File APIs for Java Developers
Manipulate DOC, XLS, PPT, PDF and many others from your application.
http://aspose.com/file-tools
The moose likes Meaningless Drivel and the fly likes Chechnya  - A new breeding ground for terrorists Big Moose Saloon
  Search | Java FAQ | Recent Topics | Flagged Topics | Hot Topics | Zero Replies
Register / Login


Win a copy of Spring in Action this week in the Spring forum!
JavaRanch » Java Forums » Other » Meaningless Drivel
Bookmark "Chechnya  - A new breeding ground for terrorists" Watch "Chechnya  - A new breeding ground for terrorists" New topic
Author

Chechnya - A new breeding ground for terrorists

HS Thomas
Ranch Hand

Joined: May 15, 2002
Posts: 3404
The Russians invaded it four years ago and then proceeded to plunge it into hell , cutting it's population by a fifth.
They claimed to have given the province an autonomous government but now have forced their own candidate in a blatantly rigged election.
The West closes it's eyes, the EU thirsts after Russia's oil and gas and the US is "blinded by strategic calculations and cynism".
How long before, like in Afghanistan was ruined by ten years of Soviet repression and became a breeding ground for terrorists that suicide bombers export terrorism to the rest of the world?
regards
Anonymous
Ranch Hand

Joined: Nov 22, 2008
Posts: 18944
Thomas,
On the contrary, I feel Afghanistan would have been better off if the Soviets had remained there. Why? Because the Soviets would have introduced Atheism to atleast one small portion of the muslim world. I hope the Russians are still Atheist and will enforce that in Chechnya.
Bill Maher said, on one of his TV shows, "The reason the west is so prosperous is because we have learned to ignore our religious leaders. The pope talks about abstinence and advises us not to use contraception, the west just says sure and then we have the french!"
I think Islam will benefit more when more of its followers learn to ignore their religious leaders and make up their own minds on issues. Atheism may play an important role in bringing about that change.
Paul Stevens
Ranch Hand

Joined: May 17, 2001
Posts: 2823
Originally posted by HS Thomas:
The Russians invaded it four years ago and then proceeded to plunge it into hell , cutting it's population by a fifth.
They claimed to have given the province an autonomous government but now have forced their own candidate in a blatantly rigged election.
The West closes it's eyes, the EU thirsts after Russia's oil and gas and the US is "blinded by strategic calculations and cynism".
How long before, like in Afghanistan was ruined by ten years of Soviet repression and became a breeding ground for terrorists that suicide bombers export terrorism to the rest of the world?
regards


So why doesn't your country step up to the plate and do something. I also don't hear the rest of the world clamoring for something to be done. Whine and cry if the US does something and whine and cry when we don't.
HS Thomas
Ranch Hand

Joined: May 15, 2002
Posts: 3404
Because the EU thirsts after Russia's oil and gas. And Putin knows he can get away with it at the moment.
In our defence there is an overflowing system for asylum seekers.
Regarding atheism in Afghanistan , I'm not sure what the situation was prior to the Russian invasion but I think the fundamentalism was whipped up during Russian occupation. As the Russians were trounced out against all odds eventually,fundamentalism took a force of it's own and was percieved to be a threat to other countries in the region notably Iraq who started exterminating Afghanistan people living within their borders.
As to why Russia occupied Afghanistan and Tibet/Nepal(?) I think it had to do with Pakistan and India pointing their nuclear war-heads at each other. Russia and India were allies and Pakistan and America allies on the other side. Iranian and Iraqi fundamentalism started at around the same period, Iranian first with Ayatoulla Khomeini.
So I don't think fundamentalism was the problem but the threat of being exterminated. Atheists would also have been similarly threatened.
A feeble attempt at connecting the dots. :roll:
It's like a chess game with nuclear war-heads as the pieces. and then there's monopoly which has to be played. I don't know if a strategy to play monopoly with loose change(people) works.

regards
[ October 25, 2003: Message edited by: HS Thomas ]
Tony Collins
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jul 03, 2003
Posts: 435
China occupied Tibet.( not russia or the afgans )
They killed thouasands of monks and nuns, forced them into rape and made children shoot their parents. Maybe this is the form of correct athesim refered to.
Tony
[ October 25, 2003: Message edited by: Jim Yingst ]
[ October 25, 2003: Message edited by: Tony Collins ]
Jim Yingst
Wanderer
Sheriff

Joined: Jan 30, 2000
Posts: 18671
Tony, is the comment you're referring to still present in the HST post above? It may be something HST edited out shortly after posting, perhaps realizing it was poorly phrased?


