, Croc. I think it's plain revenge. You have to remember that every time we hear on the news that Putin&Co "eliminated another militant" in the North Caucasus, that means his/her relatives will probably want revenge and might be brainwashed to become terrorists.

I respect your point of view. Just bear with me a bit more before you reject the oil theory as a total nonsense.

First and foremost, the Caucasian relatives are the people of honour. It's hard to deny that. Their revenge will most likely not be of this ugly type (the female suicide bombers). Perhaps a shooting of a military officer with a note why he was killed, or something like that. The suicide bombing of innocent civilians is someone else's style. Just look around for the examples to find out who does those kind of things.

Second, the sense of revenge will not purchase the so-called "shahid's belt". Neither will it purchase the travel documents, etc. Someone has to spent money and have access to such things. What are the options?

1. Criminals (driven by the desire to make more money and not mess up with the secret services).
2. Secret services (driven by the desire to have control and make money whilst having as few trouble as possible).
3. Terrorist organizations (driven by the desire to make a strong political statement).

Among those three, who is the most probable candidate? Perhaps, the third, isn't it?

It is not a trivial task to maintain a terrorist organization. It costs LOTS of money. More or less comparable with how much a private secret service might cost. Both terrorist organizations and the secret services share a lot, but among the others, it would die by itself without the CONSTANT UNINTERRUPTED SUPPLY OF LOTS OF MONEY. Perhaps, it's not that expensive to prepare an individual suicide bomber, but to maintain the entire organization.

So, just apply a common sense: who can afford to spend so much money and what will they have in return?

1. The government (political reasons)
2. The large business (business reasons = making more money)
3. Criminals (business reasons = making more money while not messing up with the secret services)

We can safely eliminate the criminals as they live in their own niche, well-known to the secret services and don't cross interests.

Among the large businesses, what type of business can benefit from the terrorist activity? My answer - the oil business.

Among the governments, what government is interested in making what political statement by blowing two women and several dozens innocent people? That is a large source of all kinds of speculations and conspiracy theories. Let's leave it at that.

So, to sum it up: the most probable people who ultimately stand behind the plot is a large oil-related consortium who regularly practice this approach all over the world for several decades now. It's their style.

BTW, if you aren't interested in pursuing those 'ultimate' guys, it's ok too because, let's face it - they haven't killed anyone, and both the bombers (='not humans') are already dead and enjoying their heaven.

Originally Posted by Ramil

.. I'm aware that even if Moscow taxi drivers got a splendid day today (fares rose up to $100, $150 from $5-$7 today) there must be someone who did better than them. I'm not sure that cynism is a word suitable for such people. Can a price for human life be any lower?..

Бл###, оторвал бы кое-что этим мерзавцам и заставил сожрать на ###:

Мошенники начинают греть руки на трагедии. На мобильники стали приходить смски с таким содержанием - "Уважаемые Россияне, убедительно просим Вас оказать посильную помощь пострадавшим от терактов в Московском метро. Все средства будут перечислены в НИИ Склифосовского. Стоимость смс 45 руб без налогов".
Пользователь Живого Журнала предупреждает о новом виде мошенничества. Абоненты Петербурга стали получать сегодня такие смски. Стало известно, что реальная стоимость смс была порядка 100 рублей.

http://www.argumenti.ru/society/2010/03/55167/

Originally Posted by Crocodile

Just bear with me a bit more before you reject the oil theory as a total nonsense.

No, I certainly don't reject it... It's a fine theory. I'm well aware that it's an entire organization and that "someone" with money is behind it. But I just don't see the necessity for "oil" everywhere... Maybe it has something to do with the present tragedy, maybe not. Maybe it's just plain "we want independence". There must have been some political demands during Beslan, weren't there? Otherwise, what's the use of taking hostages? Hmmm. There are, or there were, terrorists in Northern Ireland and the Basque country -- who sponsores them there and what are their goals? Surely, it's not oil again? Economy is not everything, sometimes it is ideology. Terrorists and revolutionaries in tsarist Russia weren't concerned with oil, right?

I don't know much about terrorism anyway. I've recently watched this film on terrorism, Dil Se, which I mentioned in the movie thread, and I sort of see where these people are coming from, though maybe not where it all starts. The backstory is this -- a very poor state in Northern India wants independence because the government doesn't do anything to improve the situation there. There's some sort of rebellion which is suppressed by the army. An eight year old girl witnesses the murder of her parents (if I understood this correctly), rape of her sister and then she herself is raped. After which she is drafted into a terrorist organization. Since 8 years old she is "zombified" -- "we'll give our body and soul for the cause, there is only hatred and anger in our hearts", etc. As a woman she puts on this belt to sacrifice herself. So far, so good. It seems those people really believe that they are doing it for a noble cause and are martyrs.

All right, I'll just go and educate myself about terrorism by reading wikipedia at least http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism.

Originally Posted by starrysky

There are, or there were, terrorists in Northern Ireland and the Basque country -- who sponsores them there and what are their goals? Surely, it's not oil again?

