Russian Suicide Attack Toll Rises to 41

The death toll in a suicide attack on a Russian military hospital near Chechnya that officials suspect was carried out by Chechen rebels climbed to 41 Saturday, officials said.

The suicide attacker rammed a truck packed with explosives through the gates of the four-story red brick hospital Friday night in the city of Mozdok in the North Ossetia region, the region's Emergency Situations Minister Boris Dzgoyev said. He said that at the moment of the explosion, there were 98 patients and 21 employees inside the building, which collapsed like a house of cards.

Robert Kireyev, a spokesman for the Emergency Situation Ministry in southern Russia, said that the death tool reached 41 by Saturday evening and that 36 bodies had been identified. He said 59 of the 79 people injured remained hospitalized, 10 of them in critical condition.

Dzgoyev said many of the injured were soldiers who were recovering from wounds suffered in Chechnya, where Russia's second war against rebels in a decade has lasted nearly four years.


Russian suicide

http://www.optonline.net/Article/Feeds?CID=channel%3D32%26article%3D8765484

Do you suppose HS has budgeted anything to secure US military hospitals?

Since no one else bothered to condemn the bastard who did this for blowing up patients in a hospital, I thought I would do so.

I'll also condemn the attack, but it should also be noted that it was a military hospital. Occupied people have been known to target these before.

Ugly.

I have no problem with military targets. Hospitals have long been considered off limits.

when flattening Chechen cities, Russia had a habit of repeatedly bombing Chechen hospitals; do you condemn that also?

NEVER bomb hospitals unless that is not what they are being used for.

Just saying that rules get blurry as the war gets uglier.

Hell, aren't we picking up Iraqi leaders' children and sending "come in if you want to see them again" kind of messages?

I hate it all. I was raised to believe there's always, always another choice than war, and it's always a better choice.

There isn't always a choice other than war. Sad to say.

but if you're told enough times that there isn't, the same old problems look like "solutions." Sad to say.

Does your opinion extend to WWII? To the Civil War? How about the Revolution?

Godwin's Law. Thou shalt always bring up Hitler. Thanks for sharing. Sure, I would have fought fascism. I'd fight it right now. But it was the same old same old, the industry of war, funded by the same people and helping the same old people. The Good Guys massecred people, the Bad Guys massecred people. It could have been avoided, but the same old cash machines went cha-ching, so the "solution" was trotted out. The alternative choice was to avoid war in the first place by not funding -- in some cases, enthusiastically, with malice and forethought -- the same old same old.

What does this have to do with the War on Terra?

I brought three wars. In one, my ancestors won their freedom. Tell me that the Civil War didn't need to be fought and I'll laugh myself to sleep tonight.

Mr. Muddle, I couldn't care less if you laughed yourself to sleep or not. Not my concern. You are confusing what one would fight for with the industry and bureaucracy of war. There's plenty I see around me that I would fight against, more and more each day. However, war is a business and is run by businessmen -- if you imagine the Civil War wasn't fought for business, we can both giggle ourselves into our respective slumbers tonight. Slavery was all about economics, in the North and South. But I'm impressed you can curse to make a point. Clever. You must be right if you can use naughty words.

Second time I've heard that here. Both times were equally lame.

The Civil War was about a lot of things. Like most wars, it had many fathers. Economics, race, regionalism, states rights, slavery, individual rivalries, land, greed, industrialism vs. agriculture, etc. ad infinitum.

But if you think that the slavery question could have been settled as quickly and decisively any other way, you are flat out wrong. So, the choice you are making is more years of slavery for African-Americans or a war.

Personally, I'll the war over that kind of peace any day.

to bolster you points with a perky "bullshit", Mr. Muddle, you can't get upset when someone points it out. I've never been impressed with proof by vigorous assertion.

I have no problem with the multiple facets of the Civil War you point out, but then again, I never claimed that there weren't multiple facets. I did note that many of your facets boil down to the bucks, but I don't discount other motives, all the same. I said slavery was an economic issue and that war is a business institution. Of course the Civil War was fought for economics, and to say that doesn't mean an individual didn't have another motivating cause. I'll say it again: you are confusing what an individual would fight for with the industry and bureaucracy of war, Mr. Muddle.

But unfortunately, you're missing the point. Slavery, land patterns, economic and class issues, etc and so on, were all part of the same old same old. Roll out the factories, roll out the negroes to provide the cotton, roll out all the rest -- and when the situation reaches a boiling point, when various interests are a stone's throw from explosion, when the vile institution of owning another human being and calling that just another part of your culture becomes too hideous to be borne....then we bat our eyelashes and say "of course there's no choice, we must fight the good fight, what are you, some appeaser coward evil-lover!? I mean, what else can we do? What are you, some terra-ist lover? What, you love slavery? What, you hate freedom?" It never changes. Kill a few towel head terrorists -- oops! sorry, helpless victims of the 21st century Hitler, that's right -- and it's the same old same old. Wash, rinse, repeat. Line your pockets and build your empires until things get to a boiling point, then cry out that There Is No Alternative. Good grief, by that point, if there isn't an alternative, there's no great wonder why.

I liked the "equally lame", by the way. That was a very nice touch. Maybe you want to call me a "stoner dude" too? That will certainly convince me of the merit of your arguments.

You must be from California. In Virginia, I've never heard anyone use that term.

I think part of our basic disagreement is the concept of slavery. Slavery was more than just economics. It was a social institution that devastated the lives of millions. THAT is not just economic.

What was at stake was the future of an entire race of people on the American continent. What was at stake was the future of the freedoms that all Americans hold dear. Lincoln knew that, though he only reluctantly eliminated slavery.

As for war, it is also more than just a business institution. War is politics as one side tries to enforce its collective will on the other. War, in this case, was Bloody Kansas and John Brown's Raid taken to their logical social and political conclusions. War was more than just some industrialist getting his pockets lined. Those industrialists didn't make the war happen and they couldn't have stopped it short of ending slavery.

There have always been things in the world worth fighting for. Sometimes directly against those same industrialists, sometimes against men who would seek to do harm to others. Not all problems can be solved over the negotiating table. That is where you and I shall always disagree.

but when you're invaded you must defend yourself...

Russian is in trouble with its occupation of Chechnya-
too bad there is oil there--otherwise there'd be no conflict-

hmmmm
when I think about it , it looks like Iraq was invaded---
hmmmm....by us and England !
We certainly had options other than to invade--
It is now apparent that they posed no immediate threat-
oil is BIG money---

Bushco loves money money money--

religion and money are the cause of most wars...

That completely ignores the history of the Russo-Caucasus conflict..

...I totally agree that there is always another choice. The fact the collectively, we fail to use them shows a deplorable lack of creative thinking, for a species that considers itself dominant and intelligent.