"I'm not back." - Bill Harding, Twister
Mapraputa Is
Leverager of our synergies
Sheriff

Joined: Aug 26, 2000
Posts: 10065
As to why Russia occupied Afghanistan and Tibet/Nepal(?)
<long quote>
"The decision to send troops was made after a long deliberation and repeated requests from the leadership of the PDPA, Prime Minister Hafizullah Amin and President Nur Mohammad Taraki. The Politburo discussions show that the Soviet leaders were very reluctant to send troops, and responded to the Afghan requests with shipments of military equipment, but not troops, throughout the spring and summer of 1979. However, the overthrow of Taraki by Amin in September just after Taraki’s return from Moscow heightened Soviet paranoia about the possibility that Amin would become another Sadat and turn towards the U.S. The actual decision to invade was made in secret by a very small group of Politburo members, against the strong and openly expressed opposition of the military, and only then rubber-stamped by the other Politburo members. Both Chief of USSR General Staff Marshal Ogarkov and his Deputy General of the Army Akhromeev voiced strong objections to introducing troops on the grounds that the proposed limited contingent of forces would not be able to fulfill its objectives.
The decision to send troops was made on the basis of limited information. According to Soviet veterans of the events, KGB sources were trusted over the military intelligence (GRU) sources. This partly reflected the growing influence of the KGB Chairman Yu. V. Andropov, who controlled the flow of information to General Secretary Brezhnev, who was partially incapacitated and ill for most of 1979. KGB reports from Afghanistan created a picture of urgency and strongly emphasized the possibility of Amin’s links to the CIA and U.S. subversive activities in the region. (President Carter had already signed a secret “finding” in July 1979 authorizing covert aid to the Afghani opponents of the Taraki-Amin regime.)
Afghanistan did not fit into the mental maps and ideological constructs of the Soviet leaders. Their analysis of internal social processes in Afghanistan was done through the conceptual lens of Marxist-Leninist doctrine, which blinded the leadership to the realities of traditional tribal society. Believing that there was no single country in the world, which was not ripe for socialism, party ideologues like Mikhail Suslov and Boris Ponomarev saw Afghanistan as a “second Mongolia.” Such conceptualization of the situation led to the attempts to impose alien social and economic practices on Afghan society, such as the forced land reform."
</long quote>
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB57/soviet.html


Uncontrolled vocabularies
"I try my best to make *all* my posts nice, even when I feel upset" -- Philippe Maquet
HS Thomas
Ranch Hand

Joined: May 15, 2002
Posts: 3404
Russia occupied Afghanistan and Tibet/Nepal (?)

Jim, I think this is the comment that Tony was refering to. Note the question mark as I wasn't sure whether Russia occupied Tibet or Nepal.

I never go back and edit my posts after someone has replied.
I may edit the last post in the thread if it is mine and no one has replied. Perhaps a time of edit along with date may prevent such acts.

Checking this link Armed Conflict Events Data it would seem the Russians didn't occupy Tibet but they certainly occupied the Khyber Pass part of Nepal. Nepal must be the most visited place as all I can find are travel videos and information. Tourists have occupied Nepal the whole of the last century it seems.
This "dialogue" on the Chchyian problem reveals a few different views.
Chechnya: Is Russian retaliation the answer ?
regards
[ October 25, 2003: Message edited by: HS Thomas ]
Mapraputa Is
Leverager of our synergies
Sheriff

Joined: Aug 26, 2000
Posts: 10065
Regarding atheism in Afghanistan , I'm not sure what the situation was prior to the Russian invasion but I think the fundamentalism was whipped up during Russian occupation.
"The Soviet decision makers did not anticipate the influential role of Islam in the Afghan society. There were very few experts on Islam in the Soviet government and the academic institutions. The highest leadership was poorly informed about the strength of religious beliefs among the masses of the Afghan population. Political and military leaders were surprised to find that rather than being perceived as a progressive anti-imperialist force, the Afghanis as foreign invaders, and “infidels.” Reports from Afghanistan show the growing awareness of the “Islamic factor” on the part of Soviet military and political personnel. "
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB57/soviet.html
Jim Yingst
Wanderer
Sheriff

Joined: Jan 30, 2000
Posts: 18671
Sorry, I should have said I was talking about this comment from Tony:
Maybe this is the form of correct athesim refered to.

