Russians 'gassed' 116 hostages to death

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by underthedome: *
Russian can do want they want to protect their people in their country and won't let terrorists set the agenda. If a passenger jet was to be taken hostage in the U.S. then it would be shot down but in the end that would likely have saved lives, these are tough choices to make but in the end it sounds like this did save lives.
[/QUOTE]

Absolutely correct, UTD. It is very easy for people to make statements about how a situation like this should be handled when the final decision is not theirs.

When dealing with scum like these terrorists (terrorists because they act against innocent people and not armed forces), there is no way that one can give in to their demands. Once you give in, they keep up with the same tactics in order to get more, and more, and more. The only way is to exterminate them. If the USA had half a chance, they would have shot down the planes on 9/11 killing all passengers.

This type of life and death decisions is hard to make but essential and often occur once one enters bloody conflicts. It is always soooo easy for people to criticise when they have never been in such positions. When in the my countries Defence Force, I was confronted with such decisions and know what difficult task it was for the person finally making the decision. His decision might be on his conscience for the rest of his life.

BTW: Snipers? Impossible if the terrorists are inside a building, have explosives strapped to themselves, and are as many as in this case - start thinking and not dreaming.

This is nothing new for the "civlized" world. They have been gassing, murdering, bombing their own people for decades now.

These people make their own student Sadaam look like a kid.

Agreed with UTD and The Old Man. I cant believe people are actually using the death of the hostages as an excuse for Saddam's gassing of the Kurds.

Good call by the Russians in not negotiating with the terrorist, and saving the majority of the hostages before the suicide bombers got time to act.

Honestly i wouldnt want the 3 of you incharge if my family was taken hostage. Dont bargain, but ever heard of knockout gas? Tear gas? Anybody? You dont freaking use lethal gas that can kill your own people. And old man you are honestly telling me that you would gas 117 people just to get the terrorist scum.

tear gas? are you for real?

And you just choose one example. Well now 117 are dead. 45 in critical condition, another 50 or in IC and all those who survived have suffered some affects from the gas. As for tear gas, yes. Pump the building full of tear gas, absolutely full and keep doing so for a good 1 or 2 hours. The body can handle only so much, they would all faint from the strain and then you move in. Or simply use knockout gas. Queer think outside of the box.

In fact it seems have been a variant of nerve gas that the Russians used. Thats why they are not divulging what type of gas they used, despite Russian and international demands, with faamilies being denied information of their relatives.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2002/10/28/wmosk28.xml&sSheet=/portal/2002/10/28/ixport.html

Rage at secrecy as gas kills 115 hostages

The gas used by Russian special forces to end the Moscow theatre siege killed 115 hostages, the capital’s leading doctor said yesterday. Only two were shot - a woman who was killed by the Chechen terrorists as she tried to escape last Wednesday and a man during the final battle. As the number of hostage deaths rose, the authorities refused to give details of the gas that was used. Andrei Seltsovksy, the city’s health chief, told a news conference that the 115 had died “from the effects of the gas exposure”. Yevgeny Yevdokimov, Moscow’s chief anaesthesiologist, said the gas was a “narcotic substance basically similar to a general anaesthetic in surgery”. But there was speculation that it could have been a form of nerve gas or defoliant. Michael Yardley, a London security consultant, said he thought it was BZ, an odourless incapacitant first used by America in Vietnam. About 800 people were being held in the Melnikova Street theatre by about 50 Chechen rebels demanding the end of the Russian occupation of their breakaway Muslim republic when the troops attacked before dawn on Saturday. Last night 646 people were still in hospital, including 150 in intensive care. The Russian media suggested that the number of deaths could double.

Western diplomats expressed anger that the Russians would give no details about the gas. They said also that the authorities had failed to tell them that the assault had been launched and, initially, which hospitals the survivors had been taken to. Later they refused to allow survivors well enough to travel to be flown home for treatment, saying that they were witnesses. An estimated 70 foreign nationals were held captive in the siege and at least four foreigners died. The three British hostages survived while almost all the 50 rebels died. Some embassy doctors did gain admission to Moscow hospitals to oversee the treatment of their nationals, but tempers quickly frayed when it became clear that nearly all the victims were suffering from gas poisoning. A diplomat said: “The embassy doctors were desperate to find out what kind of gas the Russians used, as you cannot treat someone properly unless you know what they have been poisoned with.” The United States embassy said it had asked for details of the gas - “but we have not received a reply as yet”. Russian doctors said that they too had been refused information about the gas.

