Do you think it was right for the Russians to use gas to help end the theatre siege?
Do you think it saved more people than it killed?
Did they have any other alternative?
Printable View
Do you think it was right for the Russians to use gas to help end the theatre siege?
Do you think it saved more people than it killed?
Did they have any other alternative?
yea, i think they were right to do it. yes, i think it saved more than it killed. no i dont think they had any alternative, unless you count storming in then having the whole place blown to bits by all the explosives that were in there.
anything else they did would just have resulted in hostages being shot...and lots of them.
IMO they were doing the right thing.. I can't say that I know all options they may have had, but Im sure that they not did this cause it was a fun thing to do.. I am 100 % sure that they did discuss and think over all options they may have had.
To bad that things like this can happen and Im sad cause of all people suffering from this and other bad things and unjustice wish happens everyday around the world. We do live in a world full of tragic stories :(.
~micael
I also think they were right to use gas.It would have been great if the problem could have been resolved without any casualties,but as we've all seen recently,in situations like this all someone can be expected to do is try to keep people from being able to detonate bombs and save as many lives as you can.I've searched the net for info on different types of gas and other alternative methods of disabeling people without killing hostages in close proximity,and there really aren't very many good alternatives.You have a choice of less potent things that wouldn't have stopped anyone from detonating their explosives(ie. tear gas),and more potant things that probably would have caused more hostage casualties.
Just going in and shooting would have likely gotten everyone killed.Doing nothing would have done the same.I think a good method for disabeling terrorists in a mass hostage situation needs to be researched by a joint team of scientists from all countries,so next time there's a similar situation in any country,there's a way to handle the situation with minimal,if any,deaths.
i normaly have the majorly opposed oppinion but it looks like mine is the standard here, wow look at that!
the only difference between the job of the soldier and the job of the police or firemen is that the russian soldier has in most cases been drafted. They are expected to risk their lives but not commit suicide. The prisoners were in the hands of suicide bombers. I applaud the russians on a job well done, well not really applaud, more a solemn hand shake or pat on the back.
Maybe it would be even better if they knew wich gas they used, so that the people who are on the intensive care now can be cured.
MAYBE it was ok to use gas ... but why didn't they use gas that HAS been used before instead of using some new gas that they never used before and therefore used a wrong dose ...with catastrophic number of innocent casualties... There only option was to use something like gas but then they should not of taken this opporunity to test out there new gas ....
Just an other excuse for testing bio warfare products in my opinion
So wrong !!
Refer to my previous post for your answer.I haven't yet given up my search for a method that would have been more suitable,but I'm about ready to.As far as I can see,they had a choice of using the gas they used,going with something that wasn't as dibilitating which likely would have gotten everyone killed,or using something stronger which probably would have also killed everyone.Quote:
MAYBE it was ok to use gas ... but why didn't they use gas that HAS been used before instead of using some new gas that they never used before and therefore used a wrong dose ...with catastrophic number of innocent casualties... There only option was to use something like gas but then they should not of taken this opporunity to test out there new gas ....
I don't think this was a matter of..."Hey cool we made this new gas lets use it to see what it does."
I think it was more like..."OK we've gone through every possible option,and nothing seems to suit this situation.The one thing that might work is this new gas we've been working on.We haven't had time to fully research the effects of it yet,but from what we can tell this stuff will probably disable the terrorists,and allow our soldiers to go in and get those people the hell out of there without a bunch of bombs blowing them all to pieces."
I think they were right to use gas and, yes, I think they saved more than would have died otherwise. Well over 100 innocent people died, and that's a tragedy. It does sound better though when you say 6 out of 7 innocents survived.
It was a tragedy that averted a larger tragedy, that being all the hostages being blown to kingdom come, which would probably have been the result if they didn't attack.
Uhm, The Russian Police are apparently a bunch of retards with guns. I am a Police Officer and cannot believe that they killed those hostages. One hostage being killed from a police officer is too many. If that situation had occured here in the U.S. we would have handled it without having our own police killing innocent people. We have techology such as thermal imaging equipment (to see where the suspects are), flash bangs, other types of gasses that doesnt kill you, ect. Im sure the Russian police have that technology as well.
I just cant believe over 100 hostages being killed by thier own police. Im thankful to be an American.
