Talk:Second Chechen War/Archive 1

message: If someone feels that the word "terrorism" does not apply to Moscow appartment house bombings, please visit the page September_11,_2001_attacks  and try to change the word 'terrorism' to something you feel more "approptiate" or "neutral" there first. --Gene s 05:28, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow.. you're an idiot.
-G —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 134.117.157.66 (talk) 23:35, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Apparently that's the reason why he so amazingly won the president elections, and was quoted by most of the country. "Whack those damn terrorists in toilets!"...Yeah that made him extremely unpopular...SARCASM! 81.23.56.19 01:25, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  If someone feels that the word "terrorism" does not apply 

message: The globalsecurity link you provided did confirm crearly that Basayev's groups operated independently from the Chechen governement. Therefore, I agree that the word independent must be added contextually there in the text body.--BIR 10:09, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. They are saying so. Without providing a source for this information, but I guess it's no big deal. But you, as already happened many times before, don't recognize a difference between years. The last paragraph is about post-2002, the SF is about 1999. Why is it so difficult for you to see a 3+ year difference? Why do you keep adding external links to the article body? --Gene s 10:18, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Basayev's militants independent ! 

message: Hey BIR you should take spelling lessons if you can't spell view (which you spelt as viw) and nope (which you spelt as nop). Yeeaahh, well anyway just wanted to tell you that.-Flyingcheese 10:42, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: =)--BIR 11:32, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ummm........... 

message: Here are some prominent interviews of the people who are either observers or involved in the crisis --BIR 08:19, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  BBC viewpoints 

message: There is a rewrite of this article from scratch at Second Chechen War/Temp; hopefully it alleviates some of the NPOV concerns, as well.
Cheers, --TenOfAllTrades | Talk 03:41, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non copyvio rewrite 

message: Hi,
I've reverted the copyvio addition, and I'm in the process of merging in the fresh content from the temp article page.  Hopefully this should address some of the NPOV concerns and help to remove the ugly profusion boxes on the page.
See also the talk page of the temporary article for further discussion (though further comment on the development of this article should be made here).
--TenOfAllTrades | Talk 17:27, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed copyvio material 

message: I've drafted a beginning of a description of the effects of the Second Chechen War on Russian politics, but I'm definitely not an expert on the topic.  Factual, neutral contributions are welcome; speculation should be sharply limited, however. --TenOfAllTrades (talk/contrib) 20:33, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Influence on Russian politics 

message: i was expecting to find a large description of the actual fighting, technology and troop movements for the war rather then causes and affects of the war.  so i think this article needs a major rewrite!--GregLoutsenko 14:27, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: That's the miracle of the wiki—dive in and add material if you think it's missing something.  I did a large part of the first rewrite; it was in very rough shape before.  I'd be pleased to see an expert fill in the remaining gaps. Cheers, --TenOfAllTrades(talk) 14:39, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  this article is actually really crap 

message: When I last saw this article in Feb 05 it was in my opinion pretty bad, in style, structure, content and NPOV (or lack there of).
Now its a very readable and informative article and I think shows what the open nature of wikipedia can achieve. Congrats.
--Mazzarin 20:45, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Excellent Improvement Wikepedians

message: I have recently taken a list of Suicide bombings in Iraq since 2003 from List of terrorist incidents and given them their own page, while keeping a link to the new page from the old. The original page also lists a number of Chechen attacks within Russia, especially over the period 2001-2005, and I would like to do something similar - removing that information to this page, and then linking to it. However, the attacks in question are discussed by category here, rather than chronologically, rendering linkage difficult. Any suggestions? Mporter 12:31, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relationship to 'List of terrorist incidents' 

message: We need some links for the mass grave sections.  The article has that rather large section with all those entries and not a single linke to any of them. DarthJesus 21:05, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mass Graves 

