Replies

Your post is very interesting. I never heard any of that information and you sound credible.

Could you expand a little about how you think it is reasonable that terrorists broke out of the cordon around Belsan? Do you believe the same thing could happen in the US, given that we had a few days or more (as I recall) to set up the perimeter and would bring our best people there?

Would you characterize the Belsan operation as a major blunder, analogous to Waco? (which itself could be used as a support for your thesis---things go wrong.)

I am not a person who finds a lot of conspiracies about in the world. This is my only one. (Not that that, in itself, refutes the people who think I'm "nuts".) However, I do see the influence of the Russian KGB in the world (how I refer to Putin and his friends) as extensive (realizing that many operations would be transferred to the FSB, but not all, I believe.)

One thing in my "favor", is that the myth of "helpful Russia" is dissolving in view of their involvement with Iran. For example, p. 306, Iran's Nuclear Option (not a nut case book, but well-footnoted (I have 2 footnotes for this if you'd like):

"Further arguments appeared when reports surfaced in early 1998 that the Russian FSB was in fact coordinating clandestine missile technology transfers to the Iranians---allegations denied by Russian officials. The Russian-along with Russian supplied aircraft---to provide reliable carriers for potential nuclear warheads. Furthermore, the mere existence of of the Shahib-3 missile program, with its relatively poor accuracy (Circle of error Probable 1-3 kms over distance) implies that it is most likely meant to carry a strictly WMD payload. Moscow has always declared that no infringements of the MCTR have been committed, but did admit the existence of "individual contacts" between Iranian and Russian entities. Through it all, the Russians refuse to be shut out of the lucrative market of missile technologies."

On the other side of the leger (providing the other motive for Russian involvement with the Iranian nuclear program) are the unbelievable financial rewards, especially for a country as poor as Russia.

p. 308, same source (footnote also available):

"In defiance of U.S. pressure, Russia declared in July 2002 that it will finish construction of the $840 million nuclear reactor in Bushehr, and that it plans to build five more reactors over the next decade (another in Bushehr and four in Ahvaz, 40 miles from Terran), for an additional $10 billion." (!)

You don't have to think the Russians are behind al Queada to realize they are, along with the Chinese, our no. 1 enemies in the world today. Their actions in Iran constitute massive indirect support for terrorism, in my opinion.

There is a profound difference between being well read and having experience and good training. In your posts I see none of these qualities; rather I see the inability to discriminate between reality and speculation. However, I shall respond to your post.

Your post is very interesting. I never heard any of that information and you sound credible.
Could you expand a little about how you think it is reasonable that terrorists broke out of the cordon around Belsan? Do you believe the same thing could happen in the US, given that we had a few days or more (as I recall) to set up the perimeter and would bring our best people there?

Your assumption regarding secure perimeters is obvious. I shall not give my opinion as to how some might have escaped in the Beslan operation, but an example will illustrate the ease with how this could have been accomplished. The militants were very familiar with the terrain and features at Beslan, and would have adapted their tactics to fit that scenario.
Journalists have speculated we let OBL go after he was surrounded in Tora Bora. However, his escape would have been relatively easy. Let’s say he was on a small mountain surrounded by opposing forces. These opposing forces would naturally proceed up with the goal of catching him near the top. The theoretical view would be that the perimeter would tighten as the troops proceed up. However, due to variations in the terrain it is impossible for these forces to proceed uniformly and maintain visual contact with members on either side. It is also the strong inclination of individuals to group together for security, and as they proceed up large gaps develop. All OBL had to do was sit patiently on the top watching and waiting as the surrounding forces proceeded up the mountain. Then when one sees a large gap it is relatively easy to sneak a regiment through undetected. That said, OBL was on a group of large mountains, which made his escape considerably easy.

Would you characterize the Belsan operation as a major blunder, analogous to Waco? (which itself could be used as a support for your thesis---things go wrong.)

Firstly, I was at the premier of Waco: The Rules of Engagement, and I would not characterize that as a blunder on the part of the ATF, with the exception of their initial storming of the compound. There were so many false assumptions in the video that the producer was reduced to babbling incoherently after I confronted him during the following question and answer session. That said, I have little doubt the inhabitants set the fire to commit suicide and murder.
Secondly, at Beslan an artillery shell with an electronic triggering device was hung from a basketball goal in the gym by the terrorists. During the siege the shell fell and exploded setting off the final chain of events. Adding to the confusion some of the parents rushed to the school with their rifles, and after misidentifying the Spetsnaz as terrorists shot some of them in the back. Yes, there were blunders, but armchair quarterbacking is easy, and as I stated earlier bad things happen in almost all military operations.