Do the Basques or the IRA practice suicide bombing?

Originally Posted by starrysky

Economy is not everything, sometimes it is ideology. Terrorists and revolutionaries in tsarist Russia weren't concerned with oil, right?

Right. But even the 'ideological' guys have to have the real world supplies. Some real people have to spend their real money. What for? Most of the time those who have money aren't [s:3rkpxw3j]crazy and stupid[/s:3rkpxw3j] so much ideological. If those 'ideological' guys are cut off their supplies, they can't confront the professional secret services. They just become a bunch of crazy people who try to make bomb in their basements out of the locally available chemicals and once in a while blow themselves up in the process of making it.

Originally Posted by starrysky

[...] drafted into a terrorist organization. Since 8 years old she is "zombified" -- "we'll give our body and soul for the cause, there is only hatred and anger in our hearts", etc. As a woman she puts on this belt to sacrifice herself.

Yes, yes!! That's true. But if she'd had no belt, there would be different things she might do. And she wouldn't need a terrorist organization for that. Like, going to the Empire State Building with a bag full of stones, and throw it over onto the crowd. That could potentially have a similar effect (kill some people and wound the others), couldn't it? But that sort of things isn't happening. Why?

Regarding the conspiracy theories.... I don't really believe that, BUT...

I have worked for both Shell and BP (the biggest European oil companies).
It is true that these companies have loose morals, are greedy and hippocritical... But it is VERY hard to imagine that such companies would deliberately organise a terrorist attack! I don't know anything about the Russian oil industry though.)

IF there is a consipiracy going on I think it is much more likely, as Croc says, that it is government sponsored, by a secret service or special military arm.

But this kind of thing makes you think twice about secret services: If anyone remembers the "Estonia" ferry accident which killed around 1000 people in the 1990s. The ferry was from Talinn - Stockholm and the route was notorious for weapons/technology smuggling and cold war spying activities. There were often murders on board, and people "disappeared" while on the ferry.

A lot of people believe that either Russian or US special services sank the ferry on purpose, to prevent some Soviet technology onboard from reaching a third party. There were some very suspect facts pointing in that direction. The behaviour of the Swedish government afterwards was VERY suspect too. They refused access to the ship to anyone apart from Swedish military, and later sealed the wreck in cement, and put alarms and mines around it, not even allowing bodies to be retrieved. Most people think this was done on the instructions of another country. Sinking a passenger ferry full of civilians is a terrible crime. If a secret service organisation really was behind it, then they are capable of anything --- certainly masterminding a terrorist attack.

But remember Occam's razor: "The explanation requiring the fewest assumptions is most likely to be correct."

I think it was exactly what it looked like: Islamist terrorists who don't like Russia. Unless you have any evidence to the contrary?

Originally Posted by Johanna

I think it was exactly what it looked like: Islamist terrorists who don't like Russia. Unless you have any evidence to the contrary?

1. Where do they get the money to maintain their organization?
2. Why wouldn't they do something much simpler to accomplish with a similar effect?

Originally Posted by Crocodile

Originally Posted by Johanna

I think it was exactly what it looked like: Islamist terrorists who don't like Russia. Unless you have any evidence to the contrary?

1. Where do they get the money to maintain their organization?
2. Why wouldn't they do something much simpler to accomplish with a similar effect?

1) Well it's not THAT expensive is it? They just needed some explosives, logistics (getting to Moscow and staying there for a while). PLUS there are lot of filthy rich moslem people in Saudi Arabia.... That's were islamist terrorists get money from. Anyone who *really* wanted to strangle Islamic terrorism should have invaded Saudi, not Iraq and Afghanistan.

2) They wanted something that would scare the maximum amount of people and make everyone paranoid.

Just like has happened in London Underground (people very paranoid after the 7/7 attacks and some failed attempts...) PLUS airport security has become totally INSANE; body scanners at Heathrow airport in London (they look at you naked!) Can't carry fluids on the airplane, have to take off your boots and unpack your laptop... Have to arrive 1.5 hours early for a 45 minute flight. Unbearable.

They want the Muscovites to become paranoid. start blaming the government, damage the Russian economy.... generally create problems!

-------------------------------

BTW - do you also believe that the Russian secret services were behind the apartment block explosions some years back... and the the US masterminded 9/11 -- or allowed it to happen because it suited their agenda in the Middle East?

Originally Posted by Johanna

1) Well it's not THAT expensive is it? They just needed some explosives, logistics (getting to Moscow and staying there for a while).

Ha-ha!! Are you kidding? If I give you $10K do you think you could do that?

Originally Posted by Johanna

PLUS there are lot of filthy rich moslem people in Saudi Arabia.... That's were islamist terrorist get money from.

Ah, that's a different story. So, why would the 'filthy rich moslem people in Saudi Arabia' pay something like $10,000,000 a year for 10 years? (That's my very conservative estimate of how much the maintenance of a terrorist organization capable of performing this kind of act could cost.)

Originally Posted by Johanna

2) They wanted something that would scare the maximum amount of people and make everyone paranoid.