message: Why isn't the chechen invasion of Dagestan mentioned as a beginning of the Second Chechen War?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Theocide (talk • contribs) 
:It does state that Chechen fighters invaded Dagestan, TO HELP ISLAMIC FIGHTERS UNDER ATTACK IN DAGESTSAN BY RUSSIAN FORCES.  First of all, Russia had all the rights to take out such fighters in Dagestan, but after the Chechen fighters invaded, it gave Russia a reason to counter the Chechen fighters with an attack on their own grounds. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.84.150.61 (talk • contribs) 
 Sign your posts using  ~~~~
::Thanks Travb (talk) 17:08, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chechen invasion of Dagestan 

message: Can someone please start investigating or adding the number of dead from all the massacres, battles, hostages crisis and other causes because the number of dead at the infobox looks unupdated.
The problem is: No one knows. Really - there are only estimates, and these vary radically. Memorial does a count on civilians, but they cover only about 30% of the territory, and it's the more peaceful lowlands, so it doesn't count either. --HanzoHattori 21:23, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Casualties: 

message: Why isn’t the Kavkaz center part of the links collection? Biased as it is (and it is one of the best examples of blatant, laughable bias I can think of) it is one of the few sources for covering this war day-to-day. Also, the phenomenon of Chechen video madness on the internet (examplia gratia, the fascination of non-Russians, non-Chechens, and non-Muslims such as myself with Chechnya) should be addressed.
KC uses an infamously incomprehensible newspeak, and has a mostly mind-boggling selection of world news, but yes, they're at least (and at last) have a quite realistic daily battlefield reports if anyone needs these. Nowadays they most often say of an unknown yet casaulties, or cite reports from Russian and international media (often based on official Russian stuff), and it's reasonable enough. In the past, they would make some really absurd claims most people would only roll their eyes on (one I remember was they would run straight into a Russian encampment, guns blazing and throwing grenades everywhere like in some bad action movie, "and killed 50" or something). No more I think. Of course, the other side (ITAR-TASS) had a plenty of a very hairy stories too. But for anything else, Chechnya Weekly rather. --HanzoHattori 21:18, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kavkhaz Center 

message: What do you think of unifying the timeline?
Keep the paragraphs as they are, only bring all the timelines together into one unified whole.
Neutralaccounting 06:14, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unified Timeline 

message: For the new articles. --HanzoHattori 21:41, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Need a template 

message: I guess I finished this one. --HanzoHattori 10:22, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Okay 

message: Wrong for following reasons:
*un-chronological
*Moscow? Beslan?
*I don't think it's really needed at all 
--HanzoHattori 10:32, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Battles box 

message: Can someone please explain how the dates in the infobox (1999 — 2002) combine with the result in the same infobox (Ongoing)? --AVIosad 02:19, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox 

message: Really?! Wow, it's news to me, guess you learn something everyday. Well I can see how people are confused, Putin hasn't made the official announcement yet, although he can make it anytime he wants to; he's prolly waiting for America to pull out of Iraq and then say: "we won our war against insurgents, you lost yours haha, let's have a parade. Can't he just make the announcement already, so that most Russians can breathe easier? Gah, politicians are so annoying with their jabs. 
User ABC
:yeah, you're probably right I also haven't heard for a Chechen IED, ambush or terror attack for a while... --TheFEARgod (Ч) 21:56, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: we certainly do not need Putin's announcement to see it's over --TheFEARgod (Ч) 21:59, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Chechen War is still ongoing 

message: First paragraph says was, yet it says the conflict is ongoing. I am not familiar with the subject, so can someone clarify the issue?--71.141.139.184 04:10, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ongoing or ended? 

