Agreed that the chance had to be taken in Moscow, but:
1) Was the chosen gas a mistake? Experts say it looks like "BZ", the use of which is outlawed. Russian authorities have not yet released the name of the gas used, which is making the doctors' job very difficult.
2) Was the concentration too high and/or did the Russian forces not calculate that the gas would have a higher effect in a closed space than, say, on demonstrators in open air?
3) (And this is a real mistake!) Why were there no ready antidotes to be immediately injected into the hostages? A Russian doctor on Euronews said yesterday that this would certainly save all but a few lives, those with weak hearts, asthma, etc.
There were 800 hostages in that theater, and we are of course glad that they did not all die. However, more than 100 are still in reanimation in hospitals, 45 in critical condition, and another 118 is dead in the attack of Russian forces, and only two were from gunshots. The rest could have been prevented with ready antidotes to be administered right away.
I think this is the issue at hand here - not whether or not attacking was the right thing to do, but whether or not the Russian forces were negligent and caused unnecessary deaths. |