Yeah, I agree with the rest of you. I did hear somewhere that the gas was sarin. Anyone else heard that?
BTW I know we're not meant to talk about AP's, but i'm not moaning, just laughing:
me yawns not another post on terrorisim who cares this is a security site not a talk about what ever is on your mind site join usnet if you want to talk **** like this
lol, funny when it's posted in the General Chit Chat Forum, which has the description of "A place to talk about whatever's on your mind" :D
oh yes, now THAT sounds like a well thougt out plan...lets take these people who are hold up with hostages and bombs straped to everybody than throw in a f'n flash bang! perhaps if the first one going off doesnt cause sombody to blow everyone up, the sound will be enough warning so they can just shoot them all!Quote:
Originally posted here by Brad
Uhm, The Russian Police are apparently a bunch of retards with guns. I am a Police Officer and cannot believe that they killed those hostages. One hostage being killed from a police officer is too many. If that situation had occured here in the U.S. we would have handled it without having our own police killing innocent people. We have techology such as thermal imaging equipment (to see where the suspects are), flash bangs, other types of gasses that doesnt kill you, ect. Im sure the Russian police have that technology as well.
I just cant believe over 100 hostages being killed by thier own police. Im thankful to be an American.
you act like it was 3 guys with guns and 15 hostages in 1 room or something. things that work on the small scale like that do NOT always work on the large scale.
infact, all that would really need to be heard is 1 gunman exchainging fire with the cops and *boom* no more building.
Americians(i AM an americian) would have rushed in with our uber-hitech equipment and gotten blown up with the rest of the building. we would all be mourning their deaths right now.
the russians went in, took out all but 2 of the hostage takers, and lost ~14% of the hostages.
not ideal, but certianly not what would have happened if some idiot tossed in a flash bang.
"took out all but 2 of the hostage takers, and lost ~14% of the hostages."
That's an "interesting" perspective. It's so heartwarming when we can turn people into simple statistics.
Who says to use a flashbang, i was only mentioning some of the equipment we have available. Apparently Russian police arent capable of special ops type stuff. You have to be tested by the doctor before being put under with gas to make sure that yer ass wont die, this situation is totally out of hand. This is just as retarded as the Russian Military and that whole submarine bull ****.
I just totally disagree with the fashion that situation was handled. But then again, who the hell am I to disagree with the Russian police and thier tactics.
I wonder if the 100 or so dead people would agree? What if you had been in that room? Wouldn't have been a little better to use an agent that was safer, they do have them.
Quote:
Originally posted here by neel
Maybe it would be even better if they knew wich gas they used, so that the people who are on the intensive care now can be cured.
I'm pretty sure the med's know what gas was used, it's just that we don't. They have stated that it could be a few type's of gase's but I'm not to sure about what they have told the public.
the russians tried in their normal clumsy way to handel it in the best way they could. maybe its time to put the blame where it belongs, on the hostage takers.
I think it was a controlled experiment. what better way to see and study the effects of that new gas than on the follow up and future care and tracking medically of those that survived ( they know who each and every one of them are) and the also examining the tissues of those who died and why they died. They could have use a older gas whose effects were more predictable Auntie
I think that Russia had no option but to use the gas. There where around 50 terrorists and I believe at the time of the incident around 600 hostages (please correct me if I am wrong) in a very large building.
This presents a big problem, you can't enter the building and move quick enough to have the upper hand. So a normal assault is out of the question. So bring on the gas, it seems like the only way to deal the problem.
As for the number of lives lost is it worth it, well if this incident puts off another group of terrorists from try something like this then who knows how many lives it will have saved in the future, but you can never give in to terrorists as that would open the flood gates for every Tom, Dick and Harry to have a go, and get what they want.
The usage of the gas is morally OK by me, what maddens me is the choice of gas and the subsequent refusal of authorities to release information to facilitate treatment of the victims. As for the terrorists, blow them away, IF CAUGHT RED-HANDED, it saves the costs of trials and prisons.
Don't you think a country as large as Russia has a lot of technology and a lot of medical knowledge and they have a good police system , look at the KBG. I think life is not so valued there as it is here. If Stalin and many other leaders had huge purges in that country why would something like this (a somewhat minor event) compared to the purges not present an opportunity for trials of new gases. Of course no one would say that, for they would be condemned for this by others. Of course no one will ever know if this is or is not true.