I can't figure out what "correct atheism" references, but I note that HST edited the post, before I first saw it, so maybe there was a reference which is now gone.
Jim Yingst
Wanderer
Sheriff

Joined: Jan 30, 2000
Posts: 18671
I never go back and edit my posts after someone has replied.
I may edit the last post in the thread if it is mine and no one has replied.

I also avoid changing somethign after someone has replied, if they reference my post in any way that the meaning of the subsequent post would be damaged. Or if I do, I try to make a note to indicate that it was changed in response to the subsequent comment. However, it's quite possible that your edit was close in time to Tony's response, so that you didn't see his reply, or he didn't see your edit, whichever it was that came first.
Though from the initial posting times, it's likely that your edit was well before Tony's response, in which I have no idea what he's referring to.
Perhaps a time of edit along with date may prevent such acts.
Yes it's one of those things we're not going to hack into the UBB Perl code for, but it would most likely be part of any new Saloon software. Not that post editing is a big problem, but sometimes it's nice to know what happened when.
HS Thomas
Ranch Hand

Joined: May 15, 2002
Posts: 3404
Thanks, Jim.
No I didn't have any references to "correct atheism". And I haven't a clue what that is. I think Tony was referring to <Paul McKenna>'s post. The content of my post was as you see it now.
I may have gone back to edit spelling mistakes but the content is as was initially. I've noticed the blunder of editing one's post in situ as I've done that in the OO forum and never heard from Ilja Preuss again. :roll:
It's much better to spend a few minutes proof-reading one's post and starting a new post if needed.
regards
HS Thomas
Ranch Hand

Joined: May 15, 2002
Posts: 3404
I think Tony was referring to 's post.

Paul McKenna's post. The < > got overridden.

regards
Dan Chisholm
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jul 02, 2002
Posts: 1865
Originally posted by HS Thomas:
No I didn't have any references to "correct atheism". And I haven't a clue what that is.

I am not an atheist, but I do know that they like to think of themselves as people that lack a belief in a deity. A "lack of belief" is a great position to debate from, because it requires no proof of anything. Based on that definition, you can never prove an atheist wrong.
I doubt that Atheism drives totalitarian regimes to the violent destruction of organized religion. Instead, I think that totalitarian regimes are simply motivated to destroy any organization that they don't control themselves. I think that dictators hate uncontrolled organization a lot more than any person's belief in a deity.


Dan Chisholm<br />SCJP 1.4<br /> <br /><a href="http://www.danchisholm.net/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Try my mock exam.</a>
Jim Yingst
Wanderer
Sheriff

Joined: Jan 30, 2000
Posts: 18671
Ummm, before we revive yet another tedious discussion of the various definitions of atheism, the question here was about how or if the phrase "correct atheism" was connected to the rest of this conversation. I submit that thus far, there is no apparent connection, so let's just forget about it until we hear otherwise from Tony.
Mapraputa Is
Leverager of our synergies
Sheriff

Joined: Aug 26, 2000
Posts: 10065
Dan: I am not an atheist, but I do know that they like to think of themselves as people that lack a belief in a deity. A "lack of belief" is a great position to debate from, because it requires no proof of anything. Based on that definition, you can never prove an atheist wrong.
A "lack of belief" is also called "burden of proof":
In many situations, one side has the burden of proof resting on it. This side is obligated to provide evidence for its position. The claim of the other side, the one that does not bear the burden of proof, is assumed to be true unless proven otherwise. The difficulty in such cases is determining which side, if any, the burden of proof rests on. In many cases, settling this issue can be a matter of significant debate. In some cases the burden of proof is set by the situation. For example, in American law a person is assumed to be innocent until proven guilty (hence the burden of proof is on the prosecution). As another example, in debate the burden of proof is placed on the affirmative team. As a final example, in most cases the burden of proof rests on those who claim something exists (such as Bigfoot, psychic powers, universals, and sense data).
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/burden-of-proof.html
Dan Chisholm
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jul 02, 2002
Posts: 1865
That sounds good to me. I don't have anything more to say on the subject.
I haven't read any of the other threads on atheism here at the ranch; so I didn't know that the discussion had already become tedious. On the other hand, I suppose that it wouldn't take long to become bored by discussing a belief in nothing. In fact, I'm getting bored right now.
Dan Chisholm
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jul 02, 2002
Posts: 1865
Originally posted by Mapraputa Is:[/QB]
A "lack of belief" is also called "burden of proof":
[/QB]

Map, you were too fast for me. That previous post was for Jim.
Yes, I understand completely. I agree that it is a great position for a debate.
Mapraputa Is
Leverager of our synergies
Sheriff

