Total Posts:48|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

A very simple, Soviet solution...

YYW
Posts: 36,303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/15/2014 8:11:57 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
http://articles.philly.com...

----

tl;dr The Soviets castrated and killed a hostage taker's relative and threatened to do it again if Soviet officials weren't released.

----

Are you among those frustrated Americans who have wondered how the Soviet Union's only hostage crisis in Lebanon was resolved in just a month, while the plight of the six U.S. hostages held there continues to drag on without any

break in sight?

Well, according to the Jerusalem Post, the Soviets turned the trick by forgoing diplomacy in favor of a brutally more direct approach to the problem.

Simply put, they presented the kidnappers with chilling proof that terror can cut both ways. Literally!

The crisis began last Sept. 30, you might recall, when four attaches from the Soviet Embassy were kidnapped in Beirut by Muslim extremists. Western news agencies received individual photos of the four men that same night, each with an automatic pistol pressed against his head.

The photos were accompanied by a note from a hitherto unknown group calling itself the Islamic Liberation Organization. The message warned that the four Soviet captives would be executed, one by one, unless Moscow pressured pro- Syrian militiamen to cease shelling positions held by the pro-Iranian fundamentalist militia in Lebanon's northern port city of Tripoli.

Although the Soviets attempted to open some channel for negotiations with the kidnappers, there was no immediate let-up in the shelling at Tripoli.

Only two days after the kidnappings, the body of one of the four kidnapped men, a 30-year-old consular secretary named Arkady Katov, was found, shot through the head, on a Beirut trash dump.

Apparently, that's when the Soviets dropped the idea of sweet talk and turned the matter over to the KGB.

Less than four weeks later, the three remaining hostages were freed on foot only 150 yards from the Soviet Embassy.

The pro-Syrian daily Al Sharq credited their release to the clandestine efforts of Brig. Gen. Ghazi Kanaan, the chief of intelligence for Syrian forces in Lebanon.

Western journalists reported that the kidnappers were forced to free the hostages because a block-to-block search by pro-Syrian militiamen was closing in on them.

But it wasn't until last week that Jerusalem Post diplomatic correspondent Benny Morris uncovered the most compelling reason why the three Soviets were released, emaciated and tired, but otherwise unharmed.

According to Morris, the KBG determined the kidnapping to be the work of the Shiite Muslim group known as Hezbollah, or Party of God. This was the same radical pro-Iranian faction that figured so belligerently in the mass hostage-taking from the TWA airliner at Beirut Airport last June.

Unlike the approach the United States used to resolve the TWA crisis, however, the Soviets did not bother negotiating with Hezbollah through Nabih Berri, Lebanon's justice minister and leader of the Shiite Amal militia.

Instead, the KGB kidnapped a man they knew to be a close relative of a prominent Hezbollah leader. They then castrated him and sent the severed organs to the Hezbollah official, before dispatching the unfortunate kinsman with a bullet in the brain.

In addition to presenting him with this grisly proof of their seriousness, the KGB operatives also advised the Hezbollah leader that they knew the indentities of other close relatives of his, and that he could expect more such packages if the three Soviet diplomats were not freed immediately.

The message was a lot more extreme than Ronald Reagan's vague allusions to using "Rambo next time," but the swift release of the three remaining hostages indicated that the Hezbollah big shot couldn't handle having terror shoved back in his face.

Post reporter Morris quoted unidentified observers in Jerusalem as noting:

"This is the way the Soviets operate. They do things - they don't talk.

"And this is the language the Hezbollah understand."
Tsar of DDO
YYW
Posts: 36,303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/15/2014 10:58:47 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/15/2014 10:56:20 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
Well, they didn't negotiate with terrorists.

In a sense they did.... because the Soviets implied that if the hostages weren't released, that they would kill the hostage taker's families. That's a negotiation, albeit a less than humane one.

Not negotiating is either ignoring them or killing every one of them.
Tsar of DDO
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/15/2014 11:00:22 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/15/2014 10:58:47 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 10:56:20 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
Well, they didn't negotiate with terrorists.

In a sense they did.... because the Soviets implied that if the hostages weren't released, that they would kill the hostage taker's families. That's a negotiation, albeit a less than humane one.

Not negotiating is either ignoring them or killing every one of them.