Quote:
Originally posted here by Brad
If that situation had occured here in the U.S. we would have handled it without having our own police killing innocent people.
How quickly we forget. Does anyone here remember Waco, Texas?
114 people killed by ATF agents. How can you justify that?
if you ask me people today have to much of a grasp on 'i want to live' than anything for the greater good. the only way to truely win against terrorisim is to tell them that we wont tolerate it on any scale, and well take whatever casualties necisary to rid the world of it. if i were one of the people in that room id have had no problem dieing if i knew that some good came of it, and in this case quite alot of good came from it cause its causing shockwaves everywhere. by saying that negotiation is not an option and that well set off the ourselves if it means that the terrorists die than so be it. i think that every citizen should be ready to sacrifice there selves in a situation like this. truely, whats 100 people dead in the grand scale of things? how about in the war on terror? how many people have to die before terror tactics stop being used?
An update on the suspected gas. I read in the paper that they think it may be BZ gas, something used by the US in Vietnam. They stopped using it due to the fact that it was difficult to control.
It's thought that the effects of the gas were made worse by being in an enclosed space with many old people.
So far, only one of the dead hostages was killed by gunfire, all the others are suspected victims of the gas.
Conf1rm3d_K1ll:
What happened in Waco Texas was proper. They shot some police officers and when that happens, I draw the line. hahaha, u shoot an officer yer ass is grass. Besides, the ppl in that compound were not hostages. Although one might differ in regards to the children who were in there, but the parents of those children are responsible for the deaths.
Hostages or not,not everyone in the compound was hostile.Are the lives of bystanders not just as important as those of non-hostile bystanders?It seems the US is pretty good at justifying the killing of innocent people,by writing them off as fanatics.Quote:
Conf1rm3d_K1ll:
What happened in Waco Texas was proper. They shot some police officers and when that happens, I draw the line. hahaha, u shoot an officer yer ass is grass. Besides, the ppl in that compound were not hostages. Although one might differ in regards to the children who were in there, but the parents of those children are responsible for the deaths.
And if in that case it is the fault of the parents for the deaths of the children,why then is it the fault of the Russian's for the hostage deaths and not the fault of the terrorists?
It seems like a bit of a double standard to me.
brad, I guess I saw a different Waco than you. I remember men all dressed in black attacking the compound and those inside defending themselves. I'd like to hear your defense of Ruby Ridge while we're on the subject.
As for what happened in Moscow, the facts are still coming out. Part of what happened, I still think, comes from the fact that they were Chechens. If you search back into the early 90's, this isn't an unusual event. There have been a number of terrorist and hostage incidents involving the Chechens, usually ending in high numbers of dead.
I suspect that eventually some kind of peace will be made with Chechnya. Then, following an old pattern an appeal for funding to rebuild Grozny will be made and we, through the UN, will rebuild the city for them.
gghornet:
No double standards here. Big difference between Waco and Russia. Besides, the ppl in the Waco compound were hostile, they shot police officers and like I said, when someone shoots an officer yer ass is grass and we are the lawn mower. So don't compare our federal law enforcement with Russia's. Those retards in Waco could have became major terrorists here at home had our government not taken care of them. And I'll say this one last time, lets not compare our police with Russia, that just isnt a valid argument or comparison.
I think Waco was a way for Billary and Butch Reno to make a statement. The simple fact is, and this not new knowledge, that Koresh came out of the compound to jog prior to the beginning of the siege. They could have taken him any time they wanted. They didn't and as a result, it was a disaster. The Branch Davidians becoming terrorists later? I don't think so. They were just a bunch of kooks who wanted to be left alone.
What of the woman and boy at Ruby Ridge?
I think they were justified in using gas in that situation. However, the type they chose seems
to have been a bit of overkill.
I havent looked into Riby Ridge, im unfamiliar with that.
No problem, Brad, and I'm not trying to start an argument. We're just looking at the events from different angles.
BTW, I spent 25 yrs in uniform before retiring in 1993, Albuquerque PD.
I am not going to applaud or condemn the actions in Russia .... I am going to look at it from this angle ....
You are in charge of the situation, you have 40 possibly 50 heavily armed, desperate people holding 700 innocents in a building.
In a world turning upside down you have to believe that these people mean business and are prepared to die for their cause with absolutely no consideration for their hostages.
