Moscow hostage situation - nervegas was the killer

[Ar-Cunin]

It now appears thet only 1 (one) of the hostages died due to gunshot-wounds - the rest (116 so far) died due to the nervegas the Russain secuerity service pumped into the theatre. Only 30 of those died imidiatly - the rest died later partly because the russian military refused to tell what gas was used - so the victims couldn't get an antidote.

Hopefully heads will roll because of it.

[True_Moose]

It's really tragic...and all because some little boy got scared and tried to follow his instincts. Heads may roll, but I think the problem was more poor intelligence than anything. They said that it was an anesthetic agent used to cause drowsiness, but because of the extreme exhaustion and poor conditions, that it instead caused problems with internal organs. Just a sad day.

[andrewas]

Bloody miliatary. Nervegassing civilians - Id bloody well hope that heads roll.

What kind of *idiot* chose the gas anyway. And anti-terror team should know whats safe to use and what isnt. And as for not disclosing what they used in time to save the victims - what can I say. Shoot the lot.

[NiceWorg]

The worst thing is that president and media went and praised the way these troops "rescued" the civilians. What in the world is that!?

It wasn't nerve gas! It was a knockout gas supposed to render unconciousness (sort of what one person on this board propose we use instead of guns to apprehend bad guys) not necessarily kill. But we see here that unlike in TV shows, it isn't as safe or simple as Hollywood would have you believe.

I suppose technicly those kinds of gases may be called "Never Agents" but the intent wasnt to kill but to render harmless. Give the guys responsible a break, they did the best they could with what they had. How many of you could really have done better? If the intent had been to kill they could have saved the money, bullets are much cheaper than chemical agents anyway.

[img]graemlins/1disgust.gif[/img]

[Lord of Alcohol]

Originally posted by MagiK: It wasn't nerve gas! It was a knockout gas supposed to render unconciousness (sort of what one person on this board propose we use instead of guns to apprehend bad guys) not necessarily kill. But we see here that unlike in TV shows, it isn't as safe or simple as Hollywood would have you believe. I suppose technicly those kinds of gases may be called "Never Agents" but the intent wasnt to kill but to render harmless. Give the guys responsible a break, they did the best they could with what they had. How many of you could really have done better? If the intent had been to kill they could have saved the money, bullets are much cheaper than chemical agents anyway. [img]graemlins/1disgust.gif[/img]

Give them a break? When they screwed up and killed 118+ people? Are you crazy? I'm not meaning to be inflammatory but your trivialising the death of a lot of people. Whoever was in charge of this fiasco should go on trial, along with any other idiot who was involved in this "gas" idea. Should a drunk driver not go to jail if they kill someone in an accident? Do they deserve a "break"? No the give them a break arguements are absurd. Whatever moron who thought up this harebrained scheme does NOT desreve a break.

[johnny]

Originally posted by NiceWorg: The worst thing is that president and media went and praised the way these troops "rescued" the civilians. What in the world is that!?

At least they prevented the rebels from blowing up the building, that would have cost many more lifes.

[andrewas]

Originally posted by NiceWorg: The worst thing is that president and media went and praised the way these troops "rescued" the civilians. What in the world is that!?

At first it seemed like the troops deserved praise. Only 67 civilian casualties, mostly caused by the terrorists themselves. NOt good but it oculd have been a whole lot worse.

Now thats its come out that 118 deaths were caused by the good guys, there should be a somewhat major U turn in the way this is reported.

@magick - I dont know enough about gassing people to argue with you, but the troops did know what conditions were like inside. No excuse for what happened if you ask me. But the part about the miliatary refusing to disclose what was used, costing lived because appropriate treatment coudnt be provided, nobody could call that reasonable.

[khazadman]

Well what were the Russians supposed to do, let all the hostages die? Now that would be unacceptable.

[andrewas]

Originally posted by khazadman: Well what were the Russians supposed to do, let all the hostages die? Now that would be unacceptable.

Not killing 118 of the hostages themselves would have been a good thing, yes? Actualy, one of the hostages was killed by gunfire, which could have been either side unless someones seen a report more detailed that AOL news provides. Which woudnt be hard. But that still leave 117.