<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Dead and Gone</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.joelschalit.com/2010/07/15/dead-and-gone/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.joelschalit.com/2010/07/15/dead-and-gone/</link>
	<description>Commentary and Criticism by Joel Schalit</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 Nov 2011 14:07:42 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alison</title>
		<link>http://www.joelschalit.com/2010/07/15/dead-and-gone/comment-page-1/#comment-1673</link>
		<dc:creator>Alison</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Jul 2010 20:57:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.joelschalit.com/?p=3463#comment-1673</guid>
		<description>That would be interesting indeed. 
My recollection was Chechyna wasn&#039;t a activist issue until 1999-2000. Although by then, half the &#039;progressives&#039; I knew had concluded NATO bombs = humanitarian intervention.

When it was discussed (among socialists, in academic fashion) around the time of Samashki, three major points were made: 1) Russian imperialism, using analogies to France and Algeria, and Gulf War &#039;allies&#039; hypocrisy, with reference to Kuwait;  2) Caspian pipeline, Grozny refineries, Russian manufacturing collapse and slide into a natural resource economy; 3) what the war meant for the Russian ruling class, Yeltsin&#039;s hold on power, and the military corruption cases (Kholodov murder). Point 3 especially. File under: blown backwards into the future!

Despite the French-Algeria parallels, there was no real discussion about Islamic aspects until long after the Chechen presidential elections (96-97).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That would be interesting indeed.<br />
My recollection was Chechyna wasn&#8217;t a activist issue until 1999-2000. Although by then, half the &#8216;progressives&#8217; I knew had concluded NATO bombs = humanitarian intervention.</p>
<p>When it was discussed (among socialists, in academic fashion) around the time of Samashki, three major points were made: 1) Russian imperialism, using analogies to France and Algeria, and Gulf War &#8216;allies&#8217; hypocrisy, with reference to Kuwait;  2) Caspian pipeline, Grozny refineries, Russian manufacturing collapse and slide into a natural resource economy; 3) what the war meant for the Russian ruling class, Yeltsin&#8217;s hold on power, and the military corruption cases (Kholodov murder). Point 3 especially. File under: blown backwards into the future!</p>
<p>Despite the French-Algeria parallels, there was no real discussion about Islamic aspects until long after the Chechen presidential elections (96-97).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

