Terrorism in Moscow

[mox 298]

The one thing we found somewhat humorous about this whole incident was the difference in the response of the govt. there and the govt. here.

When the U.S. is attacked, the president gets on and says, "this is a sad day for our country but we will stand united against these terrorists and they will not break our resolve to continue on as Americans. We will find the terrorists responsible for this event and we will bring them to justice."

The Russian presi... er, uhm, I mean, Prime Minister... gets on and says, "we will destroy them."

Here in America we're going to bring justice to them. Serve it up on a platter. Deliver it, even! We're such nice people. (At least on the surface.) In Russia, they don't have time for all that sugar-coating pc bullcrap. They're going to kill some people. And they're going to do it soon!

Heh. Well it's not like terrorists listen anyway. They're not going to be like "omg did you hear what he said? He said he was going to DESTROY us! Akhmed, you didn't say anything about getting destroyed! You said it was gonna be like that Bush guy who speaks worse English than me! Dude, I'm outa here, this is some serious ####### now!!"

American leaders don't speak quite so directly because it just doesn't resonate as well with Americans. We like our leaders to appear thoughtful and measured. We like it when Rambo or Chuck Norris talk smack, but not our leaders. Even Arnie had to tone it down after he landed the Governor of CA job, and George W. Bush took a hit even within his own party when he said "bring 'em on." On the other hand, Bush was widely lauded when he stood on the site of the world trade center and said "I can hear you! The rest of the world hears you! And the people who knocked these buildings down will hear all of us soon!" That resonated much better with Americans than any of his "we're here to kick аss and chew bubblegum, and we're all outta bubblegum" speeches.

Russians on the other hand like the strong language, possibly out of a sense of international insecurity, and so that's what the Kremlin's going to give them. But when it comes down to it, I don't think the words really matter. The Russian government is going to do the forensics, do the intelligence gathering, and then probably bomb the holy #### out of a bunch of people who may or may not have had anything to do with it. Which is exactly the same thing we do, we're just more subtle about the language we use as a precursor to it.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Heh. Well it's not like terrorists listen anyway. They're not going to be like "omg did you hear what he said? He said he was going to DESTROY us! Akhmed, you didn't say anything about getting destroyed! You said it was gonna be like that Bush guy who speaks worse English than me! Dude, I'm outa here, this is some serious ####### now!!"

American leaders don't speak quite so directly because it just doesn't resonate as well with Americans. We like our leaders to appear thoughtful and measured. We like it when Rambo or Chuck Norris talk smack, but not our leaders. Even Arnie had to tone it down after he landed the Governor of CA job, and George W. Bush took a hit even within his own party when he said "bring 'em on." On the other hand, Bush was widely lauded when he stood on the site of the world trade center and said "I can hear you! The rest of the world hears you! And the people who knocked these buildings down will hear all of us soon!" That resonated much better with Americans than any of his "we're here to kick аss and chew bubblegum, and we're all outta bubblegum" speeches.

Russians on the other hand like the strong language, possibly out of a sense of international insecurity, and so that's what the Kremlin's going to give them. But when it comes down to it, I don't think the words really matter. The Russian government is going to do the forensics, do the intelligence gathering, and then probably bomb the holy #### out of a bunch of people who may or may not have had anything to do with it. Which is exactly the same thing we do, we're just more subtle about the language we use as a precursor to it.

True enough. Our politicians tend to be boringly subtle. Russians and Ukrainians are anything but subtle and do not expect subtle comments from the President or PM. They even prefer to say "We are going to kill them" (or "destroy them" which sounds like a crude translation)to "We will kick @ss"

But I have to admit, I prefer to hear Ukrainian (or British or Canadian for that matter) political debates. For all their politeness, the Brits and Canadians really rip into each other in political debates. They get downright funny in their roasts of each other. who can forget the woman MP that told Churchill..."Mr. Prime Minister! I think you are drunk!" Churchill answered. "I am drunk, M'Lady. YOU are ugly. In the morning, I will be sober!" Back before I shot my TV, I used to love to watch "Prime Ministers Questions" on C-Span.

Anyway, yes, it is a bunch of blustering and postering, but still interesting.

The Russians, despite their bluster have also been noted for sneaky, quiet murder of those they determine to be enemies by some resourceful means. Viktor Yushenko lived to comment on what could have been such an attempt (denied of course)

[slim 1,525]

But, Slim...Alla says they WILL have the courtesy to ask the terrorists into which ear they want the bullet to be fired.

Now that's awfully nice of them. I didn't realize they did that. They're not so mean afterall.

The Russian government is going to do the forensics, do the intelligence gathering, and then probably bomb the holy #### out of a bunch of people who may or may not have had anything to do with it. Which is exactly the same thing we do, we're just more subtle about the language we use as a precursor to it.

Exactly our point. We do the same things we're just hypocritical here.

True enough. Our politicians tend to be boringly subtle. Russians and Ukrainians are anything but subtle and do not expect subtle comments from the President or PM. They even prefer to say "We are going to kill them" (or "destroy them" which sounds like a crude translation)to "We will kick @ss"

Which really makes me miss Donald Rumsfeld.

Reporter - "Were you aware that civilians were killed during the air strike on the wedding party?"

Rumsfeld - "When we drop these big, 15,000 lb. bombs, we kill the guys we mean to kill. Yes, we kill some other people too, but this is a war and sometimes in a war, people get killed. Next question."

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Now that's awfully nice of them. I didn't realize they did that. They're not so mean afterall.

Exactly our point. We do the same things we're just hypocritical here.

Which really makes me miss Donald Rumsfeld.

Reporter - "Were you aware that civilians were killed during the air strike on the wedding party?"

Rumsfeld - "When we drop these big, 15,000 lb. bombs, we kill the guys we mean to kill. Yes, we kill some other people too, but this is a war and sometimes in a war, people get killed. Next question."

Reportes ask the dumbest questions sometimes. I think there should be tapes somewhere of the stupid, idiotic questions. They play videos over and over when politicians mess up. Then again, sometimes they team up for a dumb-@ss double header...like when the plane crashed at DFW airport in 1985 while on approach for a landing in a thunderstorm...

Reporter: "How high off the ground was the plane when it crashed?" #######?

Witness: "About 20 ft." Oh, OK, now that makes the question sound sensible.