Eh. Semantics.
YYW
Posts: 36,303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/15/2014 11:02:29 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/15/2014 11:00:22 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 10:58:47 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 10:56:20 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
Well, they didn't negotiate with terrorists.

In a sense they did.... because the Soviets implied that if the hostages weren't released, that they would kill the hostage taker's families. That's a negotiation, albeit a less than humane one.

Not negotiating is either ignoring them or killing every one of them.

Eh. Semantics.

lol...

What did you think about the Soviet's methods?
Tsar of DDO
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/15/2014 11:05:15 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/15/2014 11:02:29 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:00:22 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 10:58:47 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 10:56:20 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
Well, they didn't negotiate with terrorists.

In a sense they did.... because the Soviets implied that if the hostages weren't released, that they would kill the hostage taker's families. That's a negotiation, albeit a less than humane one.

Not negotiating is either ignoring them or killing every one of them.

Eh. Semantics.

lol...

What did you think about the Soviet's methods?

Well, I'm not surprised. I wouldn't say I endorse them, since I would have preferred more humane methods, but it was certainly an effective show of strength that played a role, however minor, in curbing the wave of Islamic fundamentalism spreading throughout Europe.
YYW
Posts: 36,303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/15/2014 11:08:29 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/15/2014 11:05:15 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:02:29 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:00:22 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 10:58:47 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 10:56:20 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
Well, they didn't negotiate with terrorists.

In a sense they did.... because the Soviets implied that if the hostages weren't released, that they would kill the hostage taker's families. That's a negotiation, albeit a less than humane one.

Not negotiating is either ignoring them or killing every one of them.

Eh. Semantics.

lol...

What did you think about the Soviet's methods?

Well, I'm not surprised. I wouldn't say I endorse them, since I would have preferred more humane methods, but it was certainly an effective show of strength that played a role, however minor, in curbing the wave of Islamic fundamentalism spreading throughout Europe.

Would you have done the same thing?
Tsar of DDO
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/15/2014 11:10:03 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/15/2014 11:08:29 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:05:15 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:02:29 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:00:22 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 10:58:47 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 10:56:20 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
Well, they didn't negotiate with terrorists.

In a sense they did.... because the Soviets implied that if the hostages weren't released, that they would kill the hostage taker's families. That's a negotiation, albeit a less than humane one.

Not negotiating is either ignoring them or killing every one of them.

Eh. Semantics.

lol...

What did you think about the Soviet's methods?

Well, I'm not surprised. I wouldn't say I endorse them, since I would have preferred more humane methods, but it was certainly an effective show of strength that played a role, however minor, in curbing the wave of Islamic fundamentalism spreading throughout Europe.

Would you have done the same thing?

If that was the best way. I'm not in that situation, so I don't know what other options might have been available.
YYW
Posts: 36,303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/15/2014 11:15:25 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/15/2014 11:10:03 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:08:29 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:05:15 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:02:29 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:00:22 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 10:58:47 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 10:56:20 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
Well, they didn't negotiate with terrorists.

In a sense they did.... because the Soviets implied that if the hostages weren't released, that they would kill the hostage taker's families. That's a negotiation, albeit a less than humane one.

Not negotiating is either ignoring them or killing every one of them.

Eh. Semantics.

lol...

What did you think about the Soviet's methods?

Well, I'm not surprised. I wouldn't say I endorse them, since I would have preferred more humane methods, but it was certainly an effective show of strength that played a role, however minor, in curbing the wave of Islamic fundamentalism spreading throughout Europe.

Would you have done the same thing?

If that was the best way. I'm not in that situation, so I don't know what other options might have been available.

I think that castration might have been a bit much, but it was an interesting touch.
Tsar of DDO
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/15/2014 11:17:48 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/15/2014 11:15:25 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:10:03 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:08:29 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:05:15 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:02:29 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:00:22 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 10:58:47 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 10:56:20 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
Well, they didn't negotiate with terrorists.

In a sense they did.... because the Soviets implied that if the hostages weren't released, that they would kill the hostage taker's families. That's a negotiation, albeit a less than humane one.

Not negotiating is either ignoring them or killing every one of them.

Eh. Semantics.

lol...

What did you think about the Soviet's methods?