Dr Seltsovsky said they were given only general information, but were not told the exact composition or name. The impact on the hostages had been more devastating than expected, he said. “In standard situations, the compound that was used does not act as aggressively. But it was used on people who were in an extreme situation for more than 50 hours. All of this naturally made the situation more difficult.” Some of the hospitals where the hostages were being treated closed their gates and refused admission to relatives yesterday. A woman in her forties told NTV television: "I am looking for my son - here is his photo. He is called Dmitry Rodionov. He was born in 1984. I cannot find him; he is on none of the lists. “If anyone knows him or those who sat close to him in the theatre - he is tall, sporty and dark-haired - please phone. I hope you can help.” Moscow’s main emergency hospital posted a list of names of the survivors on a door, while relatives swarmed around security guards at Moscow’s Hospital No 13, asking for information about loved ones.

Ekho Moskvy radio station said: “Former hostages have virtually found themselves under arrest.” President Vladimir Putin, whose reputation for decisiveness appears so far to have been strengthened by the swift end to the siege, described the Chechen fighters as “armed scum”. He said: “We proved that Russia cannot be brought to its knees.” But while he asked the relatives of the dead for forgiveness, the president offered no explanation about the gas. Mindful of a possible public backlash, the government announced that the families of those who died will each receive around £2,200 as compensation. The hostages who got out alive will receive half that amount. Moscow city council has said it will pay up to £300 towards the burial costs of each victim. Amid the relief on all sides that not all of the hostages had been killed, another urgent question was being asked: how did 50 heavily armed rebels, including 18 women, manage to enter such a closely policed city as Moscow without being detected?

I am just glad that despite having the opportunity to kill seven hundred people, the Chechens didn't resort to such a measure and in fact it was the Russians who killed hundreds of civilians in a move which seems to have won world wide approval.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by CM: *
Honestly i wouldnt want the 3 of you incharge if my family was taken hostage. Dont bargain, but ever heard of knockout gas? Tear gas? Anybody? You dont freaking use lethal gas that can kill your own people. And old man you are honestly telling me that you would gas 117 people just to get the terrorist scum.
[/QUOTE]

Teargas would still give the terrorists a chance to blow them and the hostages sky-high - therefor useless. Give a little more details on that "knockout gas" and make sure that it would work 100% in such a large building to knock-out the terrorists in 5 to 10 seconds. I don't believe there is such a gas - maybe something for governments to investigate.

One can argue whether the gas was made maybe too strong, the antidote was not timeously given, too few ambulances to take people to hospital units, etc. The bottim line is that a government can NEVER give in to these demands. Maybe what Russia should have done is to announce over a loadspeaker to the hostages inside that they will NEVER give in, and that either the hostages whould save themselves by rushing the terrorists, or be killed. If there were some heroes inside, maybe less people might have been killed.

In a situation as this, there is absolutely no choice but that the building must be rushed by security forces. The only question always is "WHEN?". Even if my own family is inside, I would still make the same decision.

Old Man, excellent points. There were gunshots reported right before the Russians stormed in. The outcome was terrible. There are no winners in this type of dealings. It would be important to see how Russia responds against terrorism.

Very strange that this time BBC is not a Jew dominated media.

The terrorists could blow up the concert hall and kill all appr 800 civilians; in that case the Islamic media might have blamed a Russian design behind the whole episode.
May what come the killing squad was the most innocent, lovely and honest gentry.

So old man you would give your family a 0% survival chance then? Either the terrorists kill them or someone at the helm of things kills them? You were an army man so you about the logistics of such operations better than I do. However i refuses to believe that the death of 117 people could not be averted. However it is common usage in the US to use knockout gas that will take a man down in 15 seconds. What do you think they were using to hunt Al Qaeda in the mountains of Afghanistan?