message: Why there are almost no pictures? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.234.60.154 (talk) 12:23, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pictures 

message: While investigations about the incidents in Bezhetsk and Blagoveshchensk are still under way, Dzhibladze concluded that the roots of such occurrences can be found not in Tver Oblast or Bashkortostan, but in Chechnya. "One of the clear roots of police violence is Chechnya," Dzhibladze said. "[Police] troops and officers are rotating there every half a year. They go back home and bring the experience of violence with impunity. The government is promoting such impunity -- there have been just a few cases where officers have been punished for crimes against civilians in Chechnya, out of -- you can imagine -- hundreds of cases in two wars. This gives a powerful, powerful signal to state agencies and forces that they are immune from prosecution whatever they do."
To support their comparison between the recent police raids and the conflict in Chechnya, Lokshina noted that a human rights lawyer working in Blagoveshchensk recently uncovered an internal Interior Ministry (MVD) document that described how police in "emergency circumstances" should organize "filtration centers" for the detention of suspects and their associates. "The lawyer found a certain MVD document stamped 'DSP,' or 'for internal use,' in which it is described how law enforcement should handle emergency circumstances -- not emergency situations as is already stipulated in the relevant law -- but some mysterious emergency circumstances. Within these mysterious emergency circumstances, the police have to organize filtration centers. It's there on paper. It's exactly what has been going on in Chechnya for years and now we suddenly find out that in any Russian city there can be a filtration center."
http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2005/06/da84eb4b-5f23-4876-8d61-bc4d6f4f6260.html --HanzoHattori 22:44, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Police 

message: I think there would be a paragraph in the Impact on the Chechen population section, but I don't know how to write this (would be easier if I actually spoke English). There should be something about the refugee camps in Ingushetia (300,000 peak?) and their eventual liquidation (and 1999 closing of Ingush-Chechen border by Shamanov), and the refugees beyond Russia (notably European Union, and there Poland and maybe France), and of course on the IDPs. 
Incidentally, there is a (badly done) Chechen refugees article already too. --HanzoHattori 23:08, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Write it yourself, your English is not bad at all. Others will improve it later. Alæxis¿question? 05:42, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Refugees and IDPs 

message: There are strange numbers: "According to the figures presented by the pro-Moscow Chechen administration, as well as the Chechen separatists, over 200,000[37] to some 500,000[38] people died or gone missing in the two wars". Links don't work. Please, could you provide working sources for that, or copypast the text? I'm also interested, who was that "pro-Moscow official". ellol 18:11, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Civilian death toll 

message: This includes people who are in no way connected with Chechnya (the majority of them, actually). How is the number of traffic policemen, prison guards, etc related to the second chechen war? Alæxis¿question? 15:04, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I know this. I'll try to explain why I think the 4 million total is irrelevant to the topic of the article. The number of troops and other men at arms in Chechnya has already been written in the article. There could be some logic in giving total number of Russia's forces who could be engaged in Chechnya (like OMON) although it's is also open to debate. The total number of "military personnel and personnel of equivalent status" includes people who haven't been to Chechnya and have no chance of coming there in future (I've given a couple of examples in the first post) so imho its inclusion here is not justified. Alæxis¿question? 17:10, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think there are any means to count who are engaged in the conflict (all the special forces are, especially the mobile and task force detachments, as are all agencies with the official counter-terrorist duties), but all of them are potentially avaible if anything happens in their area (for better or for worse). Counting only the Russian army soldiers is not really a solution. Average Russian soldier stays in his barracks occupied with the dedovschina, not the jaamats. --HanzoHattori 17:26, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

text: I wonder on whose side you'd have to count those gaishniks who allowed terrorists to come to Beslan :( Anyway the war took place not in the whole Russia but only in part of Caucasus (Chechnya, parts of Ingushetia and Dagestan) so there's no reason to give total number of Russian troops (or other foces). Alæxis¿question? 18:10, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Also North Ossetia, Kabardino-Balkaria, Stavropol - and Moscow (when there were terrorist attacks and acts of industrial sabotage). Actually there were clashes even in Abkhazia, which is technically a breakaway part of Georgia. Where the various more-elite special forces are officially stationed doesn't matter - they are going in and out constantly when needed and are not pernamently or tour-of-duty deployed (actually, they have even names kept secret after their deaths are acknowledged). Do you have any official numbers/estimates of the siloviki in North Caucasus at least? --HanzoHattori 18:53, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