Joined: Aug 26, 2000
Posts: 10065
Dan, no problem. I just wanted to piss off Jim by fueling another discussion of atheism.
HST: Checking this link Armed Conflict Events Data it would seem the Russians didn't occupy Tibet but they certainly occupied the Khyber Pass part of Nepal.
Do you have a link? I cannot find any info on this...
HS Thomas
Ranch Hand

Joined: May 15, 2002
Posts: 3404
DC: A "lack of belief" is a great position to debate from

Funnily enough I was just thinking about that. Another word is needed to describe this requirement to negotiate to avoid fighting wars.
If the wars are not really about religion. And personally I am convinced they are not.It's all about a statement of power in order to start negotiations of some kind. Reading one of Map's links the Afghanistan fundamentalists turned their attention on Pakistan who share the same religion, after the Russian's left. And that's probably when the Americans stepped in to help Pakistan given their long alliance over the nuclear war-heads debacle. Pakistan was in a period of stability as they had a semblence of Western educated leadership.It's a pity that Ali Bhutto was executed before he could write up some personal memoirs and the same with Indira Gandhi. Pity about the war-heads though.
Continuing the thread : 6:30 AM JavaRanch time.
I had forgotten about the Kashmir problem which no doubt triggered the problems discussed above on the sub-continent. This 'lack of belief' has a whole lot of history to wipe out.

regards
[ October 26, 2003: Message edited by: HS Thomas ]
HS Thomas
Ranch Hand

Joined: May 15, 2002
Posts: 3404
Map: Do you have a link? I cannot find any info on this...

Khyber Pass
is the classic gateway between Afganistan and Pakistan and doesn't go anywhere near Nepal - Khyber is the Hebrew word for fort.
Sorry, Russia didn't occupy Nepal. I got confused in all that travel information on Nepal and Mark Tully Great railway Journeys got tucked in there somewhere which said the Russians occupied the Khyber Pass in 1982..
Just to show where Afghanistan and Nepal are:
Nepal
Afganistan and no pass could possibly connect the two.
Tibet
China seems to have occupied Tibet ( as Tony commented) in some mad copy-cat action.
Bhutan is the only surviving Buddhist Himalayan kingdom, apparently.
So perhaps we'll need to watch out for Buddhist terrorists from the region and their religion takes a strong stand against even hurting a fly. !!!
Spoke too soon. There have been Buddhist terrorists in Japan in recent years. Here's an interesting Buddhist view on terrorism from the Japan Times.
Extremism fills intellectual void?
Not your regular dirt-poor peasant threatened by modernisation but a culture that has become less materialistic and hence needs something to fill the gap.
"Shimada believes today's society has failed to establish a new paradigm that effectively connects traditional values and modern culture."
regards
[ October 26, 2003: Message edited by: HS Thomas ]
HS Thomas
Ranch Hand

Joined: May 15, 2002
Posts: 3404
The Far Eastern Economic Review - Hong Kong FEER

The Taliban are on the rise again , yet the American government seems hardly to care says Ahmed Rashid. With their dark turbans,long beards and unkempt hair. Taliban fighters are now a familiar sight in Quetta across the border in Pakistan. They come to Quetta to buy motorcycles -dealers claim to have sold more than a thousand Honda 125s in the past three months - on which to make damaging crossborder raids. The official US line is that the attacks are a sign of the Talibans "increasing desperation and fear".But it doesn't look like that from the ground. Nearly 400 Afghan civilians , soldiers and Aid workers have been killed in raids in August and as a result vital reconstruction projects are being abandoned. Afghan leaders are convinced that the Taliban are being aided by their supporters in Pakisan's military intelligence; why else would Pakistani border guards wave the raiders across the border then welcome them back afterwards ? But the US government is turning a blind eye for fear that forcing President Musharraf into a showdown with the Talibans supporters will tip Pakistan into chaos. That would be a disaster not least because President Bush wants Pakistani troops to help capture Osama Bin Laden, "ideally before next year's presidential election". A Taliban resurgence it seems is a small price to pay for that victory.

regards
[ October 28, 2003: Message edited by: HS Thomas ]
HS Thomas
Ranch Hand

Joined: May 15, 2002
Posts: 3404
English Forum on the West and Islam
Frearful nations tune into the BBC World Service - As the Jews did during the World Wars
regards
[ October 29, 2003: Message edited by: HS Thomas ]
 
I agree. Here's the link: http://aspose.com/file-tools
 
subject: Chechnya - A new breeding ground for terrorists