Well, I'm not surprised. I wouldn't say I endorse them, since I would have preferred more humane methods, but it was certainly an effective show of strength that played a role, however minor, in curbing the wave of Islamic fundamentalism spreading throughout Europe.

Would you have done the same thing?

If that was the best way. I'm not in that situation, so I don't know what other options might have been available.

I think that castration might have been a bit much, but it was an interesting touch.

It probably was excessive, but fear is a powerful motivator.
YYW
Posts: 36,303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/15/2014 11:18:54 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/15/2014 11:17:48 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:15:25 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:10:03 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:08:29 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:05:15 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:02:29 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:00:22 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 10:58:47 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 10:56:20 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
Well, they didn't negotiate with terrorists.

In a sense they did.... because the Soviets implied that if the hostages weren't released, that they would kill the hostage taker's families. That's a negotiation, albeit a less than humane one.

Not negotiating is either ignoring them or killing every one of them.

Eh. Semantics.

lol...

What did you think about the Soviet's methods?

Well, I'm not surprised. I wouldn't say I endorse them, since I would have preferred more humane methods, but it was certainly an effective show of strength that played a role, however minor, in curbing the wave of Islamic fundamentalism spreading throughout Europe.

Would you have done the same thing?

If that was the best way. I'm not in that situation, so I don't know what other options might have been available.

I think that castration might have been a bit much, but it was an interesting touch.

It probably was excessive, but fear is a powerful motivator.

You're right about that, for sure.
Tsar of DDO
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/15/2014 11:20:26 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/15/2014 11:18:54 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:17:48 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:15:25 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:10:03 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:08:29 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:05:15 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:02:29 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:00:22 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 10:58:47 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 10:56:20 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
Well, they didn't negotiate with terrorists.

In a sense they did.... because the Soviets implied that if the hostages weren't released, that they would kill the hostage taker's families. That's a negotiation, albeit a less than humane one.

Not negotiating is either ignoring them or killing every one of them.

Eh. Semantics.

lol...

What did you think about the Soviet's methods?

Well, I'm not surprised. I wouldn't say I endorse them, since I would have preferred more humane methods, but it was certainly an effective show of strength that played a role, however minor, in curbing the wave of Islamic fundamentalism spreading throughout Europe.

Would you have done the same thing?

If that was the best way. I'm not in that situation, so I don't know what other options might have been available.

I think that castration might have been a bit much, but it was an interesting touch.

It probably was excessive, but fear is a powerful motivator.

You're right about that, for sure.

http://th00.deviantart.net...
YYW
Posts: 36,303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/15/2014 11:23:49 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/15/2014 11:20:26 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:18:54 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:17:48 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:15:25 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:10:03 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:08:29 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:05:15 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:02:29 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:00:22 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 10:58:47 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 10:56:20 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
Well, they didn't negotiate with terrorists.

In a sense they did.... because the Soviets implied that if the hostages weren't released, that they would kill the hostage taker's families. That's a negotiation, albeit a less than humane one.

Not negotiating is either ignoring them or killing every one of them.

Eh. Semantics.

lol...

What did you think about the Soviet's methods?

Well, I'm not surprised. I wouldn't say I endorse them, since I would have preferred more humane methods, but it was certainly an effective show of strength that played a role, however minor, in curbing the wave of Islamic fundamentalism spreading throughout Europe.

Would you have done the same thing?

If that was the best way. I'm not in that situation, so I don't know what other options might have been available.

I think that castration might have been a bit much, but it was an interesting touch.

It probably was excessive, but fear is a powerful motivator.

You're right about that, for sure.

http://th00.deviantart.net...

http://www.reactiongifs.com...
Tsar of DDO
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/15/2014 11:29:36 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/15/2014 11:23:49 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:20:26 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:18:54 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:17:48 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:15:25 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:10:03 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:08:29 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:05:15 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:02:29 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:00:22 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 10:58:47 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 10:56:20 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
Well, they didn't negotiate with terrorists.

In a sense they did.... because the Soviets implied that if the hostages weren't released, that they would kill the hostage taker's families. That's a negotiation, albeit a less than humane one.

Not negotiating is either ignoring them or killing every one of them.

Eh. Semantics.

lol...

What did you think about the Soviet's methods?