text: First imho military operations should be distinguished from the acts of terrorism. Incursions into Dagestan and Ingushetiya could fall in the former group, however Beslan or Dubrovka crises weren't really military operations and so I cannot agree that the SCW was happening anywhere outside some part of North Caucasus. Finally if we don't have the numbers of Russian forces in that particular region it doesn't justify inclusion of unrelated info. Alæxis¿question? 11:14, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  IT's no longer just incursions. They're local groups, who just sign up for the Chechen-led jihad. They can include Chechens (or forigners) or not. There are covert urban cells, and there are uniformed guerillas in the Ingush forests or the mountains of Dagestan too (or even Mount Elbrus massive of Kabardino-Balkaria). Buddyonovsk crisis was a raid by the Chechens from Chechnya into Stavropol territory - now, the shootouts are with the local Nogais who once went to fight in Chechnya as the Nogai Battalion and then returned. A reading: --HanzoHattori 11:54, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hanzo, where did you find 4 million? I could not find it in the RFE/RL reference that you provided: Biophys 17:32, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

text: O'K, they are Russian siloviki (actually there are even more of them). But how many of them took part in operations in Chechnya? There are rotations of MVD and military forces, so a lot of people came through Chechnya, but 4 millions sounds too much.Biophys 04:57, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See my previous comments, it's not just Chechnya now. Maybe even more happens elsewhere, involving ethnic Chechens or not. --HanzoHattori 07:52, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You could count MVD, Kadyrov and other similar forces, but only those who were physically present in Chechnya. See 2003 invasion of Iraq - this is not the entire US army. If there are any sources claiming that "such and such numbers of military/MVD/security forces on the Russian Federation side took place in the operations, one can use these numbers. One can cite 4 millions as a measure of Russia's military stenght, but they are not actual combatants in this specific conflict.Biophys 15:59, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But there was no Iraqi or Iraqi-involved attack in the United States. Even "Islamic State of Iraq" claims it's only Iraq (as the name says). Now check out the official Russian list of "terrorist organizations": they themselves chose "Supreme Military Majlisul Shura of the Caucasus Mujahedin United Forces" and "Ichkeria and Dagestan People's Congress" (the rest on the list are a foreign organizations). --HanzoHattori 21:07, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  What about Ulster conflict? Would you also claim that it was happening in the whole UK because there were certain acts of terrorism in London? I'm sorry but I can't agree with it - imho military actions are different from terrorist ones and we shouldn't mix them here. Alæxis¿question? 05:48, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  No, becuase it was by the Irish, not by the Englishmen (Scotsmen, Wales). Take a look at this for example: - Dagestanis and not terrorism (after the initial skirmish which killed 2 OMON, they were "reported to be tightly encircled in an area called the Black Forest near the village of Shamilkala, and then pounded with heavy artillery, mortars and bombs. Yet somehow they still managed to escape. The Russians lost one soldier dead and ten wounded.". Just today, a large group of policemen was blown up in Dagestan (12+ killed/wounded) - my safe guess it was not done by the Chechens. --HanzoHattori 09:57, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  4 million 

message: The subject lack pictures. --HanzoHattori 14:00, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Illustrations reqested 

message: How about merging into "Second Chechen War terrorism" and "Category:War crimes of the Second Chechen War" into "Category:War crimes and terrorist incidents of the Second Chechen War"?
"Category:War crimes and terrorist incidents of the First Chechen War" would be then created too. --HanzoHattori 10:16, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Category out of two items? What's the reason behind it? Alæxis¿question? 23:45, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Categories 

message: What's wrong with this category? Alæxis¿question? 17:39, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  War on terror 

message: Her death is likely to be connected in some way to the Chechen conflict, however it shouldn't be mentioned in the "Government censorship of the media coverage" section as it'd imply that she was killed for this very reason and by "government". This is of course far from being proven... Alæxis¿question? 06:07, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Anna Politkovskaya

