Special Extra: A River of Russian Blood in Ingushetia

It was obvious from the beginning that Vladimir Putin’s barbaric behavior in Georgia, combined with his the total failure of his domestic policy in the region,  would dump gasoline on the fires of revolution burning within Russia itself, and now it has begun.  AFP reports that rebels in Ingushetia have made a daring direct raid on a large column of Russian Interior Ministry soldiers. Russia admits three soldiers have been killed including an officer, but opposition sources say up to 50 Russian soldiers have fallen and the Kremlin is covering it up with neo-Soviet lies (a local law enforcement officer has confirmed the opposition claim).  “It’s a serious attack and it shows how unstable the situation is. The numbers are not really that important. It’s a serious attack, a serious ambush. The situation is very tense there now,” said defense expert Pavel Felgenhauer. When will the people of Russia see that their “leader” is taking them down the path followed by the USSR, into the ashcan of history?

8 responses to “Special Extra: A River of Russian Blood in Ingushetia

  1. Just one question, why does the western media ignore bloodbath in Ingushetia??? There hasn’t been any reports from Ingushetia in BBC or CNN.

    LA RUSSOPHOBE RESPONDS:

    Just one answer: Gross incomptence. Hence, this blog exists! Had the media been reporting as they should have done from the first, Putin would never have come to power.

  2. Putin has dealt with separatists before extremely successfully, and I really doubt that the Ingushetia movement is any greater or more dangerous then the Chechen one. And that was years ago, and the Russian military recently annihilated the military of an American-trained/armed, albeit small, Georgian army. The Separatists are a very minor problem in Russia right now. I don’t expect this to reach any great height. I’d put economy and health as far, far greater problems.

    And, I DID see this story on BBC before. It’s not completely ignored.

  3. Anon –
    It seems that you responded to some different post. This one doesn’t have anything to do with separatism; not does it accuse you of missing / ignoring some BBC story. You don’t really imply that Ingush rebels are separatists, are you? They are rebelling against Zazikov; and Zazikov is playing Putin like a fiddle. Come to think about it, he is not the only one. Kokoity is getting Russian money and Russian troops through the roof; and Kadyrov is killing his adversary in downtown Moscow.

    Yep, The Separatists are a very minor problem for Putin, and Putin is very minor problem for the rulers of North Caucasus.

  4. Tower Bolshevik

    For Luis:

    Contrary to what many deluded russophobes (including you) say, the western media doesn’t cover Russian aggression in Chechnya or Ingushetia, because the western governments supports 100% Russian military action in these regions. They recognize these two regions as Russia’s “territorial integrity”.

  5. No TB, the western media doesn’t recognize or even care about these attrocities is because they are usefull idiots.

  6. Just to clarify, the western media has always been an enabler of russian attrocities, and are just a guilty.

  7. Tower Bolshevik

    For seanquixote:

    What I meant was that the Western governments recognize Chechnya and Ingushetia as sovereign Russian territory. I thought I had made that clear. And this is why the western media doesn’t report on atrocities committed by Russian forces. Its part of the “war on terror”.

  8. TBsHevik, I know that the western media doesn’t report on Chechnya, and Ingushetia because they are sympathetic.

    They are focused on tearing down the US military, even when involved in a real life humanitarian effort. Iraq(at its conclussion), (Panama, Somalia, maybe dated but relevant, Italy, Germany, France, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, Philippines, Algeria, Liberia, Ethiopia).

    When, of all of these liberation efforts has America gotten positive media. The answer, when we had a Democrat president. The only failures of either, was Johnson’s un-delagateable failure in Vietnam. A socialist sympithizer that was Commander in Chief of the US armed forces, and again in Somalia(Clinton who was also a sympithizer).

    The irony is that there were positive results in all of these countries except Vietnam and Somalia.

    Oh wait, did I leave somebody out, Kennedy(was not a sympathizer, but was a useful idiot) abandoned Cuba on their eve of liberation. Oh, he was a Democrat too.

    Just to be fair, Reagan did pull out of Lebanon, and I don’t agree with that either. He was a democrat early in life, and this happened early in his presidency.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s