Well, I'm not surprised. I wouldn't say I endorse them, since I would have preferred more humane methods, but it was certainly an effective show of strength that played a role, however minor, in curbing the wave of Islamic fundamentalism spreading throughout Europe.

Would you have done the same thing?

If that was the best way. I'm not in that situation, so I don't know what other options might have been available.

I think that castration might have been a bit much, but it was an interesting touch.

It probably was excessive, but fear is a powerful motivator.

You're right about that, for sure.

http://th00.deviantart.net...

http://www.reactiongifs.com...

http://media3.giphy.com...
YYW
Posts: 36,303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/15/2014 11:30:53 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/15/2014 11:29:36 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:23:49 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:20:26 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:18:54 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:17:48 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:15:25 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:10:03 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:08:29 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:05:15 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:02:29 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:00:22 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 10:58:47 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 10:56:20 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
Well, they didn't negotiate with terrorists.

In a sense they did.... because the Soviets implied that if the hostages weren't released, that they would kill the hostage taker's families. That's a negotiation, albeit a less than humane one.

Not negotiating is either ignoring them or killing every one of them.

Eh. Semantics.

lol...

What did you think about the Soviet's methods?

Well, I'm not surprised. I wouldn't say I endorse them, since I would have preferred more humane methods, but it was certainly an effective show of strength that played a role, however minor, in curbing the wave of Islamic fundamentalism spreading throughout Europe.

Would you have done the same thing?

If that was the best way. I'm not in that situation, so I don't know what other options might have been available.

I think that castration might have been a bit much, but it was an interesting touch.

It probably was excessive, but fear is a powerful motivator.

You're right about that, for sure.

http://th00.deviantart.net...

http://www.reactiongifs.com...

http://media3.giphy.com...

http://www.reactiongifs.com...
Tsar of DDO
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/15/2014 11:32:56 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/15/2014 11:30:53 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:29:36 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:23:49 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:20:26 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:18:54 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:17:48 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:15:25 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:10:03 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:08:29 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:05:15 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:02:29 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:00:22 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 10:58:47 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 10:56:20 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
Well, they didn't negotiate with terrorists.

In a sense they did.... because the Soviets implied that if the hostages weren't released, that they would kill the hostage taker's families. That's a negotiation, albeit a less than humane one.

Not negotiating is either ignoring them or killing every one of them.

Eh. Semantics.

lol...

What did you think about the Soviet's methods?

Well, I'm not surprised. I wouldn't say I endorse them, since I would have preferred more humane methods, but it was certainly an effective show of strength that played a role, however minor, in curbing the wave of Islamic fundamentalism spreading throughout Europe.

Would you have done the same thing?

If that was the best way. I'm not in that situation, so I don't know what other options might have been available.

I think that castration might have been a bit much, but it was an interesting touch.

It probably was excessive, but fear is a powerful motivator.

You're right about that, for sure.

http://th00.deviantart.net...

http://www.reactiongifs.com...

http://media3.giphy.com...

http://www.reactiongifs.com...

http://www.reactiongifs.com...
YYW
Posts: 36,303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/15/2014 11:35:51 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/15/2014 11:32:56 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:30:53 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:29:36 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:23:49 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:20:26 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:18:54 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:17:48 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:15:25 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:10:03 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:08:29 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:05:15 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:02:29 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:00:22 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 10:58:47 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 10:56:20 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
Well, they didn't negotiate with terrorists.

In a sense they did.... because the Soviets implied that if the hostages weren't released, that they would kill the hostage taker's families. That's a negotiation, albeit a less than humane one.

Not negotiating is either ignoring them or killing every one of them.

Eh. Semantics.

lol...

What did you think about the Soviet's methods?

Well, I'm not surprised. I wouldn't say I endorse them, since I would have preferred more humane methods, but it was certainly an effective show of strength that played a role, however minor, in curbing the wave of Islamic fundamentalism spreading throughout Europe.

Would you have done the same thing?

If that was the best way. I'm not in that situation, so I don't know what other options might have been available.

I think that castration might have been a bit much, but it was an interesting touch.

It probably was excessive, but fear is a powerful motivator.