message: “On December 22, 1997, Central Front of Liberation of Caucasus and Dagestan fighters and the Chechnya-based Arab warlord Ibn al-Khattab raided the base of the 136th Motor Rifle Brigade of the Russian Army in Buynaksk, Dagestan, inflicting severe losses on the men and equipment of the unit.”
According to Russian newspaper Kommersant (June 23, 2004), there were just three killed (1 serviceman and 2 civilians) and 13 wounded. Hardly it could be described as “severe losses in men”. 
В ночь на 22 декабря 1997 года 100 боевиков ворвались в Буйнакск (Дагестан), вывели из строя электроподстанции и атаковали расположение танкового батальона мотострелковой бригады 58-й армии. На обратном пути в Чечню боевики напали на военный городок 136-й мотострелковой бригады. Один военный и двое мирных жителей убиты, 13 человек ранены. (Коммерсантъ. Крупнейшие диверсионные акции за пределами Чечни. № 111 (2950), 23 июня 2004)
Loose translation:
At night of December 22, 1997, 100 militants assaulted the city of Buynaksk (Dagestan), put power-plants out of action and attacked the base of tank battalion from Motor Rifle Brigade, 58th Army. On the way back to Chechnya, militants attacked military compound of 136th Motor Rifle Brigade. One serviceman and two civilians were killed, 13 men were wounded. (Kommersant. Largest sabotages outside of Chechnya. June 23, 2004) 195.248.189.182 (talk) 08:50, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Buynaksk raid, 22 December 1997 

message: Pieter and Caesar, please stop reverting each other.
If the article describes the first war the info from it should be included there, obviously. Alæxis¿question? 20:26, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Could you present Russian-language sources then? Maybe some info could be taken from there. Alæxis¿question? 22:28, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Actually Khattab was killed by a bribed Dagestani comrade of his. More on topic, from the same link about the very beginning of the first war: "On 15 and 16 December Major-General Ivan Babichev, commander of one of the three Russian columns moving toward Grozniy, publicly announced that he was halting the advance and would refuse to use force against civilians. The military operation against Chechnya was unlawful and inhumane, and any orders to attack the population or residential areas would be "criminal," Babichev said. He made the statements to Russian and Western journalists and in a fraternizing encounter with a predominantly female Chechen peasant crowd astride his column's path. He also strongly implied that a nighttime attack by unidentified forces against his column had probably been orchestrated by Russian security services in order to provoke an attack on the Chechen[s]." --HanzoHattori (talk) 02:18, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

text: You  CANT use a source from another war. Its competly absurd and makes interily no sense. Its like me finding sources of WWI and the tactics used there and then  using at a source in the WWII article becuase it happened it world war two also. BonesBrigade 01:49, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Right. User:Transcendence who recently reverted Hanzo obviously did not read this discussion.Biophys (talk) 02:22, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Pieter, please refrain from personal attacks. Alæxis¿question? 11:48, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: what personal attack? hes been asked a few times already to sign his posts properly. - PietervHuis (talk) 12:29, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [http://leav-www.army.mil/fmso/documents/stress.htm Combat Stress in Chechnya...] 

message: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:My_Lai_Massacre#Context.3F 
I mean WilliamSpencer and his "context" additions to the article (in short, to write how dastardly these little commies were so the poor American boys snapped - this "context" is not on the talk page, but somewhere in article history as it was what earned the article POV tag status for a while - mine were onbly comments on the issue). WS argued: 
The point of adding context to this article, is that Vietnamese women and children were regularly used as combatants, and did not wear a uniform. The entire article fails to provide this highly relevant context. So what may appear to be an "innocent civilian," may actually be a combatant. My additions did not state the people were armed at the moment the madness began in the village. Also, providing a photo of a Vietnamese child combatant, which was also continually deleted, helps illustrate the usage of what people normally view as "civilians" in the role of combatant.
Well, it did no pasaran. --HanzoHattori (talk) 16:42, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree.Biophys (talk) 17:11, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ceaser's analogous to that situation here