Re: Hard core Chechen ghosts spreading through the Canadian press
I wonder where and when I should have described the current conflicts as
"non Muslims fighting against Muslims"? Where did you get that from? By
ascribing that view to me, you are actually doing yourself what you
accuse me of.
As far as I remember, I've always tried to convey my personal opinion
that none of the current major wars are about religion, but about
geopolitics, which again translates into economy/oil. I agree with Alan
Greenspan on that point ;). Religion plays a part, but only as a tool
for politics - split and rule here, unite there, establish new players,
There is one thing where we are in complete agreement: Yes, the Taleban
are horrible. But then again, those who support the war in Afghanistan
must ask themselves some questions about the history of that
organization. Who created it in the first place, and for what purpose?
Try and check that out. And they must ask themselves if the war was
justified at its beginning and if it is justified by its current results
(the reinstallation of the pre-Taleban warlords, the return of
Afghanistan as the worlds' leading opium producer and a military
campaign that has killed far more civilians than the Taleban cavemen
ever managed to hang or stone).
With regard to my remarks about the Canadian soldier who saw Chechen
ghosts, they were based on the discrepancies between the propagandistic,
the official and the real versions of the reasons for the war in
I'm sorry for the loss of lives among good-willing Nato soldiers, but my
understanding for them ends where their propagandists try to justify the
absence of military success by blaming it on the apparently supernatural
forces of the "eternal Chechen". If they took their fight for
"democracy" and "freedom" seriously, they would support the inalienable
rights of the Chechen nation instead of using Chechens as scapegoats in
a disgustingly racist way.
> It was a grim joke - "I didn't speak with them, only killed them" is
> what he was trying to say.
> Point taken, though, that there's no proof of Chechens in what he
> I could go on for paragraphs about how horrible the Taliban are, and
> that the Canadians are fighting to keep the Taliban (as an
> organization) from Afghanistan, rather than "exporting freedom" which
> other novice propaganda wonks use to try and paint NATO with
> a "George Bush brush" - but that isn't something you're interested in
> discussing. I'd ask that you avoid doing what you're accusing the
> Western media of doing: Please stop seeing the world in black and
> white. There are more than "non Muslims fighting against Muslims",
> and there are many reasons for fighting against particular groups.
> Canadians are not equal to Americans in their choices, just as
> Chechens are not equal to Afghans. We share many things with
> Americans (as Chechens share a basis in religion with Afghans), but
> there are differences - and those must be respected.
> --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, Norbert Strade <nost@...> wrote:
>> exporter of freedom, nor the heroes of investigative journalism who
>> scribbled down his tale, could see the obvious idiocy: The good man
>> describes how Chechens are the toughest guys the Nato forces are
>> in Afghanistan, and then he continues that he didn't "interact
>> with them. So how does our genius know they were Chechens? Did he
>> their passports in his sniper rifle telescope? Did they wear
>> with "Chechnya" written all over them? Did they carry a Chechen
> flag? It
>> tells a lot about the laziness/malice of the typewriters that they
>> this pass without a question.
>> Ps. I wonder when the Chechens who once invaded Montana with dirty
>> in their rucksacks will have made it to the Canadian border. They'd
>> better call their Chechnya-experts back from the outer colonies.
By pointing out that the organization represented by the author of a
comment has no website, you're implying between the lines that there's
something fishy about it. Isn't that a little propagandistic? :)
Btw., Andrew McGregor had lots of appearances in the media and is
well-known in his field.
> I'm not familiar with this agency, though I respect the sentiment.[snip]
> The propagandistic slant ("No Chechen leader ... engaged us in
> battle") isn't exactly fair to anyone, though, as it implies that
> Chechen fighters in Afghanistan (if there were any) would have been
> there sponsored by the governments.
> As a side note - this "Aberfoyle International Security" has no
> obvious website, but is quoted (Google searches) as some sort of
> strategic Islamist issue analyst.