You're right about that, for sure.

http://th00.deviantart.net...

http://www.reactiongifs.com...

http://media3.giphy.com...

http://www.reactiongifs.com...

http://www.reactiongifs.com...

https://i.chzbgr.com...

lol you win this one....
Tsar of DDO
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/15/2014 11:37:30 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/15/2014 11:35:51 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:32:56 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:30:53 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:29:36 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:23:49 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:20:26 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:18:54 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:17:48 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:15:25 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:10:03 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:08:29 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:05:15 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:02:29 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:00:22 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 10:58:47 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 10:56:20 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
Well, they didn't negotiate with terrorists.

In a sense they did.... because the Soviets implied that if the hostages weren't released, that they would kill the hostage taker's families. That's a negotiation, albeit a less than humane one.

Not negotiating is either ignoring them or killing every one of them.

Eh. Semantics.

lol...

What did you think about the Soviet's methods?

Well, I'm not surprised. I wouldn't say I endorse them, since I would have preferred more humane methods, but it was certainly an effective show of strength that played a role, however minor, in curbing the wave of Islamic fundamentalism spreading throughout Europe.

Would you have done the same thing?

If that was the best way. I'm not in that situation, so I don't know what other options might have been available.

I think that castration might have been a bit much, but it was an interesting touch.

It probably was excessive, but fear is a powerful motivator.

You're right about that, for sure.

http://th00.deviantart.net...

http://www.reactiongifs.com...

http://media3.giphy.com...

http://www.reactiongifs.com...

http://www.reactiongifs.com...

https://i.chzbgr.com...

lol you win this one....

<3
YYW
Posts: 36,303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/15/2014 11:39:22 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/15/2014 11:37:30 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:35:51 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:32:56 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:30:53 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:29:36 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:23:49 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:20:26 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:18:54 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:17:48 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:15:25 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:10:03 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:08:29 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:05:15 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:02:29 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 11:00:22 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 5/15/2014 10:58:47 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/15/2014 10:56:20 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
Well, they didn't negotiate with terrorists.

In a sense they did.... because the Soviets implied that if the hostages weren't released, that they would kill the hostage taker's families. That's a negotiation, albeit a less than humane one.

Not negotiating is either ignoring them or killing every one of them.

Eh. Semantics.

lol...

What did you think about the Soviet's methods?

Well, I'm not surprised. I wouldn't say I endorse them, since I would have preferred more humane methods, but it was certainly an effective show of strength that played a role, however minor, in curbing the wave of Islamic fundamentalism spreading throughout Europe.

Would you have done the same thing?

If that was the best way. I'm not in that situation, so I don't know what other options might have been available.

I think that castration might have been a bit much, but it was an interesting touch.

It probably was excessive, but fear is a powerful motivator.

You're right about that, for sure.

http://th00.deviantart.net...

http://www.reactiongifs.com...

http://media3.giphy.com...

http://www.reactiongifs.com...

http://www.reactiongifs.com...

https://i.chzbgr.com...

lol you win this one....

<3

Awww ;)
Tsar of DDO
HPWKA
Posts: 401
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2014 10:05:21 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Disgusting. Going after combatants is one thing, going after their families in such a grisly manner is appalling. I mean sure, it solved the problem, but then, dropping a nuke would also solve the problem.

It isn't surprising that this type of behavior is applauded by Israeli-hawks, who are very keen on dehumanizing the ones they oppress.
Feelings are the fleeting fancy of fools.
The search for truth in a world of lies is the only thing that matters.
YYW
Posts: 36,303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2014 12:05:56 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/16/2014 10:05:21 AM, HPWKA wrote:
Disgusting. Going after combatants is one thing, going after their families in such a grisly manner is appalling. I mean sure, it solved the problem, but then, dropping a nuke would also solve the problem.

It isn't surprising that this type of behavior is applauded by Israeli-hawks, who are very keen on dehumanizing the ones they oppress.

lol
Tsar of DDO
Crescendo
Posts: 470
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2014 12:39:29 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/15/2014 8:11:57 PM, YYW wrote:
http://articles.philly.com...

----

tl;dr The Soviets castrated and killed a hostage taker's relative and threatened to do it again if Soviet officials weren't released.

----

Are you among those frustrated Americans who have wondered how the Soviet Union's only hostage crisis in Lebanon was resolved in just a month, while the plight of the six U.S. hostages held there continues to drag on without any

break in sight?