I know neither the size of the building nor the status on venting. However guessing it was a theater there very little room for windows within the main halls and larger chambers due to the weather of Russia. Thus there would be a central venting system which could have been used to adminster non-lethal gas. The same way the russians used lethal gas to kill people, the same way a non-lethal one could have been administered.

The gas the russians used must have been extremely fast acting to take 600 people to the point of death.

[quote]
*Maybe what Russia should have done is to announce over a loadspeaker to the hostages inside that they will NEVER give in, and that either the hostages whould save themselves by rushing the terrorists, or be killed.
[/quote]
*

Exactly the way to boost the moral of women and children right? You either rush the guys with bombs around their waists or else we dont do jack. That is also useless.

The bottom line is that due to the russian military 117 innocent people are dead, and many more are on the way. The operation was botched. They failed in their objective of saving the lives of the hostages.

Last point of course they had no choice then, as it was only a 3 day wait. Not everything is static and you have to wait for the nerves of people to crack. But you do not rush a building and kill 117 people.

Infoman we just saw how Russia responds to terrorism. It gases its own people.

Well, lots of points for and against the method employed by the russians to tackle this ordeal.

For those in favor, does this mean that using weapons of mass destruction can be justified in selective situations?

For those in favor, does this mean that using weapons of mass destruction can be justified in selective situations?<<<

Akif, for those not in favor, does this mean that taking 700 innocent people hostages with an intention to kill them is justified in selective situations?

I dont believe that how a gas that spares 80% of the people in the same hall can be considered a "weapon of mass destruction". It was perhaps a "weapon of mass stupidity" on Russia's part, but hardly a WMD.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by NYAhmadi: *
Akif, for those not in favor, does this mean that taking 700 innocent people hostages with an intention to kill them is justified in selective situations?

[/QUOTE]

If they wanted to kill them they had plenty of opportunity to do it before the bungled attempt to break the hostage crisis. Even once the gas was released, survivors have said that it took about 5 seconds to overwhelm them so more than enough time to press a button one would think.

Actually killing the hostages would have been counter-productive for the Chechens, obviously less so for the Russians who have received quite a lot of support for the gassing of the theatre goers.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by NYAhmadi: *

I dont believe that how a gas that spares 80% of the people in the same hall can be considered a "weapon of mass destruction". It was perhaps a "weapon of mass stupidity" on Russia's part, but hardly a WMD.
[/QUOTE]

It was probably a nerve gas, not authorised by international treaties, and hence a chemical weapon. That explains why the Russians are not prepared to tell anyone - Russian doctors or foreign nations what they used.

Some here seem to forget that the terrosit's threaten to blow up the building, what other choice did Russia have?

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by NYAhmadi: *
Akif, for those not in favor, does this mean that taking 700 innocent people hostages with an intention to kill them is justified in selective situations?

[/QUOTE]

No.
But does it mean two wrongs make a right?

Blowing up buildings and blaming them on the Chechens is what Russia does best. Click here:-

“I first had doubts – like many people in Moscow – after the facts came out about the Ryazan incident. After that, in Moscow, I spoke with former and current FSB officers. During the conversations I tried to deduce whether it was theoretically possible that the FSB was behind the Moscow blasts.” Felshtinskii says that after traveling to Moscow and speaking with a number of FSB officials, he concluded that his suspicions were correct](http://www.rferl.org/nca/features/2001/08/29082001130642.asp)

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by underthedome: *
Some here seem to forget theat the terrrosit's threaten to blow up the building, what other choice did Russia have?
[/QUOTE]

That is what I asked. So you are saying that usage of WMDs and biological/chemical weapons IS justified in certain situations, like this theater saga, where terrorists threatened to blow up the entire building?

I dont see why the kurd butcher Saddam Hussain cant use the same analogy to justify his gassing of the Kurds, which, funnily enough, was approved/ignored/allowed-to-happen by the US back in the 80s. Kurds staged a revolt, and according to Saddam, they were terrorists, enemies of the state.

Now the plot seems to be thickening. Russian President Putin just today announced granting extra powers to his military (as if they didnt have enough already). He has also announced that Russia will attack terrorists at home and abroad. Now we have two power houses of the world raring to wreak havoc on the civilian population of the world, since they dont know squat about who their target is, or how to strike it.

Welcome to hell.