If the 10 bags of stones fall down the 10 buildings at the same moment, many people would be scared to even walk on the streets, won't you think? That could instill a lot of fear. But that's not happening. Rather, the terrorist acts we see are costly and require high organizational skills. Why?

It really does not cost that much to operate a terrorist organization. I quote, "The UN estimates the 2002 bombing of a Bali nightclub cost about $50,000. By comparison, the 2004 Madrid train bombing is believed to have cost between $10,000 and $15,000. The 2005 attacks on London's mass transit system cost about $2,000." (http://www.cfr.org/publication/10356/) Btw, the Council on Foreign Relations is highly reputable.

Regardless, only $2,000 to attack a mass transit system in London. If such is true, it would not be expensive at all to fund such attacks, and these kinds of attacks would not be limited to extremely wealthy oil conglomerates. Regarding the sources of the funding, I saw awhile ago and don't remember where, that most of the funding comes from Egypt, Syria, and Wahabis in Saudi Arabia.

Originally Posted by Basil77

Мошенники начинают греть руки на трагедии. На мобильники стали приходить смски с таким содержанием

Услышал по радио то же самое сегодня и подумал: «до чего мерзким стал народ». Ублюдки таксисты, эти козлы с СМСками. Не удивлюсь, если цены на похороны вырастут тоже, предлог есть. Чёрные друг за друга горой всегда, русские же даже в беде шкуру друг с друга содрать способны!

Originally Posted by alexB

Originally Posted by Basil77

Мошенники начинают греть руки на трагедии. На мобильники стали приходить смски с таким содержанием

Услышал по радио то же самое сегодня и подумал: «до чего мерзким стал народ». Ублюдки таксисты, эти козлы с СМСками. Не удивлюсь, если цены на похороны вырастут тоже, предлог есть. Чёрные друг за друга горой всегда, русские же даже в беде шкуру друг с друга содрать способны!

Да нет, я думаю всему виной мода, появившаяся довольно давно и бурно расцветшая в последние 25 лет: ругать и выискивать мерзости во всём своём и превозносить всё заграничное. Я вот тоже на неё поддался, запостив инфу про эти ублюдочные СМСки, просто уж больно противно стало, как её прочитал. Я больше чем уверен, что случаи с бомбилами, взвинтившими цены до небес, были единичными, а не массовыми, просто людей также возмутила крайняя степень цинизма этих уродов, вот факт и стал широко известен. Точно также я уверен, что в том же Нью-Йорке в 2001 тоже хватало мерзавцев, желающих поживиться на чужой беде, просто американцы сумели грамотно это не афишировать, а случаи, когда люди бескорыстно приходили на помощь, наоборот всячески документировали и предавали огласке. И молодцы, кстати. Мы же, когда выворачиваем наизнанку грязное бельё и говорим о том, что у нас больное общество, ведём себя просто глупо.

Originally Posted by Crocodile

Originally Posted by Johanna

2) They wanted something that would scare the maximum amount of people and make everyone paranoid.

If the 10 bags of stones fall down the 10 buildings at the same moment, many people would be scared to even walk on the streets, won't you think? That could instill a lot of fear. But that's not happening. Rather, the terrorist acts we see are costly and require high organizational skills. Why?

What a scary thought! Don't let's give them any ideas!

I am no expert on skyskrapers, but in my experience you cannot usually open the windows in very high buildings, ten floors and up... ??

(But of course, if you were a terrorist you'd just blow the entire window out first... )

Hmm... Could you really kill people that way?
In that case, they might as well take a machine gun and fire from a high building onto a crowded market place? That's more accurate than just throwing stones, isn't it?

I think all these things happen in Israel -- throwing stones and firing into crowds. But in Israel there are soldiers with weapons everywhere, so someone usually shoots the terrorist very fast... I spent some time there but nothing serious happened to me apart from some kids throwing stones at a van I was travelling in. Imagine Moscow and London became like that!

Originally Posted by Johanna

Originally Posted by Crocodile

Originally Posted by Johanna

2) They wanted something that would scare the maximum amount of people and make everyone paranoid.

If the 10 bags of stones fall down the 10 buildings at the same moment, many people would be scared to even walk on the streets, won't you think? That could instill a lot of fear. But that's not happening. Rather, the terrorist acts we see are costly and require high organizational skills. Why?

What a scary thought! Don't let's give them any ideas!

I am no expert on skyskrapers, but in my experience you cannot usually open the windows in very high buildings, ten floors and up... ??

(But of course, if you were a terrorist you'd just blow the entire window out first... )

Hmm... Could you really kill people that way?

You don't even need a window, but you do need something more than a penny!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUS89-_fbtk In they U.S.they have these LOVELY observation towers, so no need for windows.

Croc... I have found your theories VERY intriguing indeed. It had not even crossed my mind about the increase of oil price until you wrote about it yesterday.

And Ramil! Those taxi drivers over there.... We have price gouging here all the time when there is a natural disaster or for some other reason and yet I have never seen such high of a percentage like that!