Well, according to the Jerusalem Post, the Soviets turned the trick by forgoing diplomacy in favor of a brutally more direct approach to the problem.

Simply put, they presented the kidnappers with chilling proof that terror can cut both ways. Literally!

The crisis began last Sept. 30, you might recall, when four attaches from the Soviet Embassy were kidnapped in Beirut by Muslim extremists. Western news agencies received individual photos of the four men that same night, each with an automatic pistol pressed against his head.

The photos were accompanied by a note from a hitherto unknown group calling itself the Islamic Liberation Organization. The message warned that the four Soviet captives would be executed, one by one, unless Moscow pressured pro- Syrian militiamen to cease shelling positions held by the pro-Iranian fundamentalist militia in Lebanon's northern port city of Tripoli.

Although the Soviets attempted to open some channel for negotiations with the kidnappers, there was no immediate let-up in the shelling at Tripoli.

Only two days after the kidnappings, the body of one of the four kidnapped men, a 30-year-old consular secretary named Arkady Katov, was found, shot through the head, on a Beirut trash dump.

Apparently, that's when the Soviets dropped the idea of sweet talk and turned the matter over to the KGB.

Less than four weeks later, the three remaining hostages were freed on foot only 150 yards from the Soviet Embassy.

The pro-Syrian daily Al Sharq credited their release to the clandestine efforts of Brig. Gen. Ghazi Kanaan, the chief of intelligence for Syrian forces in Lebanon.

Western journalists reported that the kidnappers were forced to free the hostages because a block-to-block search by pro-Syrian militiamen was closing in on them.

But it wasn't until last week that Jerusalem Post diplomatic correspondent Benny Morris uncovered the most compelling reason why the three Soviets were released, emaciated and tired, but otherwise unharmed.

According to Morris, the KBG determined the kidnapping to be the work of the Shiite Muslim group known as Hezbollah, or Party of God. This was the same radical pro-Iranian faction that figured so belligerently in the mass hostage-taking from the TWA airliner at Beirut Airport last June.

Unlike the approach the United States used to resolve the TWA crisis, however, the Soviets did not bother negotiating with Hezbollah through Nabih Berri, Lebanon's justice minister and leader of the Shiite Amal militia.

Instead, the KGB kidnapped a man they knew to be a close relative of a prominent Hezbollah leader. They then castrated him and sent the severed organs to the Hezbollah official, before dispatching the unfortunate kinsman with a bullet in the brain.

In addition to presenting him with this grisly proof of their seriousness, the KGB operatives also advised the Hezbollah leader that they knew the indentities of other close relatives of his, and that he could expect more such packages if the three Soviet diplomats were not freed immediately.

The message was a lot more extreme than Ronald Reagan's vague allusions to using "Rambo next time," but the swift release of the three remaining hostages indicated that the Hezbollah big shot couldn't handle having terror shoved back in his face.

Post reporter Morris quoted unidentified observers in Jerusalem as noting:

"This is the way the Soviets operate. They do things - they don't talk.

"And this is the language the Hezbollah understand."

Regardless of whether this works, it is wrong. The relatives of the hostage taker probably did nothing wrong.
My View of the World:
http://www.debate.org...

My Greatest Debate (As of so far):
http://www.debate.org...
drhead
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2014 11:34:49 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I know it is inhumane, but I do strongly admire their efficiency.

When can we start?
Wall of Fail

"You reject religion... calling it a sickness, to what ends??? Are you a Homosexual??" - Dogknox
"For me, Evolution is a zombie theory. I mean imaginary cartoons and wishful thinking support it?" - Dragonfang
"There are no mental health benefits of atheism. It is devoid of rational thinking and mental protection." - Gabrian
YYW
Posts: 36,303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2014 1:55:51 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/16/2014 12:39:29 PM, Crescendo wrote:
Regardless of whether this works, it is wrong. The relatives of the hostage taker probably did nothing wrong.