You have to consider that any one of, if not all of these people are wired remotely to the explosives which could destroy the building and all in it at a moments notice.
You have to consider that they could be in spread over all parts of the building, so a full frontal assault/rescue mission is doomed to failure, any sign of a rescue is going to trigger a catastophe with possibly 100% casualties.
The terrorists have given you a deadline ... the clock is ticking people .... given the choices what would YOU do ?
I personally don't know what I would do, I am just glad I did not have to make that decision.
The Russians, based on what I saw and the info our fair and balanced news programs provided, were caught in a no-win situation.
If they didn't do anything, especially since the terrorists had begun to kill people, theyd be condemned. They acted and it turned out less than favorable, so they're being criticized.
I think, considering the fact that the terrorists were more than willing to level the theater to prove their point, that Russia made the right move. The news stations have interviewed a couple of survivors and they say the same thing. They were in the theater and I think have a better view on what was going on than us.
Quote:
I disagree. What happened in Waco just proved how far the US is willing to go against it's own citizens to stamp out dissent.
Quote:
Originally posted here by Brad
They shot some police officers and when that happens, I draw the line.
Shooting anyone is wrong, police officer or not. Six ATF agents were shot. 76 men , women and children were killed in the fire started by the ATF.
Anyway, Brad. It seems I've taken this thread way off topic. We'll just have to agree to disagree.;)
Remember- To serve and PROTECT....
If you know that Naloxone/Narcan is being used to treat the victims, it's not that hard to figure out anymore what gas has been used...
Here's a wild guess: Fentanyl!
Synthetic drug, first synthesized in Belgium (oops), anestetic, ultra-potent version,...Quote:
Fentanyl is a synthetic narcotic. First synthesized in Belgium in the late 1950s, fentanyl was introduced into clinical practice in the 1960s as an intravenous anesthetic under the trade name of Sublimaze. Thereafter, two other fentanyl analogues were introduced: alfentanil (Alfenta), an ultra-short (5-10 minutes) acting analgesic, and sufentanil (Sufenta), an exceptionally potent analgesic for use in heart surgery. Today fentanyl is extensively used for anesthesia and analgesia. Illicit use of pharmaceutical fentanyl first appeared in the mid 1970s in the medical community and continues to be a problem in the U.S. To date, over 12 different analogues of fentanyl have been produced clandestinely for American drug users. The biological effects of fentanyl is indistinguishable from that of heroin with the exception that fentanyl may be hundreds of times more potent. Fentanyl is most commonly used by intravenous administration, but like heroin, may be smoked or snorted.
Anestetists here in Belgium have to go to school for more than 8 years... Maybe Russian 'elite' troops are way smarter than our doctors :s
If you know that Naloxone/Narcan is being used to treat the victims, it's not that hard to figure out anymore what gas has been used...
Here's a wild guess: Fentanyl!
Synthetic drug, first synthesized in Belgium (oops), anestetic, ultra-potent version,...Quote:
Fentanyl is a synthetic narcotic. First synthesized in Belgium in the late 1950s, fentanyl was introduced into clinical practice in the 1960s as an intravenous anesthetic under the trade name of Sublimaze. Thereafter, two other fentanyl analogues were introduced: alfentanil (Alfenta), an ultra-short (5-10 minutes) acting analgesic, and sufentanil (Sufenta), an exceptionally potent analgesic for use in heart surgery. Today fentanyl is extensively used for anesthesia and analgesia. Illicit use of pharmaceutical fentanyl first appeared in the mid 1970s in the medical community and continues to be a problem in the U.S. To date, over 12 different analogues of fentanyl have been produced clandestinely for American drug users. The biological effects of fentanyl is indistinguishable from that of heroin with the exception that fentanyl may be hundreds of times more potent. Fentanyl is most commonly used by intravenous administration, but like heroin, may be smoked or snorted.
Anestetists here in Belgium have to go to school for more than 8 years... Maybe Russian 'elite' troops are way smarter than our doctors :s
I say after we get done with Iraq, we just just fly over to Russia and bomb all thier Vodka plants. heh.
Chuck56: I salute you sir.
I say after we get done with Iraq, we just just fly over to Russia and bomb all thier Vodka plants. heh.
Chuck56: I salute you sir.