I think it's even fair to assume that they were totally innocent. Even if they were, that doesn't mean that the Soviets weren't justified. The loss of one innocent life saved the lives of many innocent lives and it indicated to future hostage takers that the Soviets were willing to play by similar rules as terrorists in response to terrorism. As morally precarious as "ends justify the means" arguments can be, to fail to meet aggression of that kind at it's level would be to incentivize further hostage takings. Worse yet would be to capitulate to terrorists demands, as that would indicate that hostage taking is a way to get what they want. It's disconcerting to think about killing an innocent person to save other people, but it becomes less disconcerting when the impact is measured not only in the immediate consequences but also against future hostage takings that their methods prevented.
Tsar of DDO
HPWKA
Posts: 401
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2014 8:36:40 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/17/2014 1:55:51 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/16/2014 12:39:29 PM, Crescendo wrote:
Regardless of whether this works, it is wrong. The relatives of the hostage taker probably did nothing wrong.

I think it's even fair to assume that they were totally innocent. Even if they were, that doesn't mean that the Soviets weren't justified. The loss of one innocent life saved the lives of many innocent lives and it indicated to future hostage takers that the Soviets were willing to play by similar rules as terrorists in response to terrorism. As morally precarious as "ends justify the means" arguments can be, to fail to meet aggression of that kind at it's level would be to incentivize further hostage takings. Worse yet would be to capitulate to terrorists demands, as that would indicate that hostage taking is a way to get what they want. It's disconcerting to think about killing an innocent person to save other people, but it becomes less disconcerting when the impact is measured not only in the immediate consequences but also against future hostage takings that their methods prevented.

You keep saying "terrorist", like its a clean label easily attached to certain parties. The Soviets believe Hezbollah are terrorists, and have plenty of evidence to back it up, and Hezbollah believes the Soviets are terrorists, and have plenty of evidence to back it up.

If the "ends justify the means", as a way of thwarting perceived aggression, Earth would be reduced to a lifeless crisp in a matter of minutes.
Feelings are the fleeting fancy of fools.
The search for truth in a world of lies is the only thing that matters.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,295
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2014 2:13:56 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/17/2014 8:36:40 PM, HPWKA wrote:
At 5/17/2014 1:55:51 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/16/2014 12:39:29 PM, Crescendo wrote:
Regardless of whether this works, it is wrong. The relatives of the hostage taker probably did nothing wrong.

I think it's even fair to assume that they were totally innocent. Even if they were, that doesn't mean that the Soviets weren't justified. The loss of one innocent life saved the lives of many innocent lives and it indicated to future hostage takers that the Soviets were willing to play by similar rules as terrorists in response to terrorism. As morally precarious as "ends justify the means" arguments can be, to fail to meet aggression of that kind at it's level would be to incentivize further hostage takings. Worse yet would be to capitulate to terrorists demands, as that would indicate that hostage taking is a way to get what they want. It's disconcerting to think about killing an innocent person to save other people, but it becomes less disconcerting when the impact is measured not only in the immediate consequences but also against future hostage takings that their methods prevented.

You keep saying "terrorist", like its a clean label easily attached to certain parties. The Soviets believe Hezbollah are terrorists, and have plenty of evidence to back it up, and Hezbollah believes the Soviets are terrorists, and have plenty of evidence to back it up.

If the "ends justify the means", as a way of thwarting perceived aggression, Earth would be reduced to a lifeless crisp in a matter of minutes.

You are assuming every person is aggressive. Most would rather huddle in the herd.
YYW
Posts: 36,303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/25/2014 10:00:31 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/17/2014 8:36:40 PM, HPWKA wrote:
At 5/17/2014 1:55:51 PM, YYW wrote:
At 5/16/2014 12:39:29 PM, Crescendo wrote:
Regardless of whether this works, it is wrong. The relatives of the hostage taker probably did nothing wrong.

I think it's even fair to assume that they were totally innocent. Even if they were, that doesn't mean that the Soviets weren't justified. The loss of one innocent life saved the lives of many innocent lives and it indicated to future hostage takers that the Soviets were willing to play by similar rules as terrorists in response to terrorism. As morally precarious as "ends justify the means" arguments can be, to fail to meet aggression of that kind at it's level would be to incentivize further hostage takings. Worse yet would be to capitulate to terrorists demands, as that would indicate that hostage taking is a way to get what they want. It's disconcerting to think about killing an innocent person to save other people, but it becomes less disconcerting when the impact is measured not only in the immediate consequences but also against future hostage takings that their methods prevented.

You keep saying "terrorist", like its a clean label easily attached to certain parties. The Soviets believe Hezbollah are terrorists, and have plenty of evidence to back it up, and Hezbollah believes the Soviets are terrorists, and have plenty of evidence to back it up.

If the "ends justify the means", as a way of thwarting perceived aggression, Earth would be reduced to a lifeless crisp in a matter of minutes.

And that's the reason why Hezbollah hasn't been eradicated from this earth; the West (except Russia) holds itself to a certain standard that, under no circumstance, it will cross. We do not target civilians. Terrorists only target civilians. We do not torture innocent people. Muslim terrorists torture and behead innocent people every day -and Muslim fundamentalists know that no matter how many innocent non-Muslims they kill, the west is trapped between a choice of principle and pragmatism. That's what terrorism does.

There are more than a few of us who would like nothing more than to let some of the more rabid elements in Washington, Moscow, Beijing, London, Paris, Berlin, Tel Aviv and Paris have their day -but we don't, because at the day's end, the moral thrust of our ideals and principles (which muslim fundamentalists will never have) is more valuable to us than the method (however expedient, efficient and effective) the Soviets used. But if this war on terror has to continue, there will come a time when that is no longer the case -which is what's so ironic about those who believe that Hezbollah has any place in civilized politics, or that Islamic Fundamentalists have any right to sit at the same table as the states of the first world. The time when Washington, Western Europe and our collective allies begin to play by a different set of rules will come if terrorism doesn't subside -and it will come of necessity, and Muslim fundamentalists will be to blame.
Tsar of DDO
YYW
Posts: 36,303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/25/2014 10:08:20 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/25/2014 10:05:43 PM, Fanath wrote:
No

Is that a "no" in response to my post immediately above your last, or a "no" in response to the OP?
Tsar of DDO
HPWKA
Posts: 401
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/25/2014 10:57:29 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
You keep saying "terrorist", like its a clean label easily attached to certain parties. The Soviets believe Hezbollah are terrorists, and have plenty of evidence to back it up, and Hezbollah believes the Soviets are terrorists, and have plenty of evidence to back it up.

If the "ends justify the means", as a way of thwarting perceived aggression, Earth would be reduced to a lifeless crisp in a matter of minutes.

And that's the reason why Hezbollah hasn't been eradicated from this earth; the West (except Russia) holds itself to a certain standard that, under no circumstance, it will cross. We do not target civilians. Terrorists only target civilians. We do not torture innocent people. Muslim terrorists torture and behead innocent people every day -and Muslim fundamentalists know that no matter how many innocent non-Muslims they kill, the west is trapped between a choice of principle and pragmatism. That's what terrorism does.

Dude, wow. The "West" doesn't target civilians? The West has targeted and killed 100x the amount of civilians that any "Islamist" has. We don't torture innocent people? Aside from personally run prisons like Gitmo, Western countries run a host of proxy-prisons, supported by our money and troops, that torture people 24/7.

This is literally how some of the worst massacres/atrocities in history have been committed. Ethnocentric savages believing any violent act they commit is ultimately justified, while anything their enemy does is to derided as barbaric.

There are more than a few of us who would like nothing more than to let some of the more rabid elements in Washington, Moscow, Beijing, London, Paris, Berlin, Tel Aviv and Paris have their day -but we don't, because at the day's end, the moral thrust of our ideals and principles (which muslim fundamentalists will never have) is more valuable to us than the method (however expedient, efficient and effective) the Soviets used. But if this war on terror has to continue, there will come a time when that is no longer the case -which is what's so ironic about those who believe that Hezbollah has any place in civilized politics, or that Islamic Fundamentalists have any right to sit at the same table as the states of the first world. The time when Washington, Western Europe and our collective allies begin to play by a different set of rules will come if terrorism doesn't subside -and it will come of necessity, and Muslim fundamentalists will be to blame.

Okay, you can drop the pretense, and just say it. You are salivating at the idea of "the West" eradicating millions of Muslims, innocent or "terrorist", until all vestiges of opposition to repression are gone. Then, the US and Europe can have all of the Middle East oil they want, and Israel can bulldoze/colonize all the Arab land they want, with no opposition or consequence.

I have maybe said this one time to someone in my life, but I'm about to make it a second. You are disgusting.
Feelings are the fleeting fancy of fools.
The search for truth in a world of lies is the only thing that matters.